Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
For those of you still blinded by stupidity, whining
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 52
| visibility 1

For those of you still blinded by stupidity, whining


May 29, 2012, 8:49 PM

about us leaving the ACC, thinking there's no way in hell the ACC can/will get left out of any type of playoff, think again.

DESTIN, Fla. (AP) The Southeastern Conference is looking out for No. 1.
Maybe even No. 2.
Football coaches from the powerhouse and recently expanded league were in unison Tuesday that they want a proposed four-team playoff to include the best teams in the country - and not be tied to conference champions.
Their solidarity came as no surprise considering the league has won six consecutive national championships, with the latest one coming when Alabama knocked off LSU after not winning its division or making the league title game.
''I think it needs to be the four best teams in the country,'' Florida coach Will Muschamp said. ''I don't think it needs to be the conference champions because in our league we might have four of the best teams in the country.''
SEC Commissioner Mike Slive has been a driving force behind a proposed playoff for years, and remains as committed as anyone to getting it done this summer.
The playoff system could debut as early as the 2014 season, replacing a current No.1 vs. No. 2 BCS championship matchup that has rotated among the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta and Rose Bowl sites.
Slive expects the four-team model to be discussed by coaches, athletic directors and school presidents/chancellors, and an official league decision is expected to be announced Friday.
''Our league has been consistent that if you're going to have a four-team playoff that the best four teams ought to be selected to play for the national championship,'' Slive said. ''If the issue is how teams are selected, then let's go and talk about the selection process and make the selection process more palatable to everybody rather than try to gerrymander who the top four teams are.
''I'm very open to looking at any and all ways to make changes in the actually selection process itself.''
Slive said the league also will settle on a format for football following the addition of Missouri and Texas A&M, with teams likely to play six division games, maintain one cross-division rival and alternate an eighth conference game among the other six teams from the opposing division.
The designated rivalries are expected to be finalized, too. All indications are Missouri and Arkansas will be deemed cross-division rivals, leaving South Carolina to pair with Texas A&M.
Also, basketball coaches are close to finalizing an 18-game schedule that would put teams back into divisions. The coaches dropped division last season.
But the proposed football playoff dominated discussion on Day 1.
''We're so much closer to having the best teams play,'' Missouri coach Gary Pinkel said. ''Every single game is so critically important in college football and we should embrace that. You can lose six games, eight games in basketball and still win a national championship. You can't do that in college football. I think we're very close.''
Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delaney has said the new format shouldn't include a team that doesn't win its conference division - an obvious reference to national champion and SEC West runner-up Alabama.
Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott is pushing to have two semifinal games played at campus stadiums, which seems to address the concerns of playoff opponents who say that such a system would lessen the importance of the regular season. After all, that would reward the two highest-seeded teams with a home game - a huge incentive and major advantage.
Slive believes the semifinal games would be part of the bowl system.
''My guess is that it will end up being in the bowl system,'' Slive said. ''I think it's better for college football as a whole than just a plus-one.''
Not surprisingly, Slive's coaches seemed to wholeheartedly back his plan - although South Carolina's Steve Spurrier reiterated his preference for an eight-team playoff.
''Do you know who's won the Super Bowl the last two years?'' Spurrier said. ''Weren't the Giants 8-8? And the Packers didn't even win their division the year before and got hot in the playoffs. It just depends on how much importance you want to place into a playoff system, a tournament. I know there have been a lot of NCAA (basketball) champions that didn't necessarily win their conference but they got hot in the tournament.
''I don't know how it will play out.''
Deciding how to select the Final Four is up for debate.
''I don't know. The way we do it now?'' Georgia coach Mark Richt said. ''Just take the top four teams in the BCS instead of the top two. That's one way of doing it. It's already in place. You wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel. Change is here, it sounds like, I suppose it's worthy of discussion as to how to do it. But I'm not for making it a prerequisite that you have to be the winner in your in league. I wouldn't make that part of it.''
Neither would any of his colleagues.
LSU's Les Miles, Alabama's Nick Saban and several others made it clear that limiting a four-team playoff to conference champs likely would benefit everyone outside the SEC.
''It's just like politics and self-interest,'' Saban said. ''Somebody wants to create a circumstance that's going to help their situation or conference. That's not in the best interest of college football.''
Added Richt: ''If you take the top four teams, I think we'd all be in favor of that in our league. If you take four teams that have win a conference championship, it would guarantee that only one of us could go. If you had it the other way, we'd have a shot at two going. You can say it any way you want, but that's what everybody is talking about.''

