Things that Clemson & Carolina Fans Should Never Say: 2013-14 Edition

Last year, I hacked out an article about the ridiculous things that Clemson-South Carolina fans say to one another. It was an easy one to write, because no one does ridiculous quite like the fans in the state of South Carolina.

As I scanned the Facebook page following this year's game and into the bowl season, it seemed there would be plenty of material for another article. But judging from the kind of things that fans, who were apparently friends at some point, said to one another, I decided to let the vitriol fade a little.

Well, it hasn't. The talk is still strong and the insanity reigns. In what promises to be an annual event, here is your 2013-14 edition of the evidence that both fan bases need to get the tint out of their glasses. Here are some things that Gamecock and Tiger fans need to stop saying. Now.


1.  We killed y'all in the stats! Really? That's where you're going? It stunned me that some Clemson fans were actually saying this after the latest South Carolina victory.

You know who talks about their team's great stats? The fans of the team that lost.


2.  5. Okay, Gamecock falls, fold up your five little digits and put your hand back in your pocket. Yes, you've won five in a row, but let's keep a little perspective in mind, shall we? Clemson has streaks of three or more wins 11 times in this series, including a series record of 7 straight (which included 6 by double digits and 4 shutouts). You trail in the overall series by 23 games (65-42-4).

You're not dominating the rivalry, because you just now made it a rivalry.



3. 65-42-4. Yes, yes, Clemson has dominated this "rivalry" for decades. You are miles ahead in the win total.

But sorry, it's a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately world, an instant gratification society. Twitter isn't interested in the winning streak of 1934-40. You've had your fanny delivered to you five straight years by more than double-digits.

And until that changes, Gamecock fans will have reason to crow.



4. We're the state champions! Um...so what?

It's nice to be able to "stick it" to your rivals; but you know what you and the Head Ball Coach really want. You want--you need--that SEC title to validate all that you've accomplished since the HBC arrived. And you know that's what HE really wants to solidify that oh-so-annoying legacy. Well, annoying to half the state of South Carolina and the entire SEC, anyway.

After all, neither one of you even won your CONFERENCE in 2013...

5. We're the first team in the state to win a BCS game! Well, congratulations! You won a game in a horribly flawed (if not corrupt) system that is officially--and mercifully--headed to the trash heap. And as arrogant and annoying as it is, Gamecock fans are correct:  You are getting these chances because you're in the ACC, not the SEC. And because Duke can't muster enough fans to fill up the Orange Bowl.

You won the Orange Bowl against Ohio State and a coach that is almost as arrogant and annoying, if not as chatty, as Steve Spurrier. (And Urban "the II" Meyer has physically threatened a reporter...not sure if he got him "reassigned"). That's more than good enough.


6. ___________________ has no class! This one is just too easy.

You know that Spurrier doesn't coach anymore, don't you? He just sits in his office thinking up ways to jab Dabo and the Clemson fan base.

And then he calls up Dabo, who we know is not really coaching, and tells him what he's going to say. That gives Dabo just enough time to come up with a comeback. Or at least enough time to find someone who can think up a good comeback.

The problem is that we, as fans, take this all too seriously. And we get mad and re-tweet and paste it all over Facebook to express our outrage.

Maybe "classy" is not the right term for this situation...

There is absolutely nothing more boring to listen to than coaches talking before, during or after a football game. We scream for honesty; then, when we get it in the form of some cheap shots between coaches, we get mad and accuse coaches of having "No Class!!!"

People, this is great. We are blessed to have coaches who will at least say something interesting, sprinkled with at least a hint of what they truly think. And both coaches know exactly what they're doing when they say it.

All it does is work the fans into a frenzy, and both of these coaches are working it for all it's worth. Stop letting it drive you crazy and learn to revel in it.

Actually, forget that last statement. Keep it up, Gamecock and Tiger fanatics. It ensures that I'll have at least one entertaining blog to start each new year.

South Carolina Has "The Clowney Problem"

Could it get any better for Clemson fans after the first weekend in October?

The orange and white and occasionally purple (viewed as an abomination to Furman graduates) are basking in their glory like Don Draper in Hawaii. Their team is undefeated and they have every reason to believe that's going to continue, at least until Oct. 19. Down the road in Columbia, on the campus of their sworn enemy, South Carolina is sneaking past the likes of Kentucky, and the Head Ball Coach is slurring his speech afterwards. At least, until he talks about Jadeveon Clowney.

