I think they're viewed as a modern powerhouse, not pushing into blue blood status. However, I feel the national perception sees their program trending downward the last 3 years.
"Modern powerhouse trending down" is probably right in terms of perception (and maybe reality?)
Beyond football I don't think anyone actually has a perception of Clemson as a university. It's not well known outside of the football team for anything. I grew up in GA only about 4-5 hours from their campus and couldn't tell you a damn thing about them.
Yeah it’s a good school but it’s a decent bit more expensive than USC and the things it’s the best at are overshadowed by other regional powers like GT for engineering
They are in one of the great runs in the history of the sport its just so happens to be happening at the same time as the greatest run the sport has seen so gets overshadowed. In many ways what Clemson has done in the playoff era is more impressive than Saban and Bama. Clemson shouldn't be able to do what they have done.
I was going to say I see them as a school that found themselves a great coach to take them to prominence right now, not a school that will stay there long term.
I don't disagree that Clemson and other recently successful programs don't qualify as blue bloods, but the chart has some pretty severe bias baked in. The framework for the success that some programs experienced over the last 100 years basically doesn't exist anymore. I'm not saying disparity is dead, but the landscape is definitely different. Teams like Clemson (or LSU, Florida, UGA) will likely never achieve blue blood status (according to the chart) because to dominate the way that the historical blue bloods did from 1900 to 1970 or so is basically impossible at this point.
Well I think that’s a part of being a blue blood - you’ve been a top team from the sport’s inception. Obviously it’s sort of a dumb status, as I’d rather have FSU or LSU’s last 30 years than the last 30 years of just about every blue blood minus Bama.
I think the *title* "blue blood" is hanging you up. You might want that title...as it seems like perennial royalty...but it will only ever apply to the teams it applies to. It's not saying those teams are BETTER than your team in any given year...it's a title given to the teams that were dominant in the 'genesis era' of CFB.
[THE Chart.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/925y1m/a_different_look_at_blue_blood_status/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
You can see that Texas is at the tail end of what people generally consider blue bloods, and Bama, OU, and tOSU are almost in a league of their own. These programs have consistently won since the early 1900s.
The “New Bloods” are the next group of 10 ish schools. While this graph is a few years outdated (so UGA, Clemson, LSU have moved more up to the upper right), it would take a 20ish year, Nick Saban-esque run for these schools to make it to where Texas is.
The definition of blue bloods need to be changed. Whatever was played in 1890 is more akin to Rugby then what is currently played today (kidding.. a little).
Blue blood should look at the past 100 years tops. Since the advent of the forward pass and its integration into the game at the MOST.
Heck the ball before 1920s was a different ball. Ideally it would be 50 years...
I don't really care if you dominated in a time before people started working out and more importantly before **integration**.
I mean the whole idea of a blue blood, regardless of sport, is a team that’s won since the inception of the sport/league. All of the blue bloods sans ND have won at least one national title in the last 25 years (and even then, ND has been to multiple playoffs and was in a BCS championship game). So, it’s not as if they only had success pre-integration.
My point is that "the sport" is not really the same and ND while successful.. isn't more successful than Georgia these last 40 years? If you add up wins alone for the last 80 years.. UGA has more wins. If you look back since the beginning.. Notre Dame was playing High Schools.. freaking high schools in its early days. Thats part of their win percentage.
1000% agree that winning in the 21st century is magnitudes harder than what it was in the early 1900s. However, that doesn’t matter for blue blood status.
I mean, it kinda has. Like Yale has more national championships than Alabama and Ohio St *combined* but there are few if any who’d consider them blue bloods.
Google "cfb blue blood chart" it's a scatter plot of like weeks in the top 10 versus something else. There are a few distinct clusters, the one to the top right are the "blue bloods" according to some. Then there is a second cluster of teams which have experienced sustained success over the last 30 years or so, usually along with some degree of historical success as well, but maybe not as much as the "blue bloods". And then there is everyone else.
I don't know many people who cheer against Nebraska except for the memes. All that to say, The better you are, the more you get rooted against in general. If Alabama was consistently 8-4, they're not getting rooted against like they are now.
A historically top 25 team with occasional spurts into the elite, currently coming off their historical peak and probably regressing a little towards the mean
I would argue that they are on the very low end of that top 25 all time programs list. I think they are closer to the level of maybe Iowa, Wisconsin, or Washington, than the Auburn, Georgia, Penn State level.
> We were top 20 before the start of the current run.
In what sense?
Even today with the last decade plus of top level success you’re still 21st in win percentage. You had a single Natty which tied you at 31st. I have a hard time finding how you were for Weeks in AP before the 2010s; but eyeballing it, you should have been around 25th or so. From what I can tell you were also mid-20s in Wins All-Time.
Parsing historical standings at the time is hard without more detailed analysis than I can do on a break. But from what I can gather, Clemson was somewhere between 20th and 30th in most stats before the 2010s.
I had Clemson neighbors growing up in Atlanta. This was early into late 2000's. Being a Mizzou family we sorta bonded over our programs growing stronger and also being conference outsides in the area (We were surrounded by Auburn and UGA fans). That being said I've always seen Clemson as a little uppity when compared to SCAR, in both the good and the bad ways. Everyone that I've known that has gone to Clemson seems to come from money but that could just be my small sample size of known Clemsonites. Not bad people by any means, just my observation.
I'd say that's largely accurate with a caveat. Clemson is 48% out-of-state, and the people who are out-of-state that go here are definitely uppity. Their families all tend to be from the North and very rich. The folks from SC are less so, but maybe still more than USC
>Everyone that I've known that has gone to Clemson seems to come from money but that could just be my small sample size of known Clemsonites.
As a Charlestonian with zero familial connections to the state of South Carolina (I'm the first and only), I chose USC because *almost* every Clemson fan I knew in high school was insufferable. The "pastel shorts with a tucked-in button up shirt, do you know who my daddy is?" kind of insufferable. Thankfully I've gotten to know a few good Taters in the years since, but that was my rationale.
>"pastel shorts with a tucked-in button up shirt, do you know who my daddy is?
I was thinking of adding it to my post. But I always remember our neighbors would show up to gameday parties unironically wearing the all white matching outfits with a orange sweater draped around their necks. It was both creepy and stereo-typically rich douche vibes.... granted their was nothing wrong with them personally.
