All Forums | College Football

In depth Clemson Notre Dame breakdown

Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 7450
Posts: 34
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2010
Posts: 241
Posted: #26

Quote Originally Posted by mws:

Quote Originally Posted by wareagle18tr:

I believe ND is a tad underrated while Clemson is overrated due to the fact they played in such a weak conference (where a number of their games were closer than the score would indicate) . . .
Notre Dame is a half-way member of the ACC, with the result that Notre Dame and Clemson had four common opponents (which Clemson was 14 ppg better against). And there is no basis for saying that even a single Clemson game was closer than the score indicates. What are you talking about?

 

You're a fanboy. Are you saying, then, that all of their games have been blowouts except for the A&M game which you contend still wasn't in jeopardy?

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2010
Posts: 241
Posted: #27

Quote Originally Posted by mws:

Quote Originally Posted by wareagle18tr:

I believe ND is a tad underrated while Clemson is overrated due to the fact they played in such a weak conference (where a number of their games were closer than the score would indicate) . . .
Notre Dame is a half-way member of the ACC, with the result that Notre Dame and Clemson had four common opponents (which Clemson was 14 ppg better against). And there is no basis for saying that even a single Clemson game was closer than the score indicates. What are you talking about?

 

But are you really going to hang your hat on the "common opponent" argument? Bruh, you're a fanboy. 

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2006
Posts: 14640
Posted: #28
...MAKE A "PICK" ALREADY!!!
This, long-drawn, "OVER-ANALYSIS", is going to flow-into the NEXT YEAR!!!
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 7183
Posted: #29
Quote Originally Posted by wareagle18tr:


You're a fanboy. Are you saying, then, that all of their games have been blowouts except for the A&M game which you contend still wasn't in jeopardy?

You made a claim you can't back up. You sais a number of  Clemson games were closer than the score indicated, but you can't name one.  That's my point --- there weren't any.  Meanwhile the A&M game was not as close as the score indicated.  You have some kind of weird bias going on.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 7183
Posted: #30

Re-formatted:

You're a fanboy. Are you saying, then, that all of their games have been blowouts except for the A&M game which you contend still wasn't in jeopardy?

You made a claim you can't back up. You said a number of  Clemson games were closer than the score indicated, but you can't name one.  That's my point --- there weren't any.  Meanwhile the A&M game was not as close as the score indicated.  Your bias is preventing you from seeing things clearly.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2010
Posts: 241
Posted: #31

Quote Originally Posted by mws:

Re-formatted:You're a fanboy. Are you saying, then, that all of their games have been blowouts except for the A&M game which you contend still wasn't in jeopardy? You made a claim you can't back up. You said a number of  Clemson games were closer than the score indicated, but you can't name one.  That's my point --- there weren't any.  Meanwhile the A&M game was not as close as the score indicated.  Your bias is preventing you from seeing things clearly.

 

I don't think you understand what the word "bias" means. But I'm not here to teach. I would be very interested in hearing how you explain your belief that the A&M game was not as close as the score indicated. Also, are you going to be putting a wager on this game? 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 1182
Posted: #32

Quote Originally Posted by lajohn:

...MAKE A "PICK" ALREADY!!!This, long-drawn, "OVER-ANALYSIS", is going to flow-into the NEXT YEAR!!!

 

I'm not posting this in order to convince ppl to bet one side or the other, the reason it's so long is bc I just wanted to provide the relevant info needed for everybody to make their own predictions...

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2004
Posts: 25484
Posted: #33
Quote Originally Posted by alopez14325:

 

I'm not posting this in order to convince ppl to bet one side or the other, the reason it's so long is bc I just wanted to provide the relevant info needed for everybody to make their own predictions...


Heaven forbid someone have to read something & not get a pick out of it 

unbelievable 


Good info AL 
.
 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 1182
Posted: #34

Quote Originally Posted by wareagle18tr:

Quote Originally Posted by alopez14325:

Quote Originally Posted by smacksmiter:

My eye test ...This year, Trevor Lawrence has greatly disappointed at times in several games I watched Clemson play in...he seemed to get flustered and made typical rookie mistakes...not saying that he should not be allowed to do these, but I feel they will come up in this biggest game of his life...I would expect Notre Dame to try and take advantage of this by attempting to confuse him with various packages and sets...Based on this one eye test observation alone, I would give N.D. a very good chance to stay within the number, if not upset Clemson...
If they were to play 10 times, I think ND would win 2-3... I'm not sure which games you're refering to, but I havent really seen Lawrence make many mistakes/negative plays... I also believe he's capable of outplaying any QB in CFB
  I thought this was bias yesterday when you had only posted a few times and before I knew for sure you were picking Clemson. The ACC has only three teams with eight-plus wins this year. The ACC only has nine teams with a winning record, and besides the three I just referenced, six are only one game above .500. Both teams have played four teams with eight-plus wins with ND obviously having the stronger group of eight-plus win teams. Clemson's group consisted of Georgia Southern and A&M, a game where they escaped with a questionable win. I believe ND is a tad underrated while Clemson is overrated due to the fact they played in such a weak conference (where a number of their games were closer than the score would indicate) and are being given credit for their recent history. You said you thought ND would win only 2 or 3 times out of 10. You may be right. But they're not playing ten times. I think ND is the better team in a winner take-all match up. They definitely cover if they don't win.I also believe ND will beat bama in the NC. Bama has only played one complete team all year: Georgia. A team that's supposed to be as good as bama is (some would say greatest of all time) shouldn't take their first lead of the game with only a minute left in the game. And I think they lose that game had Tua not gotten hurt and forcing bama to play Jalen Hurts. But that's what happens when you've only played two teams that could give you somewhat of a good game, MSU and LSU, only because they had such exceptional defenses.

 

There's way too much information to spend equal time on both teams... I started with Clemson but I'm going to be posting the Notre Dame info later.

 

I think Clemson wins, but I may take Notre Dame to cover

All Forums | College Football
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.