Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sam's arguments are the same tired arguments you will read on Tigernet, nothing more. Trying to diminish the SEC is laughable even according to reporters who cover the ACC. In the WS Journal, the lead Wake Forest Reporter said that the ACC is better with the new teams but no on the same planet as the SEC. The ACC bloggers on ESPN talk repeatedly about the ACC being the nation's 5th best conference and what it has to do to make improvements. All of the stuff by Sam is the same Clemson BS. Fact is that Clemson wins 1/3 of their games against SEC teams, they are only getting at best 75% of the revenue stream of SEC teams and that gap will widen. On the field, Clemson played the game of their life and barely beat an uninspired SEC team with a last second FG at a neutral site. Playing SEC teams on occasion is a lot different than playing UGA, LSU and UF back to back, 2 of the 3 on the road. Would Clemson challenge for an SEC title, doubt it.
There is a difference in the teams between the two conferences. While the ACC loads up on skill positions, the SEC loads up on linemen. The defensive line at Carolina is terrific and not just because of Clowney, Quarles is a run stopper and Sutton had roughly 5 sacks last year as a backup. Carolina's season will be decided on how well the receivers come along. New linebackers can be helped a lot by a great line but, without being able to throw the ball, teams will out 8 folks in the box and stuff the run, that is hard to do in the SEC. Hope we can get the stable of running backs in shape quickly.
Looking at bowl records the past year, the SEC had 9 wins over teams such as Michigan, Notre Dame, & Nebraska. And, keep in mind that lower ranked SEC teams play higher ranked teams from other conferences. The ACC has only won 2 BCS games in forever.....according to the WS Journal, "The ACC disaster begins with the 2-13 record in BCS games, which trails the Big East (7-7) and every league right up to the SEC kings (15-6)".
Financially, Clemson and FSU are trying to be creative in keeping up with UF ad Carolina. The financial gap will widen between the schools in the coming years as the SEC Network comes online. What does that GAP mean? I am not sure but, in the 70's and 80's when Carolina was independent and had less money than Clemson, things went south for Carolina. I don't expect for Carolina to always have huge win streaks but, I also don't see Clemson dominating the series for a long time.
Money is important but reality is SC still doesn't recruit that well out of state. It has been fortunate to get some studs who grew up in SC like Clowney but high school talent in SC isn't always going to produce a lot of great players. Once Spurrier goes away and you have to go with a coach who is less well known look for the program to start to get back to where it was. You can dress up that stadium all you want but end of the day it is lipstick on a pig and you won't be getting kids out of Florida and Georgia to play there vs Georgia and Florida and Florida State. USC just doesn't have a unique football atmosphere compared to Clemson, that is why we been able to get studs like Spiller and Watkins out of Florida.
SEC was 1-4 against Big East last year. FLorida got spanked by Louisville.
I've already said the SEC's overall advantage is up front in the trenchs with big hosses but it isn't usually that way with SC. That is why you had several winless or 1 win seasons in the 90's and were mediocre most of the 00's. Some seasons you will be better on that front than others. It does help mask your average or below average offense for sure.
I would expect most of SC's money advantage comes from the SEC tv contract. Obviously playing in the SEC benefits them but what can Clemson do about that. I like playing in the ACC, I'd rather play UNC and NC State and Ga Tech than Miss State and Ole Miss and Kentucky. Just more schools closer to Clemson.
Clemson has beat Tenn, LSU, Kentucky in bowl games the last 10 years with only bowl game lost being once to Kentucky in Nashville. So 3-1 in recent bowl games. We also have two wins over Auburn, going 2-1 against them in 3 years, a win over LSU. I think we lost a 2 game series with UGA back in 2007-2008 when they were much better than now, especially on defense. I can't think of any other SEC teams we have played recently, maybe a loss at Alabama Tommy Bowden's last season. That looks like we are winning at least 50% of our games against SEC last 10 years. We had won 8 out of 9 over USC and 10 of 15 against USC prior to your big 4 year run. SC is the only team Clemson plays consistently enough from the SC to make any conclusions and we have dominated the series 60-40 percent. we've won 4 years in a row 4 different times since 1980s. 4 wins in a row for SC can't erase that.