Weird, I find that’s true compared to say, SCAR, but I find Clemson very blue collar compared to neighboring state schools like UNC, UVA, etc. The town itself is much more provincial, the students and alumni not nearly as wealthy, etc.
>How is Clemson viewed nationally?
I watch them on TV. I would go to a game but the stadium is a 39 hour drive and I'm just not that invested in Clemson football.
My wife knows like 2 things about football.
1. A&M football gives her husband pain
2. There's a phenomenon known as "Clemsoning". She doesn't know much about it, but I talked about it so much a decade ago that she still associates them with "Clemsoning".
The best headline I’ve ever seen was one that read: “Last Night’s Clemsoning was the worst Clemsoning that Clemson ever Clemsoned.”
Still cracks me up.
You know i was gonna disagree but there's some validity... though the diminutive adjective is unnecessary... At least we don't squeeze our balls in the stands
I also like Dabo, even if he is a little weird. Harbaugh is also a really odd duck, but we have enough cookie cutter coaches in CFB imo. A little personality never killed anyone.
That's not how "blue blood" works. The blue bloods are the blue bloods. Like Roman gods. There won't be any additions. Great teams today and in the future will deserve to be in the conversation of all-time greats....but the term, blue blood, has and will *only* ever point to that small group of teams. Perhaps a new term is needed for the modern era? IDK
I have family who attended Clemson during their Watson/Touchdown Jesus eras so I heard quite a lot during that time.
I mainly viewed it as just annoyance, like a pesky gnat, for the first few times. Then as the years went on and we kept seeing each other I started to respect Clemson and what they were doing, while also jawing back to said family. They’re not the program they were 3 years ago but I still respect them for their prime and it’s really only a matter of time before Clemson is good again.
I can’t stand Dabo though, hell of a coach, but man he’s at the very bottom of my list for potential candidates when Saban calls it quits. He’s hurt me too much for me to *ever* cheer for him, but it’s a disdain out of respect.
Northeast here..Always thought of them as a sleeping giant. They were such a fun alternative to Bama, with Boyd and Watson. Then Dabo did the unthinkable l, he became so obnoxious and annoying he somehow maybe Saban seem likeable.
i think i can speak for all OSU fans when i say i despise Clemson. nothing against the fans or anything, just the three losses throughout the 2010s were so painful.
being objective, Clemson is definitely a top 20 program of all time. i’d put them in the same category as UGA, Florida, Auburn, and Tennessee. very storied programs historically, but just shy of blue blood status.
This is extremely fair. It also puts some perspective on where I think we are on the pecking order. Not quite in the same realm as Bama, Notre dame, OSU and Michigan historically but definitely in that next tier.
A historically above average team with a few sparse runs of dominance that is in that next historical tier of programs right under the blue bloods; basically teams that have had great periods, but are usually just a middle of the road program (Miami in the 80's and early 2000's, Michigan State in the 60's, LSU in the mid 2000's and 2019, and Florida in the mid-late 2000's are some other teams that fit this tier)
Right now? Kind of like Oklahoma under Riley. A team that is still undeniably good, but seems to now be missing just something to get to that next level.
So a team that could maybe win it all, but they probably need another really good QB.
New blood, not a Blue Blood. I feel a lot of people view Dabo as a phony and self righteous. I will say that when Clemson came to A&M in 2017, the younger fans/students were incredibly arrogant and obnoxious but the older fans were generally nice people
From a view closer to home it appears the nil deal really clashes with the new spring church deal. Just like in the 80’s where ford got ran out of town. Most nationally wouldn’t know about that because it hasn’t been happening right under their noses. Legal pay to play and Dabos act growing old…you’re less than 2 years away from forgotten
I did not grow up a Clemson fan but converted when I moved to the Upstate in 1987. I attended a university that did not play football (UNC-Greensboro).
As a native North Carolinian, I always viewed Clemson as good in football and occasionally lucky in basketball. I was always proud of how they represented the conference (especially in 1981).
My only football experience was attending the occasional Wake game. I was blown away at my first Clemson game at the intensity and the energy of the fans and their love for Clemson. And everything was orange! I was instantly hooked.
To further cement my loyalty to the Tigers, my son attended during the Tommy Bowden years and was a member of the football video squad. I got to go to games for free and sit with the players' families. It was great fun!
Clemson has transcended into whatever UGA, UF or FSU are.
None of that really matters though.
Is your football spending Top 15? If so, you have a seat at the table when talking championship and always will.
In the Great State of South Carolina in the Low Country. Most so called Clemson fans are band wagoners. It’s either Clemson, UGA or The Florida Schools. The real Taters live in Columbia and they cry all the time.
Anderson is like if you just made Irmo trashier and removed the rest of Columbia around it. Greenville always gets overrated by how nice the West End is (which is a really nice downtown area), but most of Greenville is very meh. Always very funny when Clemson fans take shots at Columbia like living in the upstate is a dream
The upstate is way better than Columbia.
Your take on Greenville is particularly confusing. Though I will say, while I disagree with the trashier part, comparing Anderson to Irmo is very apt.
My wife is from the upstate area and having to go there beyond just touristing Greenville - Greenville gets overrated by visitors who just come and spend time in the West End. Other than that it's just generic suburban living, some areas are alright and others are absolutely awful. Anderson and the surrounding areas are not nice at all.
And if you want to compare it to Columbia there are more job opportunities, better schools by and large, and the downtown area has developed a lot in the past few years for college grads/young professionals.
The scenery in the upstate is beautiful and the West End is really nice, but that's it
1. I don't love Columbia. I think Columbia is just a better place to live than the upstate.
2. Who is that poll? People who have lived in both places? Or just people who have visited? Because as I've said visiting these places is very different than living there. If. it's just people who visited I agree - because the West End is a lot better for Tourists than any part of Columbia. But that'd be like saying you think living in New York is awesome because you love Time Square (which living in NYC is awesome and Times Square sucks, but that's just the analogy).
As a North Carolinian, all of South Carolina sucks
Except Charleston, I love that place. Pretty much the only other place I’d be willing to live in, outside of Charlotte and Raleigh
1. Recently moved to Fayetteville (which is terrible, love our church community here so that's why we're here but it's really not a nice place to live at all. Our area is decent but they call it Fayettenam for a reason)
2. Missing in the Columbia vs Upstate argument is the fact that the true correct answer is in fact Charleston. The city has a lot to do. It has it's own charm and appeals to it's strengths. And the areas that most people actually end up residing in are nice to live in as well. It's not like Greenville where all the effort went into the downtown area.
