|
Replies: 68
| visibility 992
|
All-TigerNet [12666]
TigerPulse: 86%
47
Posts: 12291
Joined: 2011
|
South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 8:44 AM
|
|
Preseason love. Yet, last time I saw them they had zero points in the 4th quarter of our game in their own stadium. They got 10 garbage points thanks to Dabo calling off the dogs. I know they beat a mediocre Michigan team, but before the turnover gift parade by Michigan, I think Carolina had about 6 points late in that one.
From preseason talk, you'd never know that they lost 34-10 in their house and 56-7 the year before, 90-17 total.
|
|
|
|
 |
Game Changer [1634]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 9:03 AM
|
|
It has to be. E(SEC)PN must protect it's investment in SEC football. That requires that they build up all SEC teams preseason so that when they play conference games, their opponents are always ranked. Remember what Dabo says, "Nothing in the world is less important than preseason rankings." When the season is over and all the dust has settled, no one will be talking about the "yardbirds." They'll once again drift off into obscurity until their host network has to start building them up again for the 2020 season. So don't worry. They aren't going to win their conference again for the "umpteenth" time. Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [549]
TigerPulse: 89%
19
|
Ditto this***
Jul 14, 2018, 9:31 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Time Great [97789]
TigerPulse: 100%
63
Posts: 47709
Joined: 2009
|
YeP, i’m amazed too but PR work & being in sec will dazzle the brain
Jul 14, 2018, 9:05 AM
|
|
until a big Clemson Dman hits or intercepts you for quick 6!
BAM...here come the TiGERS again Cootie Hens, in Death Valley#1 in Nov.
Get use to it & the 5 sign (payback time)!
Go TiGERS..Jeep ROCKing ‘EM for Win #28 in the Series!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68088]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90176
Joined: 2001
|
It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 9:06 AM
|
|
Other than Clemson and Georgia, their schedule is a complete joke.
With that creampuff schedule, if they don't win at least nine games, the entire coaching staff should be fired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 9:38 AM
|
|
So they play two top 5 teams, Clemson plays none, and you criticize their schedule. Really nice take there bud
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3306]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 9:45 AM
|
|
Compare SOC, Bud !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
LOL. Who's fault is it that Clemson is top 5 and SC is not?
Jul 14, 2018, 9:50 AM
[ in reply to Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play... ] |
|
Anyway, there's much more to a schedule than just the very best teams at the top. The ACC, despite the reputation, isn't going to have many bad teams at all in 2018. BC is trending way up right now and returns most of their team from last season, Wake is very competent and beat A&M in a bowl last year, NC State was right around the top 25 and returns a great QB and potent offense if nothing else, FSU is likely going to be back on track this year under Taggart, and Louisville will probably never be truly bad as long as Petrino is coaching. The only team that might be bad is Syracuse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [43327]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 11055
Joined: 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3388]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: Hey coot
Jul 14, 2018, 2:38 PM
|
|
There are only 14 teams that have a harder schedule than us, and we get pulled down by uSC being on our schedule. uSC is a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5304]
TigerPulse: 100%
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 11:38 AM
|
|
Clemson’s SOS is a joke this year. Texas A&M and FSU have new coaches. NC State, Louisville, and South Carolina are at home. And then you get Georgia Tech and Duke from the Coastal. South Carolina at least has to play Clemson and Georgia. I get that the rest of their schedule is weak, but they still play 2 of the best teams in the country. Clemson does not. I’m all for criticizing South Carolina for being overhyped by the media. There are multiple ways of doing that. But complaining about their SOS is stupid when Clemson’s is also very bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Elite [5491]
TigerPulse: 89%
38
Posts: 11946
Joined: 2001
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 12:11 PM
|
|
What would your record be against our SOS ? Now run along
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 12:48 PM
|
|
I start at Clemson in the fall, I’ve been to multiple games in my lifetime, last three being the Sugar Bowl vs Bama, ACCCG vs Miami, and SC in Columbia. Yet, people on this board call me a coot lol. It’s hysterical. Especially since the only thing that I am saying on this post is that South Carolina and Clemson, both, have weak schedules this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4995]
TigerPulse: 59%
37
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 2:14 PM
|
|
I don't think you're a coot...I just think you're dumb.
Having a new coach doesn't mean your squad is a push over. I expect Texas A&M to be a quality win by the end of the year and FSU is loaded with talent. They'll be above average. South Carolina is going to be the 2nd best team in the SEC East and probably ranked when we play them. GT, Lousiville, NC State, and Duke are all bowl teams.
