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.

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.

Random Football Thoughts: Steelers Decline, SoCon Stinking, Gamecock Grumbling

The Pittsburgh Steelers have moved from the Solid Rock of NFL consistency to possible candidates for the Teddy Bridgewater/Jadeveon Clowney Sweepstakes. Yes, their performance on Sunday and a scourge of injuries could make the Steelers one of the worst teams in the league. 

No, that's not an exaggeration. An overreaction to one game? Maybe, but there are a lot more questions than answers about the Steelers right now. 

Throughout his career, Ben Roethlisberger has compensated for deficiencies in the Steeler offense, particularly along the offensive line. Now, there are questions about whether or not Roethlisberger still has the ability to do the same job after nine years of getting pounded by defenses (or other substances). The front office really has done little to protect Ben or empower him with weapons to continue his success.

Aside from puzzling, failed draft choices, the biggest question might be why the Steelers hired Todd Haley as offensive coordinator. Roethlisberger and Haley had a strained relationship from day 1, and their sideline interactions during the Titans game didn't demonstrate much improvement. As columnist Jason Whitlock tweeted during the preseason, "Todd Haley is going to get Mike Tomlin fired". 

The bigger question is this:  Why would a team hire a coordinator without considering the thoughts of its franchise quarterback? Coordinators are a dime a dozen. Good QBs are not. Can you imagine ignoring Peyton, Eli, or Tom Brady in such a decision?

You can't do anything about injuries. But if the Steelers stay the course they started on Sunday, they could be looking at a very high draft pick in 2014. Unfortunately, there isn't a lot of confidence that they can do anything wise with it.

Some random thoughts from our first full football weekend:

-The Chip Kelly Hurry-up Works, for Now:  During the first half of Monday Night Football, twitter blew up with the news that Chip Kelly is a raging NFL success. Even I was guilty:

Yeah I think this Chip Kelly offense MIGHT be ok. #Eagles #NFL
— Tom LeGrand (@TheRev78) September 10, 2013

But then someone reminded me not to be "Overreaction Jackson", as most NFL commentators are:

@TheRev78 let's reevaluate in 10 weeks or so. Plus I think Shanahan is a terrible coach. He looks as confused as Lou Holtz.
— Brendan Buttimer (@brenb67) September 10, 2013

Kelly's offense slowed down--significantly--in the second half. And they had a very hard time getting cranked back up after they tried to slow it down and let some air out of the ball with a big lead. It was fun and entertaining, but it remains to be seen how this is going to play out long term.

An even bigger question:  Can it be sustained if Michael Vick, LeSean McCoy, or DeSean Jackson get hurt at any point?

-RGIII had a nice preseason performance:  Also from Monday Night Football, where we still have to listen to John Gruden...
     For all the talk and all the emotion, Mike Shanahan was (gulp, snarl, *eyeroll*) was right. Robert Griffin III was not ready to play. And we were foolish if we thought he was going to roll out and play just like he did last season in the first game.
     I'm not nearly as disturbed as some seemed to be by Griffin's performance. As bad as he looked during a fiasco of a first half, he began to look very comfortable by the end of the game. Hopefully, he'll get two or three more quarters of preseason work and begin to look like RGIII again.

-Wait for it...Wait for it... :  Since Furman is now 0-2 against the Big South, we can expect that there will be a chorus of grumbles that the Paladins should get rid of Coach Bruce Fowler. There are some questions about the recruiting, play-calling, and general approach of the team.

     But are we really at the point where Furman fires coaches after less than three years? Fowler is starting freshmen on defense and a sophomore at quarterback. Can we at least give him a couple more years to develop his players and recruits, while looking for the positive impact of stadium improvements?

     While we're on the subject, I heard a Citadel alum the other calling for Kevin Higgins' head on a platter. As disappointing--and shocking--as the Bulldogs' start has been, let's slow the roll a little. We forget that Furman and The Citadel are not exactly recruiting carnivals. Higgins has had more time than Fowler, but a change seems premature for either school at this point.

     Maybe one of them could lure Mike Ayers away from Wofford, as I'm convinced that the man could coach another 30 years (seriously, he's got to retire sometime, doesn't he?).

Cock-Fighting:  It's illegal in this state, unless it's on the sidelines of a Carolina game. 

