|
Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
|
Replies: 64
| visibility 2347
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:39 PM
|
|
Contrary to popular belief, if you have been paying attention to the CFB playoff voting and listening to the comments you would quickly realize that it was the loss to ND that did us in as far as playoff contention. Because of the committee's poor opinion of the ACC in general, a champion in the ACC would have needed to be undefeated to secure a playoff spot this year.
Case in point, after our loss to ND we still trailed a 2-loss LSU and ALA in the committee's ranking each week and never moved back above #9. Had we beaten SC, we would still have been #8 at best and even with the upsets, those who lost would still be ranked ahead of us. There was never a scenario where we would jump from #9 to #4 after beating an unranked SC.
People keep trying to put a lot of stock in a conference championship but they forget that the playoffs are about ranking and not about a conference tie-in. The committee has never believed, since our loss to ND, that we are 1 of the 4 best teams in America and a win against SC was not going to change that. Just watch where we land in the final playoff vote today and I bet after winning the championship last night we barely move up, if at all. That will tell you all you need to know about where we really stand in the eyes of the committee.
So, take that one worry off your plate about the SC loss costing us a playoff. It did not. ND did...
|
|
|
|
 |
Game Changer [1627]
TigerPulse: 97%
31
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:40 PM
|
|
Totally agree. OSU would have gotten because of head to head with ND and because ……
Ohio state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10825]
TigerPulse: 100%
45
|
Committee would have taken into account
Dec 4, 2022, 12:53 PM
|
|
The QB change. I don’t agree
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Day Hero [4513]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
Re: Committee would have taken into account
Dec 5, 2022, 3:55 AM
|
|
Bingo, would have needed to make that change probably in the louisville game or miami game though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3957]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Committee would have taken into account
Dec 5, 2022, 5:30 AM
|
|
If UNC would have won its last two games and been a top 10 team, I believe a 12-1 Clemson team would have been in at #4.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3874]
TigerPulse: 92%
35
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:42 PM
|
|
It would have made their decision harder, or their bias more obvious at least.
A 12-1 conference champ not making it in (with what happened with the other top teams) would have made keeping us at 5 or 6 very difficult for them with the only loss being on the road and with a different QB.
They may still have left us out, no doubt, but I think had we seen Cade in the SC game and won it we would be in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [62]
TigerPulse: 100%
7
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:44 PM
|
|
This is what I am thinking as well. Had we looked like we did last night, hard to keep us out with only 1 loss and a conference championship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [362]
TigerPulse: 94%
16
|
I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules
Dec 4, 2022, 12:43 PM
|
|
How do you explain Tenn when they’re not a Conf champion and in our common opponent they got blown away?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3874]
TigerPulse: 92%
35
|
Re: I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules
Dec 4, 2022, 12:45 PM
|
|
Because none of the rankings after 4 make a difference.
5 or 6 is functionally the same as 26... you ain't in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules
Dec 4, 2022, 12:47 PM
[ in reply to I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules ] |
|
That furthers my point. The committee has voted them #6 even with all of that. The SEC gives them an edge whereas the ACC takes points away from us. The bottom line is even at 12-1, our loss to ND looks large because the only way in for us would have been to leap OSU who beat ND and that wasn't going to happen with what would have been our only loss being to ND.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2044]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
Re: I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules
Dec 4, 2022, 4:49 PM
|
|
they would factor when OSU beat ND, that ND team was a bit of a mess, took them a month or so to get their collective identity. We hit them at home at a peak point and we started out from behind the chains (our own fault).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [831]
TigerPulse: 94%
23
|
Re: I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules
Dec 4, 2022, 12:50 PM
[ in reply to I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules ] |
|
We lost at home to USC. It wasn't a blowout, but "our loss to Carolina is better than your loss to Carolina" is the bottom of the list for comparing teams. They beat Alabama. We didn't beat anyone that good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [432]
TigerPulse: 100%
17
|
Re: I think you’re right. What’s interesting is they’re not following their own rules
Dec 4, 2022, 3:45 PM
|
|
We lost at home to USC. It wasn't a blowout, but "our loss to Carolina is better than your loss to Carolina" is the bottom of the list for comparing teams. They beat Alabama. We didn't beat anyone that good.
The notion we didn’t beat anyone good is absurd Why do we assume Alabama is better than Florida State this year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Day Hero [4437]
TigerPulse: 100%
36
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:45 PM
|
|
Yeah, ########.