Also you've already been shown that Clemson's schedule is ranked 15th in ESPN's FPI....so I'm not really sure what you're basing you're argument on that we play such a weak schedule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 4:41 PM
|
|
I’m basing Clemson’s SOS on my own eyes. How long has it been since A&M has been relevant? They beat Bama when Manziel was a freshman, but other than that, they haven’t been very good nationally. FSU lost a great coach and Taggart has a lot of work to do. They are talented, there’s no question about that. But, they are a long way off from when they were the team that won the national title in 2013. Clemson’s schedule is filled with mediocre teams. Big deal. 6 wins gets you a bowl game. I’m not going to brag about playing one more 6 win team than our rival.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4995]
TigerPulse: 59%
37
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 4:57 PM
|
|
Well I’m not bragging about the schedule either, but to say it’s weak when it’s ranked in the top 15 of the nation doesn’t make much sense.
Nobody is playing more than a game or two against elite teams. Everybody’s schedule is filled with mediocre teams because most teams are in fact mediocre.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 6:14 PM
|
|
All based off of preseason projections though. The fact of the matter is that Clemson does not play a single team that won 10 games last year. The 2 most talented teams on the schedule have new coaches. It’s cool that Clemson has to play 8 teams that made a bowl game, but all 8 of those teams are mediocre. Now, I’m not saying South Carolina has a more difficult schedule. All I’m saying is that Clemson fans shouldn’t be criticizing South Carolina’s SOS when theirs is also weak. There are so many other, reasonable, things to criticize them for.
Texas A&M: 7-6
Georgia Tech: 5-6
Syracuse: 4-8
Wake Forest: 8-5
NC State: 9-4
FSU: 7-6
Louisville: 8-5
Boston College: 7-6
Duke: 7-6
South Carolina: 9-4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4995]
TigerPulse: 59%
37
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 6:37 PM
|
|
Well yea we don't have a matchup with another playoff contender but top to bottom it's a respectable schedule and I would imagine a preseason SOS ranking takes into account the previous years records....not many teams can say 2/3rd's of their schedule is made up of bowl teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 15, 2018, 11:59 AM
|
|
I get that, but it also only takes 6 wins to make a bowl game. I don’t think we can say “South Carolina has a weak schedule” when looking at ours. There isn’t a 10 win team on the schedule. Boston College, Duke, and Wake are bowl teams just like Florida and Tennessee. But BC, Duke, and WF are deprived of talent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [142]
TigerPulse: 100%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 15, 2018, 3:57 PM
|
|
So you are favorably comparing 2 4 win teams with 3 7 win teams. No wonder you don’t think SC’s schedule is crap.They play 7 teams that didn’t have winning records, Clemson plays 3. The point is that other than the 2 top 5 teams on their schedule the other games are crap and they should be able to win. Thus the point they are being favorably looked upon because of their crappy schedule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5919]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Neither have you
Jul 14, 2018, 8:44 PM
[ in reply to Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play... ] |
|
been very good, and you've lost to TAMU how many years in a row? OH - another 5 Bomb Possibility an you've NEVER BEATEN TAMU.
You are hurting our schedule, yet our schedule is still ranked tougher than yours.
You eyes are biased compared to the schedule ranking writers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
It's dumb to say that only games against top teams
Jul 15, 2018, 5:05 PM
[ in reply to Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play... ] |
|
matter, especially now in 2018 when we access to real mathematical methods of calculating the difficulty of a schedule. Those games against bowl teams that you say don't matter really DO matter because they aren't 100% wins. Even for a really good playoff caliber team like Clemson those games against 7-9 win teams usually range somewhere from 60-90% wins. If you play enough games like that you eventually lose one or two, that's just the way it works. Playing a couple of tossup games against other top 10 teams and then a bunch of 95-99% games against really bad teams isn't any more difficult than a bunch of games against good bowl teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [515]
TigerPulse: 86%
19
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 14, 2018, 1:25 PM
[ in reply to Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play... ] |
|
So basically what you're saying is SC's schedule is tougher because how good Clemson is and Clemson's is weaker because SC sucks. I gotcha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 15, 2018, 11:52 AM
|
|
I’m saying both schedule are weak. South Carolina plays two top 5 teams and a few mediocre teams. Clemson plays a lot of mediocre teams. Since Texas A&M and FSU have new coaches, I don’t think they’ll be that good, and they are the two most talented teams on the schedule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
That new coach theory doesn't really make a lot of sense
Jul 15, 2018, 5:12 PM
|
|
FSU is loaded with talent and things just got toxic and stale under Jimbo. Both parties needed a fresh start and i fully expect FSU to win immediately under Taggart. They won't be playoff caliber this year, but there's no reason FSU can't win 9-10 games again like they did every year from 2010-2016.
