CFB51 College Football Fan Community
The Power Four => Big Ten => Topic started by: OrangeAfroMan on May 07, 2025, 09:00:34 PM
-
Do you think doing a top 100 players at each position would be doable?
Is it a fool's errand?
Inspired by Bill James' Baseball Almanac, which was inspired by him and a friend wondering if there were 100 better catchers all-time than Mike MacFarlane, how difficult might this task be?
Have I posted this before? I'm getting deja vu as I type this.
Anyways, it's the off-season and it's a long summer.
If I did this (or we did this), I'm of 2 minds:
1 - all players considered for the list, or
2 - make it P4/P5/Pwhatever only, and set the 1-year wonders aside on their own list (G5 could have their own as well).
.
I assume most here would prefer 1, but if anyone has an opinion, speak up.
-
100 might be a little much for some positions, or a little light for others, like O line, etc. Probably would need a top 500 for that position group.
-
that's a lot of work, something fora fulltime guy or crew of guys
-
We could start with this century.
-
I wonder of the value of lists and rankings, generally. But have at it.
-
Might want to decide up front if you want to allow a recency bias or not.
I'm of the opinion that almost all modern day athletes would blow the doors off of the old-timey fan favorites, if for nothing more than advances in training, nutrition, etc. And, frankly, we have the entire pool of talent in more modern times which gives us a better creme da la creme. Prior to a certain point, we only had the white kids, and the best of a smaller population almost certainly isn't going to produce the caliber of athlete as will the best of a larger population.
Others, of course, prefer to rank players according to their time, i.e., how good they were for their day. Which is really hard, I'd think, since we don't have a lot of footage to evaluate for that.
-
how about just a top 100 players overall? I nominate Charles Woodson to be on that. he was really fucking good.
-
I usually think about how players ranked "in their time". I played volley ball against the starting tight end at UGA, nice fellow, good TE, but he would get mashed in today's game.
Was Charlie Trippi a good offensive back? Of course, in his day he was. He weighted 186 pounds. In today's game? Safety maybe? He would bulk up.
Was Fran Tarkenton a good college QB? 6'0" and 190 lbs.
-
This century. Maybe the '90's. Tough to go further back. Everything is so much different.
-
how about just a top 100 players overall? I nominate Charles Woodson to be on that. he was really fucking good.
I'm sure there's plenty top 100 overall lists.
I'm thinking 100 at each position would be enough to fill a book, especially with a blurb on each player.
.
It seems like some of you are considering putting a guy like Archie Grffin in a time machine and putting him in the backfield today.
That's not how you do this.
It's stats + eye test vs their cohort. That's the only way that makes sense.
A backup OL from today would completely mash an all-american from 1977. Easily. That's not useful information.
-
I'm really interested in your opinions about keeping it only P4/5 programs and giving 1-year starters their own lists.
-
Just looking at OSU RBs....they have 4 guys with 500+ carries @ over 6 ypc....and none is named Eddie George. One had 25 career TDs, another 43.
Looking at many schools' RB stats, the TD discrepancies are substantial. How do you square a guy with more carries, way more yards, and even a better ypc average, but having half the TDs? Tricky.
-
Let's pay a game.
Here are the top 20 rushers, minus the G5 program guys, with their final season and school. How many can you get correct?
1. 1999 Wisconsin
2. 1998 Texas
3. 2019 Wisconsin
4. 1976 Pitt
5. 2017 Oregon
6. 1979 USC
7. 2004 Texas
8. 2017 Northwestern
9. 2018 Washington
10. 1982 Georgia
11. 1975 Ohio State
12. 2012 Wisconsin
13. 2011 Oregon
14. 2007 Michigan
15. 2002 West Virginia
16. 1990 Texas A&M
17. 2004 Kansas State
18. 1989 Indiana
19. 1980 South Carolina
20. 2020 Clemson
If you get more than 12, I'm impressed.
-
18/20.
-
Who were the 100 worst P5 starters at each position?
-
Who were the 100 worst P5 starters at each position?
We all probably have 100 for our own school....that guy who missed the block. The other guy who missed that tackle...
-
One cool thing from the BJ Historical Abstract for baseball was that a team made up of the 30th-best at each position would definitely win its division each year and be highly-favored to win the WS, but a team of the 70th-ranked guys would be the lower-limit on probably winning their division at all.
I think I have that right. Something like that.
.
You'd think, or at least I did, that the 70th-best at every position EVER on one team would still be VERY strong...but it's not.
I wonder if that would be similar for college football. Way more teams, even if it's just P4/5....but at 70th-best, you'd basically be having the worst best player at a school's position. If that makes sense. Like Wake Forest's best-ever DT, Oregon State's best-ever TE, etc.
That's still a great team, right?
-
We all probably have 100 for our own school....that guy who missed the block. The other guy who missed that tackle...
Oh yeah.
JB Shugarts just got flagged with another false start penalty.
Lydell Ross was the worst starting running back.
Lots of starting QB candidates; Joe Bauserman, Steve Bellisari, Justin Zwick...
-
Who was that CB that had like 15 PIs last year?
-
100 might be a little much for some positions, or a little light for others, like O line, etc. Probably would need a top 500 for that position group.
I think 300 is fair.
C
G
T
I know for tackles, often times a guy is at RT early on and moves to LT once he improves.
-
Baseball is probably more dependent on pitching than football is on the QB, though a single pitcher of course can't play every game (as a starter anyway).
-
I'm thinking the furthest-back players that may still be considered top 100 at their position would be guys like Hutson, Nagurski, Nevers,...Thorpe? Grange? O'Brien, Kinnick, Harmon? Pitt's Marshall Goldberg.
-
One issue "back in the day" is that the major newspapers obviously controlled coverage, and they were mostly in the northeast and midwest, so perhaps some of our history is biased in that fashion. They covered ND players a LOT obviously, it got "clicks".
-
One issue "back in the day" is that the major newspapers obviously controlled coverage, and they were mostly in the northeast and midwest, so perhaps some of our history is biased in that fashion. They covered ND players a LOT obviously, it got "clicks".
Indeed. Also, one big performance that got media coverage created legends out of ordinary players with 1 big game.
-
Who were the 100 worst P5 starters at each position?
Michigan 2024 QBs win the starting job on that team
-
I'm thinking the furthest-back players that may still be considered top 100 at their position would be guys like Hutson, Nagurski, Nevers,...Thorpe? Grange? O'Brien, Kinnick, Harmon? Pitt's Marshall Goldberg.
I'll take Nagurski & Thorpe
-
Michigan 2024 QBs win the starting job on that team
Over the vaunted 2008 platoon of Nick Sheridan and Steven Threet?
(https://www.toledoblade.com/image/2008/08/18/1140x_a10-7_cTC/Nick-Sheridan-Steven-Threet.jpg)
-
Top 10 Big Ten All-Time Leading Rushers:
1. Dayne WIS 6,397 yds @ 5.7 ypc for 63 TD
2. Taylor WIS 6,174 yds @ 6.7 ypc for 50 TD
3. Jackson NW 5,440 yds @ 4.8 ypc for 41 TD
4. Griffin OSU 5,177 yds @ 6.1 ypc for 25 TD
5. Ball WIS 5,140 yds @ 5.6 ypc for 77 TD
6. Hart UM 5,040 yds @ 5.0 ypc for 41 TD
7. Thompson IU 4,965 yds @ 4.6 ypc for 64 TD
8. Gordon WIS 4,915 yds @ 7.8 ypc for 45 TD
9. Davis WIS 4,676 yds @ 5.1 ypc for 42 TD
10. Ibrahim MIN 4,668 yds @ 5.4 ypc for 53 TD
-
Where would you draw the line of guys probably in the top 100 RBs of all-time? Do they all belong in?
-
1. Dayne WIS 6,397 yds @ 5.7 ypc for 63 TD
2. Taylor WIS 6,174 yds @ 6.7 ypc for 50 TD
3. Griffin OSU 5,177 yds @ 6.1 ypc for 25 TD
4. Ball WIS 5,140 yds @ 5.6 ypc for 77 TD
5. Gordon WIS 4,915 yds @ 7.8 ypc for 45 TD
this 5 would probably be in - 77 TDs is a lot
-
SEC Top 10 All-Time Rushers:
1. Walker UGA 5,259 yds @ 5.3 ypc for 49 TDs
2. Chubb UGA 4,769 yds @ 6.3 ypc for 44 TDs
3. McFadden ARK 4,590 yds @ 5.8 ypc for 41 TDs
4. Faulk LSU 4,557 yds @ 5.3 ypc for 46 TDs
5. Jackson AU 4,303 yds @ 6.6 ypc for 43 TDs
6. Webb VAN 4,173 yds @ 4.5 ypc for 32 TDs
7. Rhett UF 4,163 yds @ 4.8 ypc for 34 TDs
8. Hilliard LSU 4,050 yds @ 4.6 ypc for 44 TDs
9 Alexander LSU 4,035 yds @ 4.7 ypc for 40 TDs
10. Dixon MSU 3,994 yds @ 4.4 ypc for 42 TDs
Emmitt is 11th, with 210 fewer carries than Dixon, lol
-
1. Walker UGA 5,259 yds @ 5.3 ypc for 49 TDs
2. Chubb UGA 4,769 yds @ 6.3 ypc for 44 TDs
3. McFadden ARK 4,590 yds @ 5.8 ypc for 41 TDs
4. Jackson AU 4,303 yds @ 6.6 ypc for 43 TDs
I'd take this 4 and maybe Emmitt
-
Top 10 Big Ten All-Time Leading Rushers:
1. Dayne WIS 6,397 yds @ 5.7 ypc for 63 TD
2. Taylor WIS 6,174 yds @ 6.7 ypc for 50 TD
3. Jackson NW 5,440 yds @ 4.8 ypc for 41 TD
4. Griffin OSU 5,177 yds @ 6.1 ypc for 25 TD
5. Ball WIS 5,140 yds @ 5.6 ypc for 77 TD
6. Hart UM 5,040 yds @ 5.0 ypc for 41 TD
7. Thompson IU 4,965 yds @ 4.6 ypc for 64 TD
8. Gordon WIS 4,915 yds @ 7.8 ypc for 45 TD
9. Davis WIS 4,676 yds @ 5.1 ypc for 42 TD
10. Ibrahim MIN 4,668 yds @ 5.4 ypc for 53 TD
On, Wisconsin.
