»
Topic: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week
Replies: 65   Last Post: Nov 28, 2012 5:21 PM by: Tree
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 65  

This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week

[2]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:32 PM
 

is crap, before playing Clemson they played 3 teams worth a crap, the other 8 games we no better than what Clemson played. So don't give me this is why you won, you won cause you have better talent on the defensive side of the ball. If SC didn't have Clowney, Clemson wins going away. Has nothing to do with you're in the SEC, cause why were you so dominated the previous 17 years?

military_donation.jpg

Yeah but fact is, before them we played ONE team worth a

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:36 PM
 

crap. And unfortunately we lost to them. So yeah I kinda have to give them the argument that they did play a tougher schedule than we did this year.

Florida > FSU
Georgia > GT
Vandy > Wake
LSU > VT
Tenn > NCSt
Ark > Duke

And so on... I hate it, but this year they have a leg to stand on with that argument.


So what about FSU winning 3 in row before this year

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:39 PM
 

SC also has been playing that SEC schedule for 20 years, yet Clemson has killed them since 92 before the last 4.

military_donation.jpg

Re: So what about FSU winning 3 in row before this year

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:45 PM
 

Florida State only won 2 in a row before this year.

Florida won 6 in a row before that.

Speaking in terms of this year --- almost every conference team they played was better than every team we played --- except FSU.

I'd give Vandy the go ahead over anybody on our schedule. Vandy beat Auburn by the same margin we did. I know you can't compare, but it's something to think about.


Comparing the margin of victory of Vandy over Auburn....


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:59 PM
 

doesn't really work when you consider LSU only beat Auburn by 2 points. And everyone knows that it was the first game when Clemson played them and they had a new offensive and defensive coordinator. Once the film was out on what they were doing, everyone killed them.

Vandy, Mizzou, Kentucky, Arkansas, and Tennessee were basically ACC teams this year. Ole Miss, Miss. St. and Auburn were too.

They had 4 major games on their schedule and went 2-2. Good for them. We had 2 and went 0-2. Not so good, but at least we didn't do like we have done in the recent past.


Don't let facts get in the way of denial***


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:47 PM
 



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Ok so what about last year? Clemson had a higher ranked


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:31 PM
 

SOS than SC? You wanna bring that up, then answer why SC sucked the previous 17 years in the SEC? Why didn't it help them then? Why did Bowden own Spurrier at UF?

military_donation.jpg

What part of "they have a leg to stand on THIS YEAR"


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:37 PM
 

Didn't you get??


What part of it didn't help them the previous 17


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:42 PM
 

years do you not understand?

military_donation.jpg

When did I say ANYTHING about anybody helping anybody


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:49 PM
 

All I was stating is THEY PLAYED A TOUGHER SCHEDULE THAN WE DID THIS YEAR!!

That is all, not trying to say Jimmy helped Sally, but he didnt he last 25 years or whatever.

I'll say it one more time, they played a tougher schedule than we did THIS YEAR because the ACC was complete garbage.


Yeah and they we played a tougher schedule last year


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:56 PM
 

None of that crap matters, cause they were in the SEC for 20 years and Clemson dominated them for 17 years. Also that first reply wasn't even to you.

military_donation.jpg

Disgree.........


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:36 PM
 

np


He never said they did not play a tougher schedule....


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 5:21 PM
 

he said not every week as claimed and he is 100% correct with every point he made.


Kentucky, Arkansas, usually Vandy, Tennessee

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:43 PM
 

Wofford, UAB


Re: Kentucky, Arkansas, usually Vandy, Tennessee


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:47 PM
 

Tennessee (1 SEC win) beat NCST by two touchdowns, so Clemson played a give bad team before USC too.

Why is the USC played Wofford a valid excuse? We both played teams there weren't very good before the rival game.


Have to agree with coot on this one. I don't care if the...