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Lemme fix that so folks will read it.


May 29, 2012, 8:54 PM

DESTIN, Fla. (AP) The Southeastern Conference is looking out for No. 1.
Maybe even No. 2.
Football coaches from the powerhouse and recently expanded league were in unison Tuesday that they want a proposed four-team playoff to include the best teams in the country - and not be tied to conference champions.

Their solidarity came as no surprise considering the league has won six consecutive national championships, with the latest one coming when Alabama knocked off LSU after not winning its division or making the league title game.

''I think it needs to be the four best teams in the country,'' Florida coach Will Muschamp said. ''I don't think it needs to be the conference champions because in our league we might have four of the best teams in the country.''

SEC Commissioner Mike Slive has been a driving force behind a proposed playoff for years, and remains as committed as anyone to getting it done this summer.

The playoff system could debut as early as the 2014 season, replacing a current No.1 vs. No. 2 BCS championship matchup that has rotated among the Sugar, Orange, Fiesta and Rose Bowl sites.

Slive expects the four-team model to be discussed by coaches, athletic directors and school presidents/chancellors, and an official league decision is expected to be announced Friday.

''Our league has been consistent that if you're going to have a four-team playoff that the best four teams ought to be selected to play for the national championship,'' Slive said. ''If the issue is how teams are selected, then let's go and talk about the selection process and make the selection process more palatable to everybody rather than try to gerrymander who the top four teams are.

''I'm very open to looking at any and all ways to make changes in the actually selection process itself.''
Slive said the league also will settle on a format for football following the addition of Missouri and Texas A&M, with teams likely to play six division games, maintain one cross-division rival and alternate an eighth conference game among the other six teams from the opposing division.
The designated rivalries are expected to be finalized, too. All indications are Missouri and Arkansas will be deemed cross-division rivals, leaving South Carolina to pair with Texas A&M.

Also, basketball coaches are close to finalizing an 18-game schedule that would put teams back into divisions. The coaches dropped division last season.
But the proposed football playoff dominated discussion on Day 1.

''We're so much closer to having the best teams play,'' Missouri coach Gary Pinkel said. ''Every single game is so critically important in college football and we should embrace that. You can lose six games, eight games in basketball and still win a national championship. You can't do that in college football. I think we're very close.''

Big Ten Commissioner Jim Delaney has said the new format shouldn't include a team that doesn't win its conference division - an obvious reference to national champion and SEC West runner-up Alabama.

Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott is pushing to have two semifinal games played at campus stadiums, which seems to address the concerns of playoff opponents who say that such a system would lessen the importance of the regular season. After all, that would reward the two highest-seeded teams with a home game - a huge incentive and major advantage.

Slive believes the semifinal games would be part of the bowl system.
''My guess is that it will end up being in the bowl system,'' Slive said. ''I think it's better for college football as a whole than just a plus-one.''
Not surprisingly, Slive's coaches seemed to wholeheartedly back his plan - although South Carolina's Steve Spurrier reiterated his preference for an eight-team playoff.

''Do you know who's won the Super Bowl the last two years?'' Spurrier said. ''Weren't the Giants 8-8? And the Packers didn't even win their division the year before and got hot in the playoffs. It just depends on how much importance you want to place into a playoff system, a tournament. I know there have been a lot of NCAA (basketball) champions that didn't necessarily win their conference but they got hot in the tournament.

''I don't know how it will play out.''
Deciding how to select the Final Four is up for debate.

''I don't know. The way we do it now?'' Georgia coach Mark Richt said. ''Just take the top four teams in the BCS instead of the top two. That's one way of doing it. It's already in place. You wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel. Change is here, it sounds like, I suppose it's worthy of discussion as to how to do it. But I'm not for making it a prerequisite that you have to be the winner in your in league. I wouldn't make that part of it.''
Neither would any of his colleagues.

LSU's Les Miles, Alabama's Nick Saban and several others made it clear that limiting a four-team playoff to conference champs likely would benefit everyone outside the SEC.
''It's just like politics and self-interest,'' Saban said. ''Somebody wants to create a circumstance that's going to help their situation or conference. That's not in the best interest of college football.''