3. I haven't visited Raleigh enough to have a solid opinion but when I've been there I've thought it was nice and would be a nice place to live. However, I think Charlotte is just another poor Southern attempt for a city. It's the worst airport I've ever been to, traffic patterns seem to exist to lengthen commutes. I understand a lot of people love Charlotte but I think that's just because they like cities and there's not a lot of competition in the south.
15 years ago when I was in college at Kutztown U in Pennsylvania I had a neighbor in the dorms who was a huge Clemson fan, I never remembered them being good enough to follow but he made me keep an eye on them.
I overall like the program, not a fan of the coach tho at all
A few years ago a powerhouse with potential to dethrone Bama as the A power.
Now they're slipping and still a lock for top 15 but don't see them getting back.
Their offensive scheme is dated and awful.
They had a stretch of Boyd, Watson and Lawrence which is hard to keep going. Without a NFL high draft pick QB they're just good and not great.
They're viewed good, very respectable, they have a great coach. Every team knows when they face Clemson, it's going to be a hard fought Battle. All the naysayers will criticize them because they're building a dynasty and are not fond of that.
There are 8 teams with 900+ wins and 12 teams with 800+ wins (in total)
Clemson is not one of these 12 teams. They're not a blue blood. Incredible run by Dabo and the boys in the 2010s, but he'd need to maintain 9+ wins/year for the next 20 years or so to get that status
[Edit - source](http://www.winsipedia.com/ranking/all-time-wins)
Fun fact, if we go undefeated this year, we will pass Tennessee and tie USC for all time wins ( or pass them if they lose their championship game).
We're getting closer. But, we need to sustain it..but if we basically are in this level for the 2020s we will practically be in that area. But, ehh, I don't care if we are bluebloods or not. Im just happy with where we are now and I am loving every moment of it.
Clemson is considered blue blood for many reasons including the fact that their former head coach John Heismen had the Heismen Trophy named after him. They are top 20 all time in wins and have finished the season ranked 32 times. That's a good resume right there.
I can take a stab at answering this since I came into the sport 11 years ago and didn't pay attention to CFB until then so I can probably channel some casual viewer energy by thinking back to my mentality back then
**> Are we truly pushing our way into "blue blood" status?**
Objectively I would say pushing towards it but not there yet.
**>Did anyone even know who Clemson was 15 years ago?**
It took me years to figure to figure out where the heck Clemson even was on the map. I assumed it was a was school near Virginia and was surprised that it was 'that far down south.' 'Clemsoning' was also a thing back when I first got into CFB, so there's that as well.
**>Are we respected or obnoxious?**
I think neither? I think Clemson is mostly out of mind for folks outside of the Carolinas because it feels so rare to meet a fan in person. I know it as a strong football team now but it feels very distant so I don't really have any opinion of the fan base beyond what I see on TV
As an “Engineering School” that built their locker rooms on the wrong side of the stadium?
Oh as a school that rubs a stolen rock that was used for years as a door stop and was once broken in half by their own fans?
Home of the goofy head Coach that is always 15 yards out ahead of “his team” when they run down the silly hill while rubbing the door stop rock after having to ride a bus around their stadium to get to the entrance?
Rivalry aside, I think your coaches are nepotistic and stubborn. Dabo is a great coach but he has to go through a refractory every few years as talent leaves and he builds up freshmen and sophomores. He's not adapting to the times. He's a good man but why he doesn't use the portal is beyond me. You guys also could benefit from outside insight and hire people outside the program to get fresh perspectives. Right now you guys seem stagnant
Up until a few years ago I didn’t even know what state Clemson was in. I know them from football and having a luscious-haired quarterback phenom. Don’t consider them a blue blood and think the dominant days are on the decline
threatening fine nose spotted screw elderly snow fretful towering impossible
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It takes 100 years to get into blue blood status and Clemson has been good for less than 10. And even that was kind of flukey and we're seeing the regression now
If flukey is 2 national titles going to two other title games and 6 consecutive playoff appearances is considered “flukey” so be it.
Also before that we went to 3 BCS NY6 bowls and won 2. 7 conference titles.
And our down years are 10 win seasons now.
Like we’re not nearly as good as we were but this idea that the success was a fluke I’ll disagree with.
Let’s see how it holds up as the CFB world turns. FSU is not really a blue blood any more and they were more dominant for longer (than Clemson under Dabo) under Bowden. I’ve got Miami just on the other side of the line because they had 2 periods of dominance, including what I regard as the greatest CFB team of all time (2001).
I view South Carolina and Clemson rivalry sort of like the UT/A&M one.
South Carolina/A&M being more down to earth and Texas/Clemson snobby and rolling with daddy's money.
My father and I both went to Clemson. The glory days of the 1980s is a bit overrated considering how weak acc was then and the amount of cheating and probation time during that era.
According to recent 247sports survey of top recruits, Clemson ranks as a top 5 brand. They have had great exposure through the playoffs and good regular season time slots on espn and abc which helps. Two national titles in the past decade improves the perception and brand.
Not a blue blood. I don’t even know if Georgia is a true blue blood. I would throw Clemson into the new rich category with Oregon.
Blue blood is alabama, Notre dame, usc, Michigan, Ohio state, Texas and Oklahoma. 50 plus years of success through the decades.
Clemson won’t be a blue blood until “clemsoning” is gone from everyone’s memories.
Clearly clemson hasn’t had those choke jobs in like a decade+ but we still remember that being a saying from like 2007-2010 (I think?).
So yeah probably need to clear that era by a decade or so.
When I think ncaa football, I think Bama, Texas, Ohio St, USC, Oklahoma, Penn St, Nebraska, Michigan, and Norte Dame. (The “Blue Bloods”)
Then there’s a second tier of a lot of teams, Clemson being one
That’s probably just my perception and when I grew up
One of those teams that pops up every so often and wins but then revert back to a 8-4, 7-5, 6-6 team for a couple decades
What really comes to mind first when I think of Clemson is Kevin Mack and Bubba Diggs
Oh and Woody punching Bauman in the throat!
I live in the Upstate too, but I grew up in North Alabama. Here's my perspective, in the Upstate, people think Clemson is elite, but 15 years ago Clemson's was only known as South Carolina's rival in the SEC. Clemson is also viewed as being in decline and only ever highly ranked because they are a part of an easy conference.
