There's about 10 travel balls teams that could be sued then.Whoever did this deserves a massive lawsuit.
I was mainly joking because of the colors.There's about 10 travel balls teams that could be sued then.
Interesting question. Would you rather be Clemson, who has proven themselves to be capable of winning football titles, located in a thriving area and growing, but in the ACC........or would you rather be us, with our extensive baseball prowess, in a stagnant state, but rolling in SEC money and essentially set for the foreseeable future?Well, we’ve both seen better days.
Us, I identify as a Mississippi State Bulldog.Interesting question. Would you rather be Clemson, who has proven themselves to be capable of winning football titles, located in a thriving area and growing, but in the ACC........or would you rather be us, with our extensive baseball prowess, in a stagnant state, but rolling in SEC money and essentially set for the foreseeable future?
It's an honest question.
It’s not a bad question. The weird thing about Clemson is that without Dabo, they would probably be to the ACC about where we’ve been to the SEC over the past 15 years, but he’s probably also the thing that’s going to drag them down to the middle tier of the ACC for the remainder of its existence there.Interesting question. Would you rather be Clemson, who has proven themselves to be capable of winning football titles, located in a thriving area and growing, but in the ACC........or would you rather be us, with our extensive baseball prowess, in a stagnant state, but rolling in SEC money and essentially set for the foreseeable future?
It's an honest question.
Their 1981 title really propelled them, and they were good before that. They are significantly ahead of us in fan support and resources. They’ve been selling out that big stadium since the 80s and it paid off for them.It’s not a bad question. The weird thing about Clemson is that without Dabo, they would probably be to the ACC about where we’ve been to the SEC over the past 15 years, but he’s probably also the thing that’s going to drag them down to the middle tier of the ACC for the remainder of its existence there.
The thing is, I don’t know enough about Clemson’s alumni base and their willingness to shell out big money for top recruits and transfers to really compete in the modern era. I know their ACC TV money ain’t going to do sнit for their revenue sharing.
I guess I’d just take the SEC money.
Yeah. I'd rather have Clemson's history and conference than ours all day long and it's not even close. Only coaches since 1926 with a losing conference record were Hootie Ingram & Red Parker from 1970-1976, and even they were a combined 18-21-1. 14th most wins in major college football history. And some guy named Heisman even coached there.Their 1981 title really propelled them, and they were good before that. They are significantly ahead of us in fan support and resources. They’ve been selling out that big stadium since the 80s and it paid off for them.
Auburn is more their peer than us.
To quote Gordon Gekko:Interesting question. Would you rather be Clemson, who has proven themselves to be capable of winning football titles, located in a thriving area and growing, but in the ACC........or would you rather be us, with our extensive baseball prowess, in a stagnant state, but rolling in SEC money and essentially set for the foreseeable future?
It's an honest question.
I’ll guess Clemson’s geography is a benefit. Atlanta is closer to Clemson than Starkville is to say….uh…..IDK….Jackson?Their 1981 title really propelled them, and they were good before that. They are significantly ahead of us in fan support and resources. They’ve been selling out that big stadium since the 80s and it paid off for them.
Auburn is more their peer than us.
I'm looking for a Burnt Orange "MS" just to wear to College Station the next time we play there.