[dabigv13]

(2) not to let facts get in the way of a good Stanford narrative, but in the Voldemort conversation (as opposed to all-purpose yards conversation) being interwoven into this thread by some, TDs are also relevant and McCaffrey has relatively few (11 total including 7 rushing TDs, Fournette has 17, Henry 21) - yes, we all know that Wright is our short yardage/goal line guy.

Of course when we made the TD argument for Toby over Ingram, it didn't apply in that scenario. But now that the scenario is reversed, I'm sure it will be brought up plenty.

[dabigv13]

(2) not to let facts get in the way of a good Stanford narrative, but in the Voldemort conversation (as opposed to all-purpose yards conversation) being interwoven into this thread by some, TDs are also relevant and McCaffrey has relatively few (11 total including 7 rushing TDs, Fournette has 17, Henry 21) - yes, we all know that Wright is our short yardage/goal line guy.

Of course when we made the TD argument for Toby over Ingram, it didn't apply in that scenario. But now that the scenario is reversed, I'm sure it will be brought up plenty.

[French Rage]

[quote author=larkinforever link=topic=13278.msg143068#msg143068 date=1448239293]
(2) not to let facts get in the way of a good Stanford narrative, but in the Voldemort conversation (as opposed to all-purpose yards conversation) being interwoven into this thread by some, TDs are also relevant and McCaffrey has relatively few (11 total including 7 rushing TDs, Fournette has 17, Henry 21) - yes, we all know that Wright is our short yardage/goal line guy.

Of course when we made the TD argument for Toby over Ingram, it didn't apply in that scenario. But now that the scenario is reversed, I'm sure it will be brought up plenty.
[/quote]

I also enjoy the talking heads noting that Henry's stats come against tough SEC defenses, such as the heralded Charleston Southern.

[French Rage]

[quote author=larkinforever link=topic=13278.msg143068#msg143068 date=1448239293]
(2) not to let facts get in the way of a good Stanford narrative, but in the Voldemort conversation (as opposed to all-purpose yards conversation) being interwoven into this thread by some, TDs are also relevant and McCaffrey has relatively few (11 total including 7 rushing TDs, Fournette has 17, Henry 21) - yes, we all know that Wright is our short yardage/goal line guy.

Of course when we made the TD argument for Toby over Ingram, it didn't apply in that scenario. But now that the scenario is reversed, I'm sure it will be brought up plenty.
[/quote]

I also enjoy the talking heads noting that Henry's stats come against tough SEC defenses, such as the heralded Charleston Southern.

[stupac2]

I also enjoy the talking heads noting that Henry's stats come against tough SEC defenses, such as the heralded Charleston Southern.

He also had <100 yards against Charleston Southern.

That said, I find it absurd that he's in the Voldemort conversation. He seems like yet another Bama back who looks good running behind their all-world OL but can't do much beside run through the right hole and power through some weak LBs. At this point the fact that none of these guys have done anything in the NFL seems like it should tell you that it's not them that's getting these results.

[stupac2]

I also enjoy the talking heads noting that Henry's stats come against tough SEC defenses, such as the heralded Charleston Southern.

He also had <100 yards against Charleston Southern.

That said, I find it absurd that he's in the Voldemort conversation. He seems like yet another Bama back who looks good running behind their all-world OL but can't do much beside run through the right hole and power through some weak LBs. At this point the fact that none of these guys have done anything in the NFL seems like it should tell you that it's not them that's getting these results.

[BostonCard]

What has Toby done in the NFL?

McCaffrey deserves to go to New York, but Henry would have to make like Fournette and disappear for CMac to have a chance.

BC

[BostonCard]

What has Toby done in the NFL?

McCaffrey deserves to go to New York, but Henry would have to make like Fournette and disappear for CMac to have a chance.

BC

[doublespiral]

In the end, though Fournette is going to wind up playing only 13 games; McCaffrey gets a 14th.  Or to put it another way, both guys have three games left.

Actually, I think Fournette will only have 12 games (11 prior to the vote). McNeese State was canceled at the beginning of the season and LSU will not be in the SEC Championship game.

[doublespiral]

In the end, though Fournette is going to wind up playing only 13 games; McCaffrey gets a 14th.  Or to put it another way, both guys have three games left.

Actually, I think Fournette will only have 12 games (11 prior to the vote). McNeese State was canceled at the beginning of the season and LSU will not be in the SEC Championship game.

[stupac2]

What has Toby done in the NFL?

McCaffrey deserves to go to New York, but Henry would have to make like Fournette and disappear for CMac to have a chance.

BC

Toby hasn't done anything either, but Stanford doesn't perennially have RBs in the Voldemort hunt only to find out that they're actually not great players. Also I think Toby mostly deserved the Voldemort because it was a pretty weak year overall.

But if there were a college equivalent of WAR (or DYAR, to keep it football-themed) I wouldn't be surprised if McCaffrey doubled Henry. You're probably right that he needs to drop a turd of a game for McCaffrey to pass him (or for McCaffrey to be transcendent these next two games), but that's actually pretty possible against Florida. I guess we'll see.

What surprises me is how little traction Deshaun Watson seems to be getting. Dual-threat QB on an undefeated major-conference team? People usually eat that shit up.

[stupac2]

What has Toby done in the NFL?

McCaffrey deserves to go to New York, but Henry would have to make like Fournette and disappear for CMac to have a chance.

BC

Toby hasn't done anything either, but Stanford doesn't perennially have RBs in the Voldemort hunt only to find out that they're actually not great players. Also I think Toby mostly deserved the Voldemort because it was a pretty weak year overall.

But if there were a college equivalent of WAR (or DYAR, to keep it football-themed) I wouldn't be surprised if McCaffrey doubled Henry. You're probably right that he needs to drop a turd of a game for McCaffrey to pass him (or for McCaffrey to be transcendent these next two games), but that's actually pretty possible against Florida. I guess we'll see.

What surprises me is how little traction Deshaun Watson seems to be getting. Dual-threat QB on an undefeated major-conference team? People usually eat that shit up.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

If McCaffrey breaks the APY record -- which, if some need reminding, is a 27-year-old record held by Barry Sanders -- then he will be, statistically speaking, the most versatile offensive weapon in modern college football history.  He's also been the single biggest factor in Stanford being such a dominant team.  If that doesn't warrant serious Voldemort consideration then I don't know what would.

Sorry, had some hyperbole to burn.  But the point remains.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

If McCaffrey breaks the APY record -- which, if some need reminding, is a 27-year-old record held by Barry Sanders -- then he will be, statistically speaking, the most versatile offensive weapon in modern college football history.  He's also been the single biggest factor in Stanford being such a dominant team.  If that doesn't warrant serious Voldemort consideration then I don't know what would.

Sorry, had some hyperbole to burn.  But the point remains.

[BostonCard]

Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

[BostonCard]

Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

I think a running back is also the easiest offensive position to plug-and-play in the NFL.  If you have a good line and a good scheme, even a mediocre back can flourish.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

I think a running back is also the easiest offensive position to plug-and-play in the NFL.  If you have a good line and a good scheme, even a mediocre back can flourish.

[Rally]

If McCaffrey breaks the APY record -- which, if some need reminding, is a 27-year-old record held by Barry Sanders -- then he will be, statistically speaking, the most versatile offensive weapon in modern college football history.  He's also been the single biggest factor in Stanford being such a dominant team.  If that doesn't warrant serious Voldemort consideration then I don't know what would.

Sorry, had some hyperbole to burn.  But the point remains.

Remember, the Voldemort votes are due after the conf. champ. games but before bowl games, so McCaffrey only has two games to impress the voters with the new record.

[Rally]

If McCaffrey breaks the APY record -- which, if some need reminding, is a 27-year-old record held by Barry Sanders -- then he will be, statistically speaking, the most versatile offensive weapon in modern college football history.  He's also been the single biggest factor in Stanford being such a dominant team.  If that doesn't warrant serious Voldemort consideration then I don't know what would.

Sorry, had some hyperbole to burn.  But the point remains.

Remember, the Voldemort votes are due after the conf. champ. games but before bowl games, so McCaffrey only has two games to impress the voters with the new record.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13278.msg143105#msg143105 date=1448250077]
Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

I think a running back is also the easiest offensive position to plug-and-play in the NFL.  If you have a good line and a good scheme, even a mediocre back can flourish.
[/quote]

Right, but that's even more true in college because a dominant OL is going to get you brobdingnagian holes. Alabama consistently has one of the best lines in the country and consistently has RBs that look dominant and then aren't at the next level. Look at Todd Gurley, he was dominant behind Georgia's okay OL and has backed it up. Henry won't and we know it and it's annoying that Voldemort voters don't care, especially because his rushing numbers aren't much better than McCaffrey's, and McCaffrey is a more dangerous receiver and he's a great returner. But no, it's just "There's no great QB, so clearly this SEC running back is definitely the best!!!" It's stupid.