Once SC gets back to mediocre or losing season,, much of that money is going to dry up for them. I expect the ACC is going to continue to improve and I think ACC has a tv contract with ESPN now so maybe ESPN won't puff up SEC exclusive to all the other conferences like they used to. If all high school kids here is SEC is best conference from ESPN people it only helps SEC continue to recruit. The conference cheerleading and comparison is just speculation anyway and many years SEC teams don't see any teams with NFL type of QBs that you see in ACC. Duke sent their QB and top WR to the NFL from last year. When is last time SC had NFL QB. LOL
I think a conference with a competitive Miami, Clemson, FSU, Va Tech, Ga Tech, Louiville with some other programs like UNC and NC State and BC and Sryacuse capable of good seasons , with Notre Dame playing 5 games a season, is as good as as the SEC and actually probably more competitive top to bottom. ND itself is probably going to increase tv viewership of ACC along with our bigger geographic footprint which is actually much better than SEC now.
SEC was like 2-6 in bowl games a few years ago and ACC was like 6-2. You can't draw many conclusions about bowl games b/c the matchups usually don't make any sense and anybody can win one game.
Interesting that you are talking trash to a team that beat you at your house.
Actually, against LSU, Carolina was leading in the fourth quarter in Deth Valley. So, I would call that competitive.
As for Clemson, Carolina did dominate the 2nd half. I can't remember how many plays Clemson ran but, the Clemson offense was shut down. You had no answer for Clowney, Swearinger, Hampton, Taylor or any of the other 2 deep. On offense, you had no answer for back up running backs or a 2 star QB out of HS.
Clemson is like 9-3 or 9-4 in "your house" last 12 or 13 years. Including a 63-17 domination when we had Charlie Whitehurst. You had fans leaving in the first half of that game.
Your backup RB last year was more elusive and quicker than Lattimore who I think was overrated although part of was injury related. I think he's gone now along with your other RB's and most of your WR's including Ace Sanders. If all you got is Bruce Ellington your offense is going to struggle. He's ok but not a primary target type of player.
Clemson's offensive coordinator didn't call a good game and he didn't return with our RB Hot Rod who was running well on SC in first half. but it was mostly they couldn't block CLowney. Your defense could be had in the secondary if QB has time to throw but clearly Boyd didn't have time to throw and he rushed it when did, b/c Clowney. You guys need to build a monument to that guy b/c he's the best player SC ever seen and ever will see again. LOL
Clemson is like 9-3 or 9-4 in "your house" last 12 or 13 years. Including a 63-17 domination when we had Charlie Whitehurst. You had fans leaving in the first half of that game.
Your backup RB last year was more elusive and quicker than Lattimore who I think was overrated although part of was injury related. I think he's gone now along with your other RB's and most of your WR's including Ace Sanders. If all you got is Bruce Ellington your offense is going to struggle. He's ok but not a primary target type of player.
Clemson's offensive coordinator didn't call a good game and he didn't return with our RB Hot Rod who was running well on SC in first half. but it was mostly they couldn't block CLowney. Your defense could be had in the secondary if QB has time to throw but clearly Boyd didn't have time to throw and he rushed it when did, b/c Clowney. You guys need to build a monument to that guy b/c he's the best player SC ever seen and ever will see again. LOL
Clowney is the best player to play for either school except for George Rogers.
We'll see how the running backs look, a good line can make an average RB great. As you saw with Dylan, even a 2 star recruit can do well with good coaches and a good line, remember, he threw for 300+ yards at your house. Mike Davis can be good as can Wilds and a 4 star recruit from Pennsylvania ( what were you saying about our recruiting limited to SC?)...., I think the majority of our recruits last year were not from SC, don't believe everything you read on Tigernet.