     Coaches were fighting during the game, and Jadeveon Clowney was complaining after it. Everyone in Gamecock Nation needs to calm down, take a step back, and realize that last Saturday was somewhat inevitable. First off, Carolina lost a ton of players off that defense from last season, and they're still trying to replace those guys.

     Second, you didn't think you were going to beat Georgia forever, did you? The Dawgs defense isn't much, but there is no question about the power of their offense. They have over 1000 yards in two games against top-10 opponents.

     Third, we've blown up Clowney into a cartoon character. he was never going to be what we have made him out to be, so let's come back to reality and let the kid just be a football player. And the coaching staff needs to get him into position to do some things this season.

     Finally, you've got Vanderbilt coming to town on Saturday, and they ain't coming for the barbecue. There are no cakewalks in the SEC, and you don't have time to fight or let frustrations spill over from the last game. You better make the adjustments and figure out what you need to do to win the next one.

DJ Swearinger's Hit: Get Used to It

Following his hit on Miami tight end Dustin Keller on Sunday, I am quite sure that many will be calling into question the character of former South Carolina Gamecock DJ Swearinger. Most of them will be wearing orange overalls, but still...

Swearinger, fighting for a roster spot on the Houston Texans, ended the season, and perhaps the career, of Miami Dolphins' tight end Dustin Keller during a preseason game on Sunday. Swearinger denies doing anything intentional, and blames the new NFL rules on tackling and head shots for his tackling technique.

No need to set the DVR for that interview. You'll hear that story a lot in the next few years.

The NFL has declared that defensive players will always be held responsible for helmet-to-helmet shots, no matter how the ball carrier or receiver changes position. That sets up a situation where players have only one choice when tackling: Go low.

If you go for the legs, there is little chance that an adjustment by the receiver will result in a blow to the head. So the smart defender is going to target the area where there is a maximum opportunity to make the tackle while minimizing the chance for penalties. Not to mention the inevitable follow-up fine and suspension.

Clearly, Swearinger is no Holy Roller, and is a far cry from the defensive version of Tim Tebow in the Character Dept. (At least on the field). But this hit was not dirty; and what he said after the fact is not an excuse. It's a reason, regardless of when and where he decided to implement it. Keller's teammates and others can complain all they want, but this is going to be a common scene on Sunday afternoons.

And more players will get hauled off on a stretcher because of it.

We all understand the rules about launching, head-hunting, etc. But the league has taken those rules to a whole new level in its effort to hold defensive players solely responsible for head trauma. Worse yet, that escalation is filtering down to the NCAA, and has even made its presence felt in the Southern Conference.

Here's the thing:  The problem with these changes is that football isn't intended to be completely safe. In an effort to avoid litigation--and perhaps legislation--Roger Goodell and the NFL are fundamentally changing the game. And it's not all for the better.

What happens if more knees get popped like Keller's did? Furthermore, what happens when defensive players start getting concussions from taking a kneecap to the head? Catching the full force of a kicking leg or knee could surely cause some head trauma.

I will not be at all shocked if the league mandates a "strike zone," much as they do in baseball, where a defender can actually hit and tackle. This will be nearly impossible for defensive players, especially since the most recent collective bargaining agreement severely limits their practice time for tackling.

Football to this point has been the Roman Coliseum of sports gatherings. It is brutal, violent and inherently dangerous when played as it was intended. The players know that before they engage in it even on the Midget level.

Nevertheless, this is the "new" football, full of flags and rules and regulations to keep it from being played with that original intent. It may be safer and less likely to involve lawyers, but it's just not football. You cannot make something safe out of something that is inherently dangerous.

DJ Swearinger's words and actions in a meaningless preseason game may not seem significant. But it may actually signal an even greater change in the way the game is played and legislated.

Get used to it. More guys will lose a knee in the new NFL, at least until Roger Goodell finds a way to put "tackle flags" on the players.

And don't think for a minute that he won't do it.

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.

Gamecock Fans Getting the Truth from Frank Martin

I hope that basketball fans of the South Carolina Gamecocks--all 12 of them--are not offended by the truth. Because they're going to get it as long as Frank Martin is the head coach. He had plenty of truth following a Valentine's Day loss to LSU. Seriously, you have to check out the audio to get the full impact.

The most noteworthy sentence started with, "If we didn't have Bruce Ellington..." This was followed with some muddled comparison between the rest of the team and The Walking Dead. It was harsh, bordering on cruel, and there is no telling how the team or the fans might respond.

This is a common facial expression around South Carolina basketball.

They may not like it, but they'd better learn to live with it. Because it's the truth.

I sat at the media table at Timmons Arena on December 22, 2010. I watched a good Furman basketball team (a distant dream right now) obliterate the Gamecocks by 16 points. If Ellington had not been on the floor that night, the margin would have been 36.

Easily.

Some Carolina fans are already questioning the hiring of Martin. I've heard that he's too harsh, too demanding, too "in your face." I've heard that he can't get this team winning even though the team does have talent.

They have the same talent they did in 2010. Bruce Ellington.

Fans are naturally impatient, but it's baffling that some already want to dismiss Martin as a failure. Much like his counterpart up the road in Pickens County, Martin doesn't have the players right now. And he hasn't had nearly enough time to get them.

The players and the fans may not like Martin's style, and it's easy to see how he could quickly wear "thin" on postmodern athletes. But one thing that he has going for him is a willingness to speak the truth.

I believe that South Carolina can have a reasonably successful basketball program, particularly in a top-heavy SEC. Really, outside of Lexington (and perhaps Gainesville), does SEC hoops move the meter at all? If Carolina cares enough, they can make some noise.

But the only way that's going to happen is if the Gamecocks and their fans confront the brutal facts. And the brutal fact is that Ellington is still a one-man show. Until that changes, no coach is going to be able to take the program to a new level.

I don't know if Frank Martin is the guy to do it. Don't know if his old school style will work long term with new school athletes. The one clear thing is that Martin is speaking the truth to a University and fan base that need to hear it.

That alone should earn him the time to turn things around, even if the way he speaks it in an offensive manner. Even if he's not the guy to do it, Frank Martin's honesty will be a contributing factor if Gamecock basketball ever finds success.

Things that Clemson/Carolina Fans Should Not Be Saying

Apparently, the morning after doesn't bring any more sanity. Especially for Clemson and Carolina fans.

Even on January 2, Tigers and Gamecocks have a hard time getting along and can't bring themselves to give one another any credit. It is stunning that fans from both teams are still saying things that should never be said.

Everyone just stop for a second and think before you speak. I know, that's tough for Clemson and Carolina fans, but give it a try. And think for a few minutes about why the following things--which have been said--should never be said.


1. ESPN just hates Clemson, because all they can talk about is Clowney!
We live in a whatever-just-happened sports culture. Clowney is the last best thing, and it happened after Clemson beat LSU. That's why ESPN is talking about Jadeveon Clowney instead of Tajh Boyd. Oh, and the fact that Clowney may have offered the play of the year (and one for all-time) on the first day of 2013. And no, that's not an exaggeration.

2. Well, LSU just didn't care about the Chic-Fil-A Bowl! That's why Clemson won!
You're right, LSU didn't care nearly as much about that bowl game as Clemson did. And that's the SEC's problem. Their excessive arrogance is a huge weakness in the postseason, and Clemson exploited it to perfection.

Let's give credit where it is clearly due:  Clemson dominated almost every facet of the game against LSU. If they did it because the other Tigers thought they were too good to be there, then shame on them.

3. Clemson beat LSU and LSU beat Carolina, and that proves Clemson is really better than Carolina!
Oh please. You took a beating by Carolina for the four straight seasons. Play the way you did against LSU and maybe that streak will end. Otherwise, let it go.

4. Clemson couldn't do it against the SEC every week!
Nope, probably not. But Carolina can't do it against the SEC every week either. That little three-game stretch in late September/early October proved it. Keep in mind that no one went unscathed in the SEC this year.

Clemson has recruited SEC-level talent and they have SEC-level coordinators. They wouldn't be SEC champs, but they're certainly more SEC than ACC in football.

5. The SEC is overrated, and Clemson proved it!
To some degree, this is true. But it still shouldn't be said, and here's why:

The SEC isn't as good as everybody thinks it is; but the ACC is clearly as bad as everyone thinks it is. Clemson's win or not, the ACC is an awful football conference and has no reason to knock any other conference. And no, Louisville and Notre Dame do not count (yet).


So let's all do what rivals typically refuse to do. Take a step back and give credit where credit is due. And it is due in both Columbia and Pickens County.

While we're at it, we can enjoy being the only state with two 11-win teams who should both be in the top 10 in the final poll this season.