TigerDan

He wants you to answer a question their is no answer for. There is no way one can say there will "never" be any dynasties after Saban and Bama which is asinine. Of course there could be and that team may not even be relevant right now. the answer to the question is the same answer you give to people who say South Carolina will never be anything because of history. You come on here and stick your nose in the air and act as if you're smarter than everyone else when in fact you use the same logic to answer the Gamecock future as the Georgia fan disagreeing with you about the dynasty argument. Who cares about the future or the past all you're doing is avoiding the present and the current mediocrity that is the University of South Carolina.

Well first off @Bill Lets Party Belichick in 1st Playoffs it was Bama, Ohio State, Oregon and FSU. In the 2nd Playoffs it was Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma and Michigan State. In 3rd Playoffs it was Bama, Clemson, Ohio State and Washington. In the 4th Playoff it was Bama, Clemson, Georgia and Oklahoma. So Clemson has been to the Playoffs 3 out of the 4 years about to be 4 out of the 5 years. So you can say that its interchangeable (excluding Bama) but I truly did give you facts that while 2 of the spots have been a toss up the other 2 have been anything but with Bama going 4 for 4 and Clemson 3 for 4. I'd say that isn't to bad for being "interchangeable". Leave it to a Gamecock fan to try and rag on everyone else's team. Isn't it nice to have a fan of team that has never tasted the success of the teams he is trying to "present facts about". Sorry if I don't take the word of a fan whose school is better known for women's basketball. So go ahead and take shots or do whatever Gamecock fans do because I know the ACC shot is coming which I could care less because we still in the Playoff. Also the best part of it the Gamecocks can show the world how bad the ACC is next week. All they have to do is beat Clemson but getting pounded 90-16 like the past 2 years probably isn't going to do it. Plus the rings are the same size as all the other conferences.

Wouldn't it have been easier to go with maybe 5 or heck 3. I'd have to imagine finding 10 greatest moments for South Carolina was numbing.Its pretty funny and ironic that one of them is Spurrier owning Clemson then the next line is he had a 7-6 record against them. Having a record of 66-42 is owning and oh wait thats Clemson's record against South Carolina, my bad. Seriously having to win every game for the next quarter century just to get above .500 is getting owned. Signing Lattimore, Clowney's big hit I mean my God if thats all you got then why even keep the football program going? They couldn't put the one conference championship South Carolina has in 120 some odd years of football in the 1969 ACC Championship? Duke played horrendous and South Carolina played way above their heads, hardly the reason for a celebration. What is truly funny is the fact that South Carolina fans think that somehow their little Sweet 16 run takes shine off of Clemson's National Championship in football, uh well uh it doesn't even come close. South Carolina could win the whole thing and people in this state would hardly blink because football runs this state. South Carolina fans know that, Clemson fans know that, my 2 year old nephew knows that. South Carolina fans would trade the Sweet 16 run, George Rogers or Rodgers (don't really care) Heisman, their 1969 ACC Championship (haha that was a joke) and their 2 baseball championships to have one of Clemson's national football championship. If they say otherwise they are lying through their tooth.

Well first who has South Carolina played who had a pulse at QB? I'll wait............ Second NO Qb the Gamecocks have played can hold a candle to Watson and please don't give me the Dobbs argument we all know better than that. Heck the best 2 QB's South Carolina has played were UMass and Western Carolina which both played pretty well. The QB play in the SEC is a joke and I would imagine that if you look at the numbers of the QB's South Carolina has played I would imagine that there yards per game weren't much different than the 189 mark the Gamecock defense is giving up. I will promise you this and this isn't a bold prediction but a prediction nonetheless that is Watson doesn't throw for 189 its because Gallman has ran for 200 yards and Clemson is up by 35 and the backup QB is in. Another promise and prediction and that is South Carolina isn't good enough to stop Clemson from running the ball and throwing the ball so those aren't actual bold predictions those are dreams. The difference is that if everything fell right bold predictions could come true but with dreams dreams are something that can only be thought about so thats why your bold predictions are dreams. Oh fyi you are as good as BC and Syracuse, South Carolina isn't better than them. You need to realize you are in the lowly SEC were defense is always over infatuated because of the lack of good offenses. Its kind of sad how bad the offenses in the SEC are and we all saw when South Carolina played a team with a pulse on defense they get owned......

"somehow made it to the NC game last year" you know you do that by winning every game in the regular season. Beating Notre Dame, FSU, Oklahoma and North Carolina not to mention beating the very same App State team by over 30 that won 11 games last year. Clemson beat 5 teams that had won double digit games last year. There is no "somehow" in that formula. Sounds like someone is a hater which is fine you can be a hater but at least be a educated hater. Kind of like "some" Tennessee fans (not all) and a Tennessee writer who wrote and fans believed that Dobbs could not only be better than Watson but would be better than Watson. I am not one to kick a team while they're down (other than South Carolina) but thinking Dobbs is even in the same hemisphere as Watson is ludicrous....