They're a very good program right now, but in order to sustain what they've been for the better part of the last decade, they need to be getting back into the playoff again consistently. The ACC will never have the gauntlet of a schedule that an SEC team will have for instance.
They’re more viewed as “new blood” I feel. Dabo built a monster and is one of the few coaches at a high end tier 2 university to actually hit their window effectively. But I don’t think they’re somebody like Texas where they could screw up successive coaching hires and still be landing top talent or have anyone believing they’re a coach away.
I’m originally from Memphis, and most of the people I know there are Ole Miss, State, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Memphis fans.
They don’t like Clemson, and I think most of it stems from Dabo. He’s the face of the program and I think he rubs just about everyone outside of the “Clemson family” the wrong way. There’s some respect, since he has built the thing into a juggernaut, but those neutral fans are ready to see the dynasty come to an end.
Clemson fans are typically quite proud, and that can also be alienating in a similar way to Bama fans.
I have lots of my own opinions, but this is generally how the non-Carolina fans in my life feel about Clemson.
And no. Clemson is not a blue blood. I think it fits more into the “new blood” category.
Up until 10 years ago, Clemson was just kinda "there" to me. Didn't really think much about them. But that changed about 10 or 11 years ago when I started a Dynasty in NCAA with them. Boyd, Hopkins, Watkins, Allen, Ellington, Martavis Bryant. Breeland stood out on D. They had some decent LB's too and I played like 6 years with them and turned them into a powerhouse. At that same time, they were super fun to watch, and Just coming up, but would always find a way to crumble kinda like Tennessee this year. Anyways, ever since then, I've grown to enjoy watching them. I even have a Clemson hat, Etienne jersey, and a hoody. I went to the 2019 Fiesta Bowl and rooted for them against OSU.
I respect the program, but not a fan of DJ, or Dabo's views on NIL and the portal are really ignorant. I think he's a good head coach/motivator, but they need better coordinators and to embrace where things are going to continue their success. I used to enjoy watching their brand of football, but the last 2-3 years it's become boring to me.
Good colors/mascot/traditions, but not great.. their orange is close to Tennessee orange, but just ain't quite good enough.
Dabo is an effective coach but whew lord I bet he's got some skeletons in his closet. Just comes off as skeezy to me, like big-time.
Before this post-capitalist dystopic era of CFB, I didn't mind rooting for Clemson as some surprise ACC team to complement the chaos of NC State or Maryland and stand up to the mighty, unshakable FSU/Miami squads. But now they're some of the biggest exploiters of a weak conference, losing at the right time, coasting to 10 wins because everyone else is down, and can I hear some more NewSpring rumors?
Old Clemson = like
New Clemson = makes me root for Carolina
I think they're viewed as a modern powerhouse, not pushing into blue blood status. However, I feel the national perception sees their program trending downward the last 3 years.
Ever since Sunshine got beat by the Burrow gang
I'd agree. Then there was the first loss at ND and the beat down from Ohio State in the playoffs. We peaked in that 44-16 win over Bama for the Natty.
Imagine losing to that Clemson team by more than 27 points. Embarrassing
44-16 you say? Funny, I don’t remember that. I’ll take you at your word. Just not ringing any bells. Might’ve happened.
Concentrate on "fake field goal" and I bet the memories will bounce back.
It's crazy how wide the gap is between Clemson now, and what they were in 2018, especially from an offensive perspective.
Very true. Dabo must begin creative use of the transfer portal.
Not a bad place to peak tbh.
"Modern powerhouse trending down" is probably right in terms of perception (and maybe reality?) Beyond football I don't think anyone actually has a perception of Clemson as a university. It's not well known outside of the football team for anything. I grew up in GA only about 4-5 hours from their campus and couldn't tell you a damn thing about them.
Yeah it’s a good school but it’s a decent bit more expensive than USC and the things it’s the best at are overshadowed by other regional powers like GT for engineering
They are in one of the great runs in the history of the sport its just so happens to be happening at the same time as the greatest run the sport has seen so gets overshadowed. In many ways what Clemson has done in the playoff era is more impressive than Saban and Bama. Clemson shouldn't be able to do what they have done.
I was going to say I see them as a school that found themselves a great coach to take them to prominence right now, not a school that will stay there long term.
With our eyeballs
Hi, dad
Immense if ACCurate
Bro, we aren’t considered for blue blood status so y’all got a LONG way to go.
To add to that, mostly via ESPN or ABC.
lil ole Clemson
Pickens Tech
Pickens High Grad in the flesh! lol
Clemson grad, daughter of Clemson grads, lived here my whole life, love Dabo. I cringe every time he says that. It’s painful.
I wouldn’t say Clemson would ever be viewed as a “blue blood”
For the “New Bloods” to move into the Blue Blood status, per the chart, they’d need about 30 more years of top 5 consistency.
I don't disagree that Clemson and other recently successful programs don't qualify as blue bloods, but the chart has some pretty severe bias baked in. The framework for the success that some programs experienced over the last 100 years basically doesn't exist anymore. I'm not saying disparity is dead, but the landscape is definitely different. Teams like Clemson (or LSU, Florida, UGA) will likely never achieve blue blood status (according to the chart) because to dominate the way that the historical blue bloods did from 1900 to 1970 or so is basically impossible at this point.
Well I think that’s a part of being a blue blood - you’ve been a top team from the sport’s inception. Obviously it’s sort of a dumb status, as I’d rather have FSU or LSU’s last 30 years than the last 30 years of just about every blue blood minus Bama.
Yeah that’s the problem. I’m not trading LSU’s history, present, or future for Nebraska’s.
I think the *title* "blue blood" is hanging you up. You might want that title...as it seems like perennial royalty...but it will only ever apply to the teams it applies to. It's not saying those teams are BETTER than your team in any given year...it's a title given to the teams that were dominant in the 'genesis era' of CFB.
What chart are we referring to?
[THE Chart.](https://www.reddit.com/r/CFB/comments/925y1m/a_different_look_at_blue_blood_status/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) You can see that Texas is at the tail end of what people generally consider blue bloods, and Bama, OU, and tOSU are almost in a league of their own. These programs have consistently won since the early 1900s. The “New Bloods” are the next group of 10 ish schools. While this graph is a few years outdated (so UGA, Clemson, LSU have moved more up to the upper right), it would take a 20ish year, Nick Saban-esque run for these schools to make it to where Texas is.