-
SEC Top 10 All-Time Rushers:
1. Walker UGA 5,259 yds @ 5.3 ypc for 49 TDs
2. Chubb UGA 4,769 yds @ 6.3 ypc for 44 TDs
3. McFadden ARK 4,590 yds @ 5.8 ypc for 41 TDs
4. Faulk LSU 4,557 yds @ 5.3 ypc for 46 TDs
5. Jackson AU 4,303 yds @ 6.6 ypc for 43 TDs
6. Webb VAN 4,173 yds @ 4.5 ypc for 32 TDs
7. Rhett UF 4,163 yds @ 4.8 ypc for 34 TDs
8. Hilliard LSU 4,050 yds @ 4.6 ypc for 44 TDs
9 Alexander LSU 4,035 yds @ 4.7 ypc for 40 TDs
10. Dixon MSU 3,994 yds @ 4.4 ypc for 42 TDs
Emmitt is 11th, with 210 fewer carries than Dixon, lol
You gonna include Texas and Oklahoma?
-
I think Chubb was better than Walker.
:smiley_confused1:
-
I think Chubb was better than Walker.
:smiley_confused1:
I think Taylor was better than Dayne.
Or any other back that's ever played.
-
I think Chubb was better than Walker.
:smiley_confused1:
6.3 ypc
-
Melvin Gordon, 7.8 career ypc, holy cow!!
We played against him, and it was one of the toughest outs our defense faced in that era. That was back when we were very good on defense.
-
B10 and SEC has had some good backs, on paper, for 3-yds-and-a-cloud-of-dust leagues ;)
-
* includes bowl stats
(https://i.imgur.com/HxjEhvw.png)
-
If you're looking at what kind of career a guy had, I don't mind career yards. If you're looking at "How good was he?" I prefer ypc, because it cuts through so much of the unbalanced noise between disparate situations players find themselves in. Not perfectly, but better than total yards.
-
I think Taylor was better than Dayne.
Or any other back that's ever played.
I think Ricky Williams was better than Taylor and Dayne and every other back that's ever played.
-
Wisconsin had James White, Montee Ball and Melvin Gordon in the SAME backfield.
No way that happens today with the portal and NIL.
-
I think Ricky Williams was better than Taylor and Dayne and every other back that's ever played.
Meh.
-
Meh.
Ricky Williams played fullback his first 2 years, lead-blocking for Priest Holmes. He's way better than your Wisconsin schlubs.
-
One thing I look at is "tough yards", did the back get YAC, could he avoid tackles, or run through them, could he be relied on to get two yards consistently.
Herschel had of course a lot of "highlight reels" where the defense broke down or he ran over some 190 lb safety. He also averaged 35 carries per game his second year, which is rather astounding today. But a good defense could stone him at the line and shut him down some.
-
One thing I look at is "tough yards", did the back get YAC, could he avoid tackles, or run through them, could he be relied on to get two yards consistently.
Herschel had of course a lot of "highlight reels" where the defense broke down or he ran over some 190 lb safety. He also averaged 35 carries per game his second year, which is rather astounding today. But a good defense could stone him at the line and shut him down some.
That's pretty common. Derrick Henry is an exaggeration of that, on the good and bad side. Way too easy to bring down in the backfield or at the line, basically unstoppable once he gets going.
Leonard Fournette could run over anybody and break free from a lot of adverse situations, but Alabama overwhelmed our OL and he was stoned at or behind the line all game.
Derrick Henry is still holding Fournette's 2015 Heisman.
-
If you're looking at what kind of career a guy had, I don't mind career yards. If you're looking at "How good was he?" I prefer ypc, because it cuts through so much of the unbalanced noise between disparate situations players find themselves in. Not perfectly, but better than total yards.
Ed Zachery
-
Ricky Williams played fullback his first 2 years, lead-blocking for Priest Holmes. He's way better than your Wisconsin schlubs.
Roger Craig played fullback for Mike Rozier
-
I think Ricky Williams was better than Taylor and Dayne and every other back that's ever played.
He had better spleef also
-
(https://i.imgur.com/rFAgoA7.jpeg)
-
That's pretty common. Derrick Henry is an exaggeration of that, on the good and bad side. Way too easy to bring down in the backfield or at the line, basically unstoppable once he gets going.
But that's how you take down those types like him,Earl Campbell,Jerome Bettis,Iron Head Heyward,Mike Alstott,Marshawn Lynch. Get to them before they get a head of steam. I used to play cornerback & ended up with a mouth full of bloody chiclets more than once because Fullbacks got out and about
-
Herschel had of course a lot of "highlight reels" where the defense broke down or he ran over some 190 lb safety. He also averaged 35 carries per game his second year, which is rather astounding today. But a good defense could stone him at the line and shut him down some.
(https://i.imgur.com/LT9AaIo.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/Xdn0oE4.png)
-
You gonna include Texas and Oklahoma?
:57: When they're a "have" by way of winning the conference. For now, they're not one of the six schools to win EVERY SEC title since 1964.
They're with Vandy and Miss State and Kentucky until then. And they don't belong on any all-time lists. :96:
-
Wisconsin had James White, Montee Ball and Melvin Gordon in the SAME backfield.
No way that happens today with the portal and NIL.
No way that happens ever again, in any context.
It's funny that Dayne, the 255 lb bowling ball never lead-blocked for anyone. He outweighed his own FB by 20 lbs in the 1999 Rose Bowl, lol.
-
could be many reasons
-
I think Chubb was better than Walker.
:smiley_confused1:
Maybe, but what made Walker so special was his volume. He was a one-man offense.
Chubb always got to split carries with another good back. Gurley, then Michel. Those were great, 6 ypc guys to lighten the load. Chubb averaged 220 carries a year, taking out the year he got hurt.
Walker averaged 330. No one effective behind him to give him a breather.
So while his ypc are pedestrian for an all-time great RB, no SEC RB could match his production, even as a 3-year guy.
No one in the conference even approached him...McFadden got the closest.
And the argument could be made no one in the country did....until Mr. Jonathan Taylor.
People care too much about highlights. Just run the damn ball and get the damn yards. Then do it again and again and again. That's greatness.
-
43 years later, he's still the SEC's all-time leading rusher......in a 3-year career.
It's broken and stupid. Wow.
-
One thing I look at is "tough yards", did the back get YAC, could he avoid tackles, or run through them, could he be relied on to get two yards consistently.
Timmy!!!
(https://i.imgur.com/62gHo3m.jpeg)
-
No doubt Walker was great, for me personally, for one game against an elite team, I'd take Nick Chubb.
-
Who is getting the other 12 carries he's not in?
-
Who were the top 100 long snappers?
-
never heard of them
-
We don't know their names, which is how they want it.
-
No doubt Walker was great, for me personally, for one game against an elite team, I'd take Nick Chubb.
One Cleveland Brown I really gave a crap about.Grinder until the end never went down unless guys wrapped up.You win Championships with guys like that. I'm sure the same could be said about Herschel
Here's the play that ended it for NC
https://youtu.be/l7fM5OjE8Cc?t=28
-
Who is getting the other 12 carries he's not in?
Ask the coach who decided to share the load
-
Reggie Bush definitely belongs in the very top RBs of all-time convo.
Barry Sanders only started 1 year in college but that is the best RB that my eyes have ever seen.
we doing greatest career or just flat out best player at the position? cause none of them are in the same realm as Barry Sanders if we're talking strictly best player.
-
I'd put Marcus Dupree in the top 100 along with Barry
-
Reggie Bush definitely belongs in the very top RBs of all-time convo.
Barry Sanders only started 1 year in college but that is the best RB that my eyes have ever seen.
we doing greatest career or just flat out best player at the position? cause none of them are in the same realm as Barry Sanders if we're talking strictly best player.
