I feel like this board overrates how good a program Clemson is historically

[Pat Kelly]

Right now, they're as good as they've ever been, but we seem to be overrating their history.

Can we keep in mind before 2011, their last season with double-digit wins was 1991. Also, zero conference championships between 1991 and 2011. Obviously they've been very good these past couple years, but can we please not just expect them to dominate us every year?

Boston College beat them the first three times they played as conference foes, two of those times with Clemson being ranked.

Completely arbitrary I know, but I'd put them fourth in the conference as far as history is concerned, behind, in no particular order, FSU, Miami, VT.

 

[anomander]

They have really kicked it up a notch since Dabo was hired, Chad Morris was brought in, and just as importantly had a major facility upgrade. They now have the elite facilities to go along with one of the best home field environments in the country.

Sure they have 1 title and then eventually got him with probation, but I think they are here to stay.

 

[Pat Kelly]

They have really kicked it up a notch since Dabo was hired, Chad Morris was brought in, and just as importantly had a major facility upgrade. They now have the elite facilities to go along with one of the best home field environments in the country.

Sure they have 1 title and then eventually got him with probation, but I think they are here to stay.

All fair points. My father is a BC fan and he went down to Death Valley a couple years ago. They know how to make game day a celebration.

 

[anomander]

All fair points. My father is a BC fan and he went down to Death Valley a couple years ago. They know how to make game day a celebration.

That's not to say we shouldn't expect to compete with them when they come to the Dome. I just think they have everything in place to make a nice sustained run as a top 15 program.

Making it down to Death Valley is one of the first road trips I plan on making!

 

[OrangeDW]

Right now, they're as good as they've ever been, but we seem to be overrating their history.

Can we keep in mind before 2011, their last season with double-digit wins was 1991. Also, zero conference championships between 1991 and 2011. Obviously they've been very good these past couple years, but can we please not just expect them to dominate us every year?

Boston College beat them the first three times they played as conference foes, two of those times with Clemson being ranked.

Completely arbitrary I know, but I'd put them fourth in the conference as far as history is concerned, behind, in no particular order, FSU, Miami, VT.

Agree with everything until the end....history, meaning ever? All time? No way is VT that high.

 

[ImperialOrange]

Tough to see the forest through the trees and currently they are a huge tree

 

[Pat Kelly]

Agree with everything until the end...history, meaning ever? All time? No way is VT that high.

More wins, better win %, and in that period between 1991-2011, Beamer had 13 ten win seasons. And if you want to compare them while they've been in the same conference, up until Tech's dry spell these past two seasons, they've been a better team than Clemson.

 

[OrangeDW]

More wins, better win %, and in that period between 1991-2011, Beamer had 13 ten win seasons. And if you want to compare them while they've been in the same conference, up until Tech's dry spell these past two seasons, they've been a better team than Clemson.

So since 1991 or since 2004? Yeah, I agree.

Not ever, though.

 

[Pat Kelly]

So since 1991 or since 2004? Yeah, I agree.

Not ever, though.

The past 23 years constitutes a part of "ever", and yeah I think Virginia Tech all together has been a better program.

 

[OrangeDW]

The past 23 years constitutes a part of "ever", and yeah I think Virginia Tech all together has been a better program.

The numbers and accomplishments say otherwise though, and most of them aren't even close.

Clemson just has a deeper and longer history of good football. For that matter, so does Syracuse.

In recent times though, definitely.

And I agree with the initial point about Clemson getting way too much credit recently from many. They aren't Florida St.

 

[HtownOrange]

I agree that Clemson is not the juggernaught many seem to believe them. Their history is much like Syracuse' history.

As to VATech, they consistently lose big games and their wins are seriously padded by playing below their level of competition. We dog Schiano for weak scheduling but all he did was mimic Beamer. Ten wins v. Cupcake U. does not equate to a power school. Additionally, Beamer caught lightening in a bottle by playing the few name schools in down periods but failed to beat the highest level schools when they are good to hot.

 

[KaiserUEO]

They'll get 80k+ for game in August on Labor Day Saturday...and when given 5 months notice that its now a Friday night game, would likely get 85k.

Clemson is untouchable.

 

[Alsacs]

Clemson is not overrated they are one of three SEC style fanbases within the ACC along with Virginia Tech, and Florida State. I went to the 2011 ACC title game between Clemson and Virginia Tech and it was by far the best atmosphere of any of the ACC title games because of the 2 fanbases.

Clemson isn't Florida State nationally, but they care about football first, support the hell out of their team and with where college football recruits are located in GA, SC, FL have a great recruiting base to stay a top 25 program year in and year out. Dabo can be annoying and have What losses, but he has the program on the upward and if they can continue recruiting like he has they will be a NC contender one of these years because the ACC won't have as many landmines as the SEC.