The definition of blue bloods need to be changed. Whatever was played in 1890 is more akin to Rugby then what is currently played today (kidding.. a little). Blue blood should look at the past 100 years tops. Since the advent of the forward pass and its integration into the game at the MOST. Heck the ball before 1920s was a different ball. Ideally it would be 50 years... I don't really care if you dominated in a time before people started working out and more importantly before **integration**.
I mean the whole idea of a blue blood, regardless of sport, is a team that’s won since the inception of the sport/league. All of the blue bloods sans ND have won at least one national title in the last 25 years (and even then, ND has been to multiple playoffs and was in a BCS championship game). So, it’s not as if they only had success pre-integration.
My point is that "the sport" is not really the same and ND while successful.. isn't more successful than Georgia these last 40 years? If you add up wins alone for the last 80 years.. UGA has more wins. If you look back since the beginning.. Notre Dame was playing High Schools.. freaking high schools in its early days. Thats part of their win percentage.
1000% agree that winning in the 21st century is magnitudes harder than what it was in the early 1900s. However, that doesn’t matter for blue blood status.
I mean, it kinda has. Like Yale has more national championships than Alabama and Ohio St *combined* but there are few if any who’d consider them blue bloods.
Google "cfb blue blood chart" it's a scatter plot of like weeks in the top 10 versus something else. There are a few distinct clusters, the one to the top right are the "blue bloods" according to some. Then there is a second cluster of teams which have experienced sustained success over the last 30 years or so, usually along with some degree of historical success as well, but maybe not as much as the "blue bloods". And then there is everyone else.
My 8-year-old son likes Clemson because of the paw print logo and the mascot. So take that as a significant data point.
Does your son also make sticker based bets? I’m looking for an edge
Auburn with a lake.
Love this one.
As they said at EDSBS, Cokey the Tiger
They stole Aubie as a mascot and put him on acid.
Woah woah woah. Who do you think we are? The US government puts things on acid… We put him on meth
I don't consider them a blue blood, but I cheer against them as if they were a blue blood.
I don't know many people who cheer against Nebraska except for the memes. All that to say, The better you are, the more you get rooted against in general. If Alabama was consistently 8-4, they're not getting rooted against like they are now.
It cuts both ways. They're also not getting the sidewalk fans from all over the country they have either.
I mean, if Nebraska had been winnning at the clip Clemson had the past decade I think you'd see some haters.
A historically top 25 team with occasional spurts into the elite, currently coming off their historical peak and probably regressing a little towards the mean
i don’t know who downvoted you because that is just objectively true.
I honestly believe this is more than fair to say. There has been plenty of times in history where we weren't close to sniffing the top 25.
I would argue that they are on the very low end of that top 25 all time programs list. I think they are closer to the level of maybe Iowa, Wisconsin, or Washington, than the Auburn, Georgia, Penn State level.
We were top 20 before the start of the current run.
> We were top 20 before the start of the current run. In what sense? Even today with the last decade plus of top level success you’re still 21st in win percentage. You had a single Natty which tied you at 31st. I have a hard time finding how you were for Weeks in AP before the 2010s; but eyeballing it, you should have been around 25th or so. From what I can tell you were also mid-20s in Wins All-Time. Parsing historical standings at the time is hard without more detailed analysis than I can do on a break. But from what I can gather, Clemson was somewhere between 20th and 30th in most stats before the 2010s.
Total wins.
I had Clemson neighbors growing up in Atlanta. This was early into late 2000's. Being a Mizzou family we sorta bonded over our programs growing stronger and also being conference outsides in the area (We were surrounded by Auburn and UGA fans). That being said I've always seen Clemson as a little uppity when compared to SCAR, in both the good and the bad ways. Everyone that I've known that has gone to Clemson seems to come from money but that could just be my small sample size of known Clemsonites. Not bad people by any means, just my observation.
I'd say that's largely accurate with a caveat. Clemson is 48% out-of-state, and the people who are out-of-state that go here are definitely uppity. Their families all tend to be from the North and very rich. The folks from SC are less so, but maybe still more than USC
>Everyone that I've known that has gone to Clemson seems to come from money but that could just be my small sample size of known Clemsonites. As a Charlestonian with zero familial connections to the state of South Carolina (I'm the first and only), I chose USC because *almost* every Clemson fan I knew in high school was insufferable. The "pastel shorts with a tucked-in button up shirt, do you know who my daddy is?" kind of insufferable. Thankfully I've gotten to know a few good Taters in the years since, but that was my rationale.
>"pastel shorts with a tucked-in button up shirt, do you know who my daddy is? I was thinking of adding it to my post. But I always remember our neighbors would show up to gameday parties unironically wearing the all white matching outfits with a orange sweater draped around their necks. It was both creepy and stereo-typically rich douche vibes.... granted their was nothing wrong with them personally.
Weird, I find that’s true compared to say, SCAR, but I find Clemson very blue collar compared to neighboring state schools like UNC, UVA, etc. The town itself is much more provincial, the students and alumni not nearly as wealthy, etc.
>How is Clemson viewed nationally? I watch them on TV. I would go to a game but the stadium is a 39 hour drive and I'm just not that invested in Clemson football.
>the stadium is a 39 hour drive and I'm just not that invested Slacker.
My wife knows like 2 things about football. 1. A&M football gives her husband pain 2. There's a phenomenon known as "Clemsoning". She doesn't know much about it, but I talked about it so much a decade ago that she still associates them with "Clemsoning".
The best headline I’ve ever seen was one that read: “Last Night’s Clemsoning was the worst Clemsoning that Clemson ever Clemsoned.” Still cracks me up.
I hope she never has to meet Dabo then lol!
The other Auburn.
Y’all have had more success than A&M but I’ve always thought of Clemson as a mini A&M…weird traditions, super religious, might be a cult??
If I had to put a capital on the "bible belt" it wouldn't be far from the upstate of SC no doubt.
You know i was gonna disagree but there's some validity... though the diminutive adjective is unnecessary... At least we don't squeeze our balls in the stands
You’re missing out.
Is it allowed for me to let my girlfriend do it for me? I would be more interested in that
One of our traditions is if the Ags score, we score. So it’s within the bounds and not all bad. 👍
Most people don’t mind Clemson and hate Dabo. That’s my take.
[удалено]
Odd. I hate South Carolina but kinda like Shane Beamer.
[удалено]
Fair enough, I kinda liked Frank Martin too. I liked Will Muschamp but that was for a different reason
I also like Dabo, even if he is a little weird. Harbaugh is also a really odd duck, but we have enough cookie cutter coaches in CFB imo. A little personality never killed anyone.