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:49 PM
 

coots play an fcs opponent before us, it's no excuse when we play a weak conference opponent before we play them. The reason we lost had nothing to do with them playing wofford. In fact they played terrible against wofford.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Yeah ask FSU how weak NCSU is?***


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:33 PM
 



military_donation.jpg

that is just an ACC thing


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:49 PM
 

it actually hurts, not helps, your point


So why didn't the SEC help you from 92 to 2008?


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:57 PM
 

why is it just not that SC fans are saying it's because we play a tougher schedule? Before it was cause we played the orange crush. Which is it coots?

military_donation.jpg

Exactly….


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:46 PM
 

Playing ECU, UAB, Vandy, Ark, UK, UT, Wofford, and Mizzou didn't make them a tough team. Our loss to them is more of a result of a change of culture with in Clemson Athletics and our fans becoming soft. Our fans aren't what they used to be. Our fans used to be very demanding of excellence in athletics. I remember after Clemson fired Hatfield and West in the 90's, we were known as fan base that demanded a lot. Now our fans sell tickets to gamecock fans, and have been hoodwinked by Prez Barker for 12 years now. Hoodwinked by a Prez that hired a fundraising puppet to be AD in TDP, then once TDP retires Barker hires another fundraising puppet, and there isn't one peep out of the Clemson fan base about a very dubious hire. In the prior 100+ year history of Clemson athletics what has happened under Barker would have been met with a whole lot of anger from Clemson fans and a whole lot Clemson fans ending their IPTAY memberships.

When you don't demand excellence, then you don't get excellence. And our fan base doesn't demand excellence. In fact there are a lot of Clemson fans that think when the Clemson vs SCU game is at Death Valley that it is nothing more than a family reunion with their coot uncles, cousins, aunts, in-laws, baby mamas, 3rd cousins of their in-laws, and so on and so forth.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Oh lord


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:46 PM
 

You know why SC is better right now? Cause they have more talent on the DL. Why do you think we are hard on RN, Adams and Lawson? Take Clowney away and who wins this game? But as you can see Dabo is fixing that, also it doesn't help that we have 5 CB's out and 3 have to play every down, cause they are the only ones left. Yet you and Blue Caddie can't see that. you just want to fire everyone. 10-2 2 years in a row, doesn't show you it's getting much better and the culture is changing, then you're just bitter and have no clue.

military_donation.jpg

Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week

[2]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:46 PM
 

How could you dispute with wofford being in the game to the end. Seems to me it was pretty tough game for them.;)

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:49 PM
 

I seem to remember a Wofford team playing well against the Tigers last year, was it an 8-point blow out?


Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:59 PM
 

Apparently you don't get it. But defending the coots with a ### for tat is very unbecoming of a Tiger fan.

2020 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg


Why does everyone keep dodging the


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:37 PM
 

Why didn't it help them the past 17 years of being in the SEC?

military_donation.jpg

it has to do with when the new money started coming in


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:51 PM
 

with the new money comes new facilities and further investments into sports.

I cannot remember when the SEC deal was signed, but it did not take long after that for USC to pretty much defeat CU in any meaningful sport.


Uh Clemson's football facilities are much better than SC


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:59 PM
 

right now. Clemosn has no problem competing with anyone with football facilities. So that is a crap argument as well. It would work if Clemson had bad facilities, but that isn't the case. Only way money is an issue is if SC is paying players like Clowney, which hey who knows.

military_donation.jpg

now you are just making stuff up....and it is not just foot


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 5:01 PM
 

football, it is everything from academic center to practice, etc.


Spurrier > Holtz > Scott > Woods


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:59 PM
 

plus the extra SEC money to upgrade and improve some of our former weaknesses.


Holtz was dominated by Bowden.


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:04 PM
 

What is gonna happen when this talent is gone from SC and as you can see Clemson is getting the big time players on defense. #1 DT, #6 DT, Shaq Lawson who is a beast, 2 5 star LB's who will be juniors and much better, LB from OU who is suppose to be the best. Odaniel who is #3 OLB. #1 DT who is very high on us and will probably sign with Clemson who is a game changer he is so good. Carl Lawson who is high on us. See SC has gotten them while Dabo was just hired and starting to build things. Things run in cycles and SC got the players, but now Clemson is starting to get them. Does SC win that game without Clowney?

military_donation.jpg

Holtz dominated by Bowden. hence SOS>Holtz


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:08 PM
 

I don't play what if when I can simply watch what actually happened. Heck, we used a 2nd team QB, 2nd/3rd team RBs and a point guard (again).

