+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: CAAbbs (/forum-676.html)
+---- Forum: CAA Conference Talk (/forum-677.html)
+----- Forum: UNCW (/forum-686.html)
+------ Forum: Off Topic (/forum-978.html)
+------ Thread: South Carolina (/thread-813551.html)
South Carolina - Seahawkhoops - 03-26-2017 03:45 PM
Anyone want to tell me how much they suck now or how their early season success means nothing?
South Carolina - Seahawk Nation 08 - 03-26-2017 03:56 PM
The true Carolina.
South Carolina - Seahawk Nation 08 - 03-26-2017 03:56 PM
As I asked in another thread...why the hell did K-State let Martin go....
South Carolina - Seahawkhoops - 03-26-2017 04:25 PM
(03-26-2017 03:56 PM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote: As I asked in another thread...why the hell did K-State let Martin go....
No crap!!!!
RE: South Carolina - geezerhawkdad - 03-26-2017 04:40 PM
He left K State voluntarily to go to USC.
USC had not won a NCAA game since 1973. This year's team lost 5 of their last 7 games before the NCAA Tournament. Sindarius Thornwell was suspended for about 6 games in mid-season. Martin would not let CBS film his team watching the selection show fearing they may not be selected.
If you had offered to bet knowledgeable fans South Carolina would be in the Final Four when the field was announced, you'd be a millionaire, if you were not involuntarily committed first. They prove some teams turn it on when they make the Tournament, like Syracuse last year.
RE: South Carolina - jumpinmullet - 03-26-2017 11:01 PM
I think USC should return to the ACC and they could kick Syracuse or BC to the curb. Along with kicking Jimmy sorry ass out it would be a nice welcome home party for South Carolina.
RE: South Carolina - bricksnivy - 03-27-2017 05:48 AM
I don't think adding USC makes sense geographically and I don't think they'd leave the PAC12 without UCLA
RE: South Carolina - SEA33HAWK - 03-27-2017 06:25 AM
(03-27-2017 05:48 AM)bricksnivy Wrote: I don't think adding USC makes sense geographically and I don't think they'd leave the PAC12 without UCLA
Bingo!!!
RE: South Carolina - Seahawk Nation 08 - 03-27-2017 07:22 AM
And South Carolina won't be leaving the SEC anytime soon. As fun as their run has been this year, they're still a football school for the time being.
RE: South Carolina - bricksnivy - 03-27-2017 07:25 AM
(03-27-2017 07:22 AM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote: And South Carolina won't be leaving the SEC anytime soon. As fun as their run has been this year, they're still a football school for the time being.
That is unfortunate for them. Have you seen their football history? They're a school without an identity, but can't take away their baseball success. What "type" of shcool you are is usually limited to basketball or football, but they're truly neither. That said, they have a legit chance to win a basketball championship this year (closer than I can ever see them getting in football).
But, yeah, there's no chance they're leaving the SEC.
RE: South Carolina - B_Hawk06 - 03-27-2017 07:26 AM
This is getting moved to the OT board. Has zero to do with UNCW or our conference...
RE: South Carolina - Seahawk Nation 08 - 03-27-2017 07:53 AM
(03-27-2017 07:25 AM)bricksnivy Wrote:(03-27-2017 07:22 AM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote: And South Carolina won't be leaving the SEC anytime soon. As fun as their run has been this year, they're still a football school for the time being.
That is unfortunate for them. Have you seen their football history? They're a school without an identity, but can't take away their baseball success. What "type" of shcool you are is usually limited to basketball or football, but they're truly neither. That said, they have a legit chance to win a basketball championship this year (closer than I can ever see them getting in football).
But, yeah, there's no chance they're leaving the SEC.
That's what can be problematic about being a school with football. It can become a limiting factor for your other programs, since all decisions tend to be geared towards football.
And yeah, if baseball were a revenue sport, South Carolina would most certainly be considered a Baseball school.
RE: South Carolina - jumpinmullet - 03-27-2017 08:00 AM
(03-27-2017 07:25 AM)bricksnivy Wrote:(03-27-2017 07:22 AM)Seahawk Nation 08 Wrote: And South Carolina won't be leaving the SEC anytime soon. As fun as their run has been this year, they're still a football school for the time being.
That is unfortunate for them. Have you seen their football history? They're a school without an identity, but can't take away their baseball success. What "type" of shcool you are is usually limited to basketball or football, but they're truly neither. That said, they have a legit chance to win a basketball championship this year (closer than I can ever see them getting in football).
But, yeah, there's no chance they're leaving the SEC.
Granted I am a lot older than some of you guys but I can remember when people said there is no way they leave the ACC for the SEC but it happened. The SEC is football country and SC has not been a factor there for the most part. They were pissed about not making the NCAA tournament even though they were the No.1 team in the country for a few years and never played past the ACC tourney. They had great,great teams but could not win the tournament to get in the NCAA. I would love to see them in the ACC and kick both Syracuse and BC out.
RE: South Carolina - bricksnivy - 03-27-2017 08:15 AM
I don't like the geography of the ACC. Syracuse and Boston College don't fit, and haven't really contributed significantly to the conference. Syracuse is great at basketball, but they are trending in the wrong direction, and we have to listen to Boeheim whine about the South all of the time. Pitt isn't a great fit either, but I kind of like them in the conference.
Geographically, South Carolina makes sense, but I'm not sure they'd be in Swofford's top 5 choices. West Virginia is much more attractive than South Carolina, for example.
RE: South Carolina - jumpinmullet - 03-27-2017 11:06 AM
(03-27-2017 08:15 AM)bricksnivy Wrote: I don't like the geography of the ACC. Syracuse and Boston College don't fit, and haven't really contributed significantly to the conference. Syracuse is great at basketball, but they are trending in the wrong direction, and we have to listen to Boeheim whine about the South all of the time. Pitt isn't a great fit either, but I kind of like them in the conference.
Geographically, South Carolina makes sense, but I'm not sure they'd be in Swofford's top 5 choices. West Virginia is much more attractive than South Carolina, for example.
Give me WVU am SC all over BC and Syracuse.
RE: South Carolina - bricksnivy - 03-27-2017 12:04 PM
Mullet, I challenge you to come up with a current P5 school that would be worse than BC.