Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
So, a close loss to Bama is more impressive than an LSU W?
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 15
| visibility 1,497

So, a close loss to Bama is more impressive than an LSU W?


Aug 1, 2013, 3:07 PM

If you almost beat Bama, you get a top 5 ranking. If you beat them, you get a Heisman. If you beat LSU, you get a top 10 ranking.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

we just to win this year and we will FORCE respect


Aug 1, 2013, 3:16 PM

on all

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

"Clemson Is Coming" says Stephone Anthony (Class 2011)"
"Why NOT Clemson"
"Why Not Dabo"


Re: So, a close loss to Bama is more impressive than an LSU W?


Aug 1, 2013, 3:21 PM

The logic is that being a SEC division champ that went to the SEC conference championship vs the #1 team in the nation and losing by a small margin, then winning by two touchdowns the Capital One Bowl with a 12-2 overall record would trump us, which only co-owned the division, but wasn't the division leader due to losing to the one that was so didn't go to (much less win or lose) the ACC Championship, but wins vs a ranked SEC team of LSU by 1 point with a last minute field goal after trailing the entire game to finish 11-2. SO in all, both teams lost to the same opponent (USuCk)...our second loss was to a lower ranked Florida State, theirs was in the Conference Championship vs the National Champion.

Regretfully, makes sense, tbh. Let's just hope Aug 31st, we change that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: So, a close loss to Bama is more impressive than an LSU W?


Aug 1, 2013, 3:37 PM

Agree with Tigerman. Plus UGA was probably better than LSU last season. It doesn't really matter. UGA, USC, and CU could all be in any order, we are all on the same level and fortunately the polls will be more accurate two weeks into the season after two matchups between the three teams

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

A loss is NEVER impressive.***


Aug 1, 2013, 3:50 PM



badge-donor-10yr.jpg2006_nit_champ.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

We're friends. You laugh, I laugh. You cry, I cry. You jump off a bridge, I get in my boat and save your retarded a$$.


I'll take being tall anyday.


Aug 1, 2013, 4:29 PM

signed

Logan

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: So, a close loss to Bama is more impressive than an LSU W?


Aug 1, 2013, 4:09 PM

I believe this ranking is for this years teams, not last years.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: So, a close loss to Bama is more impressive than an LSU W?


Aug 1, 2013, 4:12 PM

Ga had 2 losses, The Gamecocks and the National Champion. Clemson had 2 losses, The Gamecocks and the team that finished 14th.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Yes but UGA brings back very few starters on D


Aug 1, 2013, 4:19 PM

That many question marks normally brings a team's ranking down.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

But, overall UGA returns 14 O and D starters total


Aug 1, 2013, 4:25 PM

16 if you count ST.

Those numbers give UGA a higher than average total starters returning. Seems the voters are focusing on the whole package and not just one of the units.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Yes but UGA brings back very few starters on D


Aug 1, 2013, 4:28 PM [ in reply to Yes but UGA brings back very few starters on D ]

Having an offense like they should though also counters that some...same as it does for the view on us. Keep in mind we have just about as many Q's on D (the entire secondary) as they do, yet they put us in the top 10 too.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I wish we weren't ranked.


Aug 1, 2013, 4:32 PM

I'll take underdog status anytime we play.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Rankings are based on more than 1 game.***


Aug 1, 2013, 4:41 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Especially if you're in the $EC...


Aug 1, 2013, 5:17 PM

where narrow last minute wins against vastly inferior opponents are eessentially ignored.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-20yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sometimes good things fall apart so better things can fall together.


Re: Especially if you're in the $EC...


Aug 1, 2013, 5:39 PM

I think it means they won their division, played in their conference championship, got beat by a team that won another nc in a league that has won 7 nc in a row. we did not win our division in a league that is 3-14 in bcs games. our conference last won a nc in 1991. we just need to win the game on the 31 st. at least we are in the top 10, and will move up with a victory. if we don't win then the polls were right.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

A&M actually beat Bama and is not in the Top 5 so I


Aug 1, 2013, 5:55 PM

don't think your point holds much water.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 15
| visibility 1,497
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic