Poll: Will Clemson join the SEC?

[FurmanCock]

How many teams would have to leave to void the grant of rights?

The numbers I have seen is either 5 or 6.

 

[markymark550]

The numbers I have seen is either 5 or 6.

I don't think that will happen then. I think 3 or 4 might try to leave. Those 3 or 4 will probably try to convince other schools to leave as well in order to void that deal. However, not every school that will leave the ACC will have a desirable landing spot.

 

[USCGMCK]

How many teams would have to leave to void the grant of rights?

Here are Clay's thoughts. The Media Rights speculation comes at 8:29.

Clay Travis Reacts To College Football Conference Realignment

Clay Travis reacted to the college football conference realignment going on right now, saying it doesn't make any sense.

www.outkick.com

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I don't think that will happen then. I think 3 or 4 might try to leave. Those 3 or 4 will probably try to convince other schools to leave as well in order to void that deal. However, not every school that will leave the ACC will have a desirable landing spot.

Other schools could also be invited to join as current members leave.

 

[gamecock88]

Clemorrhoids use the same argument, that they have done well against the SEC. The big difference is doing it once a year and doing it week in and week out are two totally different things. They played Georgia first last year, and got beat up unlike any ACC team could ever do. They had so many injuries, and never recovered from it all year.

Wasn't referring to the top of the SEC, which is really only two teams relative to clemson. UGA and Bama. UGA beat everyone in they faced and looked pretty dominant in doing so. That early game was basically a defensive struggle. cu took a step back last year but not too far. They've typically beat everyone else in their conf convincingly and most likely would in an SEC schedule. They sometimes get beat by a surprise team, pitt, syracuse, ncstate, but those teams are very close to what ut, ole miss, types are. I'm not arguing there aren't tougher teams in the SEC, just the bottom 1/2 compares to what clemson handles in the ACC. They're still recruiting at a very high level as compared to nearly every other team in the country.

 

[Cockyandproud]

Wasn't referring to the top of the SEC, which is really only two teams relative to clemson. UGA and Bama. UGA beat everyone in they faced and looked pretty dominant in doing so. That early game was basically a defensive struggle. cu took a step back last year but not too far. They've typically beat everyone else in their conf convincingly and most likely would in an SEC schedule. They sometimes get beat by a surprise team, pitt, syracuse, ncstate, but those teams are very close to what ut, ole miss, types are. I'm not arguing there aren't tougher teams in the SEC, just the bottom 1/2 compares to what clemson handles in the ACC. They're still recruiting at a very high level as compared to nearly every other team in the country.

I understand your point, but I also disagree, somewhat. I do agree that Clemson is better than the lower half of the SEC, but the difference in my mind is how physical the games are in the SEC vs. the ACC. Clemson is better than many of the SEC teams, but having to take the beating week in and week out would make a huge difference. I've said it before, but I did work for one of the Clemson coaches. He told me that they had it made in the ACC. The only thing they had to worry about each year was maybe one ACC team, and if Carolina was any good. Other than that, they had clear sailing to the playoffs. He told me that the ACC was weak, which allowed them to play their third and fourth string players on a weekly basis, and get them game experience, while rarely sustaining injuries, so that they enter the playoffs fresh. To me, not incurring many injuries is the key point. Alabama typically has several of their key players out in the playoffs, but they have the bench to make it up.

 

[markymark550]

@Cockyandproud You did work for a Clemson coach? Hope you charged him at least double as a "tater fee"

 

[kingofnerf]

I understand your point, but I also disagree, somewhat. I do agree that Clemson is better than the lower half of the SEC, but the difference in my mind is how physical the games are in the SEC vs. the ACC. Clemson is better than many of the SEC teams, but having to take the beating week in and week out would make a huge difference. I've said it before, but I did work for one of the Clemson coaches. He told me that they had it made in the ACC. The only thing they had to worry about each year was maybe one ACC team, and if Carolina was any good. Other than that, they had clear sailing to the playoffs. He told me that the ACC was weak, which allowed them to play their third and fourth string players on a weekly basis, and get them game experience, while rarely sustaining injuries, so that they enter the playoffs fresh. To me, not incurring many injuries is the key point. Alabama typically has several of their key players out in the playoffs, but they have the bench to make it up.

Likely true for FSU in the Bobby Bowden era as well.

 

[kingofnerf]

^^ The only realignment the Taters have worried about the past several years. LOL