A&M is a little bit more of a rebuilding job but Sumlin recruited pretty darn well there and now they just got a coaching upgrade. Fortunately for Clemson i think it will take a little while for things to gel at A&M, particularly on offense, but there's no reason to think that they will be bad just because they got a new coach. Keep in mind that the new coach they got is one of only four active HCs to have won a national title. He's a helluva lot better than Sumlin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1222]
TigerPulse: 100%
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [530]
TigerPulse: 99%
19
|
Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play...
Jul 15, 2018, 1:37 PM
[ in reply to Re: It's largely due to the weak a$$ schedule they play... ] |
|
So you know more about ranking SOS than the pundits at ESPN? Seriously, you’re gonna make that argument?
I’ll admit they’re not the brightest bulbs in the box but 15 vs 44 rankings for SOS IS statistically significant.
And probable games with at least one if not 2 of the top 4 teams at the end of season in the CFP should elevate that ranking somewhat.
Not likely SCar will have to deal with that though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1350]
TigerPulse: 100%
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13674]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 14829
Joined: 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [40674]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 18513
Joined: 2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [1093]
TigerPulse: 99%
25
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 9:12 AM
|
|
I think that says more about where Clemson is right now, not them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [43327]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 11055
Joined: 2017
|
Yes and no.
Jul 14, 2018, 9:17 AM
|
|
Clemson is an elite program but they are also not near as good as their record indicated. The pundits look at that record and assume that they are trending up. I don’t think so. They are mediocre at best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68088]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90176
Joined: 2001
|
Again...
Jul 14, 2018, 9:30 AM
|
|
the improved record was the result of playing a bunch of lousy opponents yet they nearly lost several of those games.
Each time they faced an opponent with an actual pulse, they got their a$$es handed to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [43327]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 11055
Joined: 2017
|
Re: Again...
Jul 14, 2018, 6:36 PM
|
|
Exactly and that’s why I said what I said. It does say a lot about where Clemson is as a program but almost nothing about SC. Their soft schedule made them look good in the W-L record but anyone who actually watched that team play knows they were not very good. They needed a miracle to beat LaTech. Nuff said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6961]
TigerPulse: 100%
41
|
Well, when they are in the basement of their conference...
Jul 14, 2018, 9:16 AM
|
|
the only place they can go is up.
Go Tigers!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [13674]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 14829
Joined: 2010
|
If they can finally beat Kentucky.
Jul 14, 2018, 12:03 PM
|
|
xx
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4995]
TigerPulse: 59%
37
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 9:20 AM
|
|
Can you link me to some of this love because I haven’t been seeing it?
I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume that they will be a borderline top 25 team considering they have all their skill players back and the defense has improved each year under Muschamp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [68088]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 90176
Joined: 2001
|
That "improved" defense you mention...
Jul 14, 2018, 9:28 AM
|
|
is largely the result of their playing a bunch of teams with really lousy offenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
Nah, i think their defense actually has improved
Jul 14, 2018, 9:42 AM
|
|
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ncaadef
2015 - 95
2016 - 50
2017 - 36
Those numbers adjust for opponent strength which largely removes the "weak schedule" argument.
On the flip side, their offense is worse than it was during their 3-9 season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4745]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
How many returning starters does SCAR have on
Jul 14, 2018, 10:34 AM
|
|
defense? I know they lost their best defender and leading tackler.
Their defense was awful against Clemson the last two years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
I might be slightly off, but it looks like they return
Jul 14, 2018, 1:28 PM
|
|
3/4 DL, 2/3 LB, and 1/4 DBs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [142]
TigerPulse: 100%
11
|
Re: I might be slightly off, but it looks like they return
Jul 14, 2018, 1:40 PM
|
|
They lost their 2 starting DT (Stallworth and Jones) and best DE Sawyer. They lost 7 starters on defense and maybe their best 7 defensive players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5919]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
I just compared their returning guys to the depth chart from
Jul 15, 2018, 7:34 AM
|
|
our game against them at the end of last season. Were they missing 1 or 2 DL starters when they played us? Just curious...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [38595]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 33261
Joined: 2011
|
Re: Nah, i think their defense actually has improved
Jul 14, 2018, 10:44 AM
[ in reply to Nah, i think their defense actually has improved ] |
|
Their defense has improved , but still isn't very good against good offenses . Of course , they only play a couple a year anyway so that stat will be skewed .
They are 7-5 this year , mark that down .
