Next schedule brutal... whatever

[Sarrick]

So what I’m hearing is that it’ll be all the more impressive when we go undefeated in 2020

 

[WreckinGT]

ND and UCF on the schedule certainly makes it tougher. I think Syracuse will be a tougher game on the road than NC State was at home also. I still think we can reach 6 wins, but it is one of our tougher schedules in recent memory.

 

[Skeptic]

We can’t play Big Boy football and avoid the Big Boys. Get rid of the Gardener Webbs and add a Big 10/14, Big 12/10, or a Pac-12/12 game.

That at least would have the consequence of upgrading or getting humiliated. Maybe that is what it would take. But then it didn't help with the Citadel.

Absolutely zero evidence to support this opinion. Tilting at windmills.

Really? Look back at how quickly and decisively Clemson was dropped in the order when boring Penn State was elevated, only to immediately lose; or from public comments from the committee that changed the parameters depending on the team pushed forward. Alabama, for instance, just "looked good". Georgia got gobsmacked by SC, which was demolished by Clemson ... yet they remained right there in the wings. Let's not kid ourselves. The ACC is so weak that winning games by 31 points is not a good thing, but further proof of the creampuffs so to speak. And until Miami, FSU, UNC, VT, Syracuse, Pitt get consistently good, again, one loss dooms an ACC team for the playoffs. Don't think Clemson doesn't know it. (I did not include GT in the competition since it is a foregone conclusion that it will take seven years to get there.)

 

[RyanS12]

I’m still trying to decide if I want to come to the UCF,Clemson or ND game. It amazes me how the acc can’t put out a complete schedule until damn near February but every other conference is set a year ahead.

 

[Coloradojacket]

LOL....Back in the 70's we played ND, Tennessee, South Carolina, Auburn on a regular basis. We also played Tulane, Navy, and Duke. Guess what, we would lose the last three as much as we did the first 4. Clemson was our whipping boy and Home coming choice.

Clemson will drop when Lawrence turns pro. UGA is already showing a drop as is Alabama. LSU will not be the same next year. And as said before if recruiting is everything....please explain FSU and Miami. Coaching means so much more.

 

[bobongo]

ND and UCF on the schedule certainly makes it tougher. I think Syracuse will be a tougher game on the road than NC State was at home also. I still think we can reach 6 wins, but it is one of our tougher schedules in recent memory.

Probably top-10 SOS. At least top-15.

 

[GT flunkout]

That at least would have the consequence of upgrading or getting humiliated. Maybe that is what it would take. But then it didn't help with the Citadel.

Really? Look back at how quickly and decisively Clemson was dropped in the order when boring Penn State was elevated, only to immediately lose; or from public comments from the committee that changed the parameters depending on the team pushed forward. Alabama, for instance, just "looked good". Georgia got gobsmacked by SC, which was demolished by Clemson ... yet they remained right there in the wings. Let's not kid ourselves. The ACC is so weak that winning games by 31 points is not a good thing, but further proof of the creampuffs so to speak. And until Miami, FSU, UNC, VT, Syracuse, Pitt get consistently good, again, one loss dooms an ACC team for the playoffs. Don't think Clemson doesn't know it. (I did not include GT in the competition since it is a foregone conclusion that it will take seven years to get there.)

Again, ridiculous speculation. "Lets not kid ourselves" is not a valid argument. Clemson was one of three undefeated teams. They were ranked in the top three where they belong. Where they were ranked in that top three is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter. Had Clemson lost a game, they would have been 1 of 4 teams with less than 2 losses, and been the #4 seed behind Oklahoma.

Point to one example of a P5 team with more losses than another P5 team being ranked higher in the top four. I'll wait.

 

[Sarrick]

Clemson will drop when Lawrence turns pro. UGA is already showing a drop as is Alabama. LSU will not be the same next year. And as said before if recruiting is everything....please explain FSU and Miami. Coaching means so much more.

Clemson I believe had the best QB in this recruiting class too. Hard for me to see them drop until that coaching staff leaves

 

[CuseJacket]

I still believe the bar should be no lower than 6 wins. Another year to implement the CGC system. OL back healthy. Transfers. And possibly a surprise from a freshman QB. There are 7 home games. The wins should be:

Garner_Webb
UCF (at Home)
Duke (at Home)
UVa (At Home)
Pitt
Syracuse

Other possible upsets:

Miami (at Home)
UNC
Va Tech

(This is the ACC Coastal for crying out loud)

Heck, there could be an upset of Notre Dame.

And if CPJ were here, an upset in Athens.

Maybe I just don't want to believe Tech has fallen so far after last year that some upsets are not possible. I know I have my gold colored glasses on right now, but not to have enough faith in the team and staff in the off season to find 6 wins next season seems to apologetic to me. The coaches need to do their job this off season, coach the kids up, and put some wins together next season. I know I will be disappointed if the team looks as bad this coming year as they did last year, even though I don't fault team effort.

Yea, I think it's gold colored glasses, though it's not strictly due to the degradation in performance last year alone.