[stupac2]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13278.msg143105#msg143105 date=1448250077]
Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

I think a running back is also the easiest offensive position to plug-and-play in the NFL.  If you have a good line and a good scheme, even a mediocre back can flourish.
[/quote]

Right, but that's even more true in college because a dominant OL is going to get you brobdingnagian holes. Alabama consistently has one of the best lines in the country and consistently has RBs that look dominant and then aren't at the next level. Look at Todd Gurley, he was dominant behind Georgia's okay OL and has backed it up. Henry won't and we know it and it's annoying that Voldemort voters don't care, especially because his rushing numbers aren't much better than McCaffrey's, and McCaffrey is a more dangerous receiver and he's a great returner. But no, it's just "There's no great QB, so clearly this SEC running back is definitely the best!!!" It's stupid.

[Rally]

[quote author=ThePassionOfTheChryst link=topic=13278.msg143107#msg143107 date=1448250241]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13278.msg143105#msg143105 date=1448250077]
Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

I think a running back is also the easiest offensive position to plug-and-play in the NFL.  If you have a good line and a good scheme, even a mediocre back can flourish.
[/quote]

Right, but that's even more true in college because a dominant OL is going to get you of exceedingly large proportions holes. Alabama consistently has one of the best lines in the country and consistently has RBs that look dominant and then aren't at the next level. Look at Todd Gurley, he was dominant behind Georgia's okay OL and has backed it up. Henry won't and we know it and it's annoying that Voldemort voters don't care, especially because his rushing numbers aren't much better than McCaffrey's, and McCaffrey is a more dangerous receiver and he's a great returner. But no, it's just "There's no great QB, so clearly this SEC running back is definitely the best!!!" It's stupid.
[/quote]

I agree with everything you said, but this award is supposed to be for the best COLLEGE player, not best NFL prospect, and shouldn't be judged by NFL results. 

[Rally]

[quote author=ThePassionOfTheChryst link=topic=13278.msg143107#msg143107 date=1448250241]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=13278.msg143105#msg143105 date=1448250077]
Running back in the NFL is one of the hardest positions to predict based on college production.  That's why it is rare for a RB to get drafted in the first round.  I don't hold it against Alabama or the SEC that their running backs have struggled in the NFL.  The Voldemort goes for the "most outstanding player", and while a great case can be made for McCaffrey (he's outstanding running, receiving, and returning), I don't think you need to disparage Henry to make the case for C-Mac.  Indeed, if I were voting, I'd give it to C-Mac; and that screen catch and run shows you why.  He had a little bit of everything there.

And/but Henry will win it.  That's just the way it is.

BC

I think a running back is also the easiest offensive position to plug-and-play in the NFL.  If you have a good line and a good scheme, even a mediocre back can flourish.
[/quote]

Right, but that's even more true in college because a dominant OL is going to get you of exceedingly large proportions holes. Alabama consistently has one of the best lines in the country and consistently has RBs that look dominant and then aren't at the next level. Look at Todd Gurley, he was dominant behind Georgia's okay OL and has backed it up. Henry won't and we know it and it's annoying that Voldemort voters don't care, especially because his rushing numbers aren't much better than McCaffrey's, and McCaffrey is a more dangerous receiver and he's a great returner. But no, it's just "There's no great QB, so clearly this SEC running back is definitely the best!!!" It's stupid.
[/quote]

I agree with everything you said, but this award is supposed to be for the best COLLEGE player, not best NFL prospect, and shouldn't be judged by NFL results. 

[stupac2]

Do you really think I don't know that? What I'm saying is that the fact that there is some Alabama running back in the conversation every single year and yet none of them actually do anything tells you that it's not the back that's the good player. I think if you put McCaffrey behind that line his stats look absurd. If you want to give the Alabama OL collectively a Voldemort, fine, but Henry doesn't deserve it. At least Fournette looked like a monster, Henry doesn't, from what I've seen.

I wanted to come up with some kind DYAR-like stat, but the best I could do is adjusting the schedule for the opponent. So I took the opponents year-long rushing stats, factored out the ones against the team in question, and took the difference of what was achieved in the game against said opponent and their year-long stats, then added that to the player in question's total production in the game, which I then summed and divided by their total carries. I learned a few things.

First, Alabama's running game is impressive, Henry has 6.8 adjusted YPC, McCaffrey only has 5.8.