Not Houston's Chuck Weatherspoon? 8.2 career ypc, on almost 400 carries?
What is "best player" if not what they do? Does an exciting 3-yard run help more than a boring 5-yard run on 3rd-and-4?
-
I was at the game when C-Spoon rushed for 218 yard on only 11 carries against Texas. But at least Andre Ware only threw for 5 TDs that day. Yay...
-
What is "best player" if not what they do? Does an exciting 3-yard run help more than a boring 5-yard run on 3rd-and-4?
absolutely
thousands of NCAA backs (all) can make a boring 5-yard run on 3rd-and-4?
only the top 100 can make the exciting 3-yard run
-
This was a game.
(https://i.imgur.com/4JSFzJs.png)
-
So was this.
(https://i.imgur.com/Cij2XKm.png)
-
not many boring 5-yard runs on 3rd-and-4 in those two games
-
Reggie Bush definitely belongs in the very top RBs of all-time convo.
sure in College he was electric also had an NFL team around him and that helped more than a little
Barry Sanders only started 1 year in college but that is the best RB that my eyes have ever seen.
we doing greatest career or just flat out best player at the position? cause none of them are in the same realm as Barry Sanders if we're talking strictly best player.
IYHO, great back,durable,elusive with a great burst and class act for sure. Arguably the most exciting player to watch in NFL history but there are most certainly others just as worthy Lion Fan.Bo,Eric Dickerson, A. Peterson for flat out open field speed.Bo,Brown,Campbell,Beast Mode, when you absolutely needed 1-2yds. Payton for all out everything. Gale Sayers could play in any backfield and seemed to changed directions in mid air then cut when he landed making everyone miss
Sanders played on artificial turf/synthetic grass which enhanched his cutting abilities even more,making him damn near untouchable at times. Eric Metcalf before his injury was damn near untouchable to.If looking just at highlight reels Sanders video stands out. Watching the games however many,many X he went 25yds and ended up where the ball was snapped. Good convo in front of a fireplace on a long winter night
-
There's no doubt Sanders had the best single season for a RB in college football history. But those 344 carries are doing A LOT of work on his behalf.
No one would argue he had the best college career, so then it sort of becomes a sample-size thing, no?
I know he was exciting and amazing and had all the highlight runs, but no one would teach a RB to run that way, lol. And as Sanders' single-season makes him stand out, dozens of guys had better ypc averages in fewer carries, just as Sanders does compared to all-time great RB careers.
So does Sanders get the halo effect because 344 carries is a magic number between "not enough" carries and a healthy career's worth? Or is it because of his running style? If it's the latter, I find that sort of silly.
Melvin Gordon's worst ypc season was his big one, at 7.5 ypc. His 631 career carries at a higher ypc than Sanders doesn't make him better because.....he should have juked more?!? I can't get on board with that, sorry.
OU's Greg Pruitt famously had a 9.4 ypc season on 178 carries. I guess it gets the "yeah, but" treatment due to the option offense he was in. But who else averaged 9.4 ypc for a season in that same system? Or is the argument that 178 carries isn't enough, but 344 is?
And what seems to be everyone's kryptonite, is Sanders' HOF NFL career the reason no one's college production can measure up to his?
Poor Felix Jones of Arkansas. His Thurman Thomas (Darren McFadden) didn't leave, just kept him as a backup, averaging 7.7 ypc on 386 career carries. He was super fast and shifty...but was never a starter. Maybe he should have juked more.
How many carries does it take for you to say a guy was "the best"? 344? 1? 100?
Maybe the answer is 1 season.
Of all high-ypc seasons from RBs, what sets Sanders apart is his number of carries. EVERY RB with a higher ypc for a season has far fewer carries. Career-wise, this is not the case, but in the 1-season sample, most higher-ypc RBs only have 90-150 carries.
Bryce Love, Travis Etienne, and a few others have 250 or so, but that's still 100 carries behind Sanders' effort in '88.
-
top 100 players for a career?
or simply top 100 players?
-
top 100 players for a career?
or simply top 100 players?
What's the sliding scale?
-
no scale - if the guy played one game he was a player and in the conversation
In my opinion the greatest can be proven in a few amount of games or carries - quality over quantity
-
OU's Greg Pruitt famously had a 9.4 ypc season on 178 carries. I guess it gets the "yeah, but" treatment due to the option offense he was in. But who else averaged 9.4 ypc for a season in that same system? Or is the argument that 178 carries isn't enough, but 344 is?
Pruitt was exciting like trying to catch a chipmunk in the woods. Specially when he wore tear away jerseys,NFL (Not For Long) put the keebosh on that. And he played on natural grass in N. Ohio,well mud really after the middle of November
-
no scale - if the guy played one game he was a player and in the conversation
In my opinion the greatest can be proven in a few amount of games or carries - quality over quantity
Okay, I guess anyone with a 99-yard TD run is "the best."
-
Who has the most 99 yard TD runs over that time period?
-
depends on degree of difficulty
Tony Dorsett's 99 yarder vs the Vikings wasn't impressive to me
didn't break tackles, didn't fake some one out of their shoes, just a big hole and straight line speed
-
For me, this highlights the team sport aspect of this. Those Badger offensive lines were pretty good at opening up big holes for their backs. That's a big help. But what you do with the hole (or lack thereof) matters, too.
If you were an NFL GM and you had the chance between Adrian Peterson, Barry Sanders, and Melvin Gordon, just based on their college production, how would you do it? Looking at their success post-college, it's clear that Peterson and Sanders were better backs than Gordon, right? Of course, Gordon had to contend with the system he played in for the NFL teams, too, but...
-
Not Houston's Chuck Weatherspoon? 8.2 career ypc, on almost 400 carries?
What is "best player" if not what they do? Does an exciting 3-yard run help more than a boring 5-yard run on 3rd-and-4?
nah, but rushing for 2,850 yards and 42 touchdowns in 12 games sure as shit helps a lot. get back to me when anyone even comes remotely close to that.
-
sure in College he was electric.
Sanders played on artificial turf/synthetic grass which enhanched his cutting abilities even more,making him damn near untouchable at times. Eric Metcalf before his injury was damn near untouchable to.If looking just at highlight reels Sanders video stands out. Watching the games however many,many X he went 25yds and ended up where the ball was snapped. Good convo in front of a fireplace on a long winter night
a) 2,850 rushing yards and 42 rushing touchdowns in 12 games. he was a buck fifty short of 3,000 rushing yards and he ran for more touchdowns in a single 12 game season than most guys get in an entire college career. that was the greatest single season we've ever seen from any player in the history of the sport. should count for something.
b) his numbers on grass were better than his numbers on turf. just listen to some of the greatest defensive players in history talk about having to face him. they pretty much all say bar none he was the best back they ever played against. Reggie White said the only player he feared on the football field was....Barry Sanders. John Randle said bar none he was the best offensive player he ever played against and the toughest guy to tackle. Darren Woodson said he had nightmares before the game and couldn't sleep any time he was playing Barry Sanders. Rod Woodson said Barry was the best back he ever played against. Barry popped Rod Woodson's ACL and Rod Woodson never even touched him.
-
There's no doubt Sanders had the best single season for a RB in college football history. But those 344 carries are doing A LOT of work on his behalf.
No one would argue he had the best college career, so then it sort of becomes a sample-size thing, no?
I know he was exciting and amazing and had all the highlight runs, but no one would teach a RB to run that way, lol.
the amount of carries doesn't matter. what he did with them does. nearly 3,000 rushing yards and 42 rushing touchdowns in a 12 game season is fucking ridiculous. if he was playing 14 and 15 game seasons like these guys do now and all the post-season stats counted he'd have rushed for close to 3,500 yards and over 50 touchdowns. In a single season.
No one would teach a RB to run that way because well, no other mere mortal RB could run that way. God only made one person with knees, joints, tendons, thighs, and calves like that. It's amazing the guy didn't blow out his knee or pop his hamstring or tear something every other run.
-
Okay, I guess anyone with a 99-yard TD run is "the best."
Only if you overweight YPC, which... You have a tendency to do, IMHO.
To answer your question directly... No. If a player is only on the field for one carry, and that one carry happens to be a 99-yard touchdown, and he never plays another snap... He's not in the conversation due to lack of sample size. He *might* be the best, but nobody is going to put their reputation behind claiming it because we can never truly know.
I think it is a sliding scale, yes. You have to account for situation, and offensive scheme, and the level of the players around him on a team, and the level of the competition he was facing on the other side of the ball, etc...
For example, look at Calvin Johnson. In his top year, he was 14th in receptions, 9th in receiving yards, T2 in receiving TDs. Overall pretty darn good, but not by any means a world-beating statistical season. And yet anyone who watched him on the field knew he was a man amongst boys. His production was limited by Reggie Ball and an option offense. But everyone could see with their eyes that he was special.
That same year Graham Harrell and Colt Brennan were the top of the heap statistically at the QB position. They were both good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Nope. They were system quarterbacks.
That same year rushing was led by Ray Rice-Rutgers (attempts), Garrett Wolfe-NIU (yards), Anthony Alridge-Houston (ypc), and Ian Johnson-Boise (TDs). Again, they were good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Ray Rice made a name for himself at the next level, but he never got a nickname like Megatron--he was ultimately most famous for punching his fiancée.