We would have been in without the loss to USC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1101]
TigerPulse: 76%
26
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:46 PM
|
|
Keep believing that if it helps you sleep better at night…
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:54 PM
|
|
I am going to sleep fine either way and look forward to the Orange Bowl and hopefully crushing TN.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [831]
TigerPulse: 94%
23
|
Of course it did (combined with the Notre Dame loss)
Dec 4, 2022, 12:46 PM
|
|
Disagree - as do most of the sports talking heads - we would have jumped other teams if we went 12-1 with a dominant ACC Championship game win. You pointed out LSU (who were killed by Georgia) and Alabama (who sat at home) - no multiple loss team has made the playoff. If we beat USC, we'd have passed OSU either then or in the final seeding.
TCU didn't even win their conference championship and came it at #3 because they were 12-1. As Clemson would have been, but with a conference championship.
Also, note that no 12-1 P5 conference has missed the playoff except for the single season that would have required a fifth playoff spot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Of course it did (combined with the Notre Dame loss)
Dec 4, 2022, 12:50 PM
|
|
If we are 12-1 and OSU is 12-1 and OSU beat the team that beat us, the committee was always going to favor that over us winning the ACC. Comparable opponents is looked at very closely as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [26664]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 46334
Joined: 2010
|
OSU is 11-1... No CCG. Therein lies the difference.***
Dec 4, 2022, 12:53 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: OSU is 11-1... No CCG. Therein lies the difference.***
Dec 4, 2022, 12:56 PM
|
|
True on the 11-1. But if winning the conference really means anything then we should really jump this week in the final rankings. Let's see what happens...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1039]
TigerPulse: 96%
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2044]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Of course it did (combined with the Notre Dame loss)
Dec 4, 2022, 1:03 PM
[ in reply to Of course it did (combined with the Notre Dame loss) ] |
|
If all of that were true, we should have been higher than #9 with only one loss before the SC game. We were never positioned by the committee to be close enough to move above so many other teams even if we had not lost to SC. My point was the committee signaled all along they just didn't believe Clemson was a top 4 team in their eyes, otherwise they would have moved us closer to contention.
We should have never continued to be ranked behind 2-loss ALA and LSU teams and that was my first indication that the committee was not giving us the recognition we deserved and was not going to reward us with a playoff spot simply for winning the ACC. It may not be right but that was the path they were signaling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7377]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:47 PM
|
|
Hard to say for sure but USCs rather easy win over ND hurt us as well. So did UNCs weak finish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starter [263]
TigerPulse: 95%
14
|
Except not really, and you’ll never know so neither of us can say for sure
Dec 4, 2022, 12:49 PM
|
|
They’ve clearly shown in past years both that conference champs get the nod in “equivalent” teams, as well as that they’ve got no problems moving a team 3+ spots in one week after major changes. It’s not like the AP/coaches polls simple “win and move up, lose and move down, don’t move relative to another team that also won”
The “sparkle” of Cade at QB would have been relevant, and they would not have left a line loss conference champ out in that scenario, I think. But the point is it certainly was a nonzero possibility had we not lost last week - I think it a high one
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Except not really, and you’ll never know so neither of us can say for sure
Dec 4, 2022, 1:22 PM
|
|
If they viewed us and OSU as equivalent then I agree with you that would have been a point to consider but they would have also considered that OSU beat the team we lost to and also, I don't think they ever considered us equivalent to OSU to where it would have even mattered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8064]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 12:49 PM
|
|
100%
The perception train about how much better the Big 10 is had left the station. Then we lost to ND.
Despite beating a then #10 NCSU. A #13 at the time Wake. A #15 Syracuse the voters did not respect the ACC as much as they did the lowsy Big 10.
And, the Big 10 is lowsy don't fool yourself. Case in point: The big 10 west champion was beaten by ACC foe Syracuse!!!!
Yet, Michigan and OSU got the "pass"! Because one would have to lose to the other in the super weak Big 10 it sets up for both of them making it. If those nostalgic minded talking football heads had their way - i'm sure they would have two SEC teams and two Big 10 teams.
SMH.
In short, the loss to scar didn't do it. We weren't going to make it unless we were perfect despite having played what ended up being a pretty impressive schedule. FSU is ranked. Louisville got ranked prior to losing to UK.
We aren't a bad team; the teams we played were all better than their records. Biggest thing; I think we will be just fine as a program.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3652]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Disagree. And furthermore what happened to the
Dec 4, 2022, 12:50 PM
|
|
good ole eye test? We were a much better team last night than at any point in the season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Disagree. And furthermore what happened to the
Dec 4, 2022, 12:51 PM
|
|
Against a very poor defense and a fading team that lost their last 3 in a row.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13392]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 12960
Joined: 2001
|
Let me put it to you this way...if we had beaten SC at home
Dec 4, 2022, 12:51 PM
|
|
last weekend we would be in the CFP right now. And had our coaches not bungled the QB situation to high he!! I firmly believe we win that game and probably easily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Let me put it to you this way...if we had beaten SC at home
Dec 4, 2022, 1:05 PM
|
|
That all sounds fine but that wasn't the impression of the committee based on the way they were ranking us and others all along.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1857]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: Let me put it to you this way...if we had beaten SC at home
Dec 4, 2022, 1:09 PM
|
|
Clemson would have jumped TCU
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Let me put it to you this way...if we had beaten SC at home
Dec 4, 2022, 1:24 PM
|
|
TCU lost and probably isn't even going to move at all so I really doubt Clemson would have jumped from #9 to #3 after beating an unranked (at the time) SC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1857]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: Let me put it to you this way...if we had beaten SC at home
Dec 4, 2022, 1:32 PM
|
|
Clemson win over usuck and winning the ACC trumps TCU losing to Kansas State.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23200]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 14101
Joined: 2013
|
I tend to agree. These media buffoons are still questioning how close Bammer was to getting in…
Dec 4, 2022, 12:51 PM
|
|
Over OSU.