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [5919]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
They lost
Jul 14, 2018, 5:11 PM
[ in reply to Re: South Carolina getting a lot of ] |
|
arguably their best skilled player - their tight end, Hurst, and 7 starters on defense, including "all world" Skai Moore.
They have Samuels back and he's good - if healthy. Their QB, other WRs and runningbacks would be second string AT BEST at Clemson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1878]
TigerPulse: 98%
31
|
Re: They lost
Jul 14, 2018, 7:18 PM
|
|
Second string? We have had 3 QBs transfer that are equal or better than Bentley. He has 0 chance starting over KB and TLaw as well as he has a much lower ceiling than Chase Brice.
The receivers weren’t good enough to earn a scholarship at Clemson so second string is a no for them. Edwards had a safety spot and Shi couldn’t get a scholly. Deebo is an ok player who would contribute at second string behind Amari and probably would be kick returner.
Defensively they have no one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
People that only look at their record the previous two
Jul 14, 2018, 9:34 AM
|
|
years - and that's apparently a lot - see great improvement. They went from 3-9 to 6-7 to 9-4. That seems really good until you dig deeper into the numbers and realize there wasn't actually that much improvement and the biggest factors in their higher win totals were weaker schedules and luck.
This is their great improvement in Bill Connelly's S&P+ ratings:
2015 - 85
2016 - 79
2017 - 60
Funny that there was virtually no improvement at all from their 3-9 team to their 6-win team in 2016. There's a little improvement there last year, but 60th really isn't good. That's barely above the dead middle of division 1. They were similarly rated to Duke and lower than Indiana. They were the lowest ranked P5 team to win 9+ games in 2017 with the next lowest being 10-3 Northwestern sitting at 45th.
How did they manage that? Easy schedule and luck. I mean their schedule wasn't a completely cake walk or anything, but I'm tired of hearing the phrase "SEC schedule" thrown around about SEC East teams. SEC schedule are absolutely not created equally. On the one side you had Auburn playing Georgia, Bama, LSU, Miss St etc and on the other you had South Carolina playing... well just Georgia. The most difficult part of SC's schedule last year were there two OOC games against ACC opponents - one of which they were very lucky to beat (State out gained them about 2-1 but couldn't get out of their own way) while the other shellacked them in their own stadium.
As for luck... well their 2nd order win total was just 7.5 (2nd order wins measure how many games a team probably should've actually won based on the stats in those games). The difference of +1.5 was one of the larger totals in the country.
Muschamp is improving their defense, I'll give them that much, but there's been virtually no improvement at all on the offensive side of the ball even with Jake Bentley at QB for the last two years. Here are their offensive S&P+ ratings for the last 3 years:
2015 - 69
2016 - 107
2017 - 88
Yes, their 3-9 team was the only one to field even a remotely competent offense - and even that's a bit of a stretch considering they were in the bottom half of all of D1. As per his MO, Muschamp immediately tanked their offense when he took over in 2016 and there were only very modest improvements last year and they still fielded one of the worst offenses in all of D1 football. None of this is really a surprise given Will Muschamp's track record. This is the same man that only managed to field one remotely competent offense at Florida, and that offense wasn't exactly stellar (it finished 28th) and it was comprised largely of Urban Meyer recruits. The further Muschamp got into his Florida tenure the more the offense declined.
So what can we really expect of a Muschamp led SC program going forward? Probably a solid top-25 defense that can keep them in games paired with an anemic offense that will always struggle to move the football and score points. He can probably keep them in the 7-8 win range every year and make annual bowl trips, but expecting this man to suddenly turn SC into a division title caliber team given his woeful track record with offenses is just ludicrous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3306]
TigerPulse: 100%
34
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 9:35 AM
|
|
Their Soc is 44 which includes playing Clemson . Without Clemson Soc would be high 50’s . Burns high school could win some games playing that schedule .