I wasn't paying attention to college football during Barry Sanders' year. I've never really studied tape or looked at the history during that time. So I have no opinion on him, either way. But he did win the Heisman, so at least SOMEONE thought he was pretty fucking good. Despite only playing one year.
-
his numbers on grass were better than his numbers on turf. just listen to some of the greatest defensive players in history talk about having to face him. they pretty much all say bar none he was the best back they ever played against. Reggie White said the only player he feared on the football field was....Barry Sanders. John Randle said bar none he was the best offensive player he ever played against and the toughest guy to tackle. Darren Woodson said he had nightmares before the game and couldn't sleep any time he was playing Barry Sanders. Rod Woodson said Barry was the best back he ever played against. Barry popped Rod Woodson's ACL and Rod Woodson never even touched him.
yup, stats don't tell the story, the defenders that tried to tackle the man........ that's the difference.
they would rather put the guy down after he got 5 yards on a forth an 4 a hundred times than try to take Barry 3 yards dep in the backfield on 1st and 10.
Barry made the best defensive palers in the league look silly. the guy that had 1000 carries in 10 seasons didn't impress them
-
b) his numbers on grass were better than his numbers on turf. just listen to some of the greatest defensive players in history talk about having to face him. they pretty much all say bar none he was the best back they ever played against. Reggie White said the only player he feared on the football field was....Barry Sanders. John Randle said bar none he was the best offensive player he ever played against and the toughest guy to tackle. Darren Woodson said he had nightmares before the game and couldn't sleep any time he was playing Barry Sanders. Rod Woodson said Barry was the best back he ever played against. Barry popped Rod Woodson's ACL and Rod Woodson never even touched him.
College, please.
-
the amount of carries doesn't matter.
What if it was 16 carries? Or 107? This statement is silly.
-
Only if you overweight YPC, which... You have a tendency to do, IMHO.
How did you determine that? lol
To answer your question directly... No. If a player is only on the field for one carry, and that one carry happens to be a 99-yard touchdown, and he never plays another snap... He's not in the conversation due to lack of sample size. He *might* be the best, but nobody is going to put their reputation behind claiming it because we can never truly know.
Oh, let's not bring people's ego into this, lol. So 1 carry is too few. How many isn't too few?
I think it is a sliding scale, yes. You have to account for situation, and offensive scheme, and the level of the players around him on a team, and the level of the competition he was facing on the other side of the ball, etc...
Okay so what % for eye test and what % for stats? 50/50? 80/20?
For example, look at Calvin Johnson. In his top year, he was 14th in receptions, 9th in receiving yards, T2 in receiving TDs. Overall pretty darn good, but not by any means a world-beating statistical season. And yet anyone who watched him on the field knew he was a man amongst boys. His production was limited by Reggie Ball and an option offense. But everyone could see with their eyes that he was special.
Absolutely, he probably maximized his context. Comparing him to other WRs in option offenses is easier than comparing him to air raid beneficiary WRs.
That same year Graham Harrell and Colt Brennan were the top of the heap statistically at the QB position. They were both good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Nope. They were system quarterbacks.
That same year rushing was led by Ray Rice-Rutgers (attempts), Garrett Wolfe-NIU (yards), Anthony Alridge-Houston (ypc), and Ian Johnson-Boise (TDs). Again, they were good, but did anyone think they were all that special? Ray Rice made a name for himself at the next level, but he never got a nickname like Megatron--he was ultimately most famous for punching his fiancée.
I wasn't paying attention to college football during Barry Sanders' year. I've never really studied tape or looked at the history during that time. So I have no opinion on him, either way. But he did win the Heisman, so at least SOMEONE thought he was pretty fucking good. Despite only playing one year.
No one is suggesting he wasn't "pretty fucking good."
Despite what Mr mdot says, carries matter, and it seems as if everyone is cool with 344 (or 373) as enough to determine "the best." I don't think I've once criticized that, just questioned it.
So it's not 200, from Bush's 8.7 ypc Heisman season. Not Harvin's 194 career carries @ 9.5 per.
Sanders is 37th in career ypc, behind guys like IU's Coleman, Stanford's Love, Etienne from Clemson, a bunch of option guys like Sims and Rozier, FSU's Warrick Dunn, etc.
They had as many career carries with higher ypc averages.
Sanders was fun to watch and went ballistic for one season. But other guys did a tiny bit better over a career with as many carries.
This seems to me to come down to the fact Sanders did it mostly in 1 season. His 1 season blows away anyone else's. A special peak. That's great.
But was it the best season + 3 games ever? The best season and a half?
If a RB's 2nd-best season was much better than Sanders', does that count for anything? And if his 3rd-best season blows Sanders' out of the water...does that matter even a little bit?
I find it odd that there doesn't seem to be any kind of sliding scale with peak vs career, especially with the RB position.
And the 1-season peak seems to be most special. Tidy. Complete. Easy.
-
I think Sanders just crushes the eye test
-
Only if you overweight YPC, which... You have a tendency to do, IMHO.
How did you determine that? lol
So it's not 200, from Bush's 8.7 ypc Heisman season. Not Harvin's 194 career carries @ 9.5 per.
Sanders is 37th in career ypc, behind guys like IU's Coleman, Stanford's Love, Etienne from Clemson, a bunch of option guys like Sims and Rozier, FSU's Warrick Dunn, etc.
They had as many career carries with higher ypc averages.
Sanders was fun to watch and went ballistic for one season. But other guys did a tiny bit better over a career with as many carries.
Again, throughout many years on this board, you've constantly talked about ypc. It's been one of the stats you continually highlight for RBs. We had that debate many years ago about ypc vs number of carries where you stated your belief (looking at backfields with two backs, and the one with fewer carries had higher ypc) that coaches should dial back number of carries for the lead guy to increase his ypc.
And right here you state that "other guys did a tiny bit better over a career with as many carries"--defining "a tiny bit better" as higher ypc.
That's why I say you overweight ypc. Which is also why--and my assertion supported by--you cherry picked a guy with one carry and a 99 yard TD, so the absolute maximum career ypc, as your extreme case.
-
The 99-yard, 1 carry was a reply to "carries don't matter." An anorexic example for a dim-witted statement.
.
The backups having higher ypc averages than starters is strictly a sample size/validity thing.
But it's sort of moot here, as I've acknowledged Sanders having the best ypc season with so many carries.....but in precisely 1 season.
We have a healthy number of RBs with higher ypc averages with more career carries (so "better" on both fronts) of which I'm asking why Sanders is considered better than them.
I do understand the appeal of the precisely-one-season sample, as it's strength of argument, despite only a few hundred carries, is the validity of continuity. (Generally) the same blockers, defenses, play-callers, etc make 1 season consistent and valid.
But at some point, volume may tilt the sliding scale it's way: maybe 1.5 season's worth of carries does it...maybe 2x the volume of a season, maybe 3x. I don't know.
i also can't shake the idea that the masses see someone "special" and hold them up on a pedestal, while I tend to value the guy who seems unremarkable, yet outperforms the special guy. Isn't it more impressive to be ho-hum AND more productive?
It's not a long list, but there is a list of guys who fit that bill when it comes to RBs.
Barry Sanders had the best season for a college RB ever. Great. But if that's enough to be "the best," then what about the guy who had the best 8-game stretch ever? Or 5-game stretch?
If you're willing to weigh Sanders' individual season over lofty-ypc guys' careers, then why not weigh other guys' seasons with less carries or 8-game stretches over Sanders' full season?
If you're drawing a line, that's fine, but where is the line and why do you draw it where you do?
-
Taylor>Gordon>Ball>Dayne>Sanders
COLLEGE
-
The 99-yard, 1 carry was a reply to "carries don't matter." An anorexic example for a dim-witted statement.
.
The backups having higher ypc averages than starters is strictly a sample size/validity thing.
But it's sort of moot here, as I've acknowledged Sanders having the best ypc season with so many carries.....but in precisely 1 season.
We have a healthy number of RBs with higher ypc averages with more career carries (so "better" on both fronts) of which I'm asking why Sanders is considered better than them.
I do understand the appeal of the precisely-one-season sample, as it's strength of argument, despite only a few hundred carries, is the validity of continuity. (Generally) the same blockers, defenses, play-callers, etc make 1 season consistent and valid.
But at some point, volume may tilt the sliding scale it's way: maybe 1.5 season's worth of carries does it...maybe 2x the volume of a season, maybe 3x. I don't know.
i also can't shake the idea that the masses see someone "special" and hold them up on a pedestal, while I tend to value the guy who seems unremarkable, yet outperforms the special guy. Isn't it more impressive to be ho-hum AND more productive?
It's not a long list, but there is a list of guys who fit that bill when it comes to RBs.
Barry Sanders had the best season for a college RB ever. Great. But if that's enough to be "the best," then what about the guy who had the best 8-game stretch ever? Or 5-game stretch?
