I hope we remain the underdogs in this game vs taters. We play better when we are the underdogs. ***

[Freddie.B.Cocky]

nm

 

[18IsTheMan]

Last I saw, the line had already shifted to make us the favorites. It's basically a pick em.

 

[Piscis]

The fact a 4-7 team whose coach is on the hot seat is a 2.5 pt favorite over Clemson should have their fans in an uproar.

I love it.

 

[gpcocks]

Vegas always wins.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Vegas always wins.

They do seem to always win most of the time.

 

[Statelinecock]

little known fact. Will Muschamp had a better record in the conference than Shane Beamer. Muschamps problem was he got Clemson during their dominant years. Beamer will continue to keep his job if he routinely beats Clemson. Thats South Carolina's main goal every year. SC wins Saturday the fanbase will be totally satisfied and he can hire the temp OC and everyone will love it until next year when they are on the struggle bus again.

 

[18IsTheMan]

little known fact. Will Muschamp had a better record in the conference than Shane Beamer. Muschamps problem was he got Clemson during their dominant years. Beamer will continue to keep his job if he routinely beats Clemson. Thats South Carolina's main goal every year. SC wins Saturday the fanbase will be totally satisfied and he can hire the temp OC and everyone will love it until next year when they are on the struggle bus again.

So you're saying we've come full circle then to the pre-Spurrier days when all that matters is beating Clemson and the conference record is irrelevant.

Spurrier had the right philosophy. Worry about winning conference games first and wins over Clemson will happen.

 

[SouthernBelly]

So you're saying we've come full circle then to the pre-Spurrier days when all that matters is beating Clemson and the conference record is irrelevant.

Spurrier had the right philosophy. Worry about winning conference games first and wins over Clemson will happen.

IIRC there were some in the fanbase who didn’t care for the thought of not prioritizing the Clemson game. But how was it not obvious that if you’re a competitive team in the SEC you’ll begin to get more W’s over Clemson? I don’t believe that was ever lost on Spurrier or on anyone who thought about it for 3 seconds.

It still would have been true during that 7 year streak they had. Clemson definitely winning games still in that time, maybe the majority. But had the Gamecocks remained at that 2012 level and Clemson ascended like they did; not only would we not have seen a 7 year losing streak we also would not have been skull drug in just about every loss.

 

[18IsTheMan]

IIRC there were some in the fanbase who didn’t care for the thought of not prioritizing the Clemson game. But how was it not obvious that if you’re a competitive team in the SEC you’ll begin to get more W’s over Clemson? I don’t believe that was ever lost on Spurrier or on anyone who thought about it for 3 seconds.

It still would have been true during that 7 year streak they had. Clemson definitely winning games still in that time, maybe the majority. But had the Gamecocks remained at that 2012 level and Clemson ascended like they did; not only would we not have seen a 7 year losing streak we also would not have been skull drug in just about every loss.

Yeah, it ruffled a lot of feathers (pun not intended). I remember some fans being totally aghast at the idea that we wouldn't totally ignore the rest of the season's results as long as we beat Clemson. It was total heresy. I recall some people saying "he'll learn".

 

[Rob Hawk]

As long as we don't jump out 30-3 we should stand a chance.

 

[Sweetwatergolf]

As long as we don't jump out 30-3 we should stand a chance.

If we were to blow that kind of lead, this board will be shut down