Funny thing about recruiting is that we have consistently recruited well. I don't see that hanging when Shawn Elliott (the coach who turned down an opportunity to coach at Alabama) takes over.
It is interesting that you see Carolina being a 500 club in the future with Clemson becoming the next Alabama, how is that?
Seems as though Carolina fans are being level headed and you can't handle Carolina being a good program. Clemson folks predicted the demise of our baseball program when Coach Tanner moved to AD, that did not happen. And, I don't expect our football team to drop when Spurrier retires. You should be worried about your offense when Morris leaves.
As for money, $20m annually and rising is a hard gap to overcome. Clemson is spending a ton in football but, eventually, that kind of funding gap is hard to overcome. I am not foolish enough to write that Clemson will fall way behind but, unless you repeat your cheating ways of the 80's, this series will not be one sided.
As for the SEC, it is a fact that Clemson has won about 1/3 of their games vs the SEC, look it up on the ESPN bloggers.
Do you believe the ACC and SEC are equal conferences? Do you believe Clemson would do better than Carolina in the SEC? Why?
Clowney is the best player to play for either school except for George Rogers.
We'll see how the running backs look, a good line can make an average RB great. As you saw with Dylan, even a 2 star recruit can do well with good coaches and a good line, remember, he threw for 300+ yards at your house. Mike Davis can be good as can Wilds and a 4 star recruit from Pennsylvania ( what were you saying about our recruiting limited to SC?)...., I think the majority of our recruits last year were not from SC, don't believe everything you read on Tigernet.
Funny thing about recruiting is that we have consistently recruited well. I don't see that hanging when Shawn Elliott (the coach who turned down an opportunity to coach at Alabama) takes over.
It is interesting that you see Carolina being a 500 club in the future with Clemson becoming the next Alabama, how is that?
Seems as though Carolina fans are being level headed and you can't handle Carolina being a good program. Clemson folks predicted the demise of our baseball program when Coach Tanner moved to AD, that did not happen. And, I don't expect our football team to drop when Spurrier retires. You should be worried about your offense when Morris leaves.
As for money, $20m annually and rising is a hard gap to overcome. Clemson is spending a ton in football but, eventually, that kind of funding gap is hard to overcome. I am not foolish enough to write that Clemson will fall way behind but, unless you repeat your cheating ways of the 80's, this series will not be one sided.
As for the SEC, it is a fact that Clemson has won about 1/3 of their games vs the SEC, look it up on the ESPN bloggers.
Do you believe the ACC and SEC are equal conferences? Do you believe Clemson would do better than Carolina in the SEC? Why?
Clowny might be the best player at his position for either school. I am pretty sure he isn't best ever for either school. Clemson has had some studs over the years. You really can't beat CJ Spiller at RB or Hopkins/ Sammy Watkins at WR.
I'd be surprised if CLemso doesn't have much better record against SEC than SC does. Given CLemson has like 26th best all time win loss record and SC is 78th. SC only has a better W-L record than 3 ACC schools, they are just a few spots above NC State and then over Duke and Wake Forest. Duke actually has dominated the series with SC.
SC went into the SEC with a losing record against the SEC. Now you guys claim you are national title contenders b/c of two good seasons. So a loser program goes to the "best" football conference and now they are players, at least in their own mind. Yet you claim Clemson couldn't handle it.
Given the fact we have dominated the rivalry with SC, 60 to 40 percent W-L, and that is the only SEC school we play on consisent basis , and we still outrecruit SC from out of state every year or almost every year despite not being in the SEC now, and we have highly ranked recruitig classes every year, yeah I think Clemson could do better than SC in the SEC. Clemson would never be going winless or 1 win for several seasons in a row in a conference that gets all kind of free hype from ESPN.
The money advantage USC has is basically b/c it is in the SEC which proves my point that the SEC helps SC more than SC helps it.
Nobody knows who yoru coach is that got offered a job at Alabama. He has no name recognition. He won't be on Spurrier or Hotz'es level with recruits.