How much would you have bet on CU knowing Shaw wouldn't play a down and the losing team scored 17 points? You'd be homeless!!!


SC's defense beat Clemson


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:12 PM
 

also when Breeland went down, I wasn't so confident. We had 3 CB's on scholarship left, so i could throw on that. Guys can't play every single snap and stay effective. SC didn't do anything till second half. Ya'll bring up your injuries, but when we do it's excuses. We were playing with 2nd and 3rd string CB's. Does that not make a big difference

military_donation.jpg

Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week

[3]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:51 PM
 

During the Tommy Bowden years, all south carolina fans complained that their team was too beat up after playing a SEC schedule. They didn't have anything left for Clemson. Now that they've won a few, it's because of their previous SEC games.

2020 student level member

Exactly^^^^^^^


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:37 PM
 

can't have it both ways coots fans and CU fans defending coots

military_donation.jpg

called depth....


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 5:03 PM
 

USC beat CU with a back-up QB, then 2nd and third string RB....and kept the ball for almost 40 minutes.


South Carolina has usually been beaten up by the end...


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:41 PM
 

...of the year - just like most teams. SC has always had decent to good first string players. The main difference is that now there is some talent on the depth chart that has been absent in years (decades) past.


I don't think anyone claims to play a tough game every week


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:46 PM
 

.. but SC does play several tough games as opposed to just one or two.


Yes, exactly 3............

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:04 PM
 

tough games and lost 2.


SC played 3 tough teams


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:05 PM
 

how is that a big difference

military_donation.jpg

They have Clowney who is a game changer


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:48 PM
 

take him away and Clemson wins this game going away. They lose to Tenn without him. Give Clemson Clowney and do we have a loss this year. SC has gotten Mr football int his state every year, because they grew up SC fans. it's a cycle and you can see Clemson is getting there. We have Adams who is probably gonna pick Clemson who is a game changer

military_donation.jpg

Clowney a game changer?? You said Mike Bellamy


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:54 PM
 

would be a star and Clowney (like Bowers) wouldn't make that big of a difference when he signed.

I love the IF...blah blah blah

Why did Dabo punt on 4th down with 3 minutes to go?


No you're lying, I said Bellamy and Watkins would make


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:07 PM
 

a bigger impact their first year and i'd say Sammy did as a all american. So quit lying and putting words in my mouth. i'm not making excuses as i'm saying it's because of talent, you're the ones saying it's because of schedule the last 4 years, when you said that is why you lost the last 17 years.

military_donation.jpg

I never said schedule was the difference for us *****


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:09 PM
 




Re: I never said schedule was the difference for us *****


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:13 PM
 

Did I say you did? I didn't make this post for Joel

military_donation.jpg

When u respond directly under my post I assume ur talking


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:16 PM
 

to me. Here are your words:

a bigger impact their first year and i'd say Sammy did as a all american. So quit lying and putting words in my mouth. i'm not making excuses as i'm saying it's because of talent, you're the ones saying it's because of schedule the last 4 years, when you said that is why you lost the last 17 years.

you're the ones saying it's because of schedule the last 4 years


your assumption cannot stand on its on...USC could have


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:54 PM
 

other good/serviceable DE that would also help defend. In fact, if you watch the game, Boyd was often flushed out by others and into JC's hands. The entire DL was dominate.

If you are saying that if CU played 11 against 10, then yes, maybe there would be a chance that CU could scheme out a win.