Added Richt: ''If you take the top four teams, I think we'd all be in favor of that in our league. If you take four teams that have win a conference championship, it would guarantee that only one of us could go. If you had it the other way, we'd have a shot at two going. You can say it any way you want, but that's what everybody is talking about.''

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpgringofhonor-clemsontiger1988-110.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Lemme fix that so folks will read it.- priceless


May 29, 2012, 9:07 PM

Saban worried about the interest of college football. where was this last year. what a load

badge-donor-05yr.jpgringofhonor-74tiger.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Maybe the SEC should play with themselves and ....


May 29, 2012, 11:57 PM [ in reply to Lemme fix that so folks will read it. ]

everybody else can have a playoff. Since the SEC is so powerful, they can have their own post season with the top ranked SEC teams in a series of Bowl"etts", and the rest of College Football can have a playoff which determines who is overall Champion.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Hey Spurrier you'll have no impact on the playoff


May 30, 2012, 12:10 AM

so you need to keep quiet

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I'm not sure what you think the article is saying.


May 29, 2012, 9:00 PM

The SEC Commish is in favor of ranking solely determining the four teams in a four team playoff.

The Big Ten Commish is in favor of teams at least having to win their conference division to get in.

The PAC 12 Commish seems to have made a comment on the location of the semifinal games.

Your comment and the article are unrelated.

Seriously...does no one else see how badly this playoff scenario is the tail wagging the dog?

16 team playoff, or it's still fake.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


Keep smoking dope, wookie. At least you'll have an


May 29, 2012, 9:06 PM

excuse for being wrong.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

WOOKIE??


May 29, 2012, 9:15 PM

Hilarious!

badge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Go Tigers!
Go Wildcats!


Or, instead of insulting me, you could explain how your


May 29, 2012, 9:22 PM [ in reply to Keep smoking dope, wookie. At least you'll have an ]

comment relates to the article.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


It's simple. If you don't think the SEC/Big12 deal was done


May 29, 2012, 9:41 PM

for anything other than cornering the marketSSSS (TV, Recruiting, Bowls, Money) then my insult was correct.

If they control the playoff, the bowls, the TV money, then they'll control recruiting.

If that happens, college football as we know it dies. It's dying as we speak.

I think you know exactly what the link is but it's hard to admit when you're wrong so you keep up the charade.

Clemson leaving the ACC isn't about hating unc and swofford. It isn't about the refs having it in for us. It isn't even about the coots recent success b/c of their SEC ties.

This is simply about doing what is best for Clemson football which benefits every other single sport we have including intramural sports and it impacts our academics as well. It impacts the entire university and hence, the community.

There's your link.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Lol. Have we met, 'cause you've got some pent up anger


May 29, 2012, 9:54 PM

that you're funneling my way for, as far as I can tell, no reason. Perhaps you should relax a bit.

Also, quit being so dramatic. They aren't controlling the playoff and they aren't controlling the TV money. Heck, they don't even control the bowls. What is wrong with you? You've gone X-Files conspiracy.

Intramural sports? What the heck?

Sorry, your conclusion and the aricle are unrelated. It doesn't mean your conclusion is wrong, just that it was unclear why you C&P'ed the article when you made it.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


you really should start smoking...***


May 29, 2012, 10:24 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's simple. If you don't think the SEC/Big12 deal was done


May 29, 2012, 11:26 PM [ in reply to It's simple. If you don't think the SEC/Big12 deal was done ]

Oh chit you just told the truth. Everybody is gonna hate your A$$ now. I'll try and defer some of the hate. C L E M S O N, will die in the acc. Leaving the acc will be the only chance to look after our Clemson's best chance of survival. Not nothing done 30 years ago can ever be changed. Not leaving the acc, not blaming swofford, unc, or anyone else in the acc. All of the move talk is about the way college FB is headed. And the acc ain't invited to go with it. We either pack our bags and go with the big boys. Or our dreams of playing big time FB with the big boys will sure as H&LL die with any FB school that stays with the basketball acc. The F-ing other teams that are jumping in with the FB conferences ain't doing so b/c somebody wrong them 30 years ago. They are doing it b/c they don't won't to die like we will if we don't go also....

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


F the haters. I'll go so far as to question whether these


May 30, 2012, 8:17 AM

people are Clemson fans or ACC fans.

It sickens me to see them standing up for the ACC yet they won't stand up for their team.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: F the haters. I'll go so far as to question whether these


May 30, 2012, 10:40 AM

You know dude,

Maybe you just can't understand that we're Clemson fans and ACC fans at the same time.

Maybe it just seems illogical and stupid to be travelling all the way across the country to play sports against rival teams instead of in our regional neighborhood where we belong.

Maybe we think the ACC has fine teams and traditions and although going through some lean football years as of late believe that most of the schools can be at the top again.

Maybe we think all of this Big Xii love by some of you is because you're bored and want to follow a far out trend. The Big Xii almost imploded last year, what makes you think it wouldnt happen again?

Maybe we believe it's better to stay closer to home because this area is where 95% of our alumni live.

There is no reason we can't be successful in the ACC.

I say screw the SEC and the Big Xii.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

If you're a Clemson fan, you can't be a fan of the ACC.


May 30, 2012, 11:02 AM

It hurts us being in the ACC. It's hurts our SOS, it hurts our RPI, it hurts our reputation with the media voters... it just plain hurts us. friday night football games will hurt us.

keep drinking the ACC blue kool-aid.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: If you're a Clemson fan, you can't be a fan of the ACC.


May 30, 2012, 11:15 AM

The ACC stinks. Even John Swofford knows that. But he wouldn't admit that to his family. But you're stuck. Do you really think that fans are going to cross country to go to games for the Big 12?

I think that the S.E.C. would be a much better way of jumping ship. But they have not made the call.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sorry Dude, I just don't agree with you.


Jun 1, 2012, 11:09 AM [ in reply to If you're a Clemson fan, you can't be a fan of the ACC. ]

If FSU leaves then that will hurt us, otherwise we need to stay.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

things move fast these days. your attachment to the acc


May 30, 2012, 11:03 AM [ in reply to Re: F the haters. I'll go so far as to question whether these ]

will end soon after we move. Rivalries with UMd and UVa will be replaced by TCU and Ok State. We'll still have FSU and sakerlina on our schedule.

it's ok to let go.


Message was edited by: Clayton Big Spee®


flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Sorry dude, you're dreaming....***


May 30, 2012, 11:17 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: F the haters. I'll go so far as to question whether these


Jun 1, 2012, 10:55 AM [ in reply to F the haters. I'll go so far as to question whether these ]

I have an idea - why don't we continue to play in the ACC and actually beat mediocre teams like WF, Georgia Tech and NC State. We can also beat a mediocre Auburn and a USC who had a great season last year but lost a lot of playmakers. If we do that, guess what? We'll have a perfect season and we would be one of the 4 teams being considered for the playoffs regardless of WHICH option is chosen. Until we can beat those teams without being embarrased on national TV we don't deserve to even think about playing in a playoff system.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

True that!


Jun 1, 2012, 11:10 AM

If we win all of out games we'll be in the 'proposed' playoff no matter where we are.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

4 or 16 is flawed, 8 is just right.***


May 29, 2012, 10:54 PM [ in reply to I'm not sure what you think the article is saying. ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Start small, but 16 makes the most sense.


May 29, 2012, 11:07 PM

Sometimes you lose early. Sometimes you get upset. Everyone loses some games they "shouldn't lose". Sometimes you get better as the season goes along, but regardless anyone can get hot in (a minimum of) the top 16 and win the whole thing. Look at the average number of losses of 1-AA championship teams. Sometimes teams with 2~3+ losses win it all.

At least 16 should get a shot.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

This isn't baseball or basketball, you don't get hot at the


Jun 1, 2012, 2:24 AM

end of the season in football and win multiple games. One upset, yea, but not 3 or 4. In football, the team with the most talent and best coaching wins at a very high rate. The odds of a team outside the top 8 winning a payoff are slim, and that's assuming the best 8 teams are selected. With a 10, 12, or 16 team playoff you'll have conference winners jumping ahead of better teams with zero chance of winning one game, much less the whole thing.

You can't compare I-AA with I-A. The quality of coaching and talent is very inconsistent and injuries to key players are even more penalizing.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

8 would be perfect!***


May 30, 2012, 10:41 AM [ in reply to 4 or 16 is flawed, 8 is just right.*** ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

people like you are the reason the internet sucks


May 29, 2012, 9:29 PM

can't you just disagree without accusing people of stupidity? or drug use?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Well, the drug thing was a reference to his handle, "Wookie"


May 29, 2012, 9:46 PM

the dirty dread-locked animal looking pot smoking acid taking fans of bands like phish and the grateful dead.

The stupidity part is for the people that refuse to see the facts unfolding before their eyes and still think we can/should stay in the ACC.

I do not want Clemson to become a Boise State or an App State for that matter. We are slowly headed that way with the ACC.

Sorry for hurting feelings.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

LOL! I just Googled "Wookie Phish". :-D I've never heard


May 29, 2012, 9:56 PM

that before in my life. Sorry, I didn't get the pot reference before. Too funny. The user name doesn't come from that, though.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


well i apologize. and i don't think your stupid but I


May 29, 2012, 10:16 PM

really don't understand how people can not see the changing landscape and still think we're ok in the ACC.

the less conferences involved in the big picture, the better for those that are in it. if you think slive will work with us to keep the acc at the table, then you're missing moves like the Big 12/SEC bowl deal and like the show they're putting on at the sec meetings with a report like this.

Getting ND is the ACC's only hope and if I'm a betting man, my money is not on the ACC.

I've asked many on here who want to stay in the ACC what they think could/would save the ACC. No one ever gives an answer. They just all say the same thing... we'll be good in the acc. we shouldn't leave just b/c we're mad at swoffie. blah blah blah.

this isn't about the past. this is about the future and Clemson's place in that future.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

That's fine. I've said my piece on the Big 12. ******


May 29, 2012, 10:35 PM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

null


You wanted to know how I link my comment to the article.


May 29, 2012, 10:47 PM

I told you.

I asked you why you think the ACCs the place to stay or what you think the ACC should/could do and you have nothing?

I stand by my original post.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: You wanted to know how I link my comment to the article.


Jun 1, 2012, 11:18 AM

Hey Clayton, I've got some reasoning for staying. Look up my recent post on the increase in pay to Big 12 only being $6-$9 million per year. Clemson's athletic budget is $61 million which means a whopping 10% increase in overall revenue for making such a drastic move.

I just don't think it is worth it right now. Too many unknowns for too little money. Additionally, the Prez and BOT do not make their decisions based only on football, like every Big 12er on this message board.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

you're***


May 29, 2012, 11:15 PM [ in reply to well i apologize. and i don't think your stupid but I ]



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Phish is a good band! and ....


May 30, 2012, 12:29 AM [ in reply to Well, the drug thing was a reference to his handle, "Wookie" ]

Yes, Clemson should and WILL stay in the ACC ... guess what! Clemson is a school not a Football Team... the Football Team is just part of the school (yes, its a significant part, but not the whole thing) You should poll the Baseball Team, The Basketball Team, every other team, the faculty, the DONORS, do they want to be associated with the Big-12?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Those other sports you mention rely on the football teams


May 30, 2012, 8:12 AM

revenue so to think they'd prefer to get less money just to stay in the ACC, is wrong.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Those other sports you mention rely on the football teams


Jun 1, 2012, 11:27 AM

Clayton, after the measly pay increase is divided among the entire athletic department I can't imagine any of the (non-football) coaches or teams wanting to move to the Big 12. How much does baseball, soccer, golf and swim benefit from a move to the Big 12? I would say zero.

Think about it, everyone is complaining the ACC money is too low to compete in football on a national level. So then, it bears to reason that additional income must be spent on FOOTBALL so Clemson can compete on a national level. A move to the Big 12 is not going to bring in SEC or Big 10 money. Therefore, do we expect the athletic department to suddenly start spending lavish amounts on the non-revenue sports?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Now, what is your problem with Appalachian State!!! ???


May 30, 2012, 12:39 AM [ in reply to Well, the drug thing was a reference to his handle, "Wookie" ]

Boone is a very nice town.... its really caught on, ranked as one of the top Retirement areas in the U.S. of A. !!! Did you know John Fogerty of Creedence Clearwater Revival fame is playing there in July? Oh I forgot, that's that hippy music, the devil's music. Yes sir, let crank up that Patsy Cline!