The Tigers are as gleeful as Gamecock fans are puzzled about The Clowney Problem. His fall from grace is so wonderful because they predicted it. And there is nothing quite as enjoyable for a football fan than being right, particularly about your rival. They made these predictions of "overrated" Clowney largely due to the tint of their orange-colored glasses. But the rest of us should have seen this coming on January 2, 2013.

As soon as Clowney made "The Hit", sports pundits started talking about how he should sit out for a year to wait for the NFL draft. From that point on, The Clowney Problem became inevitable.

Add in the Heisman Trophy predictions. Then add in that Clowney is a likeable 20-year old who seems to lack some maturity. He was happy to talk about how opposing quarterbacks like Aaron Murray and Tajh Boyd are scared of him. THEN add in a summer of listening to how great he is and how he will be the top pick in the 2014 draft, and it adds up to a serious Clowney Problem.

The Clowney Problem went public when he came into the season out of shape. He's being double and triple-teamed on every play because South Carolina's defense isn't nearly as good as a year ago. He has some nagging injuries in his feet and now with his ribs, and seems to perpetually carry a stomach virus.

All opponents have to do is run away from him--which just demonstrates his lack of conditioning--and they can have success.

Now, Clowney is taking himself out of games if he has pain or can't keep his wind or is just getting frustrated with the blocking schemes. The doctors aren't telling the coaches to sit him. He is removing himself from the lineup! If there is anything that Steve Spurrier hates, it's a star player that doesn't seem to think he's accountable to the HBC.

But can we truly blame Jadeveon Clowney? Okay, perhaps we can, for being out of shape and running his mouth and reading about himself in the papers far too often before the season started. It's tougher to blame him for thinking about injuries, especially since he has a nice pile of money waiting at the end of the rainbow. This still does not excuse him for not being prepared or giving everything he has to his team, IF he chooses to play.

At the same time, The Clowney Problem could end up being the best thing for--Jadeveon Clowney. It may be the best thing for him both off the field and on it.

Clowney is an incredible talented with almost unlimited physical potential, but he has to develop the maturity and mental toughness to handle the pressure of being a high draft pick. The HBC is absolutely correct to divert the media attention to Clowney, because he'll have to field those kinds of questions on Sunday afternoon. Sometimes, the only way to learn is to be thrown directly under the bus, and no one does that quite like Spurrier.

Clowney also has to learn to manage himself with things are not going his way.

In his football life, he has been a man among boys during his public career. Even prior to this season, people accused Clowney of taking plays off because he could flip a switch and dominate whenever he felt like it. At this point, he's learning what it's like to not be the biggest bully on the block, and that lesson will serve him well at some training camp next fall. NFL stands for "Not For Long" if you go in with an attitude.

As bad as The Clowney Problem is, it could end up benefitting Clowney as a player and a person. It's just sad that South Carolina may have to endure some disappointment this season in order for The Clowney Problem to be resolved.

Sad, that is, unless you own a pair of those orange-colored glasses.

A Layperson's Take on Ron Morris

The entire world of print media went into a tailspin last week when The State newspaper took Ron Morris off the South Carolina Gamecock football beat. Apparently, the Head Ball Coach (aka Steve Spurrier, aka Sports Media Director) had enough of Morris, a reporter that he clearly didn't like going all the way back to 2011. And probably before.

So The State newspaper did the new natural thing for a paper to do. They took Ron Morris off the beat for South Carolina football. There was a time when that wasn't the norm, but it seems to be the direction that papers are taking.

I don't know how long Morris has covered the Gamecocks, but it seems as if he wrote something about their battles with the boys of John C. Calhoun back in the day. Thankfully, public outrage--particularly (and rightly) from other reporters--Morris is back on the Gamecock beat. But this leaves a lot of questions about what happened here and the nature of reporting on sports in this era.

This is the Steven Colbert "Tip of the Hat, Wag of the Finger" commentary on what happened to Ron Morris. And the "Wag of the Finger" includes fans (especially those in orange), athletic departments, radio pundits, and big media companies.