Bull crap, there is only ONE Clowney on SC


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:08 PM
 

please name that other DE that is anywhere near Clowney?

military_donation.jpg

4 SEC teams (29%) are firing their staffs. Is that an answer***

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 2:55 PM
 




Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:24 PM
 

For years USC finished with "The Orange Crush" Tennessee Florida and Clemson. In 2008 there last five games were LSU Florida Arkansas Tennessee Clemson. Clemson finished the year against BC FSU Duke Virginia USC. So yes that took a toll. Since that was changed in 2010 USC has become more competitve.


Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:44 PM
 

South Carolina has also gotten a lot better in that timeframe. In 2008 we were 7-6, the last two years we've gone 10-2 in the regular season.

Correlation does not imply causation.


Carolina can't play with the "big boys" of the SEC..........

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:35 PM
 

Out of 8 SEC games, only three were against perrenial powerhouse teams, Georgia (who obviously had an off night), LSU, and FLA, who both beat them. The rest of their schedule was filled with the likes of ECU, UAB, and Wofford (who gave them a ###### good scare). I'm convinced Vanderbilt and Tennessee would have beaten them without some very questionable no-calls/calls by Spurrier's officials. The rest Kentucky, Arkansas, and Missouri would be easy pickin's for anybody this year.
The LimpCocks just cannot play with the big boys of the SEC. The SEC has as many push-overs as any conference.


Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:42 PM
 

Man, I should've made that bet with you Bryant


Their 2nd best win came against us...***


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:47 PM
 




True! Our best win on GameDay was much bigger/better


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:03 PM
 

Just curious, who was CU's second best win?


The real question is, why has CU's O add no success


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:48 PM
 

these past four years? 34-14, 29-7, 34-13 and 27-17...how many wins do you get scoring those numbers?

BTW until a few years ago we'd play Arkie, UT, FL and CU the last month of the year. I wonder if CU played VA Tech, Miami and FSU before our game for 10-15 years in a row if it would matter?


*had no success ****


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:51 PM
 




So which is it? Cause you play in the SEC you're having


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:53 PM
 

success or it caused you to lose to us as why? So that is the only reason SC lost to Clemson? No it's because we had better defensive talent, you do right now, but it's starting to turn back toward Clemson with LB gonna be loaded and a great one coming from OU to play this year and being said he is the best LB on the team. Adams who is a game changer is probably coming to Clemson, Lawson is high on us, Alexander is high on us. Crowder a stud Ol is coming. Clemson is very young on the OL and that was SC's strength. That is why you won, not because of schedule. Also please chose one of the excuses, cause you can't have too tough or tougher then CU when it suits you. No you have better talent

military_donation.jpg

I clearly stated that for many years the killer schedule


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:56 PM
 

in November played a role in some of our losses to CU. That changed 4-5 years ago I think.


Re: So which is it? Cause you play in the SEC you're having


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:00 PM
 

Our OL is very young too. Two sophomores and a freshman starting...


Can you coots not get any points? Yeah and lets compare


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:16 PM
 

what the OL's had to go against? Who has a better DL?

military_donation.jpg

Re: This crap with SC saying they play a tough game every week


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 3:53 PM
 

You're right. We played three teams worth a crap in three consecutive weeks; all top ten.

Georgia
LSU
Florida

Did I miss anyone?


And lost to two of them...........

[1]
Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:01 PM
 

You only beat the weak links in the SEC. LimpCocks are second tier and will never be an SEC powerhouse like ALA, LSU, FL, GA.


Re: And lost to two of them...........


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:03 PM
 

Good to know Clemson is 3rd tier then.


No......


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:06 PM
 

CU is not in the SEC. But if they were they'd be mediocre just like SC.


Correct. Talent and better coaching the difference now*****


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:07 PM
 




No one can expect Dabo to better coaching than Old sack


Posted: Nov 28, 2012 4:19 PM
 

after being in his 4th season. Spurrier has benefited from better players, cause he didn't do crap his first 5 years. So why isn't it granted that Dabo get time to get his guys in?

military_donation.jpg

Replies: 65  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: SEASON TICKETS FOR 2021 Lower Deck Section T, row 18, seats 5 & 7, plus a parking pass. $1900

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
1546 people have read this post