I don't think either Clemson or SC are going to be next Alabama. Clemson has better shot at wining a "fluke" title one year than SC in my view. THere is just no long term success at SC to predict that kind of thing for them.
I'd like to see Clemson's record against SEC team since 1980 or so b/c I suspect it is pretty even. I know we done ok against SEC teams last decade.
I'd say ACC is better top to bottom than SEC. SEC top 2 teams every year might be better than ACC's top two teams although some years FSU, Va Tech, Miami probably will be better or lest even with top SEC team.
If Tenn and Auburn and Kentucky and the Miss schools get more competive than SEC would be superior. It is much easier to make title game out of the SEC b/c you can lose one or two games and not drop much in the rankings b/c of the SEC bias. ACC teams got to win out and it still won't be guaranteed. I can see a 1 loss or 2 loss Alabama team getting in over an undefeated SEC team right now b/c the bias is so out of control.
I laugh at anybody who says Les Miles and LSU were not pumped up to play Clemson. They wanted to win that game. Boyd din't have the game of his life in that game as somebody claimed, he has talent and put up the same numbers as Wonderboy at Texas AM but the white boy got more love partially b/c of that and he's in SEC. Boyd beat LSU, Wonderboy didn't. Conor Shaw didn't.
The game of the life QB is your "backup" QB against Clemson. That would somebody making more passes than he normally will. Won't happen again this lifetime against CLemson or any team.
2005
1-1 against ranked teams, lost to Clemson, lost bowl game.
Best wins: at Tenn by 1, at Ark. by 4
Bad loss: None
2006
1-5 against ranked teams, beat Clemson, won bowl game over sorry opponent.
Best wins: At unranked Clemson, at unranked Kentucky
Bad loss: None, but failed to score a point on Georgia
2007
2-3 against ranked teams, lost to Clemson, no bowl game, closed season on 5 game losing streak
Best wins: Kentucky (ranked 8 at the time), at UGA by 4 points
Bad loss: unranked Vanderbilt team
2008
0-3 against ranked teams, lost to Clemson, lost to unranked Iowa team in bowl game
Best win: one of your wins over a unranked middle of the pack SEC team or unranked NC State.
Bad loss: unranked Vanderbilt team
2009
2-3 against ranked teams, with the two wins over ranked teams being a win over CLemson and 6 point win over Ole Miss at SC. Lost to unranked Big East team Connecticut in bowl game
Best win: Clemson, or Vanderbilt (1st time in 3 years)
Worse loss: Beatdown at Ark and Tenn, both unranked teams
2010
4-3 against top 25 teams with one of these ranked teams being Furman at 25 (LOL). Beat Clemson. Lost to Auburn in SEC title game. Also lost to FSU in bowl game (SEC is better, right)
Best win: Alabama or Georgia
Worse loss: unranked Kentucky
2011
3-1 against ranked teams including Clemson. Won bowl game over ranked opponent. No SEC title game this year.
Best win: 3 and 5 point wins over UGA and Florida, both unranked, Florida being really bad
Worse loss: Lost to horrible Auburn team at home, drubbing at ranked Arkansas despite being ranked as high as them
2012
3-2 against ranked teams including Clemson. Won bowl game over ranked Michigan team who has 4-5 losses prior. No SEC title game
Best win: UGA at home, at Clemson
Worse loss: Couldn't score on FSU or LSU both teams with stagnant offenses and should be winnable for a top program.
Here are my takeaways. SC's success in the past 3 years is based mostly over beating UGA several times, Florida a couple of times, and Clemson 4 times and most just racking up wins against the bottom half of the SEC. SC has not any success against LSU or Auburn since Spurrier came on board, and one win over Bama the year they did pretty bad with Saban and didn't go to title game. These good wins are largely negated by bad losses to Vanderbilt, Auburn post-Cam, Kentucky, and a losing record to Arkansas despite being even programs.
