Which medal table (for London 2012) were you looking at? On Wikipedia it says that the US won 103 medals 4 years ago. Now you have 93 medals already and you will win at least 20 more medals (2 x basketball, 2 x boxing, 0-2 x BMX, 0-1 x diving, 0-1 x equestrian, 0-1 x golf, 0-1 x sailing, 0-1 x taekwondo, 0-2 x triathlon, 0-2 x volleyball, 1 x water polo, 0-4 x wrestling, 0-12 x athletics), so this will easily be your best result ever (1904 and 1984 excluded of course).
By the way: You won 110 medals in Beijing, not in London.
You also should think about the following thing: Even if you wouldve won less medals than 4 years ago, you still could have overperformed. In my opinion your team is weaker than 4 years ago (just because you won more medals than 4 years ago, it doesnt mean that your team got better), you might want to look at the results of the swimming/athletics world championships from last year if you dont agree. I think you clearly had an advantage this time, because all other big nations had to adapt to a different time zone and NBC was able to dictate the start times for swimming/athletics finals, so most athletes had a "double jetlag".