Signature Win

[orange_in_VA]

Shafer needs a win like this to hang his hat on with recruits. Beating (mostly) bad teams doesn't show recruits that we are trending in the right direction. We have to be able to show that we can compete. With that said, this is the best chance that we have to, A. Beat Clemson for a while (They have insane recruits coming in recently) and B. Get a big win this year (ranked opponent). Have to take advantage of the injuries they have. I know we have a lot as well, but we aren't missing anybody in the same league as their top 4-5 injured players.

 

[Crusty]

I just want to see us actually competitive in a "big game". We have yet to actually compete in any games against top teams in the Shafer era. That is most alarming to me.

Yes, but the Shafer era is only 20 games old.

 

[CanadianSU]

Duke isnt a signature win.

At all. Wow

 

[cuseguy]

Shafer's first signature win may come next year at home against LSU.

I'd be shocked beyond belief to beat Clemson on the road.

 

[CanadianSU]

Shafer's first signature win may come next year at home against LSU.

I'd be shocked beyond belief to beat Clemson on the road.

Again, this isn't the Clemson we all think it is. They are not in the top 3 in the ACC this year at least.

 

[HtownOrange]

When is the last time y'all played in a venue like Death Valley? (Honestly curious, I'm not trying to set anything up with that question.)

You may have heard of that little team in Michigan, the Wolverines, beat them in the Big House...while they were good, real good. Should have won at Tennessee. Happy Valley sound familiar? (That's three 100K+ stadiums) USC (not the east coast one). Played Miami, Florida and FSU, Alabama, Auburn. You may have heard of the Irish. WVU is no pushover at home (dangerous on the field and more dangerous for opposing fans in the stands). Shall I go on, there are many more, or does that trump playing Georgia and FSU? Not trying to be a wise guy but one thing most ACC fans forget is that as an indy for so long, to be respectable Syracuse played mostly big name teams. If Syracuse played pansy schedules (ahem, Beamerball) Syracuse would have another 100+ wins. Historically, Syracuse has played tough schedules.

Anyway, Clemson has a great tradition and it will be fun to be a part of it, but in the big scheme, it will be just another game against another good team, it will not be THE highlight of the Syracuse football team to look back on for generations.

 

[storange]

I just want to see us actually competitive in a "big game". We have yet to actually compete in any games against top teams in the Shafer era. That is most alarming to me.

Yes and No. I was encouraged to see SU move the ball up and down the field against FSU ( To collapse in the Red Zone )

 

[noexCUSEs]

Duke would beat Clemson.

no...

 

[gbo]

Again, this isn't the Clemson we all think it is. They are not in the top 3 in the ACC this year at least.

Who's in your top three if Clemson isn't?

 

[CUTater]

Again, this isn't the Clemson we all think it is. They are not in the top 3 in the ACC this year at least.

With Watson we are #2 in the ACC. With Stoudt, I'm not sure, but I think we're probably still #2.

 

[CUTater]

You may have heard of that little team in Michigan, the Wolverines, beat them in the Big House...while they were good, real good. Should have won at Tennessee. Happy Valley sound familiar? (That's three 100K+ stadiums) USC (not the east coast one). Played Miami, Florida and FSU, Alabama, Auburn. You may have heard of the Irish. WVU is no pushover at home (dangerous on the field and more dangerous for opposing fans in the stands). Shall I go on, there are many more, or does that trump playing Georgia and FSU? Not trying to be a wise guy but one thing most ACC fans forget is that as an indy for so long, to be respectable Syracuse played mostly big name teams. If Syracuse played pansy schedules (ahem, Beamerball) Syracuse would have another 100+ wins. Historically, Syracuse has played tough schedules.

Anyway, Clemson has a great tradition and it will be fun to be a part of it, but in the big scheme, it will be just another game against another good team, it will not be THE highlight of the Syracuse football team to look back on for generations.

I was asking when. I wasn't suggesting that you'd never played in a tough venue, but I know y'all don't play Michigan Penn State, Miami, Alabama, Auburn, and Notre Dame every year.

 

[jekelish]

If we play well and somehow manage to beat Clemson, we're still going to be irritated. Know why? Because ESPN will be talking about nothing but "Clemson lost" and "this is embarrassing for Clemson" and "this is what Clemson did wrong" and chances are we'll get zero credit from the national media.