If you're willing to weigh Sanders' individual season over lofty-ypc guys' careers, then why not weigh other guys' seasons with less carries or 8-game stretches over Sanders' full season?
If you're drawing a line, that's fine, but where is the line and why do you draw it where you do?
With the number of times you mention "ypc" in that post, and use terms like "outperforms" and "more productive" in relation to ypc numbers, does it make you consider AT ALL that you're overweighting ypc?
For example, you brought up Reggie Bush and Percy Harvin as your high-ypc guys. Reggie Bush was the "lightning" to Lendale White's "thunder" in his Heisman season. Completely different usage between them. White was the "between the tackles" guy and Bush was used for other types of runs. They split carries almost equally that year. Harvin was listed as a WR and had the 4th-most carries on the team his senior year, 3rd-most his junior year, and 5th-most his sophomore year. You probably remember him more than I do, but how many of his carries were things like jet sweeps vs between the tackles runs?
On the other hand, Barry Sanders rushed the ball 344 times. The next 3 RBs on the roster combined had only a little over 100, and looking over the OkSU schedule, they had a lot of blowout wins so I'm guessing a good portion of those were ONLY when Barry needed rest, or in garbage time. Barry was the workhorse back. Barry had to be that "between the tackles, every down back". Different usage than someone like Bush or Harvin == different ypc.
I think ypc is important, but I don't think it's nearly as significant as you do. Because ypc can be heavily influenced by situation and usage, and so it's not always fair to compare two backs based purely on ypc when their usage is completely different.
-
I'd say there are a lot of variables that could be weighted differently depending on ... a lot of variables.
-
The way you describe play type makes it seem like the coaches were stupid. If you average 9 yards a carry every time you run a sweep, then just run a sweep every play.
And does the play-call really matter with Sanders? If the play calls for him to run through the B-gap, how often did that actually happen? lol
But back to play type....you seem to think lower carry guys' generally-higher ypc numbers are mostly due to that...when it's not (at least not mathematically).
A lower number of carries often yields a higher ypc average simply due to being a lower sample size and less close to their true ability level.
Same on the other side of the bell curve - tons of guys with not-a-lot-of-carries average 3.2 ypc or 2.7 ypc...not because they were that awful, but because the lower carries is less valid or accurate of their true ability level and their ypc is skewed lower.
If you can't accept that point, there's no need for us to continue. It's precisely why stat leaders are segmented by number of carries, as it's not "fair" (ie - statistically accurate) to compare a guy with 2,000 carries with a 500-carry guy.
Sanders, with his 350ish carries, is deemed the best, despite players with more carries (career) for higher ypc. If that number (or his actual career number) is deemed "enough carries to determine he's the best," then why isn't it a number 100 fewer than that? 200 more?
If it's arbitrary, then acknowledge it's arbitrary.
-
stats don't tell the entire story
often times stats are VERY misleading
if you're just going to rank the top 100 players by stats - it's a fine list, but many will find faults
-
If someone thinks he's the best because they watched him and see the stats and it all adds up to him being the best in their eyes, great.
But when there's guys out there with more carries AND a higher ypc average, well.....people get to suggest one of them was better, right?
Sorry, I just don't deem play-call type an overriding figure on that, lol. Not with more volume overall.
Bush ran the ball inside plenty of times. White ran the sweep plenty, otherwise they'd have been telegraphing their play-calls to the defense. Harvin ran plenty of counters, I promise. Nearly all of his carries were from the backfield and not on motion-jet sweeps.
Bush didn't average 8.7 ypc on 200 carries with the defense knowing what play was called, no matter how great he was.
-
Husker I-backs ran plenty of sweeps when the defense knew damn well what was coming
same with Sooner backs with the option
bread & butter
I'm not impressed that play calling can create a top 100 player, but offensive systems can if you're only looking at stats
-
stats don't tell the entire story
often times stats are VERY misleading
if you're just going to rank the top 100 players by stats - it's a fine list, but many will find faults
I haven't said anything to the contrary. But stats DO negate the style of the RB's production, which can be useful.
And I'd love for people who find faults to actually explain the faults, besides 'I know this to be true because I know it to be true'...which is far too common.
Barry Sanders was great. Fun share: I don't recall watching him play at OKST (I was 8 years old), but I do distinctly remember pretending to be him when I played football with my friends. I remember telling the girl OKST was the Cowboys, as she was going to play cheerleader and wanted to know the mascot.
So this isn't an anti-Sanders thing at all. It's more of an observation about certain guys over time sort of being bronzed into the consensus. And I just think it's interesting. Everyone agrees Sanders had the best season, but almost no one would argue he had the best career. I'm just interested in the sliding scale between those 2 things.
His peak was "the best" but didn't have the best career, so then should we actually say he's the best?
Just off-season wonderings and fun discussion.
-
Husker I-backs ran plenty of sweeps when the defense knew damn well what was coming
same with Sooner backs with the option
bread & butter
I'm not impressed that play calling can create a top 100 player, but offensive systems can if you're only looking at stats
I think option RBs get the shortest end of the stick when it comes to all this. Sure, the offense catered to their getting higher-than-normal ypc numbers, but they tend to be simply dismissed for that, when they really should only be slightly SLIGHTY downgraded.
-
so, when you're on the playground or the football field - most kids can tell who the best player is.........
got nothing to do with stats - just recognizing talent. Hence the eyeball.
in determining the best - I don't worry about a sliding scale of two statistics. I'll go with my eyeballs and what's on tape or film. It's not difficult to recognize greatness.
-
I'd say it almost wasn't fair.
In depth: Gordons Jet Sweep - BadgerBlitz: Wisconsin Badgers Football & Basketball Recruiting (https://wisconsin.rivals.com/news/in-depth-gordons-jet-sweep)
-
The way you describe play type makes it seem like the coaches were stupid. If you average 9 yards a carry every time you run a sweep, then just run a sweep every play.
No. A jet sweep is a constraint play.
https://www.smartfootball.com/offense/why-every-team-should-apply-the-constraint-theory-of-offense/comment-page-1
You don't run a jet sweep because it's some completely undefendable wonder play. If it were, then you're right. Coaches would be stupid not to run it more often. But it's not. You run the jet sweep generally for two reasons:
- You see the defense doing something (often something taking them out of position, to stop your base play set) that you think will make them susceptible to a big hitter with a constraint play like a jet sweep.
- You want to force the defense to do something (i.e. defend sideline to sideline instead of cheating to load the box, for example) in their defensive scheme to make certain other concepts easier to execute, and making the defense be aware of and defend the jet sweep helps you with that.
There's a lot of situational stuff in football. Some plays you have to use to make other plays work better. Jet sweeps can often have very high ypc for a team, but only because the defense is NOT expecting it or defending it well. Once they start defending it, it doesn't work--but that change to the defensive scheme now opens other things up.
But back to play type....you seem to think lower carry guys' generally-higher ypc numbers are mostly due to that...when it's not (at least not mathematically).
A lower number of carries often yields a higher ypc average simply due to being a lower sample size and less close to their true ability level.
Same on the other side of the bell curve - tons of guys with not-a-lot-of-carries average 3.2 ypc or 2.7 ypc...not because they were that awful, but because the lower carries is less valid or accurate of their true ability level and their ypc is skewed lower.
If you can't accept that point, there's no need for us to continue. It's precisely why stat leaders are segmented by number of carries, as it's not "fair" (ie - statistically accurate) to compare a guy with 2,000 carries with a 500-carry guy.
And you seem to think that carry type doesn't matter. That ypc == talent and the more carries you have, even if they're just plowing into the B gap, the more it will reveal your true talent level.
I do believe that sample size matters. As you say, it's why stats need a certain sample size to even qualify being included. After all, in 2006 Calvin Johnson had a 100% completion percentage and a 158.8 passer rating. Of course, he only threw one pass that season, because he's a WR. So we shouldn't include him on completion percentage stat lists or passer rating stat lists.
Sanders, with his 350ish carries, is deemed the best, despite players with more carries (career) for higher ypc. If that number (or his actual career number) is deemed "enough carries to determine he's the best," then why isn't it a number 100 fewer than that? 200 more?
If it's arbitrary, then acknowledge it's arbitrary.
I think the concept that you need a minimum number to qualify isn't arbitrary. It's a matter of statistical analysis where it starts to become apparent that you have enough data points to be outside the "noise" of randomness.
Let's say the "true" number for a running back is 193 career carries, if we were to be able to truly "know" such a thing. There's a certain degree to which it's arbitrary whether you set the qualifying number as 180, or 200, or 220. Either way you're probably close enough for our purposes (comparing backs). But if you set the number to 50, or 500, I think we'd say that you're effectively out of bounds on that because you'll either include too many players that shouldn't be in the list, or exclude a bunch of players that should.
I think a single season and ~350 carries has cleared that bar. I think Percy Harvin's career 194 carries is probably enough to clear that bar. We can quibble about what that number is, obviously, but we're not talking about someone with 75 career carries over 3 seasons who mostly worked in garbage time.
What I disagree with is that ypc should be the primary metric by which we judge RBs. It's only one of many data points.