Of your "should be" wins, the following teams have performed better than us for 2 consecutive seasons: UCF, Pitt, Syracuse. Fairly easy to argue that UVA and Duke are in that category too. That leaves Gardner-Webb. And if you really want to be a masochist, going 3 years back (2017) comparatively doesn't look a whole lot better for GT, where 3 of those teams went to a bowl and we did not.

I agree that we should perform better next year, but that doesn't mean all of our ills will be fully cured. I don't think we'll reach our eventual ceiling at QB, OL and DL next year (i.e., the most important positions), though I expect those groups to perform better than they did in 2019, and that should translate to more wins, barring more injuries.

 

[stech81]

barring more injuries.

Yes something no one knows till it happens. This team sure be better this year, question is will we have the depth if we have injuries.

 

[GTJake]

Approaching the season, we should be looking at next years schedule as one game at a time ... at this point there's no advantage to looking ahead.

 

[LongforDodd]

LOL....Back in the 70's we played ND, Tennessee, South Carolina, Auburn on a regular basis. We also played Tulane, Navy, and Duke. Guess what, we would lose the last three as much as we did the first 4. Clemson was our whipping boy and Home coming choice.

Clemson will drop when Lawrence turns pro. UGA is already showing a drop as is Alabama. LSU will not be the same next year. And as said before if recruiting is everything....please explain FSU and Miami. Coaching means so much more.

I saw a little bit of Clem's QB recruit in the ArmyAll America game. 6'-4, 250, runs well and throws darts. May not miss much when Lawrence leaves.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

We play Clemson and Ugag every year, next season adds ND which everybody hear calls overrated. BFD.

Most of the same guys so concerned about the “brutal” schedule are the very guys complaining about our lack of marquee matchups and playing FCS teams.

Well, you can’t have both ways. I bet our players are excited about playing another big time nationally televised game. Our coach sure is or so he says.

Why is next year so much worse than any other year we’ve had one extra marquee matchup? Last I checked, we still play in the lowly ACC Coastal.

Seems like you worded this to annoy the people that don't want a tough schedule and to annoy the people that don't want an easy schedule, and the people who don't really have a strong opinion on it. Perfect.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I saw a little bit of Clem's QB recruit in the ArmyAll America game. 6'-4, 250, runs well and throws darts. May not miss much when Lawrence leaves.

Well Deshaun Watson before him was something like 37-2.

 

[JacketOff]

Well Deshaun Watson before him was something like 37-2.

And Kelly Bryant was 15-2. Clemson dominates the trenches, as long as they have someone semi competent playing QB they’ll be more than fine.

 

[Skeptic]

Again, ridiculous speculation. "Lets not kid ourselves" is not a valid argument. Clemson was one of three undefeated teams. They were ranked in the top three where they belong. Where they were ranked in that top three is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter. Had Clemson lost a game, they would have been 1 of 4 teams with less than 2 losses, and been the #4 seed behind Oklahoma.

Point to one example of a P5 team with more losses than another P5 team being ranked higher in the top four. I'll wait.

I believe I am correct that when Penn State beat somebody, it escapes me who because it is the Big 10, or really the Big One, they jumped Clemson to take 3 ... a vote nobody on the committee could explain and which fell apart a week later with a Penn State loss. You can breathe now.

 

[Skeptic]

And Kelly Bryant was 15-2. Clemson dominates the trenches, as long as they have someone semi competent playing QB they’ll be more than fine.

And Bryant, bless his soul, was 0-1 in NC play when Alabama rightly figured he could not throw deep and so stuck eight up front and dared him to. He could not. Swinney made the harsh decision that Bryant could get Clemson to the playoffs, Bryant just couldn't win them. If one wants to win a NC one must have a top of the line QB who can hang 4-6 TDs on the board because that is now the nature of college football.

 

[GT flunkout]

I believe I am correct that when Penn State beat somebody, it escapes me who because it is the Big 10, or really the Big One, they jumped Clemson to take 3 ... a vote nobody on the committee could explain and which fell apart a week later with a Penn State loss. You can breathe now.

And you'd be wrong. An undefeated Penn State jumped an undefeated Clemson. They didn't have a loss. At no point in the season was Clemson ranked below a one-loss team. You and I can disagree, but at that point in the season, the committee felt like Penn State had a stronger resume with the same record.

Try again.

 

[gtrower]

I saw a little bit of Clem's QB recruit in the ArmyAll America game. 6'-4, 250, runs well and throws darts. May not miss much when Lawrence leaves.

Yeah that's what I saw too. Might be the closing thing to Cam that we've seen since he went pro. Hopefully he gets stuck with a nickname soon b/c it takes the announcers forever to spit his name out. And I imagine we'll be hearing it a lot.

 

[JorgeJonas]

LOL....Back in the 70's we played ND, Tennessee, South Carolina, Auburn on a regular basis. We also played Tulane, Navy, and Duke. Guess what, we would lose the last three as much as we did the first 4. Clemson was our whipping boy and Home coming choice.

Clemson will drop when Lawrence turns pro. UGA is already showing a drop as is Alabama. LSU will not be the same next year. And as said before if recruiting is everything....please explain FSU and Miami. Coaching means so much more.

But we weren’t in a conference then.