In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 151
Online now 123 Record: 3605 (4/12/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
On Twitter: @Niebuhr247
Georgia did beat a Top 5 team last year. Florida was No. 3 when they played
That was from something the week before that game lol. Florida's 7 personal fouls did them in. My point is Clemson can be successful regardless of affiliation.
The bottom line is Dabo and Jimbo want a national championship. If they are 13-0 they will be in the game. If they are 12-1 they'll have a shot.
Conference affiliation didn't help Florida when Louisville whooped them or when Clemson beat LSU.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Cory Fravel 11 months ago
I had actually typed out a VERY long, well thought out response but accidentally reloaded the page and lost it so i'll keep this short and sweet...
I'm shocked that you insinuated that LSU was the 6th best team in the SEC last year. The ONLY team that has a better case for the number two spot is Florida because, like Bama, they only had one conference loss. LSU easily had the toughest schedule in the conference and came out with the same conf record as UGA, SC and TAMU. They physically whooped SC while out gaining them by more than 200 yards and they beat TAMU on the road. You mention that LSU was "fortunate" to beat SC and TAMU, but was Bama fortunate to beat LSU and UGA? Was SC fortunate to beat Vandy and UT? Was Florida fortunate to beat LSU and TAMU? How fortunate was UGA to barely beat Kentucky?
I also think its pretty funny that you penalize LSU for only beating Auburn by a few points, but choose not to reward them for their play against Bama. LSU had 100 more yards than Bama, more first downs and double the time of possession. Bama was very fortunate that Chavis went full Vic Koenning with that soft zone to allow bama to dink and dunk down the field at the end of the game.
You mention that Clemson had to "rally" against LSU, yet Florida "out muscled" them... Really? Clemson had 445 yards to LSU's 219 (their second worst offensive output of the year). Clemson had 32 first downs to LSU's 9. LSU landed a few big plays off of major Clemson miscues, but Clemson had a number of long, sustained drives. LSU was extremely fortunate that Clemson didn't win that game by double digits. BTW, Florida had about 30 more yards than LSU and neither team could really move the ball on each other.
I actually think Clemson and FSU would have fit in very well in that tier underneath Bama last year along with UF, LSU, UGA, TAMU and SC. Using your transitive property logic, FSU beat Clemson, Clemson beat LSU, LSU beat SC and TAMU, SC beat UGA and UGA beat UF... UF and LSU beat TAMU who beat Bama. So it seems that Clemson and FSU could go toe to toe with anybody in that conference right?
Lastly, I agree with everything that you've said about the ACC needing FSU, Clemson and Miami to be top 10-15 good for national perception of the conference. I would also argue that VT, GT and UNC need to consistently be top 25 good for both the perception of the conference and just the overall benefit the top ACC schools would get from playing in more high profile games. I think one of the major reasons that the SEC does so well in big time non conference matchups (aside from the DL) is because they are much more battle tested. Last year's Clemson/SC and FSU/UF games were perfect examples of poise and confidence being the difference between evenly matched teams. The ACC teams seemed much more jittery in crucial situations and it showed with uncharacteristic "unforced errors" in key, late game situations. Clemson was much more poised and confident in the 4th quarter against LSU from having played in two similar games throughout the season with FSU and SC.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by trich24 11 months ago
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports