- Joined
- Sep 21, 2011
- Messages
- 4,788
- Reaction Score
- 14,795
It's unfortunate Clemson took the foot off the pedal. They could have easily put up 50-60 if they wanted to. Alabama had that kind of embarassment coming for awhile.
Ummm. If you don't mind my asking. Are you 55 plus?
They might be one of the worst big acts around, smh. Personal tastes and all whatevs, but they suck. Weezy compounds the sucking.
Clemson's defense was outstanding in the red zone...and their offense, even with a true freshman quarteback, was potent.
Heck, Clemson scored 74-19 against two of the top four teams (and, in hindsight, maybe it wasn't that Notre Dame was bad).
Dabo has built a program, recruited well, developed the kids, and hired assistants that are a cut above...kudos for doing what a coach should.
UCF did play a three loss SEC team in the bowl...it was entertaining.
And it was without their starting QB.
Again, I find the whole "the little guys can't win" argument silly. Of course they can if given a chance. Would they? Not often. Clemson was the best team this year and would have likely won with an 8-team tournament.
But you'd lose all the griping and it would feel more fair if college football did what literally every other team sport does.
Scariest part is that he has 2 more years left...
And no...little guys can't win if they only had a chance (a convenient fiction)....the last 50 years of NCAA BB tournaments tell us that...Only if they are a team that now plays in a P5 or the Big East, or UConn have they won.
All of those "little guys" just provide interesting color but do not win a national championship...and that is in a sport that having only a couple of great players on a team can make you very competitive.
UNLV ring a bell?
That's all time. I'm a huge Ferrell guy now.