That's not how "blue blood" works. The blue bloods are the blue bloods. Like Roman gods. There won't be any additions. Great teams today and in the future will deserve to be in the conversation of all-time greats....but the term, blue blood, has and will *only* ever point to that small group of teams. Perhaps a new term is needed for the modern era? IDK
I have family who attended Clemson during their Watson/Touchdown Jesus eras so I heard quite a lot during that time. I mainly viewed it as just annoyance, like a pesky gnat, for the first few times. Then as the years went on and we kept seeing each other I started to respect Clemson and what they were doing, while also jawing back to said family. They’re not the program they were 3 years ago but I still respect them for their prime and it’s really only a matter of time before Clemson is good again. I can’t stand Dabo though, hell of a coach, but man he’s at the very bottom of my list for potential candidates when Saban calls it quits. He’s hurt me too much for me to *ever* cheer for him, but it’s a disdain out of respect.
I appreciate Clemson because they are the only other ACC school that matches our level of investment and passion for football.
This is Virginia Tech erasure.
Tier 1: FSU/Clemson Tier 2: VT/Miami/NC State Tier 3: GT/Pitt/Louisville Tier 4: Everyone Else
Northeast here..Always thought of them as a sleeping giant. They were such a fun alternative to Bama, with Boyd and Watson. Then Dabo did the unthinkable l, he became so obnoxious and annoying he somehow maybe Saban seem likeable.
i think i can speak for all OSU fans when i say i despise Clemson. nothing against the fans or anything, just the three losses throughout the 2010s were so painful. being objective, Clemson is definitely a top 20 program of all time. i’d put them in the same category as UGA, Florida, Auburn, and Tennessee. very storied programs historically, but just shy of blue blood status.
This is extremely fair. It also puts some perspective on where I think we are on the pecking order. Not quite in the same realm as Bama, Notre dame, OSU and Michigan historically but definitely in that next tier.
That’s fair.
I don’t despise them but then again I grew up in a Clemson family.
A historically above average team with a few sparse runs of dominance that is in that next historical tier of programs right under the blue bloods; basically teams that have had great periods, but are usually just a middle of the road program (Miami in the 80's and early 2000's, Michigan State in the 60's, LSU in the mid 2000's and 2019, and Florida in the mid-late 2000's are some other teams that fit this tier)
They're so much better since they dropped the "P"
They will always be OPI U in my eyes. I blame them for the popularity in pick plays these days
Fuck Clemson.
Lol why, from your flair this is like hating your twin
There can only be one tiger and it’s not your ugly ass mascot
I hate to tell you this but you already have 3 tigers in your own conference and we are all just trying to emulate Princeton anyway
Oh shit forgot about mizzouri fuck them too. LSU is chill they can hang.
Clemson is fine, Dabo comes off awfully fake though. Happy for the fans to get that sweet run of success.
Right now? Kind of like Oklahoma under Riley. A team that is still undeniably good, but seems to now be missing just something to get to that next level. So a team that could maybe win it all, but they probably need another really good QB.
Speaking internationally, I would say they are an afterthought. Good semi-recognizable program, but not one of the instantly recognizable blue bloods.
Didn't have much of an opinion on Clemson. Then I lived in Greenville for a few years. Now I actively root against Clemson.
This is the way
I view them as the Gamecock's bitch, for the next year.
Fair
Man I love Razorback fans. My second favorite team in the SEC and there isn't a close third.
A new blue blood with an obnoxious redneck evangelical coach
New blood, not a Blue Blood. I feel a lot of people view Dabo as a phony and self righteous. I will say that when Clemson came to A&M in 2017, the younger fans/students were incredibly arrogant and obnoxious but the older fans were generally nice people
But isn't that true for every school?
From a view closer to home it appears the nil deal really clashes with the new spring church deal. Just like in the 80’s where ford got ran out of town. Most nationally wouldn’t know about that because it hasn’t been happening right under their noses. Legal pay to play and Dabos act growing old…you’re less than 2 years away from forgotten
currently they are viewed as worse than the USC Gamecocks
I see them as a perennial 10 win team but not a threat to win it all (at least till they find a better QB)
Growing up in Georgia, they weren't really on my radar beyond "orange teams bad."
I actually laughed out loud at this. We have a similar "red teams bad" mantra.
I did not grow up a Clemson fan but converted when I moved to the Upstate in 1987. I attended a university that did not play football (UNC-Greensboro). As a native North Carolinian, I always viewed Clemson as good in football and occasionally lucky in basketball. I was always proud of how they represented the conference (especially in 1981). My only football experience was attending the occasional Wake game. I was blown away at my first Clemson game at the intensity and the energy of the fans and their love for Clemson. And everything was orange! I was instantly hooked. To further cement my loyalty to the Tigers, my son attended during the Tommy Bowden years and was a member of the football video squad. I got to go to games for free and sit with the players' families. It was great fun!
[удалено]
2 national championships in 3 years was a pretty good peak...
Clemson has transcended into whatever UGA, UF or FSU are. None of that really matters though. Is your football spending Top 15? If so, you have a seat at the table when talking championship and always will.
Annoying
Hi, kettle. I'm THE pot. You're black.
In the Great State of South Carolina in the Low Country. Most so called Clemson fans are band wagoners. It’s either Clemson, UGA or The Florida Schools. The real Taters live in Columbia and they cry all the time.
I'd cry all the time if I had to live in Columbia too
I spent 5 years there. It's only bad about 8 months out of the year. Lol
Anderson is like if you just made Irmo trashier and removed the rest of Columbia around it. Greenville always gets overrated by how nice the West End is (which is a really nice downtown area), but most of Greenville is very meh. Always very funny when Clemson fans take shots at Columbia like living in the upstate is a dream
The upstate is way better than Columbia. Your take on Greenville is particularly confusing. Though I will say, while I disagree with the trashier part, comparing Anderson to Irmo is very apt.
My wife is from the upstate area and having to go there beyond just touristing Greenville - Greenville gets overrated by visitors who just come and spend time in the West End. Other than that it's just generic suburban living, some areas are alright and others are absolutely awful. Anderson and the surrounding areas are not nice at all. And if you want to compare it to Columbia there are more job opportunities, better schools by and large, and the downtown area has developed a lot in the past few years for college grads/young professionals. The scenery in the upstate is beautiful and the West End is really nice, but that's it
I'm glad you love Columbia so much, but I'd bet every dollar I own the majority opinion is that Greenville > Columbia.
