• Attention: Register today to view CanesInSight Ad-Free for 7 days.

Canes vs. Basketball Dabos

Notsince1985

Retired staff
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
15,049
17-8, 7-6. Izundu better have been cramping. Clemson is a crap road team, but without Newton, it's going to be a fight. Need the fucking students to get their asses to a noon tip on a Saturday.
 

___THEU___

Sophomore
Joined
Jan 30, 2014
Messages
589
17-8, 7-6. Izundu better have been cramping. Clemson is a crap road team, but without Newton, it's going to be a fight. Need the ****ing students to get their asses to a noon tip on a Saturday.

Yes^! Seems like every Clemson game is a grind and they've played a ton of close ones. With Izundu out tonight, Huell looks to be figuring some things out and starting to look the part. Gonna need him either way being only 7 deep.
 

Consigliere

All-American
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
21,756
Clemson started out 11-2 and looked good. They had a nice road win at South Carolina and then everything went to chit during ACC Play. Clemson is 2-5 on the road in conference and their road wins were to Pitt and Wake Forest. They lost on the road to ND (5), GT (12), UL (32), FSU (48) and Duke (2).

Clemson has the following:

RPI: 51
SOS: 15
BPI: 34

Miami has the following:

RPI: 50
SOS: 60
BPI: 29


Clemson is a bottom dweller and we can't lose. Just win, baby.
 

Gables Canes

Freshman
Joined
Jan 10, 2017
Messages
2,616
Clemson started out 11-2 and looked good. They had a nice road win at South Carolina and then everything went to chit during ACC Play. Clemson is 2-5 on the road in conference and their road wins were to Pitt and Wake Forest. They lost on the road to ND (5), GT (12), UL (32), FSU (48) and Duke (2).

Clemson has the following:

RPI: 51
SOS: 15
BPI: 34

Miami has the following:

RPI: 50
SOS: 60
BPI: 29


Clemson is a bottom dweller and we can't lose. Just win, baby.

They're far from a bottom dweller, but yes, we need to win this.
 

Consigliere

All-American
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
21,756
Clemson started out 11-2 and looked good. They had a nice road win at South Carolina and then everything went to chit during ACC Play. Clemson is 2-5 on the road in conference and their road wins were to Pitt and Wake Forest. They lost on the road to ND (5), GT (12), UL (32), FSU (48) and Duke (2).

Clemson has the following:

RPI: 51
SOS: 15
BPI: 34

Miami has the following:

RPI: 50
SOS: 60
BPI: 29


Clemson is a bottom dweller and we can't lose. Just win, baby.

They're far from a bottom dweller, but yes, we need to win this.

They're not in the top. They're not in the middle. They're in the bottom 4.
 

Notsince1985

Retired staff
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
15,049
Clemson started out 11-2 and looked good. They had a nice road win at South Carolina and then everything went to chit during ACC Play. Clemson is 2-5 on the road in conference and their road wins were to Pitt and Wake Forest. They lost on the road to ND (5), GT (12), UL (32), FSU (48) and Duke (2).

Clemson has the following:

RPI: 51
SOS: 15
BPI: 34

Miami has the following:

RPI: 50
SOS: 60
BPI: 29


Clemson is a bottom dweller and we can't lose. Just win, baby.

They're far from a bottom dweller, but yes, we need to win this.

They're not in the top. They're not in the middle. They're in the bottom 4.

Record wise, but they're not as bad as their record. Yes, I know, I know, but this isn't a shitty team talent wise.
 

Consigliere

All-American
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
21,756
Clemson started out 11-2 and looked good. They had a nice road win at South Carolina and then everything went to chit during ACC Play. Clemson is 2-5 on the road in conference and their road wins were to Pitt and Wake Forest. They lost on the road to ND (5), GT (12), UL (32), FSU (48) and Duke (2).

Clemson has the following:

RPI: 51
SOS: 15
BPI: 34

Miami has the following:

RPI: 50
SOS: 60
BPI: 29


Clemson is a bottom dweller and we can't lose. Just win, baby.

They're far from a bottom dweller, but yes, we need to win this.

They're not in the top. They're not in the middle. They're in the bottom 4.

Record wise, but they're not as bad as their record. Yes, I know, I know, but this isn't a ****ty team talent wise.

Great. The original comment is Clemson is a bottom dweller. They are as indicated above. Someone has to be at the bottom and Clemson is in the bottom 4.
 

Notsince1985

Retired staff
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
15,049
Clemson started out 11-2 and looked good. They had a nice road win at South Carolina and then everything went to chit during ACC Play. Clemson is 2-5 on the road in conference and their road wins were to Pitt and Wake Forest. They lost on the road to ND (5), GT (12), UL (32), FSU (48) and Duke (2).

Clemson has the following:

RPI: 51
SOS: 15
BPI: 34

Miami has the following:

RPI: 50
SOS: 60
BPI: 29


Clemson is a bottom dweller and we can't lose. Just win, baby.

They're far from a bottom dweller, but yes, we need to win this.

They're not in the top. They're not in the middle. They're in the bottom 4.

Record wise, but they're not as bad as their record. Yes, I know, I know, but this isn't a ****ty team talent wise.

Great. The original comment is Clemson is a bottom dweller. They are as indicated above. Someone has to be at the bottom and Clemson is in the bottom 4.

Yes, they are, but they're not "your average 4-9 team." They lost to Xavier by 6, beat South Carolina, lost to UNC by 3, Notre Dame by 5 on the road, UVA by 4, VT by 1, SU by 1, Duke by 2 on the road, and beat a Wake team on the road by 5 that we lost by 17 or whatever. Now, they haven't been great or even good on the road in the ACC, but, still, they're not losing to everyone by 30+ points. They could easily be 7-6 like us or better. If we had Newton and a healthy Huell, I wouldn't be as worried, but we are where we are.
 