This is the program Gamecock fans say is superior because they play in SEC.
[quote=Samoyed3;30366896] I'd say ACC is better top to bottom than SEC. SEC top 2 teams every year might be better than ACC's top two teams although some years FSU, Va Tech, Miami probably will be better or lest even with top SEC team.
quote]
This is the most absurd, mindless statement you've made. This is so glaringly bad, I refuse to read anything else you post.
Anyone that even keeps up with college football even at a very basic level, would never be so out of touch to say something like this. Points for thinking out of the box, but you're incomprehensibly wrong.
Clowny might be the best player at his position for either school. I am pretty sure he isn't best ever for either school. Clemson has had some studs over the years. You really can't beat CJ Spiller at RB or Hopkins/ Sammy Watkins at WR.
I'd be surprised if CLemso doesn't have much better record against SEC than SC does. Given CLemson has like 26th best all time win loss record and SC is 78th. SC only has a better W-L record than 3 ACC schools, they are just a few spots above NC State and then over Duke and Wake Forest. Duke actually has dominated the series with SC.
SC went into the SEC with a losing record against the SEC. Now you guys claim you are national title contenders b/c of two good seasons. So a loser program goes to the "best" football conference and now they are players, at least in their own mind. Yet you claim Clemson couldn't handle it.
Given the fact we have dominated the rivalry with SC, 60 to 40 percent W-L, and that is the only SEC school we play on consisent basis , and we still outrecruit SC from out of state every year or almost every year despite not being in the SEC now, and we have highly ranked recruitig classes every year, yeah I think Clemson could do better than SC in the SEC. Clemson would never be going winless or 1 win for several seasons in a row in a conference that gets all kind of free hype from ESPN.
The money advantage USC has is basically b/c it is in the SEC which proves my point that the SEC helps SC more than SC helps it.
Nobody knows who yoru coach is that got offered a job at Alabama. He has no name recognition. He won't be on Spurrier or Hotz'es level with recruits.
I don't think either Clemson or SC are going to be next Alabama. Clemson has better shot at wining a "fluke" title one year than SC in my view. THere is just no long term success at SC to predict that kind of thing for them.
I'd like to see Clemson's record against SEC team since 1980 or so b/c I suspect it is pretty even. I know we done ok against SEC teams last decade.
I'd say ACC is better top to bottom than SEC. SEC top 2 teams every year might be better than ACC's top two teams although some years FSU, Va Tech, Miami probably will be better or lest even with top SEC team.
If Tenn and Auburn and Kentucky and the Miss schools get more competive than SEC would be superior. It is much easier to make title game out of the SEC b/c you can lose one or two games and not drop much in the rankings b/c of the SEC bias. ACC teams got to win out and it still won't be guaranteed. I can see a 1 loss or 2 loss Alabama team getting in over an undefeated SEC team right now b/c the bias is so out of control.
I laugh at anybody who says Les Miles and LSU were not pumped up to play Clemson. They wanted to win that game. Boyd din't have the game of his life in that game as somebody claimed, he has talent and put up the same numbers as Wonderboy at Texas AM but the white boy got more love partially b/c of that and he's in SEC. Boyd beat LSU, Wonderboy didn't. Conor Shaw didn't.
The game of the life QB is your "backup" QB against Clemson. That would somebody making more passes than he normally will. Won't happen again this lifetime against CLemson or any team.
Just a couple of questions.......why do you on one hand use historical records from the beginning to classify Carolina and then change the rules when looking at Clemson? You are throwing up so much trash, you just want to see what sticks.
As for recruiting, it is what it is. We have consistently been in the top 20 and outside of a few players, no one is a sure bet, remember Willy Korn? Bowers was highly recruited and never met expectations. Garcia was a 4 Star out of Florida and never met his potential. Carolina recruits a lot more lineman each year which traditionally do not get as many stars as the skill players. Just curious, do you even know how recruiting rankings are compiled? In short, you don't win games in February.