-
so, when you're on the playground or the football field - most kids can tell who the best player is.........
got nothing to do with stats - just recognizing talent. Hence the eyeball.
in determining the best - I don't worry about a sliding scale of two statistics. I'll go with my eyeballs and what's on tape or film. It's not difficult to recognize greatness.
Isn't it peak vs norm? What a guy CAN do vs what he USUALLY does.
RB1 has runs of 1, 2, 19, -2, 3, 1, 4, 1, 0, 0, 3, 27 yds.......that's 12 carries for 59 yards.
RB2 has runs of 4, 5, 13, 1, 6, 4, 7, 4, 3, 3, 6, 3 yds..........that's 12 carries for 59 yards.
RB1's runs of 19 and especially 27 yards were amazing, showing his speed and shiftiness.
RB2 didn't really have an eye-opening runs, but he kept the chains moving and helped the OC with easier play-calls.
Statistically, they're equals. One had more exciting runs. The other probably helped his offense out more, when considering down-and-distance.
RB1 is "better" based on the eye test of what he CAN do, right?
-
I commented on sweeps, not jet sweeps, sorry. Didn't mean to obfuscate there.
But any running play is called to obviously gain yardage. If certain plays can be relied on to gain more yardage, then any coach is going to call those plays more often, yes?
So the reason I'm not overly convinced about play call type yielding higher ypc for some RBs who get those play call carries is that if there were a set of specific running plays that magically yielded higher ypc, then those plays would be called more. Why even call the other plays? They're shit.
If Lendale White is better at gaining yardage on a dive play, cool, but the defense knows that, too. If Reggie Bush is better at gaining yardage on a toss sweep, cool, but the defense knows that, too. I'm going to have White go wide sometimes to surprise the defense. I'm going to have Bush go up the middle for the same reason. We all know this, the cat-and-mouse of things.
Backups don't tend to have less valid ypc numbers because of play-call tendencies, either. Teams are still running their normal rushing offense, especially when up big. They're not suddenly calling their shit run plays. And backup RBs aren't just getting garbage-time carries. Most starters actually only get 50-60% of the carries (which may surprise a lot of people). It is extremely rare for a RB to have over 60% of a team's carries.
Teams are not calling all different play types 40% of the time they're running the ball. Sorry.
.
fwiw, Sanders had about 70% of OKST's carries (not counting the QB's sacks)
-
Big Ten candidates for the top 100 RBs of all-time:
WIS - like 17 guys
NW - Autry, Anderson, Jackson, Sutton
IU - Dunbar, Levron, Thompson, Coleman
MINN - Barber, Thompson, Maroney, Ibrahim, Bruce Smith?
IOWA - Banks, Shaw, Harmon, Wadley, Kinnick
ILL - Holcombe, Mendenhall, Chase, Grange
UM - Hart, Thomas, Perry, Wheatley, Corum, Harmon
MSU - Ringer, Duckett Bros, White, Irvin
PUR - Alstott, Keyes, Sheets
OSU - Griffin, George, Elliott, Byars, Dobbins, Janowicz, Cassady
PSU - Carter, Enis, Johnson, Royster, Barkley, Warner, Mitchell, Thomas, Dozier, Cappelletti
RUT - Rice, Willis, Leonard, Pacheco
UNL - Rozier, Green, Phillips, Jones, Abdullah, the human square, Redwine, Craig
UMD - Jordan, Johnson, Perry
USC - like 18 guys
UCLA - Franklin, Abdul-Jabbar, Hicks, Foster, Green, McNeil, Kermit, Farr
ORE - James, Freeman, Barner, Stewart, Irving, Thomas, Marshall
WARSH - Gaskin, Kaufman, Shehee, Dillon, Bryant, Lewis
-
Dobbins had butter fingers vs Clemson
-
stats don't tell the entire story
often times stats are VERY misleading
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" - Mark Twain
-
I wonder how many here tout 'eye test' for gauging players also poo-poo 'eye test' when it comes to ranking teams.
:86:
-
"There are lies, damned lies, and statistics" - Mark Twain
Actually, Mark Twain only quoted Benjamin Disraeli who is claimed to have stated that.
-
I wonder how many here tout 'eye test' for gauging players also poo-poo 'eye test' when it comes to ranking teams.
:86:
eye test for ranking teams is better than the one stat (wins and losses)
-
But any running play is called to obviously gain yardage. If certain plays can be relied on to gain more yardage, then any coach is going to call those plays more often, yes?
So the reason I'm not overly convinced about play call type yielding higher ypc for some RBs who get those play call carries is that if there were a set of specific running plays that magically yielded higher ypc, then those plays would be called more. Why even call the other plays? They're shit.
So let's think about that... One site (referencing NFL) suggests that one of the ways to differentiate RBs (at least on successful offenses) is based on number of carries (https://www.footballperspective.com/yards-per-carry-and-points-per-drive/). Per your point, coaches are going to do what works, more often, because it works, right?
So, look at OkSU from 1986-1989. That's from Barry's freshman season until the season after he left.
- 1986:
- Record: 6-5
- Plays per game: 71.4
- Rushing percentage: 56.0%
- Leading Rusher: Thomas - 173/743/4.3
- Thomas touches (rush+receive) as percentage of total plays: 31.6%
- 1987:
- Record: 9-2 (excl. bowl)
- Plays per game: 72.5
- Rushing percentage: 61.4%
- Leading Rusher: Thomas - 251/1613/6.4
- Thomas touches as percentage of total plays: 40.4%
- 1988:
- Record: 9-2 (excl. bowl)
- Plays per game: 73.0
- Rushing percentage: 69.9%
- Leading Rusher: Sanders - 344/2628/7.6
- Sanders touches as percentage of total plays: 50.7%
- 1989:
- Record: 4-7
- Plays per game: 71.3
- Rushing percentage: 59.7%
- Leading Rusher: Hudson - 187/910/4.9
- Hudson touches as percentage of total plays: 30.7%
Think about that. In 1988 Barry sanders touched the ball on over half of OkSU's offensive plays. Not including kick/punt returns--he had more than half of those overall too.
If you want to talk about a coach doing something more and it leading to success, it's giving Barry Sanders the ball. They were winning games doing it. And despite doing that--and despite the defense KNOWING he was getting the ball--he still put up absolutely massive stats, including your favorite of 7.6 ypc.
In Reggie Bush's Heisman season, he touched the ball on 28.6% of USC's offensive plays. In Percy Harvin's 2008 season, he touched the ball on 14.8% of Florida's offensive plays.
Two others we've talked about... Ron Dayne in 1999 touched the ball on 43.8% of Wisconsin's plays, and in 2019, Jonathan Taylor on 40.5% of Wisconsin's plays.
I'd say that's justifying how tremendous Barry Sanders was based on more than "eye test". He put the team on his back and carried them.
(All stats from sports-reference.com: # plays and run/pass balance was taken from the game "averages", percentage of total plays taken from the "rushing & receiving" stats -- my apologies if anything is slightly off.)
-
Sure, good on that HC.
But who was the Tebow on 1988 OKST's team to take carries away from Sanders? Who was the Lendale White? lol
That's not fair, and all in good fun.
That being said, I'm not sure which point you're addressing with the post.
It doesn't seem to fit the play-call TYPE argument. I wonder about Sanders pre-88 seasons and why he didn't get more carries then. Their HC knew what they had, as did Barry Switzer.
-
Sure, good on that HC.
But who was the Tebow on 1988 OKST's team to take carries away from Sanders? Who was the Lendale White? lol
That's not fair, and all in good fun.
That being said, I'm not sure which point you're addressing with the post.
It doesn't seem to fit the play-call TYPE argument. I wonder about Sanders pre-88 seasons and why he didn't get more carries then. Their HC knew what they had, as did Barry Switzer.
It doesn't address the play call type argument. I don't think we're quite going to see eye to eye on that. I personally think situation matters, more than you do. I.e. a player who lines up and runs power between the tackles with two tight ends on 1st and 10 is going to face different defensive looks than a CoP back who lines up with the offense spread 4 wide on 3rd and 8 and the defense is thinking pass. But we're just going to have to agree to disagree on that.
It was more addressing your question of why Barry from 1988 gets SO much love based on that one season. I'm saying it's more than eye test. I'm saying that he was just a goddamn one man wrecking crew. And the fact that he had over half the team's offensive touches is just... INSANE. It's a level of workhorse performance that is unique.
I wanted to offer a different perspective of why some people put Barry above everyone. It might have only been one season as the starter, and it might have been a lower ypc than some of the other backs you've mentioned... But there might not be another back in modern college football history that's done what he's done, either.
I'd be interested to see if there are any other equivalents. Even someone like Ron Dayne didn't do that, and that was when the Big Ten was still in the "3 yards and a cloud of dust" era.
A modern equivalent might have been Ashton Jeanty last year. 397 total touches against 799 offensive plays for Boise State, or just BARELY under 50%. And on a good team, too... 12-2. So he was clearly the centerpiece of a VERY successful offense. But this was against a weak conference schedule, so he'll never be seen as the same as Barry.