Appalachian State has a fine football team, they won the FCS Championship several times times ... they beat Michigan a few years a go ..... oh, I forgot, the FCS has a playoff to determine overall Champion, that is such a stupid system...

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

really? You want to join the FCS?***


May 30, 2012, 8:14 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

I do not want the Tigers to join the FCS, HOWEVER....


May 30, 2012, 8:55 AM

as the name implies, the Football Championship (FCS) has a playoff to determine the Champion, the Football Bowl Series (FBS), the so called "superior" Division, has Bowls!!!!! to determine "Champion". Now, using our logic, who do you think has the better system?

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

the FCS has the better system but that's irrelevant.


May 30, 2012, 9:03 AM

Right now, there is jockeying for position in the FBS and the ACC is currently on the outside looking in. These moves the other conferences are making prove that.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You're just wrong, wrong, wrong....


May 30, 2012, 10:44 AM [ in reply to Well, the drug thing was a reference to his handle, "Wookie" ]

You're not hurting feelings, just showing your own ignorance.....

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

You translated that wrong.


May 30, 2012, 4:18 AM

If they take teams ranked 1,2,3,4 then the ACC can get a team in. A (1) loss Clemson team last year would've been in the top 4.

If they take the 4 conference champions(PAC,Big,Big12,SEC) then the ACC is left out.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Clemson doesn't care about basketball....as evidenced by Brown-L getting 14 years.


Look, if y'all don't see these conferences positioning


May 30, 2012, 8:10 AM

themselves to protect their own interests, then I think that's stupid. I think you have to be blind to the reality of the situation. If you think this article came out just for the heck of it and that it provides no insight into the SECs plan, then you're ignorant of the situation.

Clemson fans/die hard ACC fans are the only ones who see it the way you do.

Like my mom used to say, "you are the company you keep."

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Here's how I think it would've played out.


May 30, 2012, 8:27 AM [ in reply to You translated that wrong. ]

Assuming Clemson had only 1 loss (to a non Scar team)...

LSU in
Bama in
Ok State in
Arky in
Clemson out

If Clemson's loss was to Scar, then both Arky and Scar would've been in before Clemson.

Why? b/c of the perception that the ACC is much weaker than the SEC.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Here's how I think it would've played out.


May 30, 2012, 8:32 AM

When I say 1 loss Clemson team I'm talking about us just losing the GT game. If you remember the week of the NCSU game they were putting us back in the title hunt because everyone kept losing.

For the record I'm pro-Big12. I was just letting you know that if it's a conference champion only playoff(4 teams) then the ACC is left out.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Clemson doesn't care about basketball....as evidenced by Brown-L getting 14 years.


I think you're correct in that Clemson (or an ACC team)


May 30, 2012, 9:10 AM

could get left out in both scenarios... even more reason to jump this sinking ship.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

What are you talking about? Stanford was already above


May 30, 2012, 11:21 AM [ in reply to Here's how I think it would've played out. ]

Arky, so where did you get Arky?

Regardless, if our one loss last year was to GT, we would've been #4 in the county and would've been in the playoffs.

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg2011_pickem_champ.jpgbadge-ringofhonor-soccerkrzy.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Cole @ Beach Cole w/ Clemson Hat


If it's allowed, there will be years where the SEC gets 4


May 30, 2012, 10:17 AM

teams in. Do you really want that? We all know the SEC is a little overrated. Yes, it's the best conference, but not by as much as some people think.

Here's the biggest issue: JUST WIN YOUR CONFERENCE.

USuCk starts the season with the same record as LSU: 0-0

Everyone has equal opportunity to get in. Win, and you're in. Plain and simple.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Not blasting you, btw***


May 30, 2012, 10:19 AM



flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


What if we're 11-1? 11-1 in the Big 12 might get you in.


May 30, 2012, 11:07 AM [ in reply to If it's allowed, there will be years where the SEC gets 4 ]

11-1 in the ACC will most likely keep you out.

Again, if we can better our position, why would we not look in to it?

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Z-Z-ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ


May 30, 2012, 10:53 AM

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

This is getting a little out of hand and SEC is really....


Jun 1, 2012, 10:11 AM

starting to think a little too much of themselves. Why doesn't veryone else just stop participating in football and let's all just watch the ALL MIGHTY SEC? GEEZ the arrogance.

military_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 52
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic