National Championship

[CRA]

23 minutes ago, KaseKlosed said:

Trevor Lawrence is Blaine Gabbert 2.0

the Trevor Lawrence horrific takes are really strong this am. 

Dude loses one game and now he is a bum.   Which happened to be a road game against the greatest offensive team in college football history. 

Trevor is also 19.  Burrow is 23 (not even a real student) and Burrow looked as average as average can be at 22. 

 

[raz]

sunshine may not be as good as the hype yet - all the time,  but gabbert?   seeing folks on my ignore list get quoted is great validation for my ignore list.    

[Mr. Scot]

 

[CRA]

10 hours ago, Snake said:

Superior or allowed to target? 

Either way Sunshine showed tonight he can be rattled. Still it's not like Clemson won't be back next year. They just happened to run into the SEC.

nah.  They happened to run into LSU.  

People who talk about the SEC as some collective body generally are fans of SEC teams that don't do diddly poop.   Clemson has proven time and time and time again....they got no problem with the SEC as a conference.  

Sunshine showed what literally every player has shown.  That you will have bad days mixed in every once in awhile.   I wouldn't say he was rattled.  Just off.  I also think Clemson's O scheme was flawed this year from start to finish this year in terms of how the passing game was constructed.   Part of that was losing Renfrow.  Part of that was losing the starting TE all season.    That isn't an excuse....but a note of something that needs to be corrected.  Clemson's passing scheme has always attacked the middle of the field.   It didn't this year.  

[Snake]

18 minutes ago, CRA said:

nah.  They happened to run into LSU.  

People who talk about the SEC as some collective body generally are fans of SEC teams that don't do diddly poop.   Clemson has proven time and time and time again....they got no problem with the SEC as a conference.  

Sunshine showed what literally every player has shown.  That you will have bad days mixed in every once in awhile.   I wouldn't say he was rattled.  Just off.  I also think Clemson's O scheme was flawed this year from start to finish this year in terms of how the passing game was constructed.   Part of that was losing Renfrow.  Part of that was losing the starting TE all season.    

Seems like excuses to me. Seems people who were pulling for Clemson have plenty of them today. 

[Jmac]

9 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

I can't help wondering if the LSU players occasionally turn to each other in the locker room and ask "What did Coach just say, man?"

GO TIGERS.....they all understand that when coach O rasps that out.

[CRA]

33 minutes ago, Snake said:

Seems like excuses to me. Seems people who were pulling for Clemson have plenty of them today. 

I fail to see where an excuse was even attempted? 

I merely dismissed the SEC fans of other teams always seeking to gain attention off whatever lone SEC team is having success.   Clemson didn't run into the SEC.  They ran into a singular LSU team.  Clemson has no problem w/ the collective SEC. 

It isn't making an excuse to say Trevor didn't have a good game.  He simply didn't play well.   A fact.  We have seen enough of him to know a bad game from a good game.  Some of that is LSU, some might of been a road game, some probably was just a bad day.  For Clemson to win vs the greatest offense in college football history that also wasn't getting to play the NC at HOME? He needed to play great.  He didn't.   Clemson D could only do so much.  Clemson O had windows they needed to make plays.  They didn't.   They allowed LSU to stack unanswered scores.  They lost. 

The hot takes on Trevor are just bad.  Simple as that.  

Trevor is still the best prospect since Luck.   That game doesn't' change that.    Joe Burrow's season at 23 years old under Joe Brady's Saints scheme doesn't change that either. 

[blackcat]

Bottom line is Clemson played a superior opponent, who's been tested all season playing ranked teams.  Clemson is very talented, but when you're playing in the ACC, you're not going to get tested like you would the SEC.  Not pitting conferences against each other, just saying that LSU was ready for a test, Clemson's first test was 2 weeks ago.

[Varking]

19 minutes ago, CRA said:

I fail to see where an excuse was even attempted? 

I merely dismissed the SEC fans of other teams always seeking to gain attention off whatever lone SEC team is having success.   Clemson didn't run into the SEC.  They ran into a singular LSU team.  Clemson has no problem w/ the collective SEC. 

It isn't making an excuse to say Trevor didn't have a good game.  He simply didn't play well.   A fact.  We have seen enough of him to know a bad game from a good game.  Some of that is LSU, some might of been a road game, some probably was just a bad day.  For Clemson to win vs the greatest offense in college football history that also wasn't getting to play the NC at HOME? He needed to play great.  He didn't.   Clemson D could only do so much.  Clemson O had windows they needed to make plays.  They didn't.   They allowed LSU to stack unanswered scores.  They lost. 

The hot takes on Trevor are just bad.  Simple as that.  

Trevor is still the best prospect since Luck.   That game doesn't' change that.    Joe Burrow's season at 23 years old under Joe Brady's Saints scheme doesn't change that either. 

Snake was saying last night that Chase was just mediocre. I wouldn't even bother trying to explain anything to him. 

[CRA]

27 minutes ago, blackcat said:

Bottom line is Clemson played a superior opponent, who's been tested all season playing ranked teams.  Clemson is very talented, but when you're playing in the ACC, you're not going to get tested like you would the SEC.  Not pitting conferences against each other, just saying that LSU was ready for a test, Clemson's first test was 2 weeks ago.

on a neutral field? 3 games? I'd say LSU probably wins 2 of 3.  

I don't think the conferences they play in really alters that.  Just a matter of which team is having a good day and how you matchup vs your opponent.  

I mean that narrative? of LSU was ready because of the SEC and Clemson wasn't because of the ACC? is a narrative that has been trotted out for the last 5 conservatives years entering the CFP.   It is proven untrue by Clemson's success in the CFP the last 5 years. 

[KaseKlosed]

1 hour ago, CRA said:

the Trevor Lawrence horrific takes are really strong this am. 

Dude loses one game and now he is a bum.   Which happened to be a road game against the greatest offensive team in college football history. 

Trevor is also 19.  Burrow is 23 (not even a real student) and Burrow looked as average as average can be at 22. 

 

Seeing him having time to prepare and playing against legit top talent shows you how far he has to go to live up to the hype. y'all love bringing up his age but this is college football right? 

[CRA]

1 minute ago, KaseKlosed said:

Seeing him having time to prepare and playing against legit top talent shows you how far he has to go to live up to the hype. y'all love bringing up his age but this is college football right? 

Trevor Lawrence blew the doors of Alabama last year in the Natty (which was pimped as one of the greatest teams of all time).  So again, these Trevor hot takes because of one game are just nonsense.  Dude has lost only 1 game....a road game in a natty vs a historical GOAT offense.  

Team sport.  Teams and players don't always play their best every game.  Trevor didn't play well.  

What is living up to the hype? 3 straight Nattys and never losing a college game?  I mean, I'm not sure what living up to the hype means when you put the bar at absurd/unreasonable.   There are strong odds he never loses a regular season college game.  He likely could make the natty in all 3 seasons of his college career. 

Age is relevant when talking in terms of a prospect going forward.    

[Davidson Deac II]

1 hour ago, blackcat said:

Bottom line is Clemson played a superior opponent, who's been tested all season playing ranked teams.  Clemson is very talented, but when you're playing in the ACC, you're not going to get tested like you would the SEC.  Not pitting conferences against each other, just saying that LSU was ready for a test, Clemson's first test was 2 weeks ago.

Irrelevant.  

Based on that criteria, Clemson should have lost last year to Alabama.  Better team is the better team, the conference they come from is mostly irrlevant.  

[blackcat]

12 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Irrelevant.  

Based on that criteria, Clemson should have lost last year to Alabama.  Better team is the better team, the conference they come from is mostly irrlevant.  

Pretty much everything said here is irrelevant, that's why they play the games I guess.