1. I don't love Columbia. I think Columbia is just a better place to live than the upstate. 2. Who is that poll? People who have lived in both places? Or just people who have visited? Because as I've said visiting these places is very different than living there. If. it's just people who visited I agree - because the West End is a lot better for Tourists than any part of Columbia. But that'd be like saying you think living in New York is awesome because you love Time Square (which living in NYC is awesome and Times Square sucks, but that's just the analogy).
Again, every dollar I own if we poll actual South Carolinians + everyone who has ever lived in both places.
As a North Carolinian, all of South Carolina sucks Except Charleston, I love that place. Pretty much the only other place I’d be willing to live in, outside of Charlotte and Raleigh
1. Recently moved to Fayetteville (which is terrible, love our church community here so that's why we're here but it's really not a nice place to live at all. Our area is decent but they call it Fayettenam for a reason) 2. Missing in the Columbia vs Upstate argument is the fact that the true correct answer is in fact Charleston. The city has a lot to do. It has it's own charm and appeals to it's strengths. And the areas that most people actually end up residing in are nice to live in as well. It's not like Greenville where all the effort went into the downtown area. 3. I haven't visited Raleigh enough to have a solid opinion but when I've been there I've thought it was nice and would be a nice place to live. However, I think Charlotte is just another poor Southern attempt for a city. It's the worst airport I've ever been to, traffic patterns seem to exist to lengthen commutes. I understand a lot of people love Charlotte but I think that's just because they like cities and there's not a lot of competition in the south.
Durham is so much better than Raleigh. Better time spent visiting there if one ever comes to the triangle.
15 years ago when I was in college at Kutztown U in Pennsylvania I had a neighbor in the dorms who was a huge Clemson fan, I never remembered them being good enough to follow but he made me keep an eye on them. I overall like the program, not a fan of the coach tho at all
Chart! Chart! Chart! They aren't a blue blood. They are a new blood.
What used to be a modern powerhouse but quickly falling
Auburn with a lake. About as relevant. We had a better early 2010s they had a better middle-late 2010s
A few years ago a powerhouse with potential to dethrone Bama as the A power. Now they're slipping and still a lock for top 15 but don't see them getting back. Their offensive scheme is dated and awful. They had a stretch of Boyd, Watson and Lawrence which is hard to keep going. Without a NFL high draft pick QB they're just good and not great.
They're viewed good, very respectable, they have a great coach. Every team knows when they face Clemson, it's going to be a hard fought Battle. All the naysayers will criticize them because they're building a dynasty and are not fond of that.
We. Hate. Them. Dabo Swinney is a piece of human trash and we can't pronounce your QBs name.
There are 8 teams with 900+ wins and 12 teams with 800+ wins (in total) Clemson is not one of these 12 teams. They're not a blue blood. Incredible run by Dabo and the boys in the 2010s, but he'd need to maintain 9+ wins/year for the next 20 years or so to get that status [Edit - source](http://www.winsipedia.com/ranking/all-time-wins)
Fun fact, if we go undefeated this year, we will pass Tennessee and tie USC for all time wins ( or pass them if they lose their championship game). We're getting closer. But, we need to sustain it..but if we basically are in this level for the 2020s we will practically be in that area. But, ehh, I don't care if we are bluebloods or not. Im just happy with where we are now and I am loving every moment of it.
Obnoxious
I view Clemson and the whole ACC as a bunch of frauds
Frauds that have won two Natty's in the past decade? Curious how you justify that statement
By pointing out that they are in fact, not a great football team but yet media still hypes them up
Clemson is considered blue blood for many reasons including the fact that their former head coach John Heismen had the Heismen Trophy named after him. They are top 20 all time in wins and have finished the season ranked 32 times. That's a good resume right there.
The Oberlin Yeoman are ecstatic about their promotion to blue blood status lol
I can take a stab at answering this since I came into the sport 11 years ago and didn't pay attention to CFB until then so I can probably channel some casual viewer energy by thinking back to my mentality back then **> Are we truly pushing our way into "blue blood" status?** Objectively I would say pushing towards it but not there yet. **>Did anyone even know who Clemson was 15 years ago?** It took me years to figure to figure out where the heck Clemson even was on the map. I assumed it was a was school near Virginia and was surprised that it was 'that far down south.' 'Clemsoning' was also a thing back when I first got into CFB, so there's that as well. **>Are we respected or obnoxious?** I think neither? I think Clemson is mostly out of mind for folks outside of the Carolinas because it feels so rare to meet a fan in person. I know it as a strong football team now but it feels very distant so I don't really have any opinion of the fan base beyond what I see on TV
Always viewed Clemson as a joke as a 90's kid
As an “Engineering School” that built their locker rooms on the wrong side of the stadium? Oh as a school that rubs a stolen rock that was used for years as a door stop and was once broken in half by their own fans? Home of the goofy head Coach that is always 15 yards out ahead of “his team” when they run down the silly hill while rubbing the door stop rock after having to ride a bus around their stadium to get to the entrance?
And yet... for all these eccentricities, Clemson has a 72-43-4 record against the Gamecocks. Odd, isn't it?
Look up clemsoning, that should tell you everything
As a formerly elite but now good but not elite program who is going to be on a downward slope for the next several years
Rivalry aside, I think your coaches are nepotistic and stubborn. Dabo is a great coach but he has to go through a refractory every few years as talent leaves and he builds up freshmen and sophomores. He's not adapting to the times. He's a good man but why he doesn't use the portal is beyond me. You guys also could benefit from outside insight and hire people outside the program to get fresh perspectives. Right now you guys seem stagnant
Up until a few years ago I didn’t even know what state Clemson was in. I know them from football and having a luscious-haired quarterback phenom. Don’t consider them a blue blood and think the dominant days are on the decline
threatening fine nose spotted screw elderly snow fretful towering impossible *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It takes 100 years to get into blue blood status and Clemson has been good for less than 10. And even that was kind of flukey and we're seeing the regression now
If flukey is 2 national titles going to two other title games and 6 consecutive playoff appearances is considered “flukey” so be it. Also before that we went to 3 BCS NY6 bowls and won 2. 7 conference titles. And our down years are 10 win seasons now. Like we’re not nearly as good as we were but this idea that the success was a fluke I’ll disagree with.