AND THE USE OF VEGAS BETTING LINES IN PICKING TEAMS IS DRIVING ME NUCKING FUTS!!!
I’m just glad Vegas allowed us to play Bammer in those championship games cuz clearly we weren’t worthy or deserving.
?
~JKB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Athletic Dir [1125]
TigerPulse: 98%
26
|
Re: I tend to agree. These media buffoons are still questioning how close Bammer was to getting in…
Dec 4, 2022, 1:03 PM
|
|
Cade at QB is a playoff team.
DJ was not and it cost us one if not two losses and almost certainly a return to the cfp.
Remember, the ND game 2 plays cost us 21 points, we came out flat and had the blocked punt for a td, and pick 6 with Ngata wide open in the end zone was a 14 point swing.
But now we are past that learning curve at least we got to see some Clemson football last night after DJ’s charity start/ two drives and then getting the majority of our roster in up by 4 scores in the 4th.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2044]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
Re: I tend to agree. These media buffoons are still questioning how close Bammer was to getting in…
Dec 4, 2022, 5:02 PM
|
|
no need to disparage DJ. Cade came in and got the reigns and he's not giving them back ala DW4 and TL16
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [26664]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 46334
Joined: 2010
|
Disagree... Not going to debate it, tho...***
Dec 4, 2022, 1:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3625]
TigerPulse: 98%
35
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 1:23 PM
|
|
It was the loss to the coots. Thats fact. We beat the coots and we were in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 1:26 PM
|
|
We were #9 before we lost to SC. Do you really think winning the ACC was going to move us up that much when nothing the committee had done up to that point indicated that much interest in Clemson as a final 4 team?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [3625]
TigerPulse: 98%
35
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 1:28 PM
|
|
All of the pundits disagree with you. Just so you know. You're clueless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16126]
TigerPulse: 97%
51
Posts: 24632
Joined: 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1039]
TigerPulse: 96%
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7819]
TigerPulse: 97%
42
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 1:25 PM
|
|
Total BS…. Period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 1:27 PM
|
|
Believe what you want but the committee wasn't buying it all along based on the way they ranked us and others each week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1039]
TigerPulse: 96%
25
|
Agreed***
Dec 4, 2022, 1:35 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Redshirt [98]
TigerPulse: 92%
10
|
Disagree, but WHO CARES, we lost to Usuck
Dec 4, 2022, 1:37 PM
|
|
and no way I'll ever believe we lose that game if Cade played instead of the Big Stinko.
12-1 Conference champ gets in over OSU when they got boat raced on their home field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17045]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 16937
Joined: 2004
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 1:37 PM
|
|
Totally disagree. Our conference championship would bump us above every other one loss team that is a non-conference champion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [8114]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 2:22 PM
|
|
Beat South Carolina we move up to at least six. Hold serve with North Carolina we get bumped up with the two losses to number four. Quite frankly, I’d rather not get our brains beaten by Georgia this year though
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [19657]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 15031
Joined: 2010
|
Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 2:27 PM
|
|
slwcu79 ... Or did it? And who sez we lose to Notre Dame with a much better QB and a Defense who is not entirely on their own? I respect the Tiger players too much to be able to answer that hypothetical.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [440]
TigerPulse: 94%
17
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 2:44 PM
|
|
Yes, it did. Losing to a now ranked Notre Dame team, with a quarterback change, it would’ve been impossible to keep us out, given all of the changes in the rankings that have occurred, even despite the flagrant SEC bias.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16126]
TigerPulse: 97%
51
Posts: 24632
Joined: 2002
|
Unfortunately you are wrong…we would be in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 2:47 PM
|
|
With a win over SC. TCU even made it with one loss. Educate yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [4029]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 3:48 PM
|
|
I'm going to disagree really hard with you there. With how everything has played out at this point. We beat the coots and win the ACCCG with Cade in we would be sitting pretty at #3 going to play Michigan. Our ranking prior to the Coot loss set us up to slide right in there. I don't want the Coots to take credit for it but it happened and we just gotta suck it up and move on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 3:53 PM
|
|
Based on the final ranking it probably would have come down to us and OSU and the committee would have had to decide if winning the ACC was better than OSU beating the one team we lost to. I still think in the end they would have ranked OSU higher but unfortunately, we'll never know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [4029]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 4:00 PM