-
I wonder about Sanders pre-88 seasons and why he didn't get more carries then. Their HC knew what they had, as did Barry Switzer.
could be many reasons - maybe tryin to win a hypesman for Thurman - maybe Barry was a bit immature or needed to put on some weight
-
Who was the Lendale White? lol
1989:
Record: 4-7
Plays per game: 71.3
Rushing percentage: 59.7%
Leading Rusher: Hudson - 187/910/4.9
-
I wonder about Sanders pre-88 seasons and why he didn't get more carries then. Their HC knew what they had, as did Barry Switzer.
could be many reasons - maybe tryin to win a hypesman for Thurman - maybe Barry was a bit immature or needed to put on some weight
Could simply be load management. You know you've got a Thurman Thomas on your team, you don't need to lean on Barry as much. In 1988 you had Barry and... Nobody.
Could be physical development. Thurman Thomas was a 4th year senior, so ostensibly two years older than Barry. That's a big thing at that age. Maybe he was just more developed that year even if he career-wise wasn't "better".
I don't *generally* think coaches are prioritizing winning a player a Heisman over getting the best damn record they can. They're trying to win games. And they did.
They finished with the same 9-2 regular season in 1987 as they did in 1988. So the TEAM success was similar, as far as W-L record anyway. It's not like giving Thomas more carries was stopping them from being successful. They were still 3 wins better (regular season) than 1986. It would be hard to suggest that they were giving up wins by not giving Barry more carries.
Also, Sanders had a lower ypc in 1987 than Thomas. We could try 100 different ways to analyze WHY that is... But if we're aligned with OAM's idea that ypc is one of the most critical points there is, giving the higher ypc guy (Thomas) the ball more often than the lower ypc guy (Sanders) seems like a good idea.
-
There are RBs who had a higher % of his team's carries, but I haven't written them down, unfortunately. None that averaged 7.6 ypc though, of course.
-
Coming up with say top 50 RBs over the past 50 years would be hard enough.
I personally prefer to list the ones who really impressed me a lot, and then let someone else try and rank them somehow.
-
There are RBs who had a higher % of his team's carries, but I haven't written them down, unfortunately. None that averaged 7.6 ypc though, of course.
Yeah, but BTW that's one reason I didn't limit it to % of team carries--I was talking about % of team touches.
Some RB might have 80% of his team's carries, but if his team passes the ball 70% of the time, he's only got 24% of the team's touches (okay maybe slightly more if he's getting some receptions too). Barry had >50% of the team's touches.
The link in the longer post re: the NFL (https://www.footballperspective.com/yards-per-carry-and-points-per-drive/) though was interesting... It looked at Eddie George, who had pedestrian ypc (I think it was 3.71) but for the first 7 years of his career with the Titans (a successful, winning, franchise through those years) was getting insane carry volume for an NFL team. Essentially his ypc wasn't stellar, but he was helping his team win. Which was what got me thinking about volume. If the coach is giving someone insane volume--even if the ypc isn't amazing--he's probably doing it because it's working--and generally you think maybe that means the RB is pretty damn good.
And then when I looked at Sanders' volume in 1988 relative to the team overall? Holy shit! I think the coach basically said "feed him the damn rock until someone proves they can stop him." At that point it doesn't matter if he's at 6.0, 7.0, or 8.0 ypc. He's just so damn good that his production isn't a question of ypc stats. It's that he's an otherworldly talent who is a game-changer. You're not worried about ypc. You just give him the damn ball as much as you can because he's helping you win.
It's why it's hard to compare someone like him to a Reggie Bush or a Percy Harvin, who had higher ypc. Neither of them were truly the centerpiece of the offense. Bush was electric, an AMAZING talent in the open field. He was dynamite; just light the fuse and watch what happens. But he, never in his college or pro career, was a true workhorse RB. I'm not in any sense sure that if LenDale White didn't exist, and you gave him all of White's carries, that he either would have held up for a full season, or that he would have retained such a lofty ypc. Harvin? He was a gadget player listed as WR, who occasionally did double duty in the backfield. Situationally, Tebow was the primary RB. If you lined him up in a traditional RB role for 250+ carries per season, you think he's going to retain his lofty ypc? I don't. He'd be lucky to stay alive all season at his size.
I'm not going to say that a Reggie Bush or a Percy Harvin is an "a dime a dozen" type of player. They were electric. But I think Barry Sanders may be a one of one type of player.
-
Yeah, but BTW that's one reason I didn't limit it to % of team carries--I was talking about % of team touches.
Some RB might have 80% of his team's carries, but if his team passes the ball 70% of the time, he's only got 24% of the team's touches (okay maybe slightly more if he's getting some receptions too). Barry had >50% of the team's touches.
The link in the longer post re: the NFL (https://www.footballperspective.com/yards-per-carry-and-points-per-drive/) though was interesting... It looked at Eddie George, who had pedestrian ypc (I think it was 3.71) but for the first 7 years of his career with the Titans (a successful, winning, franchise through those years) was getting insane carry volume for an NFL team. Essentially his ypc wasn't stellar, but he was helping his team win. Which was what got me thinking about volume. If the coach is giving someone insane volume--even if the ypc isn't amazing--he's probably doing it because it's working--and generally you think maybe that means the RB is pretty damn good.
And then when I looked at Sanders' volume in 1988 relative to the team overall? Holy shit! I think the coach basically said "feed him the damn rock until someone proves they can stop him." At that point it doesn't matter if he's at 6.0, 7.0, or 8.0 ypc. He's just so damn good that his production isn't a question of ypc stats. It's that he's an otherworldly talent who is a game-changer. You're not worried about ypc. You just give him the damn ball as much as you can because he's helping you win.
It's why it's hard to compare someone like him to a Reggie Bush or a Percy Harvin, who had higher ypc. Neither of them were truly the centerpiece of the offense. Bush was electric, an AMAZING talent in the open field. He was dynamite; just light the fuse and watch what happens. But he, never in his college or pro career, was a true workhorse RB. I'm not in any sense sure that if LenDale White didn't exist, and you gave him all of White's carries, that he either would have held up for a full season, or that he would have retained such a lofty ypc. Harvin? He was a gadget player listed as WR, who occasionally did double duty in the backfield. Situationally, Tebow was the primary RB. If you lined him up in a traditional RB role for 250+ carries per season, you think he's going to retain his lofty ypc? I don't. He'd be lucky to stay alive all season at his size.
I'm not going to say that a Reggie Bush or a Percy Harvin is an "a dime a dozen" type of player. They were electric. But I think Barry Sanders may be a one of one type of player.
Yeah, I got the team touches thing, I was just being lazy. And throughout history, a VAST majority of teams ran the ball over 60% of the time (exceptions being super shitty teams that were always playing catch-up). So for me, it's close enough not to matter.
I can't help but mention this.......Sanders' backup in '88 averaged 7.9 ypc :57:
So obviously feeding Sanders was a mistake!
A funny thing about that team was that they had a WR with nearly 50% of their receptions for the season - Hart Lee Dykes.
A 2-man gang if there ever was one!
-
Actually, Mark Twain only quoted Benjamin Disraeli who is claimed to have stated that.
Thanx for that update Mr Clavin ;D
-
I am reminded of our collective attempt to construct a computer ranking poll, with help from TheBobs. The first few algorithms of course were simplistic, so we added terms, adjusted coefficients, diddled around ... all to make the computer poll look more like the human polls ....
The entire thing was interesting, but circular. You already had the desired result, you just wanted the computer to reproduce it.
We quit.
-
Well from that B1G start, we could list a few hundred RBs and take guys off until there's 100. Don't have to rank them.
-
This automatically ranks them as top 100, or not. But have at it, I'm mildly entertained.
-
I am reminded of our collective attempt to construct a computer ranking poll, with help from TheBobs. The first few algorithms of course were simplistic, so we added terms, adjusted coefficients, diddled around ... all to make the computer poll look more like the human polls ....
The entire thing was interesting, but circular. You already had the desired result, you just wanted the computer to reproduce it.
We quit.
Yep. And this was the problem with the computer polls in the BCS.
We had to keep tweaking them every year to get the "right" result.
What's the "right" result?
When they're the same as the human polls.
-
almost the same
-
This is an issue I have with such algorithms, include the ones that attempt to predict such things as sea level rise and mean temperature increases.
They may be "right", but you're checking them against a "known", until they generate the "known", which is already ..... "known".
-
This is an issue I have with such algorithms, include the ones that attempt to predict such things as sea level rise and mean temperature increases.
They may be "right", but you're checking them against a "known", until they generate the "known", which is already ..... "known".
It's like the year after Katrina, when NOAA tweaked their formula and started predicting a massive increase in major hurricanes over the next several years... and then it didn't happen.
-
One of my favorite quotes is "The inverted yield curve has predicted 9 out of the last 4 recessions."
It's been invested so long now no one pays attention to it. And yes, it did uninvert briefly, the 2/10.
-
This automatically ranks them as top 100, or not. But have at it, I'm mildly entertained.
