College Football Board game update

[OrangeAfroMan]

I'm glad I finally got to make this card.  Any team allowing 2.8 ypc or less maxes out at -4 yards on their card.  But this defense was special, allowing only 0.9 yards per carry.  It's the best since 1957, and since I don't make teams going back that far (aside from '45 Army, and maybe some ND teams eventually), it's the best run defense ever.  
.
I want to give the same special treatment to the best pass defense ever, but it'll take some more work to identify that one.  Tons of defenses from the 70s have great pass D stats, because everyone was running the option and QBs sucked at passing.  As for more modern teams, it's basically down to '97 UM and '11 Bama.  I need to look deeper to make sure I'm not leaving someone out.  

[OrangeAfroMan]

.
Got to be our first team with a presidential candidate....'95 Noles.

[ELA]

[img width=420.996 height=500]https://i.imgur.com/A2D4J4w.jpg[/img]
.
Got to be our first team with a presidential candidate....'95 Noles.

Haven't done 1933 Michigan or 1990 Stanford yet?

[OrangeAfroMan]

Aside from '45 Army, the only teams I'm confident I could make pre-1969 are ND teams.  '66, maybe '46, '49.  HuskerMax goes back to the 60s, although only tackles data is there, not sacks or TFL.
.
I've offered to help sportsreference.com with their college football data, but nah.  Someone could get all the stuff athletic depts have and create a source going back much further than what's currently out there.  They all have it.  Stupid NCAA is too lazy to acquire it.  
.
I wish college football nerds were as stat-savvy as baseball nerds were back in the day.

[CWSooner]

Aside from '45 Army, the only teams I'm confident I could make pre-1969 are ND teams.  '66, maybe '46, '49.  HuskerMax goes back to the 60s, although only tackles data is there, not sacks or TFL.
.
I've offered to help sportsreference.com with their college football data, but nah.  Someone could get all the stuff athletic depts have and create a source going back much further than what's currently out there.  They all have it.  Stupid NCAA is too lazy to acquire it. 
.
I wish college football nerds were as stat-savvy as baseball nerds were back in the day.

I think the reason they are not is that football is not as susceptible to individual stats as baseball is.

Half the football team isn't creating stats that many people care about.  But every baseball player (at least in the NL) has AB, H, BB, RBI, Batting Avg, Slugging Pctg, SB, etc.  And the pitchers also have G, IP, H, R, ER, K, etc.  And there are Opportunities (Chances?), Putouts, Errors.  Those things are all pretty clear and reasonably straightforward.

Non-skill-position stats in football are pretty murky.  Even passer and receiver stats can be deceptive.  When is a drop the receiver's fault and when the QB's fault.

[OrangeAfroMan]

Non-skill-position stats in football are pretty murky.  Even passer and receiver stats can be deceptive.  When is a drop the receiver's fault and when the QB's fault.

Depends which one you played in high school.  

[CWSooner]

Yep.  Probably does.

You were an interior lineman, weren't you?

[OrangeAfroMan]

left tackle, but I backed up both G and T spots before starting.

[OrangeAfroMan]

1984 Boston College has been a big seller lately.  People love them some Flutie Flakes!

[FearlessF]

1984 was a big year for the Blackshirts

[OrangeAfroMan]

Forgot to put the school name it - OOPS.

[OrangeAfroMan]

I always found it odd that MSU's best year under Dantonio wasn't very good defensively, relative to the other years in that era.
.
I'm making the 2010 Spartans now, and i don't recall 1,000-yard rusher Edwin Baker at all.  His backup, I do remember, however.  

[OrangeAfroMan]

I'm on to making 1989 Illinois.
I tend to look at those programs who have never had their day in the sun and feel bad for them.  But over the course of creating all these team seasons and doing deep-dives of many obscure programs like the ones I mention here, they all seem to have had their chance....and fell on their face.
.
Illinois had everything in front of them in '89.  They were headed to the Rose Bowl if they won out.  Only had 1 loss, who knows what would have happened?  Big test with another top-10 team in Michigan, but they got them in Champaign.  Had a QB with a cannon (George), good RB (Griffith), great DL (Agee and Gardner). 
And they lay an egg - lose 24-10.  So I don't feel bad for Illinois. 

[OrangeAfroMan]

Just created '89 Houston.  Andre Ware - Heisman - throwing the ball all over the place.
BUT...2 things about that team, well actually 3:
1 - the RB averaged 9.6 ypc
2 - they only averaged 8.1 yards per pass attempt, which isn't that high
3 - they had a great defense

Another oddity is that because they threw so much, only 2 players carried the ball all season.  2!!!  Weatherspoon, the starter, and Kimble Anders, who some of you may remember as a longtime FB for the Chiefs.  Aside from QBs getting sacked, no one else carried the ball.  It might be unprecedented.

I know the SWC wasn't strong at the end, but aside from SMU, it wasn't super weak in 1989.  They were as good as the ACC, Big Ten, or Big 8 that season.  Arkansas and A&M were very strong, along with Houston.  They didn't face very prolific pass attacks in the SWC, but their pass defense per attempt was extremely good, and option teams tend to have high yards-per-attempt numbers, so that's extra impressive for their D.