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 9:46 AM
|
|
The obvious reason why they are getting so much buzz is because of Muschamp’s success. They were 3-9 two years ago. Going 9-4 two years after a season where you lost to the Citadel is pretty good. I think they are overhyped right now as well, because they could have easily lost to LA Tech and Tennessee last year. But, they obviously return a lot on offense, including their QB. Florida and Tennessee are going through coaching changes and Georgia lost almost half their team. Now is their time to make a statement. That is why they are getting so much love. They could, potentially, win the East this year. I don’t think they will, but at least that conversation can be had.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Campus Hero [14067]
TigerPulse: 100%
48
Posts: 23297
Joined: 2004
|
Read my post a couple above yours. Their actual improvement
Jul 14, 2018, 9:52 AM
|
|
has been modest and it's all been on the defensive side of the ball. Going from 3 to 6 to 9 wins is pretty darn misleading and i think the odds of equaling last year's 9 wins this year are probably pretty slim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [38595]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 33261
Joined: 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [591]
TigerPulse: 97%
20
|
schedule Gods helped Boom
Jul 14, 2018, 10:49 AM
[ in reply to Re: South Carolina getting a lot of ] |
|
Boom has not had to play Bama, Auburn or LSU, the 3 best West teams. And he has played Fla and Tenn at their lowest point this decade. Let’s see how Boom does next season when the get Bama for the first time in 9 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: schedule Gods helped Boom
Jul 14, 2018, 11:40 AM
|
|
I understand that the East is down and that they haven’t had to play the best teams from the West. But, criticizing their schedule while being a Clemson fan makes no sense. Clemson’s schedule is not good either. Find another way to criticize them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22127]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
|
Re: schedule Gods helped Boom
Jul 14, 2018, 12:11 PM
|
|
If a team is judged to be No. 1 or 2, then their SOS would appear to be weak because all other team are rated lower. If a team is ranked No. 40, their SOS will be rated higher if they are playing 2 or 3 teams rated higher. As stated un a post above, The Gamecocks SOS gets a boost because they play Clemson whereas our SOS takes a loss when we play the Gamecocks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [39166]
TigerPulse: 100%
57
Posts: 51709
Joined: 2004
|
Clemson's overall SOS is actually still higher for 2018.
Jul 14, 2018, 12:38 PM
|
|
A schedule of the #2 team, the #5 team and then 10 cupcakes is easier than playing six top 30 teams.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [149]
TigerPulse: 42%
11
|
Re: schedule Gods helped Boom
Jul 14, 2018, 12:44 PM
[ in reply to Re: schedule Gods helped Boom ] |
|
Again, no where in this post have I mentioned that they have a difficult schedule. I’m simply stating that we, as Clemson fans, should not be criticizing their schedule when ours is also very weak. The difference is that South Carolina has to play two of the best teams in the country, whereas Clemson does not. Does Clemson play more mediocre teams? Sure. But at the end of the day, that doesn’t really matter much. Wake Forest and Florida are both mediocre teams. Boston College and Tennessee are mediocre. Louisville and Kentucky are mediocre. The point that I am making is that there are a number of valid reasons to criticize the hype that South Carolina is receiving so far. Their SOS is not a good reason though because Clemson’s is also really bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17108]
TigerPulse: 91%
51
Posts: 27280
Joined: 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7712]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 10560
Joined: 2007
|
again, bc they’re in the SEC East, that division has
Jul 14, 2018, 10:21 AM
|
|
Been the worst and most wide open division in college football for the last 15 years. It’s anybodys guess as to who can win it. And if you win it and perform decent against Bama in the sec championship game you’ll get a look for the playoff bc of historical bias.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5977]
TigerPulse: 100%
39
|
Just like Florida did going into Muschamps 3rd season and
Jul 14, 2018, 11:22 AM
|
|
How did that turn out? 4-8 after and 11-2 second season. USCjr has no real threat at RB and only 1 at WR, if he’s healthy, they have zero depth at QB, and very little on the OL. A good defense will load the box, jam their slow WR, and pressure Bentley into bad decisions. Coots will not beat a good team all year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15492]
TigerPulse: 100%
50
Posts: 18413
Joined: 2014
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 11:58 AM
|
|
I hope they're undefeated when we mop the field with 'em. Only show how much better we are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
58
Posts: 49059
Joined: 2004
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 12:04 PM
|
|
You really wouldn't prefer they go winless and have a dumpster fire of a season?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1878]
TigerPulse: 98%
31
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 12:27 PM
[ in reply to Re: South Carolina getting a lot of ] |
|
Them being undefeated is impossible due to Kentucky being on their schedule... who cares about any love when you are staring down a 5 bomb from both Clemson and Kentucky (a basketball school).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2347]
TigerPulse: 92%
32
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 1:55 PM
|
|
If you don’t watch ESECPN you won’t have to hear that garbage. The last time I watched that joke of a network was last football season. I only watch the football game. Nothing else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1748]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 6:43 PM
|
|
The Coots are like the Kentucky’s of college football. Oh wait I meant like Navy. Crap, I mean they are the Citadel of College football.
Well, you get the point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [515]
TigerPulse: 86%
19
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 14, 2018, 7:03 PM
|
|
The Coots are the Cleveland Browns of CFB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7583]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Re: South Carolina getting a lot of
Jul 15, 2018, 2:55 PM
|
|
|
|
For your viewing enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 68
| visibility 992
|
|
|
50
.gif)