South Carolina has owned him and if he can win more of those games he will be untouchable. Remember the famous quote about South Carolina it is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum.

They are a good program and wish them well outside of any Syracuse games.

 

[OrangeCrush22]

Completely arbitrary I know, but I'd put them fourth in the conference as far as history is concerned, behind, in no particular order, FSU, Miami, VT.

Really? I'd put Pitt, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse ahead of Clemson. In fact I'd put Pitt, GT, and SU ahead of FSU and Miami historically. Virginia Tech is behind Clemson, definitely.

 

[SmilinBob]

Loads of talent and speed to burn plus an impressive fan base. That's how I look at Clemson. Are beatable, absolutely.

 

[NKR1978]

Completely arbitrary I know, but I'd put them fourth in the conference as far as history is concerned, behind, in no particular order, FSU, Miami, VT.

Agree we've overrated their history, and I would put ours up against theirs any day of the week. But they have an SEC fan base and an SEC atmosphere at their games. Think that's what we respect more than their history. And Armory Square was filled with their fans the night before the game.

Virginia Tech should not be mentioned in the same breath as far as history goes with Syracuse, Pitt, Georgia Tech, Miami, Clemson, BC or FSU. At best they're 8th historically and even that might be a stretch with Virginia being better than them historically.

 

[Pat Kelly]

They'll get 80k+ for game in August on Labor Day Saturday...and when given 5 months notice that its now a Friday night game, would likely get 85k.

Clemson is untouchable.

Not comparing them to us, but because they draw huge crowds doesn't mean they've been a very great program

 

[Pat Kelly]

Really? I'd put Pitt, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse ahead of Clemson. In fact I'd put Pitt, GT, and SU ahead of FSU and Miami historically. Virginia Tech is behind Clemson, definitely.

Agree we've overrated their history, and I would put ours up against theirs any day of the week. But they have an SEC fan base and an SEC atmosphere at their games. Think that's what we respect more than their history. And Armory Square was filled with their fans the night before the game.

Virginia Tech should not be mentioned in the same breath as far as history goes with Syracuse, Pitt, Georgia Tech, Miami, Clemson, BC or FSU. At best they're 8th historically and even that might be a stretch with Virginia being better than them historically.

If I say history, I don't mean only count like 50 years ago, I mean over the entire course of the program...

 

[NKR1978]

If I say history, I don't mean only count like 50 years ago, I mean over the entire course of the program...

Miami, FSU, Pitt, Georgia Tech, Syracuse, BC and Clemson all have consensus national championships. Virginia Tech doesn't and really it didn't do much of anything before the last 20 years.

 

[milerock]

Clemson has a very solid history both all time and recently. 24th in all time wins 25th in all time winning %.
We have had periods of excellence. 1948-1959...appeared in 3 major bowls and 2 undefeated seasons.
1977-1991 won a national title. John Heisman coached for 4 seasons back in the 1900s. Another Hall of fame coach Jess Neely
for 9 years back in the 30s. Committed program suicide by firing coach ford in 1990 and we are just now
coming out of it 20+ years later. The firing of coach ford more or less coincided with Florida State coming
into the league so there was a long dry spell of winning conference championships for the whole ACC. I think
they had 14 consecutive top 5 seasons.

We have a passionate fan base and we have arguably the best game day experience in the country. Are we elite?
I would not say that but we are edging toward it. Unfortunately it looks like FSU may be getting on another
roll. Hope some of you make it down next year.

 

[milerock]

And by the way we like to say the SEC has a Clemson like atmosphere.

 

[PhatOrange]

They're an elite program right now. Historically no. But right now yes. The hardest thing to do is maintain elite status.

 

[SU2NASA]

They're screwed this year. We're going to beat their ass.

 

[money3189]

historically they are okay and a top 25 program. recently and potentially are title contenders becuase of their location and fan/booster support. We will see

 

[xc84]

Right now, they're as good as they've ever been, but we seem to be overrating their history.

Can we keep in mind before 2011, their last season with double-digit wins was 1991. Also, zero conference championships between 1991 and 2011. Obviously they've been very good these past couple years, but can we please not just expect them to dominate us every year?

Boston College beat them the first three times they played as conference foes, two of those times with Clemson being ranked.

Completely arbitrary I know, but I'd put them fourth in the conference as far as history is concerned, behind, in no particular order, FSU, Miami, VT.

While I agree with your characterization of how good they have been, I disagree that people on this board overrate them in general. In fact, many have continually pointed out that they are good now but not great historically. 41-0 comes to mind.