Deadspin's top 25 - Clemson

[deeeznutz]

http://deadspin.com/deadspin-25-clemson-already-missed-its-shot-at-the-pla-1724618799
This link is from Deadspin's 25 teams "most worthy of being written about" piece on Clemson. Aside from the comments about the ACC (Clemson is from the "slightly less $#!tty division in worst P5 conference), they give us some pretty high praise. The writer says he has us winning the ACC, says we'll be in top 10 when we play Clemson (and we'll beat them because we're "flat out better"), and later says they're not even close to being better than GT. Pretty interesting seeing a NY based guy giving us respect, will be interested to see their write-up on us (assuming they do us).

 

[Skeptic]

http://deadspin.com/deadspin-25-clemson-already-missed-its-shot-at-the-pla-1724618799
This link is from Deadspin's 25 teams "most worthy of being written about" piece on Clemson. Aside from the comments about the ACC (Clemson is from the "slightly less $#!tty division in worst P5 conference), they give us some pretty high praise. The writer says he has us winning the ACC, says we'll be in top 10 when we play Clemson (and we'll beat them because we're "flat out better"), and later says they're not even close to being better than GT. Pretty interesting seeing a NY based guy giving us respect, will be interested to see their write-up on us (assuming they do us).

That's a good get. I hope they do GT and assume they will at some point if there is some kind of countdown. But very flattering in those comments specific to Tech. (And I can't help it: I love Dabo. I think he can coach, know he can recruit, and from all indications runs a clean program that rids itself of bad characters instantly. That said, he is kind of weird at times.)

 

[Carober18]

I have been following this, and saw the Clemson write-up today. It is not definite that Deadspin will do GT (because they polled Deadspin readers, and whichever teams the poll produced as a top 25 will be the teams Deadspin writes about). But, my guess is the kinja readers are primarily well-educated, and northeast-based, meaning that there is a decent chance there is less (or even anti-) SEC bias.

Someone posted a great preview from another site recently (picksix... something.com), and I happened to read the Notre Dame write-up today, which got me much more hesitant about that game, but they also had GT beating Clemson I believe. The nonsense sporting news sites like ESPN who pander to the masses are heavily discounting the fact that Clemson essentially lost their entire defense.

 

[DC Bee]

Brutally honest write-up about Klimpsun IMO. A co-worker of mine went to State Penn, so I read that one based upon our office CFB discussions, and that one seemed pretty accurate too.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

........in worst P5 conference...........

BS. ACC has been 3rd behind SEC and PAC 10 last two years. But maybe he can only count to 3. http://www.jhowell.net/cf/cfindex.htm

 

[Skeptic]

BS. ACC has been 3rd behind SEC and PAC 10 last two years. But maybe he can only count to 3. http://www.jhowell.net/cf/cfindex.htm

First rule of propaganda: if you are going to lie, lie big. Second rule: if you keep repeating it, then it must be true.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

First rule of propaganda: if you are going to lie, lie big. Second rule: if you keep repeating it, then it must be true.

Yeah and propagate the lie to be able to justify no ACC team in the top 4.

 

[Carober18]

I hate the conference pride thing, to be honest. The reality is that the SEC is the best conference in football, presumably because it has more state universities in the southern states (which produce far better athletes per capita), and state universities have the most alums. But the margin that media suggests exists is a complete joke that caters to sidewalk fans because they pay the bills. The reality probably is that once you get outside of the top 25 in a class, the next 500 are comparable, and the next 1,000 after that are very close behind. High school football and determining how those players will perform 2-3 years down the road is substantially more inefficient and is less reliable than the MLB draft in many cases, I think, which means highly unreliable. No one wants to believe that though, because the people who pay and receive money for prognosticating that information lose out if that is true. I do not care whether the ACC has been "3rd" or "1st" or "5th" (no slight to you, GTNavy--it is easy to get frustrated by these people), but the truth is the ACC produces a lot of NFL talent, the ACC has underperformed the past 10 years, and media runs on momentum and past information and is typically a general summary of the past 3-4 years but purports to be useful information about the future.

 

[CTJacket]

I hate the conference pride thing, to be honest.

You and me both. It's a pretty recent phenomenon as far as I can tell, though. I don't remember it when I was younger.

At the end of the day, I don't care about the ACC except in how it affects Tech and Tech's perception. If we won the conference 20 years in a row and people said the conference was weak, I really wouldn't care as long as it didn't affect us. Sadly, this:

Yeah and propagate the lie to be able to justify no ACC team in the

is why you basically HAVE to pull for teams in your conference when they don't play you.

 

[Yjacket82]

I lost respect for Dabo after the "Uppercut Battle" incident. Internal punishment and "he felt really sorry". Laughed a bit when he left the team after Dabo tried to actually punish him a bit this year.