Winning is hard

Advertisement
Well we won at our highest level for the 2nd time in over 20 years. I would like to thank the University (shout out to unnamed sources) and Mario for making that happen. This was the best season we have had in over 20 years. It was great beating our 2 most hated rival's.
You delivered this season and I am grateful.
Let's get to work building on top of this.
I think we will have a young (mistakes) more talented team next season with a less talented QB and harder schedule. That means less wins I think.
I see you 2026. We shall see. The portal adds and also takes away.
 
Life Drink It GIF by Percolate Galactic
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
So we played @4, @5, @6, 7 and 8 at home

Clemson played @8 and 5 at home

SMU played @5 and @7

Love the unbalanced schedules, super cool
FSU, Stanford, Nc St, Wake only guaranteed victories for us. Got 2 of 4 not bad, missed the top 2 also not bad. Teams with no qb's only ones we guaranteed to beat. Swap out GT for BC still probably lose. Syracuse for Pitt same.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
FSU, Stanford, Nc St, Wake only guaranteed victories for us. Got 2 of 4 not bad, missed the top 2 also not bad. Teams with no qb's only ones we guaranteed to beat. Swap out GT for BC still probably lose. Syracuse for Pitt same.
None of that has anything to do with my comment, which is that we objectively had a more difficult path to the title than SMU and Clemson and with the size of conferences we have to get back to divisions. Not a cope, not an excuse, just a fact.
 
None of that has anything to do with my comment, which is that we objectively had a more difficult path to the title than SMU and Clemson and with the size of conferences we have to get back to divisions. Not a cope, not an excuse, just a fact.
Sure and my point is you could take the w's off cuse and gt and add them to bc and pitt if we played them. Semantics.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top