TallulahtheTiger

It was 1992. They fired their coach on the field after the game.

No, but Missouri loves company.

Don't forget Ohio State HC John Cooper.

If nothing else, being a head coach at Arkansas ought to teach him some humility.

No, we beat Kentucky in the '09 Music City Bowl, which was the only time we've played them since Dabo became our head coach.

Y'all would have to cough up something more like $200 apiece to cover that buyout! Who the heck signed off on that? Like, who was going to swoop in & hire away Muschamp? Just for point of comparison, Dabo's buyout is $4 million.

The rot had already set in by that aTm game in 2014; it just wasn't apparent until then to the media, the fan base, the UofSC administration & really anyone who wasn't paying close attention. Spurrier had already started mailing it in, had already sloughed off to his assistants the drudgery of recruiting. I remember 2014 well - all the preseason hype for USC, coming off their #4 final ranking the season before. People in Colatown were all just talking so big. Sure, they'd lost all that talent on the D-line, but they were just going to reload & keep chugging along, while Clemson - whom SC fans dubbed a lesser program from a lesser conference - was going to come crashing back to reality & 6- or 7-win seasons. And the 5-peat was just going to go on forever. Pride does indeed come before the fall.

Gee, i'd almost forgotten that one. Oh yeah, that was the game that led Dabo to hire Brent Venables as our DC. Our record since that day is 99-11. This year we have the best defense in college football, again.

I'm of the assumption that we'll get the best effort that the Gamecocks have in them. Whatever the noise & circus surrounding the program on the outside, there's no evidence that CWM has lost his team & players. They'll come out motivated & playing with nothing to lose, & their coaches will empty out the playbook. As for how the game might play out, USC might be able to slow our offense in the 1st half & get some 3-&-outs. I wouldn't rule out that they might make a big play in special teams (which have been a liability at times or minimally adequate at best) for a score or advantageous field position. But over the course of the game, how is their offense going to score, or even move the ball with any consistency? They'll want & need to get some productivity from their run game, but judging from what we've seen to date, nobody is really banking on that. Maybe the OL can step up, maybe Feaster can show out; but those are big ifs. How will their defense hold up through 4 quarters? How are they going to cover our receivers? Does anyone think Muschamp & BMac are going to outcoach Dabo & Venables? Barring 3 ints & a lost fumble, & maybe a special teams disaster on top, it's just hard to see a pathway to victory for the Cocks. Fully acknowledging that predictions have a way of making us all look like a fools, I'm picking Tigers 42 Gamecocks 17.

I think the author was referring to the SC-Florida game this season (which was a tight game in which the Cocks did get hosed by the officiating), not the Clemson-SC game from '17.

Descent, as in falling? When was the last decent defense CWM put on the field?

Y'all are a women's basketball school. Embrace it.

Ken Hatfield left on his own accord during the off season to take the Clemson job in 1990. He must have really hated working for Frank Broyles.

If it really is the case that the UofSC is unable or unwilling to eat the buyout, & thus y'all & Muschamp are stuck with each other, well that's just not a good situation to be in. What you might want to consider is offering him a 1- or 2-year extension in exchange for a much reduced buyout. That way you don't lose your recruiting class, & then a year from now if you have to can him, it won't cost nearly as much money. If Muschamp really believes his program is on track & success is right around the corner, he ought to be inclined to agree to this in some form. And it would also buy you some time to retire Ray Tanner with dignity & hire a professional AD who could be better trusted to make tough decisions & good coaching hires.

Only thing about Lane Kiffin that's "bigger than life" is his ego. Really, I just don't get fans' continual infatuation with him. Sure, he can call plays & make an offense with talented players wirk. But as a head coach he's accomplished next to nothing. Every job he's had, he's left bitterness &/or wreckage in his wake. At every stop of his career, he's shown himself to be an immature brat as well as a 1-man distraction machine. Why any AD in his right mind would want this guy to lead his school's football program is beyond me. As a Clemson fan, I'm so thankful we didn't hire him back in 2008 when we had a head-coaching vacancy. (His name was getting tossed around in the rumor mill right after we canned Tommy Bowden 6 games into the season.) It isn't hard to imagine how we'd have ended up.

Seriously doubt Dabo would be shaking with fear at the prospect of coaching against Urbs. Remember, he is the one who put the 0 in Ohio.

Says a supporter of the lyingest, cheatingest, stealingest president in US history.

Didn't know he owned Sanford Stadium. But he was sighted in Columbia out walking his dog Jake on a leash.

I think the Cocks have a better-than-even chance of pulling out a win vs Kentucky.

Tweetsie gonna whoop 'em in Colatown!

We play UNC in Chapel Hill in 3 weeks. If that team is a "cupcake", what does that make your team?

Notre Dame finished the regular season 12-0. If they shouldn't have been in the CFP, who should've taken their place? 2-loss Georgia? Ohio State with the beatdown loss to Purdue?

SC can play a couple of ACC teams a year (& get their arses whooped!) but every other game is Vandy, Tennessee, Arkansas & Ole Miss. I would include Kentucky on that list but you really can't consider them an in-conference cupcake with the way they've owned y'all the last 5 years.

"...510 yards against Clemson" That game was one hell of a moral victory for SC!

The purpose behind Coach Meyer's particular choice of words was to etablish plausible deniability to the inevitable charge of being a weaselly liar when he takes the USC job.

From this Clemson fan's observation, it seems that Muschamp has done yeoman's work recruiting, considering what he's up against & the talent depletion he inherited. Even going into year 4, with some okay-to-good classes, he still has some obvious holes to plug, & he's nowhere near closing the talent gap with Clemson & Georgia. We know he can recruit, but the question is whether he can develop his talent, motivate his players & get consistent play out of his team. (I mean, they put up 600+ yards & 35 points on the #1 defense in America & then turned in that clunker in the Belk Bowl.) Maybe his staff adjustments will help some in that regard.

I think he be might he referring to the geographical proximity of Clemson & Georgia - & the fact that both programs are drawing from the same well for talent - rather than a dig at the ACC. Though we've obviously done pretty well these last few years, Clemson outrecruiting Georgia is not something we're used to seeing.

Yeah, this is the same game Cock fans played 2 years ago: it's called called "Pin the asterisk on Clemson's national championship". Because lord knows they aren't ever going to even sniff one themselves.y y

C'mon y'all. For the sake of argument, let's do a bit of role-reversal. If Alabama had won 44-16 & I as a Clemson fan came in here to make this argument, I'd get laughed out of the room.

If it were only a matter of wins & losses, Durkin might deserve to keep his job, as it certainly seemed that he had that program trending upward. If the Maryland administration were focused only on that bottom line, he just might possibly be able to survive this scandal. But the more pertinent question is whether the program can continue to move forward under his leadership now that so much bad has gone public. Durkin has a track record as a good recruiter, but henceforth would parents be willing entrust their sons to play there? And there is also the matter of whether the university could live with the stain on its image that retaining him would entail. Add on top of that the certainty of lawsuits & litigation (which will likely drag on for several years), & the totality of it I think is just too much for Durkin to be able to survive. Maryland may be desperate for athletic success, but occasionally one faces something more important than wins & losses. The obvious call will be to cut their losses now & start over.