Let's begin by dispensing with some of the sanctimony, first and foremost from Clemson fans and radio pundits. As they should, they love any chance to criticize the HBC and their rivals, and they have jumped all over the "outrageous" and "arrogant" Gamecocks. A number of the radio guys blasted The State for not standing up for honesty and integrity and solid journalism.

Please. Spare us. Spare us your naive moral outrage with the idea that Clemson and Dabo Swinney would NEVER do such a thing. Why do you think that access to practice/players/coaches is so limited in Pickens County? Do you really believe that Dabo's legendary "Tweet That" routine wasn't planned and prepared for the media? Do you honestly think the Anderson Independent or Greenville News wouldn't get a call if they wrote something that the folks in Tiger Town really didn't like?

To the radio guys:  Have you listened to yourself lately? It would be hard to find a bigger group of biased "homers" than those at a radio station essentially owned by the Clemson athletic department. Do you honestly think that they wouldn't pull the plug on you if you failed to put on your orange-colored glasses and pucker up?

Right or wrong, people use what influence they have at their disposal in order to get the result that they want. Coaches and athletic directors pull this on the media whenever they get the chance. Spurrier did exactly that, and every other athletic department in this state has done the same thing. 

Fans threaten to cancel their subscriptions when the paper writes something that they don't like or to stop listening to the radio pundit when they don't like his or her commentary. I'm willing to bet that papers and radio stations get at least one call a day demanding the job of some reporter.

Coaches and athletic departments and fans have a common goal:  Make their program look absolutely the best that they can, using whatever tools they have at their disposal. They all do it, even small schools and high schools. And if you can smear your rival in the process, all the better. As bad as South Carolina and Spurrier may look--and as much as those who hate them are enjoying it--their job is to look out for themselves, not Ron Morris.

That job belongs to the newspaper. And they failed. The fault of this lays at the feet of the media outlets and moguls and conglomerates that now run our newspapers. As long as they believe that homer-ism sells, Morris is not going to be the last victim.

I've had the privilege of getting to know a number of newspaper writers in the last few years. Sitting  in the press box or outside the locker room or at the press conference, I always felt like a fish out of water with them. There is a fraternity, integrity and work ethic to most of them that I never knew until I witnessed it.

Make fun of them all you want for asking stupid questions at the PC (I'm not saying everyone is a good reporter). But the majority of these writers research and ponder and pour over every word, which is why they're in the stadium two hours after everyone else has left.

Radio guys and bloggers (ie: ME) can choose to go about their work with some level of integrity. On the other hand, true reporters demand it, from one another and from themselves. On-air personalities and bloggers can decide to act with some level of integrity, not giving in to complete homer-ism or outrageous commentary. We have a choice. Sports news reporters don't.

The problem is that newspapers are shrinking, even folding, in the face of news outlets that lack their same level of integrity. Instead of holding to their principles, they are giving in to people like the HBC in an effort to gain/maintain readers. And it's exactly the wrong thing to do.

Newspapers have always had a counter-cultural element, challengers of the system and the status quo. We live in a country where 40 of our 50 states have a sports coach as their highest-paid employee. Whether or not it should be, sports is a vital part of our society and culture. We need people who are willing to report honestly on it rather than caving to the unprecedented influence that athletic departments now have.

I've had a person in an athletic department threaten to revoke my media credentials because I wrote a story that he didn't like--and that was just a blog. I was "saved" because someone else in the department stood up and said that the purpose of media is to report, not to kiss the school mascot. The guy who made the threat is gone, and the guy who spoke up is still there.

My hope is that the same will happen for reporters and editors who stand their ground.

I can't imagine what it must feel like for Morris or other reporters, who depend on this to pay their mortgage while they look over their shoulder to see who is ticked off at them. How much tougher is it when they now cannot depend on the paper to have their back?

If we get very introspective, reporters don't always help the situation. They are under more pressure than ever to get the jump on a story or to needle people with their words in order to attract more readers/listeners/subscribers. Sometimes they poke a little too hard and the needle stings a little more than necessary. But that's much better and more honest than becoming a cheerleader for the local university (or high school, in parts of this state).