Then I can die happy.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/SBZTWlW.png)
-
SEC RBs by school:
Alabama: basically every RB under Saban, Shaun Alexander, Musso, Nathan, Bobby Humphrey
UGA: Herschel, Chubb, Gurley, Michel, Hearst, Tate, Swif,t Moreno, Hampton, Trippi
Tenn: Lewis, Henry, Stewart, Jones, Graham, Sampson, Cobb, Garner
LSU: Faulk, Hilliard, Alexander, Fournette, Guice, Harvey Williams, Scott, Hill, Cannon
Florida: Emmitt, Rhett, Fred, Neal Anderson, Graham, Demps & Rainey, DuBose, John L Williams
Auburn: Bo, Cadillac, Jarquez Hunter, Mason, Fullwood, Davis, Brooks, Cribbs, Brown, McCalebb, Bigsby
OM: McAllister, Judkins, Bolden, Innocent, Ealy, McCluster, Flowers, Wilkins, Baldwin
UK: Snell Jr, Rodriguez, Moe Williams, Collins, Higgs, Boom Williams, Little, Rose, Homer, Cobb, Bowden Jr (WR Wildcat extraordinaire)
Vandy: Webb, Stacy, Vaughn, Mordica....boy, anyone with any TDs has a low ypc, anyone with a decent ypc has no TDs. Vandy gonna Vandy
Miss St: Dixon, Norwood, Packer, Haddix, James Johnson, Ballard, Robinson, Marks, Walker
-
ACC off the top of my head.....
UNC has Amos and the other guy from the early 80s. Lawrence? Maybe it's Amos Lawrence, idk.
FSU has Dunn, Sammie Smith, Amp Lee
UVA has Kirby and Barber.....Thomas Jones
GT: Eddie Lee Ivory, Choice
Maryland: Bruce Perry....Mcfarland who just left
Duke: pass
WF: pass
NCST: McClendon...and a guy who was the ACC's all-time rushing leader before Dunn, idk his name
Clemson: Etienne, Terry Allen, Spiller, Priester
okay, let's see who I missed....
NCST guy is Ted Brown. Plus Stephens was good.
UNC guys are Lawrence and Bryant
Dalvin Cook for FSU
Lamont Jordan for UMd
WF - Charles Barclay
ohh, Dwyer on GT.
Clemson - Davis, Ellington, Gallman
UNC - Leon Johnson, Hampton, Voight, Carter
Duke has no candidates for the top 100 RBs of all-time.
-
This is an issue I have with such algorithms
Ya I saw them when they opened up for Judas Priest in like '92 - not impressed
-
Big Ten candidates for the top 100 RBs of all-time:
UNL - Rozier, Green, Phillips
Husker top 3 IMO
Personal fav and passes the "eye test" Roger Craig for 4th
-
Judas Priest was still touring in '92??
-
For Purdue, about the only possible nominees are Leroy Keyes and Mike Alstott...
-
I'd recommend Alstott
-
RBU has a lot of guys.
Taylor
Gordon
Ball
Dayne
White
Davis
Calhoun
Bennett
Moss
Fletcher
and more.
Everyone knew they were getting the ball, and most could do nothing about it.
-
the good old daze
-
RBU has a lot of guys.
Taylor
Gordon
Ball
Dayne
White
Davis
Calhoun
Bennett
Moss
Fletcher
and more.
Everyone knew they were getting the ball, and most could do nothing about it.
You left out a Heisman-winner, of the equine variety.
Not a criticism, just belaboring your point.
-
Classifying these RBs might be fun.
Physical freaks that could have gone straight to the NFL:
I'm bigger AND faster than you:
You could tackle me if you could touch me:
I'm just going to run you right over:
I'm not big or fast, but you still can't stop me:
-
Classifying these RBs might be fun.
Physical freaks that could have gone straight to the NFL:
Adrian Peterson, Herschel Walker, Marcus Dupree, Bo Jackson
I'm bigger AND faster than you:
Ricky Williams, George Rogers, Jonathan Taylor, Darren McFadden, Eric Dickerson, Tyrone Wheatley, Mike Rozier, Ahman Green, Leonard Fournette
You could tackle me if you could touch me:
Barry Sanders, Reggie Bush, Tony Dorsett, LaMichael James, Darren Sproles, Melvin Gordon, Noel Devine, Joe Washington, Warrick Dunn, Christian McCaffrey, Billy Sims, Demarco Murray
I'm just going to run you right over:
Earl Campbell, Ron Dayne, Charles Alexander, Lorenzo White, PJ Hill, Steve Owens, James Connor, Derrick Henry
I'm not big or fast, but you still can't stop me:
Emmitt Smith, Cedric Benson, Archie Grffin?, Michael Hart, Trevor Cobb, Marcus Allen, Blake Corum, Shaun Alexander
Here are some
-
Texas has had some good ones, off the top of my head
Ricky Williams
Earl Campbell
Cedric Benson
Priest Holmes
D'Onta Foreman
Jamaal Charles
Eric Metcalf
Bijan Robinson
-
For the Dawgs, I'd list:
Charlie Trippi (Different time of course)
Frank Sinkwich (same)
Herschel
Garrison Hearst
Todd Gurley
Sony Michel
Nick Chubb
Some other decent ones of course, but no one comes to mind as super special, Knowshon, Terrill Davis (was underused in college), Rodney Hampton... the Dawgs have not had a great one in a few years IMHO, and it shows, perhaps the OL or play calling?
-
Texas has had some good ones, off the top of my head
Ricky Williams
Earl Campbell
Cedric Benson
Priest Holmes
D'Onta Foreman
Jamaal Charles
Eric Metcalf
Bijan Robinson
Metcalf had 125 receptions, which is a lot.
THE forgotten Horn RB is Roosevelt Leaks, from the mid-70s. 1000 yard season, 1400 yard season, but then must've gotten hurt his SR season.
I think that, combined with Campbell coming up next, makes him sort of lost to history.
Between the both of them, UT was signing some hombres...
(https://i.imgur.com/nIjkWc7.jpeg)
-
I remember watching Roosevelt Leaks
-
Here are some
Jamal Lewis
-
Jamal probably still hates the blackshirts
-
One interesting category someone might find is players who were "on the verge" of greatness and were injured or otherwise couldn't play, per above.
-
Judas Priest was still touring in '92??
Yes, Judas Priest was still actively touring in 1992, although it was the year Rob Halford left the band, which marked the end of the Halford era for a period. While Halford left the band, they continued to tour
-
Jamal Lewis
I'd put him in the "run over you" category.
He's a guy whose production, while good, didn't match the eye test. He benefits from his NFL exploits in the general consciousness.
-
I'd put him in the "run over you" category.
He's a guy whose production, while good, didn't match the eye test. He benefits from his NFL exploits in the general consciousness.
He ran by plenty as well.
And he shared a backfield with Travis Henry, and Travis Stephens.
His stats were down after blowing out his knee his sophomore year in game 5, and took all of his junior year to get going again.
Still managed to be the 5th overall pick.
-
Big 8/Big XII/SWC Dudes:
Sproles, KSU
OU guys
Perine, Peterson, Washington, Owens, Sims, Griffin, Murray, Parker (when they sucked), Brooks, Pruitt
FBs - Carr & Kenny King
ISU
Troy Davis
Breece Hall
Dexter Green, from the 70s
KU
Devin Neal
Gale Sayers
Laverne Smith (same stats as Sayers, a decade later)
June Henley
Tony Sands (single-game rushing record holder for 8 yrs)
TTU
Tahj Brooks, Byron Hanspard, James Gray, the other Ricky Williams, Bam Morris
Taurean Henderson (50 rushing TDs AND 2000+ receiving yds)
Mizzourah
it's weird for a school's all-time leading rusher to be a QB (Brad Smith)
Rountree III
Josey (7.0 ypc for a career - wow)
OKST
Sanders, Thomas, Terry Miller, Hunter, Hubbard, Randle....a lot of similar guys under the mullet
A&M
Darren Lewis, Dickey, Trayveon, Woodard, Bubba Bean, Achane
Baylor
Linwood, Abercrombie, Douglas, Anderson, Seastrunk
-
Metcalf had 125 receptions, which is a lot.
THE forgotten Horn RB is Roosevelt Leaks, from the mid-70s. 1000 yard season, 1400 yard season, but then must've gotten hurt his SR season.
I think that, combined with Campbell coming up next, makes him sort of lost to history.
Between the both of them, UT was signing some hombres...
(https://i.imgur.com/nIjkWc7.jpeg)
Yeah Metcalf was also a pretty good return man. He was very versatile and a bright star in some otherwise dark days for Texas football.
And my parents really liked Roosevelt Leaks. He was slightly before my time, my earliest memories of UT football were all about Earl Campbell, but my folks remember what Darrell Royal said about Leaks when someone mentioned that he always seemed to get up slow after a tackle. Royal said, "that's okay, he goes down slow, too."
-
Big 8/Big XII/SWC Dudes:
Sproles, KSU
OU guys
Peterson, Washington, Sims, Pruitt
ISU
Troy Davis
KU
Gale Sayers
TTU
Byron Hanspard
Mizzourah
it's weird for a school's all-time leading rusher to be a QB (Brad Smith)
OKST
Sanders, Thomas
A&M
Baylor