What SEC bias? That is some mythical garbage spouted on the Clemson message boards. No sense in answering your statement about the ACC being equal to the SEC.........can I sell you the Cooper River Bridge?
As for LSU, no, they were not pumped to play that game and it showed. Half of their defense was on the sideline for the game due to nagging injuries. In any other game, those guys are playing. Boyd did have the game of his life, when you hit a 4th and 16 pass throwing off your back foot, that is the game of your life. If Boyd does that every week against top competition, he should win the Heisman like Johnny football at A&M. The big difference is that A&M plays against top teams, Boyd plays Duke, Wake, NC State, etc.....
We'll see who gets drafted first, Clowney or Watkins. CJ is good, just not in the same league as Clowney, he is a once in a decade player.
Hope Carolina does well this year, this is the most talented team depth wise we may have had in a while. If not, does not change my life, I still have to go to work on Monday AM win or lose.
Finally, the SEC would help Clemson more than Clemson would help the SEC.
I'd say ACC is better top to bottom than SEC. SEC top 2 teams every year might be better than ACC's top two teams although some years FSU, Va Tech, Miami probably will be better or lest even with top SEC team.
quote]
This is the most absurd, mindless statement you've made. This is so glaringly bad, I refuse to read anything else you post.
Anyone that even keeps up with college football even at a very basic level, would never be so out of touch to say something like this. Points for thinking out of the box, but you're incomprehensibly wrong.
It is funny, only Tigernet folks and Dabo actually believe that crap.
I'd say ACC is better top to bottom than SEC. SEC top 2 teams every year might be better than ACC's top two teams although some years FSU, Va Tech, Miami probably will be better or lest even with top SEC team.
quote]
This is the most absurd, mindless statement you've made. This is so glaringly bad, I refuse to read anything else you post.
Anyone that even keeps up with college football even at a very basic level, would never be so out of touch to say something like this. Points for thinking out of the box, but you're incomprehensibly wrong.
I dont' think it is at all. Miami has been to title game in recent years, played Ohio State or somebody. No SEC team there. Virginia tech and FSU played in title game one year, no SEC team in that one.
Clemson beat LSU last year and a case could be made LSU was 2nd best SEC team last year overall. FSU beat SC the year SC went to the SEC title game. Clemson has bowl wins over Tenn and Kentucky, and went 2-1 against Auburn in recent years.
Florida's run with Tebow and the Nick Saban era at Alabama really only thing that impressive about SEC and LSU has kind of been the consistent second best team in the SEC. You have a 4th school kind of cycle into the conversation every 3-4 years and then cycle back out. SC is that school right now but reality is it is a losing program historically and losing programs tend to start losing again after a few good years, and I see no reason why it is going to continue to get better and you lost a lot on offense from last year. It took Spurrier 5 years just to get people talkig about SC as a player in the SEC. Still not titles. If guy who made Florida can't win the SEC at SC, who is? LOL
When Miamia and FSU and VA Tech have been at their best they just as good as any top SEC school. The ACC was historically bad last season and the prior season wasn't much better but a few years ago it would be hard to make the case SEC is better, and I think SEC was pretty horrible last year. Even the better teams like Florida and LSU and UGA were much less talented as they were a few years ago. The bottom 8 or so of SEC don't scare other teams, that is for sure. Nobody ever said, Man I wish we didn't have to play Miss State or Kentucky, they too good.
Alabama doesn' even make the title game last year if Ohio State was ineligible so that was fluke title for SEC anyway and we will never know if Alabama would have beat Oregon or Kansas State who only had 1 loss as well. SEC bias is the difference maker for them, and some luck. Even Saban knows this. The year both LSU and Bama got to go was nonsense too.
I'm just getting tired of SC acting like they are an awesome program simply b/c they play Florida/Georgia and 1 decent school out of SEC west every year. Talk about your own school, stop making it about the conference which your school has nothing to do with in terms of winning titles.
Last edited by Samoyed3; 07-07-2013 at 05:41 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