Consigliere

All-American
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
21,756
Yes, they are, but they're not "your average 4-9 team." They lost to Xavier by 6, beat South Carolina, lost to UNC by 3, Notre Dame by 5 on the road, UVA by 4, VT by 1, SU by 1, Duke by 2 on the road, and beat a Wake team on the road by 5 that we lost by 17 or whatever. Now, they haven't been great or even good on the road in the ACC, but, still, they're not losing to everyone by 30+ points. They could easily be 7-6 like us or better. If we had Newton and a healthy Huell, I wouldn't be as worried, but we are where we are.

What does the part in bold even mean? Did you do a statistical analysis of 4-9 ACC teams so you can compare them?

Yes, Clemson lost a lot of close games. There is still a pattern, losing.

There is no reason to lose and this is BY FAR the easiest game left. It is at home and they're not good. With or without Newton and Huell, we need to win. I am not trying to be a jerk but they're not good.
 
Last edited:

Notsince1985

Retired staff
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
15,049
Yes, they are, but they're not "your average 4-9 team." They lost to Xavier by 6, beat South Carolina, lost to UNC by 3, Notre Dame by 5 on the road, UVA by 4, VT by 1, SU by 1, Duke by 2 on the road, and beat a Wake team on the road by 5 that we lost by 17 or whatever. Now, they haven't been great or even good on the road in the ACC, but, still, they're not losing to everyone by 30+ points. They could easily be 7-6 like us or better. If we had Newton and a healthy Huell, I wouldn't be as worried, but we are where we are.

What does the part in bold even mean? Did you do a statistical analysis of 4-9 ACC teams so you can compare them?

Yes, Clemson lost a lot of close games. There is still a pattern, losing.

There is no reason to lose and this is BY FAR the easiest game left. It is at home and they're not good. With or without Newton and Huell, we need to win.

It means that there are 4-9 teams that suck, and lose 9 games by 15-20 points, and there are teams like Clemson, that lose most of their games by 5 points are less. How hard is that to understand? Anyone, as I said, if Newton was playing, and Huell was 100%, I wouldn't really be worried. They're not. I'm worried.
 

Consigliere

All-American
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
21,756
Yes, they are, but they're not "your average 4-9 team." They lost to Xavier by 6, beat South Carolina, lost to UNC by 3, Notre Dame by 5 on the road, UVA by 4, VT by 1, SU by 1, Duke by 2 on the road, and beat a Wake team on the road by 5 that we lost by 17 or whatever. Now, they haven't been great or even good on the road in the ACC, but, still, they're not losing to everyone by 30+ points. They could easily be 7-6 like us or better. If we had Newton and a healthy Huell, I wouldn't be as worried, but we are where we are.

What does the part in bold even mean? Did you do a statistical analysis of 4-9 ACC teams so you can compare them?

Yes, Clemson lost a lot of close games. There is still a pattern, losing.

There is no reason to lose and this is BY FAR the easiest game left. It is at home and they're not good. With or without Newton and Huell, we need to win.

It means that there are 4-9 teams that suck, and lose 9 games by 15-20 points, and there are teams like Clemson, that lose most of their games by 5 points are less. How hard is that to understand? Anyone, as I said, if Newton was playing, and Huell was 100%, I wouldn't really be worried. They're not. I'm worried.

I edited my post and congrats for having the fastest response I have ever seen.

They're 2-3 in their last 5. They're 3-7 in their last 10. Their 4 wins in conference are against the worst, third worst and fifth worst (x 2) teams [remember they're the 4th worst].

They are who there record says they are. The constant for Clemson, during ACC play, is losing.

Again, I am not trying to be a jerk but Clemson is not good. You're free to think otherwise.
 

Notsince1985

Retired staff
Joined
Oct 7, 2012
Messages
15,049
Yes, they are, but they're not "your average 4-9 team." They lost to Xavier by 6, beat South Carolina, lost to UNC by 3, Notre Dame by 5 on the road, UVA by 4, VT by 1, SU by 1, Duke by 2 on the road, and beat a Wake team on the road by 5 that we lost by 17 or whatever. Now, they haven't been great or even good on the road in the ACC, but, still, they're not losing to everyone by 30+ points. They could easily be 7-6 like us or better. If we had Newton and a healthy Huell, I wouldn't be as worried, but we are where we are.

What does the part in bold even mean? Did you do a statistical analysis of 4-9 ACC teams so you can compare them?

Yes, Clemson lost a lot of close games. There is still a pattern, losing.

There is no reason to lose and this is BY FAR the easiest game left. It is at home and they're not good. With or without Newton and Huell, we need to win.

It means that there are 4-9 teams that suck, and lose 9 games by 15-20 points, and there are teams like Clemson, that lose most of their games by 5 points are less. How hard is that to understand? Anyone, as I said, if Newton was playing, and Huell was 100%, I wouldn't really be worried. They're not. I'm worried.

I edited my post and congrats for having the fastest response I have ever seen.

They're 2-3 in their last 5. They're 3-7 in their last 10. Their 4 wins in conference are against the worst, third worst and fifth worst (x 2) teams [remember they're the 4th worst].

They are who there record says they are. The constant for Clemson, during ACC play, is losing.

Again, I am not trying to be a jerk but Clemson is not good. You're free to think otherwise.

And I stand by what I stand by what I said. This isn't DePaul to the Big East. And, I'd feel better if we had Newton and a healthy Huell.
 

Consigliere

All-American
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
21,756
And I stand by what I stand by what I said. This isn't DePaul to the Big East. And, I'd feel better if we had Newton and a healthy Huell.

Obviously I would want those players back/healthy. We almost all would.

No, this isn't Depaul to the Big East but they're not good.
 
Top