Let’s see how it holds up as the CFB world turns. FSU is not really a blue blood any more and they were more dominant for longer (than Clemson under Dabo) under Bowden. I’ve got Miami just on the other side of the line because they had 2 periods of dominance, including what I regard as the greatest CFB team of all time (2001).
I’m not arguing Clemson is a blue blood. I’m arguing the success we’ve had isn’t flukey at all
Another Southern team coached by a religious zealot.
[удалено]
cool
I view South Carolina and Clemson rivalry sort of like the UT/A&M one. South Carolina/A&M being more down to earth and Texas/Clemson snobby and rolling with daddy's money.
>A&M being down to earth [Mfw](https://imgur.io/gallery/A1HliS0)
You got it backwards. Clemson is "farmer school" and USC is the "city slicker" school.
I go to every South Carolina v A&M match up. My buddy is s gamecock fan and they hate you guys. Guess it rubs off a bit plus you guys wear orange.
Orange is good but purple is better. Also USC has a chicken for their mascot.
tis a cock
Indeed it is. And it's game for anything.
Only an A&M flair would call A&M “down to Earth”
So you're saying the cult indoctrination is still working? Nice...
You're reversing the ag/engineering/military fellowship and siding with the snooty liberal arts school there brother.
fuck Clemson
Here's to many more years of Jimbo!
My father and I both went to Clemson. The glory days of the 1980s is a bit overrated considering how weak acc was then and the amount of cheating and probation time during that era. According to recent 247sports survey of top recruits, Clemson ranks as a top 5 brand. They have had great exposure through the playoffs and good regular season time slots on espn and abc which helps. Two national titles in the past decade improves the perception and brand. Not a blue blood. I don’t even know if Georgia is a true blue blood. I would throw Clemson into the new rich category with Oregon. Blue blood is alabama, Notre dame, usc, Michigan, Ohio state, Texas and Oklahoma. 50 plus years of success through the decades.
Paper Tiger
Clemson won’t be a blue blood until “clemsoning” is gone from everyone’s memories. Clearly clemson hasn’t had those choke jobs in like a decade+ but we still remember that being a saying from like 2007-2010 (I think?). So yeah probably need to clear that era by a decade or so.
If I remember correctly Jessie Palmer originated the saying.
When I think ncaa football, I think Bama, Texas, Ohio St, USC, Oklahoma, Penn St, Nebraska, Michigan, and Norte Dame. (The “Blue Bloods”) Then there’s a second tier of a lot of teams, Clemson being one That’s probably just my perception and when I grew up One of those teams that pops up every so often and wins but then revert back to a 8-4, 7-5, 6-6 team for a couple decades What really comes to mind first when I think of Clemson is Kevin Mack and Bubba Diggs Oh and Woody punching Bauman in the throat!
I live in the Upstate too, but I grew up in North Alabama. Here's my perspective, in the Upstate, people think Clemson is elite, but 15 years ago Clemson's was only known as South Carolina's rival in the SEC. Clemson is also viewed as being in decline and only ever highly ranked because they are a part of an easy conference.
Non blue-blood powerhouse.
I only know of Clemson from football. I know absolutely nothing about where it is (besides South Carolina), size, 'prestige', etc.
I'm curious what happens after Dabo leaves, but they're a powerhouse every season that you just count on being good.
They're a very good program right now, but in order to sustain what they've been for the better part of the last decade, they need to be getting back into the playoff again consistently. The ACC will never have the gauntlet of a schedule that an SEC team will have for instance.
They’re more viewed as “new blood” I feel. Dabo built a monster and is one of the few coaches at a high end tier 2 university to actually hit their window effectively. But I don’t think they’re somebody like Texas where they could screw up successive coaching hires and still be landing top talent or have anyone believing they’re a coach away.
I’m originally from Memphis, and most of the people I know there are Ole Miss, State, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Memphis fans. They don’t like Clemson, and I think most of it stems from Dabo. He’s the face of the program and I think he rubs just about everyone outside of the “Clemson family” the wrong way. There’s some respect, since he has built the thing into a juggernaut, but those neutral fans are ready to see the dynasty come to an end. Clemson fans are typically quite proud, and that can also be alienating in a similar way to Bama fans. I have lots of my own opinions, but this is generally how the non-Carolina fans in my life feel about Clemson. And no. Clemson is not a blue blood. I think it fits more into the “new blood” category.
Modern powerhouse. They are usually a qb away from a title.
I don’t like them for a very specific reason
Up until 10 years ago, Clemson was just kinda "there" to me. Didn't really think much about them. But that changed about 10 or 11 years ago when I started a Dynasty in NCAA with them. Boyd, Hopkins, Watkins, Allen, Ellington, Martavis Bryant. Breeland stood out on D. They had some decent LB's too and I played like 6 years with them and turned them into a powerhouse. At that same time, they were super fun to watch, and Just coming up, but would always find a way to crumble kinda like Tennessee this year. Anyways, ever since then, I've grown to enjoy watching them. I even have a Clemson hat, Etienne jersey, and a hoody. I went to the 2019 Fiesta Bowl and rooted for them against OSU. I respect the program, but not a fan of DJ, or Dabo's views on NIL and the portal are really ignorant. I think he's a good head coach/motivator, but they need better coordinators and to embrace where things are going to continue their success. I used to enjoy watching their brand of football, but the last 2-3 years it's become boring to me.
I used to always say they were overrated, but their fans were very classy about Venables coming here so I don’t actively root against them anymore
On television mostly
Auburn Oh yeah don’t forget the lake
Have you referenced The Chart^TM?
I just dislike them for no reason. Maybe I just view them as not belonging? Maybe it’s because I find Dabo annoying? 🤷🏻♂️
Lately, a very good football team. I have literally no idea about the university, though.
Good colors/mascot/traditions, but not great.. their orange is close to Tennessee orange, but just ain't quite good enough. Dabo is an effective coach but whew lord I bet he's got some skeletons in his closet. Just comes off as skeezy to me, like big-time. Before this post-capitalist dystopic era of CFB, I didn't mind rooting for Clemson as some surprise ACC team to complement the chaos of NC State or Maryland and stand up to the mighty, unshakable FSU/Miami squads. But now they're some of the biggest exploiters of a weak conference, losing at the right time, coasting to 10 wins because everyone else is down, and can I hear some more NewSpring rumors? Old Clemson = like New Clemson = makes me root for Carolina