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.
I know the Gamecocks have played NCState, East Carolina(alot)and UNC out of conference over the same time period. Now that's stepping it up.
On a non smack-talk note, you've swerved into something I've been thinking for a while. I would like to see SC schedule more intersectional-type matchups against teams from other parts of the country...not necessarily to make for a tougher schedule (SEC slate + clemson is tough enough), but for a more interesting schedule. Oregon State would be an obvious first choice, but there are others I'd like to play too...if nothing else than to get an interesting road trip possibility out of it.
On a non smack-talk note, you've swerved into something I've been thinking for a while. I would like to see SC schedule more intersectional-type matchups against teams from other parts of the country...not necessarily to make for a tougher schedule (SEC slate + clemson is tough enough), but for a more interesting schedule. Oregon State would be an obvious first choice, but there are others I'd like to play too...if nothing else than to get an interesting road trip possibility out of it.
I agree on the road trips and seeing different schools in your own stadium however
I am not so sure with this small 4 team playoff that strength of schedule will make a big difference. I believe it would be if it expanded to 16 or 32 teams and you were trying to get in. SC already fits the new SEC model 8+1 (Clemson) and I imagine the ACC will follow suit. I think you are going to need to be undefeated and conference champion or one loss and conf. champion to be one of the 4 chosen ones out of the 5 power conferences so my argument has been with fellow Clemson fans - Why make the schedule even tougher and risk another loss? Clemson is now required to play Notre Dame also once every 3 seasons in addition to SC and the 8 conference games.
On a non smack-talk note, you've swerved into something I've been thinking for a while. I would like to see SC schedule more intersectional-type matchups against teams from other parts of the country...not necessarily to make for a tougher schedule (SEC slate + clemson is tough enough), but for a more interesting schedule. Oregon State would be an obvious first choice, but there are others I'd like to play too...if nothing else than to get an interesting road trip possibility out of it.
doubtful it will ever happen as long as Spurrier is here. He schedules those OOC games to help expand the "brand" (so to speak) in areas we recruit. He has also been vocal in the past about having a fairly strictly defined recruiting area (seemingly focusing primarily on SC, NC, GA, and FL, and then Mangus with the northeast). If we are going to expand our recruiting foot print I would prefer we start with Texas, maybe playing A&M annually now will help with that. It would especially be nice since the current #1 ranked player in the country for the 2016 class is in Texas and his father played for Carolina.
Would like to see us in the top 20 for this ranking. But, our entire athletic department is doing well from funding to the classroom to on field success. I am glad that the university has a broad focus on athletics and not just towards one sport.
Would like to see us in the top 20 for this ranking. But, our entire athletic department is doing well from funding to the classroom to on field success. I am glad that the university has a broad focus on athletics and not just towards one sport.
The Director's Cup is really a number's game that doesn't mean much to the average fan. If you had the choice between winning the BCS, the men's NCAA basketball tournament and the college world series, or winning the championship in fencing, women's bowling, men's gymnastics, women's ice hockey, and men's and women's water polo which would you take? The latter would get you twice as many Director's Cup points, even though you might only be competing against a couple dozen schools in some of the sports. Finishing first out of 351 schools who field division 1 men's basketball teams is worth the same amount of points as finishing first among the 22 schools who field a men's water polo team.
Both in state schools would have to greatly expand their athletic departments if they wanted to rank highly in this competition. Last year, Stanford qualified for points in things like women's lacrosse, women's rowing, women's softball, women's water polo, fencing, men's and women's gymnastics, men's and women's swimming, men's wrestling, men's and women's cross country and women's field hockey. All of these programs are not available at one or both of the in state schools. To be fair, Stanford is generally very good in the big time sports as well.
The Director's Cup is really a number's game that doesn't mean much to the average fan. If you had the choice between winning the BCS, the men's NCAA basketball tournament and the college world series, or winning the championship in fencing, women's bowling, men's gymnastics, women's ice hockey, and men's and women's water polo which would you take? The latter would get you twice as many Director's Cup points, even though you might only be competing against a couple dozen schools in some of the sports. Finishing first out of 351 schools who field division 1 men's basketball teams is worth the same amount of points as finishing first among the 22 schools who field a men's water polo team.
Both in state schools would have to greatly expand their athletic departments if they wanted to rank highly in this competition. Last year, Stanford qualified for points in things like women's lacrosse, women's rowing, women's softball, women's water polo, fencing, men's and women's gymnastics, men's and women's swimming, men's wrestling, men's and women's cross country and women's field hockey. All of these programs are not available at one or both of the in state schools. To be fair, Stanford is generally very good in the big time sports as well.
I understand all if that but I don't see it as either/or. I want to see Carolina do well in every sport where we field a team. I would like to see our program more in line with Florida who is good in most sports rather than schools who put a minimum into everything but one team.
We finished 35 on this list, not bad but we can do better.
I think Clemson historically is better than SC in football, basketball, soccer, tennis, and baseball, and by historically I mean since it stopped being a military college and was given the university designation. Probably track and field and golf too.
Other than recent titles in baseball, SC has never amounted to much in athletics. Most people below 45 don't care much about baseball. Just not fun to watch.
Even in two of SC's baseball title years or runner up, 2002 and 2010, Clemson had beat SC 3 out of 4 and 2 out of 3 in the regular season games but SC won the playoff games against Clemson.
Even after all the ESPN hype due to Spurrier being there, SC has no SEC titles and only won the weak SEC east once and then proceeded to get beat by a bigger point margin in the SEC title game than Clemson did in that bowl game with West Virginia, despite SC having a much better defense that year than Clemson. Ironically, SC fans have been able to keep that WVa game associated with Clemson football while few people remember the beatdown Auburn gave them in the SEC title game. Clemson had played Auburn tougher that year than anybody and actually led the game 17-0 until our QB was hit hard in the head.
SC's biggest wins over the last few years in football have been a down UGA program (on defense), Clemson (which just fired a coach mid season a few years ago), Alabama the year they didn't win a title between their other 3 title wins, and a few non-OSU mediocre big 10 teams in bowl games. You would think they had beat the likes of FSU, Oregon, Olkohama State, LSU, Ohio State, etc. The SEC east as been at least as bad as the ACC is claimed to be and SC has lost most of their contests with good teams in the other division over the past 5 years. SC played the worse two teams in the SEC west division last year, Arkansas and Miss State.
Last edited by Clempson; 07-05-2014 at 04:06 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.
