UConn is a garbage team. They aren't good at all. I've watched them 3-5 times this season and I don't see a good team. Clemson has one of the best players in the country in C.J. Spiller and plenty of talent around him. There's no comparison there, no matter how much of an argument can be made.

UConn has lost 5 games by a total of 15 points against very solid competition. Clemson lost to the Terps. The only other win for Maryland on the season? James Madison. Awesome...

Clemson lost to highly ranked Georgia Tech on the road by 3 points. They beat top 15 Miami on the road. Since the Maryland game they have been really good.

 

UConn has 4 wins (@Ohio, @ Baylor, Rhode Island, U of L). They've played close with some teams, but haven't beaten anyone of note. If you have to reach and say that they are a good team, UC's schedule must be worse than some think.

If UC wins out, they will pass TCU.

If you have to reach and say that they are a good team, UC's schedule must be worse than some think.

 

There you go trying to put words in my mouth again. I simply said they are better than their record after leading in the 4th Q against UNC, WVU and Pitt. Keep trying though...

UConn has lost 5 games by a total of 15 points against very solid competition. Clemson lost to the Terps. The only other win for Maryland on the season? James Madison. Awesome...

 

They haven't been humiliated by anyone, but Clemson is easily 14 points better than UConn if not more. They are not the same team that played Maryland. Notice, C.J. Spiller is getting whispers in the Heisman consideration, which he wasn't earlier in the season. The QB they have finally has some experience and they are a much different team.

They haven't been humiliated by anyone, but Clemson is easily 14 points better than UConn if not more. They are not the same team that played Maryland. Notice, C.J. Spiller is getting whispers in the Heisman consideration, which he wasn't earlier in the season. The QB they have finally has some experience and they are a much different team.

I just looked at their schedule and the loss to 2-7 Maryland is still on there...

There you go trying to put words in my mouth again. I simply said they are better than their record after leading in the 4th Q against UNC, WVU and Pitt. Keep trying though...

 

UNC and WVU are terrible. Pitt is very good and it is impressive that they were able to keep that game close.

 

I didn't say anything about UC's close game last week. Actually, I was one of the few who was kind of impressed with them in their game vs. UConn. I think TCU has been the better team this season, but UC is still a quality team and will give anyone problems in their bowl game.

I just looked at their schedule and the loss to 2-7 Maryland is still on there...

 

What does that have to do with anything? College football teams change more than teams in any other sport over the course of a season. Every team is going to have a bad game, young inexperienced teams in bad games often lose even against inferior opponents. Judging a team on one game is ridiculous.

So a 6-3 UNC team that won at Virginia Tech and a 7-2 WVU team ranked in the BCS Top 25 are terrible, but a loss to 2-7 Maryland is no big deal? Just trying to follow along...

UNC and WVU are terrible. Pitt is very good and it is impressive that they were able to keep that game close.

 

I didn't say anything about UC's close game last week. Actually, I was one of the few who was kind of impressed with them in their game vs. UConn. I think TCU has been the better team this season, but UC is still a quality team and will give anyone problems in their bowl game.

 

WVU is terrible? I'd say if 7 wins is terrible then a lot of teams would choose to be terrible then. They really haven't done anything impressive, but they are not terrible. I would say Clemson at 6-3 is very comparable to WVU. Clemson's only big win is against The U. Those teams are very similar.

What does that have to do with anything? College football teams change more than teams in any other sport over the course of a season. Every team is going to have a bad game, young inexperienced teams in bad games often lose even against inferior opponents. Judging a team on one game is ridiculous.

You have to stick up for them to cover why they beat your beloved Canes. I get it...

WVU is terrible? I'd say if 7 wins is terrible then a lot of teams would choose to be terrible then. They really haven't done anything impressive, but they are not terrible. I would say Clemson at 6-3 is very comparable to WVU. Clemson's only big win is against The U. Those teams are very similar.

 

Yes, I think they are awful. I think that Auburn exposed them, and they haven't looked good since. Clemson is a good comparison, but I think that Clemson is better. JMO.

 

WVU has beaten:

Liberty, ECU, Colorado, Syracuse, Marshall, UConn & U of L. That is 5 cupcakes, and 2 decent teams in UConn and maybe ECU. How they are ranked in the top 25 again, I'll never know.:idunno:

 

You have to stick up for them to cover why they beat your beloved Canes. I get it...

 

Absolutely not. Clemson should have not been in that game. Miami got beat in every facet of that game, and they beat themselves as well. I didn't take up for VT either, I feel that the U should have won both games from an overall talent perspective. I can take that the Canes just weren't an elite title contender this year and it doesn't bother me. But, I do know why you are taking up for UConn...and everyone else on that schedule. Pitt will be a very good win, WVU, USF, and Oregon State are pretty good wins but nothing to get excited about IMO. UC plays a good schedule, but it is far from a schedule that should get them a title shot IMO given how bad their conference is.

But, I do know why you are taking up for UConn...and everyone else on that schedule. Pitt will be a very good win, WVU, USF, and Oregon State are pretty good wins but nothing to get excited about IMO. UC plays a good schedule, but it is far from a schedule that should get them a title shot IMO given how bad their conference is.

 

I'll go slow for you.

You said Clemson was better than their record.

I replied so was UConn, but that it didn't mean anything in the long run.

UConn still blew 4 late leads and Clemson still lost to an AWFUL Maryland team.

Got it???

I'll go slow for you.

You said Clemson was better than their record.

I replied so was UConn, but that it didn't mean anything in the long run.

UConn still blew 4 late leads and Clemson still lost to an AWFUL Maryland team.

Got it???

 

I get all of that, fine. I don't see why it's even being argued about though.

 

My question is who is the better team of the two? It's Clemson by a landslide. So, what you're arguing doesn't actually go into the conversation. Sure both may be better than their record, but beating Clemson is a better win than beating UConn is it not? Clemson could win their conference, UConn will be lucky to get to a bowl game.:idunno: Which BTW is a better conference than the Big East.

I get all of that, fine. I don't see why it's even being argued about though.

 

My question is who is the better team of the two? It's Clemson by a landslide. So, what you're arguing doesn't actually go into the conversation. Sure both may be better than their record, but beating Clemson is a better win than beating UConn is it not? Clemson could win their conference, UConn will be lucky to get to a bowl game.:idunno: Which BTW is a better conference than the Big East.

Did I ever say UConn was better than Clemson? Anywhere? Buehler?

 

I simply pointed out being "better than your record" is a useless argument.

 

And the ACC is awesome. Multiple losses to D 1AA teams and all...