The big media companies need to leave the "rah-rah" to the blogs and message boards and sponsored radio shows. Controversy drives the conversation and counter-cultural sells. Taking that angle is not a guarantee that your paper will survive and thrive. But caving in to a football coach IS a guarantee that your paper will fail, on numerous levels. The least of which is not purpose and integrity.

So the "Tip of the Hat" goes to all the newspaper reporters, sports or otherwise, across the state. We cannot imagine what it must be like to be threatened with losing your job because you are doing your job. But stand firm. (Easy for ME to say, tougher for you to do). In the long run, I have to hope and believe that your integrity will pay off for you.

Keep doing what you do, because we need you now more than ever.

Another Big 10 (plus 2) Farce Cuts Out the FCS

Well, praise the Lord for Barry Alvarez!

The Citadel and Furman and Wofford can all fall prostrate before him and shout in adoration, "We're not worthy! We're not worthy!" Because that's exactly what Alvarez thinks of FCS opponents for his Conference of the 1%, otherwise known as the Big 10. He and his fellows athletic directors have declared that they will no longer play FCS opponents.

We'll ignore the fact that the ADs were playing video of the AppSt/Michigan game while they made this decision. Barry has saved us from the embarrassment of watching our little guys from around South Carolina from having to play the "mighty" Big 10 teams.

Thank you, Big 10, for solving a problem that wasn't a problem. Unfortunately, it could become a big problem FCS schools just trying to make budget, particularly FCS schools that are near and dear to the Palmetto State.

Small schools have been playing "money ball" against big schools for decades. The objective is a nice, fat paycheck. Mix in the occasional upset and it's not a terrible system.

Yet, writers and pundits are suddenly concerned that someone is going to get "hurt" in one of these games. I don't know of a single instance of an FCS player losing a limb or severing an artery just because their opponent had Buckeyes on the back of the helmet.

I've argued on the air on ESPN Spartanburg about these FCS schools "prostituting" themselves in this way, and I still don't get it. It gives these smaller schools a chance to play in a setting and on a level of which they normally just dream. It offers them an opportunity to play David in the Goliath passion play and see if their best may just be good enough against a big-time program.

Here's the thing:  Some fans and bloggers believe this will mean better regular-season match-ups for Big 10 schools. I dare you to check in two years for the replacement schools for these FCS games. You won't be seeing Texas or 'Bama or Southern Cal. But I'm betting you'll see a lot of Marshall and Toledo and Middle Tennessee State.

They may be FBS (artist formerly known as Division I), but does anyone think MAC Conference USA teams are that much better than Wofford or The Citadel or Furman?

There is legitimate concern around the Southern Conference that other conferences may follow suit, although this is not set in stone. Southeastern Conference schools have plenty of tough games in their own league, and certainly don't need to ramp up the schedule. Unlike the Big 10, they play real football. The ACC might be more likely, especially since they've been embarrassed more than once against the FCS. But that could create some scheduling nightmares and end some long-standing connections.

Besides, the SEC seems content with their "SoCon Challenge" each year. Here at home, both Clemson coach Dabo Swinney and South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier support the idea of continuing to play "home grown" FCS opponents. Death Valley was full last season for Clemson-Furman, so this seems like a positive arrangement (although Spurrier might prefer to leave off the option teams in the future).

Still, it could all change very quickly. There is even some rumblings that the NCAA may try to ban games between FCS and FBS. (And we all know that things can only get better when the NCAA gets involved).

No matter what some people are saying, this really isn't about these schools "prostituting" themselves or safety or fair competition or better games for season ticket holders. This is, as always, about one thing:  Money.

The Big 10 believes that it would be more profitable for them to leave FCS opponents off the schedule, and they may well be right (particularly if they have another Mountaineer Fiasco on their hands). But this is also about an ongoing desire of the BCS-level conferences to keep their money and not share it with anyone, least of all FCS.

And that's okay. FCS will be fine and continue to play a more pure brand of football that is designed for the last remaining bastion of true student-athletes in the nation. It would just be nice if people like Alvarez and his Big 10 brethren would drop the charade and just speak the truth. They may not know how many teams they have in their conference, but they know that they want every one of their schools to keep every dollar available.

That's fine. At least our FCS teams know how to count. We'd rather play real football teams in the SEC anyway.