|
|
Nah, they rewarded conference champions in their rankings. Only reason TCU moved up was because they didn't want a OSU Mich rematch in the semis. I still think we would have been #3. TCU and OSU can fight for the #4 spot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 4:06 PM
|
|
That assumes they view the conferences equally which I am not convinced they do. I think OSU beating the team that beat us would have been a problem but I also could see it working out in our favor. The subjectivity makes it too hard to know for sure because there is not a hard and fast rule to follow when it comes to these selections, only guidelines that are supposed to lead to a fair conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [4029]
TigerPulse: 100%
35
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 5, 2022, 12:49 AM
|
|
You're right we will never know because SC cost us a spot or chance into getting in. I do agree they don't view conferences equally. That's not a bad thing because not every conference is equal, that's just the reality of it as a season goes on and what makes rankings and scheduling important. I still think the Big10 in a depth perspective was the weakest conference this year by far and presented very VERY little challenge to either Mich & OSU. Pac12 and ACC tying for the next spot, maybe Pac12 taking the edge over ACC. I still think 12-1 Clemson is in over Ohio State. They can't punish us for playing that extra game and leaving us out.
But who knows with those people. I still don't think Ohio State deserved to be in the 2020 playoff playing only 5-6 games or whatever it was while everyone else played 10,11 or 12. That was baffling, I don't care how good they may have been. They basically punished everyone else in the country playing nearly full schedules by doing that. But that's a tangent for a different day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2044]
TigerPulse: 99%
31
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 4:42 PM
|
|
We will never know, but IF Clemson had beat SCar and all else being the same Clemson likely would have gotten the bid. Especially after Cade's performance and the D shutting down a QB who was being discussed in the Heisman circles.
As I said, we will never know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20825]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
Posts: 12678
Joined: 2018
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 5:19 PM
|
|
The committee paved the way for OSU to get in over ALA using the ND win as a big reason. I'm afraid if it were us instead of ALA because we only had 1 loss, we would have run into the same rationalization, even with an ACC championship in our pocket.
“I think you look at the big wins as well, as part of this,” Corrigan said. “The wins that Ohio State has over Notre Dame, the win they had over Penn State. Compare that to Alabama with the wins over Texas, Mississippi State and some other close games.”
https://www.al.com/alabamafootball/2022/12/cfp-chair-explains-why-ohio-state-made-playoff-over-alabama.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [583]
TigerPulse: 100%
20
|
100% False.
Dec 4, 2022, 5:45 PM
|
|
UGA 1, Michigan 2.
Two spots up for grabs among:
Clemson 12-1 (ACC Champion)
TCU 12-1 (did not win conference)
Ohio State 11-1 (did not win conference)
Alabama 10-2 (did not win conference)
Tennessee 10-2 (did not win conference, QB injured).
There is no way in hell Clemson isn’t taken in one of the TWO spots available at 3-4. The loss to SC cost Clemson a spot in the CFP, period. There’s no reasonable argument to the contrary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11849]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 4, 2022, 6:10 PM
|
|
Totally wrong! A one loss conference champion would get in before a one loss team that did not win their division ..... period. It's not completely about the four best teams but the four best "deserving" teams. When we were undefeated and in the four team group, there were many that said we did not "deserve" to be there, but the committee felt differently. I saw no sign that they were disrespecting the ACC or us!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13365]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 16723
Joined: 2010
|
Which is why Cade should have been practicing with the 1s
Dec 5, 2022, 12:52 AM
|
|
After he bailed us out of the Syracuse game and it was clear that Steph Curry couldn’t run the offense
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [2029]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 5, 2022, 12:56 AM
|
|
It may not have cost us a spot in the playoff but it certainly cost me a lot of money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [725]
TigerPulse: 99%
22
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 5, 2022, 4:27 AM
|
|
Sad fact is that we will never truly know. A 1 loss ACC conference champ wouldn't get left out imo. That 1 point loss was larger than some are willing to admit. Perhaps it's because they don't want to lend credence to the fact that the yard birds kept us out of the playoffs. Not sure, but a 12-1 ACC champion Clemson is in imo. We can sit here and say what the committee was thinking, but none of us know, nor will we likely ever know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [31589]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
Posts: 18166
Joined: 2008
|
Re: Losing the SC game DID NOT cost us a spot in the playoffs
Dec 5, 2022, 7:27 AM
|
|
This is next level gaslighting. Yes, it did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 64
| visibility 2347
|
|
|
|
50