 

[Food_Lion]

Again, this isn't the Clemson we all think it is. They are not in the top 3 in the ACC this year at least.

Who is in the top 3 of the ACC this year?

Who's in your top three if Clemson isn't?

I'm not by any means saying Clemson is a powerhouse program this year but I would like to know your top 3 as well.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Beating (mostly) bad teams doesn't show recruits that we are trending in the right direction.

 

[Chip]

Who's in your top three if Clemson isn't?

That was my question too.

Because to me it's..

1. FSU
2. Clemson
3. Nearly everyone else (including UNC because they always finish strong)
13. NC State
14. Wake

I should probably put Louisville clearly ahead of us based on their win, but I still think most of this league is just one big jumbled middle.

 

[ssmorol]

Clemson is clearly #2 even being down this year. I agree with Chip too...it's a big friggin mess in the middle, though I like to think we are towards the top of that mess!

 

[CousCuse]

Who is in the top 3 of the ACC this year?


I'm not by any means saying Clemson is a powerhouse program this year but I would like to know your top 3 as well.

Duke , who people here are oblivious to , has really played tough . Cutcliffe would be at the top of every SEC teams coach list. Miami also seems close to returning to the limelight , get a good test tonight against VT.

 

[suloyalfan]

When is the last time y'all played in a venue like Death Valley? (Honestly curious, I'm not trying to set anything up with that question.)

Syracuse played at Florida State last year... does that count?

 

[suloyalfan]

With Watson we are #2 in the ACC. With Stoudt, I'm not sure, but I think we're probably still #2.

QB is the most important player on the offense... if you believe ESPN's QBR numbers, Cole Stoudt is #122 while AJ Long is #66 (Terrell Hunt is #81). Deshaun Watson is #8... according to this, Clemson is really going to miss the production on offense. Defense can get you through, but mistakes and lack of productivity on offense can also negatively impact your defense no matter how good they are.

 

[CUTater]

QB is the most important player on the offense... if you believe ESPN's QBR numbers, Cole Stoudt is #122 while AJ Long is #66 (Terrell Hunt is #81). Deshaun Watson is #8... according to this, Clemson is really going to miss the production on offense. Defense can get you through, but mistakes and lack of productivity on offense can also negatively impact your defense no matter how good they are.

We already really miss it. Look at the dropoff from Watson to our last two games. But we have an elite defense.

 

[CUTater]

If we play well and somehow manage to beat Clemson, we're still going to be irritated. Know why? Because ESPN will be talking about nothing but "Clemson lost" and "this is embarrassing for Clemson" and "this is what Clemson did wrong" and chances are we'll get zero credit from the national media.

True. Clemson fans feel the same way about the national media. Everyone before last week's game at BC recognized it was a tough spot, the pundits all said that, but post-game Clemson got no credit for winning in that tough spot. If we'd lost though? It would've been dubbed "Clemsoning." The national pundits are so lazy with their "analysis," and it's a shame they have so much influence.

 

[jekelish]

True. Clemson fans feel the same way about the national media. Everyone before last week's game at BC recognized it was a tough spot, the pundits all said that, but post-game Clemson got no credit for winning in that tough spot. If we'd lost though? It would've been dubbed "Clemsoning." The national pundits are so lazy with their "analysis," and it's a shame they have so much influence.

I agree. Most of them, I'm convinced, base their takes purely on box scores and a fuzzy memory of how teams have generally performed over the last few years. No real insight.

College football needs its own version of Ron Jaworski - a guy who actually watches hours of film and understands everything about every team he sees.

 

[gbo]

I agree. Most of them, I'm convinced, base their takes purely on box scores and a fuzzy memory of how teams have generally performed over the last few years. No real insight.

College football needs its own version of Ron Jaworski - a guy who actually watches hours of film and understands everything about every team he sees.

What we really need is Frank Caliendo as Ron Jaworski doing college football.

 

[NKR1978]

What we really need is Frank Caliendo as Ron Jaworski doing college football.

Do people actually like Frank Caliendo?

 

[gbo]

Do people actually like Frank Caliendo?

I don't know. His act does gets old.