Second, McCaffrey was not the player early in the year. His worst game? You might think it was WSU, or maybe Northwestern, but it was actually winless UCF! Relative to their performance for the year he averaged 1.1 AYPC. That's pretty atrocious. If you drop the first two games he goes up to 6.3 AYPC, or half the difference between him and Henry. Yeah, I know Henry would improve too if you dropped his worst games, but I was curious about this because I know it takes a game or two to get things figured out for some teams. In fact, Henry's first game is by far his most statistically impressive, and if you assume that Wisconsin hadn't figured itself out defensively yet and drop that game, Henry's AYPC goes to 6.4, meaning that the first couple games are the entirety of the difference between the two players.

Third, neither team's second-best runner gets many carries. Sanders has 48, Drake has 68, and I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to do the same exercise for them and get meaningful results, though I did it anyway and Sanders is at 7.4 and Drake is at 5.8. But like I said, I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to be meaningful, both had multiple games where they didn't touch the ball at all.


I'd still like to have some version of DYAR, or better yet line-adjusted yards (even yards after contact would nice and I don't know of anywhere that does it for college), but looking at this has softened me a bit on Henry being a Voldemort contender. I still think that if you factor in everything else McCaffrey does he should be in front of Henry (Henry has  0.9 receptions/game for 8.8 y/game, as opposed to 3.1 for 37.8 for McCaffrey, plus the kickoffs), but I get Henry being in the conversation.

[stupac2]

Do you really think I don't know that? What I'm saying is that the fact that there is some Alabama running back in the conversation every single year and yet none of them actually do anything tells you that it's not the back that's the good player. I think if you put McCaffrey behind that line his stats look absurd. If you want to give the Alabama OL collectively a Voldemort, fine, but Henry doesn't deserve it. At least Fournette looked like a monster, Henry doesn't, from what I've seen.

I wanted to come up with some kind DYAR-like stat, but the best I could do is adjusting the schedule for the opponent. So I took the opponents year-long rushing stats, factored out the ones against the team in question, and took the difference of what was achieved in the game against said opponent and their year-long stats, then added that to the player in question's total production in the game, which I then summed and divided by their total carries. I learned a few things.

First, Alabama's running game is impressive, Henry has 6.8 adjusted YPC, McCaffrey only has 5.8.

Second, McCaffrey was not the player early in the year. His worst game? You might think it was WSU, or maybe Northwestern, but it was actually winless UCF! Relative to their performance for the year he averaged 1.1 AYPC. That's pretty atrocious. If you drop the first two games he goes up to 6.3 AYPC, or half the difference between him and Henry. Yeah, I know Henry would improve too if you dropped his worst games, but I was curious about this because I know it takes a game or two to get things figured out for some teams. In fact, Henry's first game is by far his most statistically impressive, and if you assume that Wisconsin hadn't figured itself out defensively yet and drop that game, Henry's AYPC goes to 6.4, meaning that the first couple games are the entirety of the difference between the two players.

Third, neither team's second-best runner gets many carries. Sanders has 48, Drake has 68, and I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to do the same exercise for them and get meaningful results, though I did it anyway and Sanders is at 7.4 and Drake is at 5.8. But like I said, I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to be meaningful, both had multiple games where they didn't touch the ball at all.


I'd still like to have some version of DYAR, or better yet line-adjusted yards (even yards after contact would nice and I don't know of anywhere that does it for college), but looking at this has softened me a bit on Henry being a Voldemort contender. I still think that if you factor in everything else McCaffrey does he should be in front of Henry (Henry has  0.9 receptions/game for 8.8 y/game, as opposed to 3.1 for 37.8 for McCaffrey, plus the kickoffs), but I get Henry being in the conversation.

[Rally]

Do you really think I don't know that? What I'm saying is that the fact that there is some Alabama running back in the conversation every single year and yet none of them actually do anything tells you that it's not the back that's the good player. I think if you put McCaffrey behind that line his stats look absurd. If you want to give the Alabama OL collectively a Voldemort, fine, but Henry doesn't deserve it. At least Fournette looked like a monster, Henry doesn't, from what I've seen.

I wanted to come up with some kind DYAR-like stat, but the best I could do is adjusting the schedule for the opponent. So I took the opponents year-long rushing stats, factored out the ones against the team in question, and took the difference of what was achieved in the game against said opponent and their year-long stats, then added that to the player in question's total production in the game, which I then summed and divided by their total carries. I learned a few things.

First, Alabama's running game is impressive, Henry has 6.8 adjusted YPC, McCaffrey only has 5.8.

Second, McCaffrey was not the player early in the year. His worst game? You might think it was WSU, or maybe Northwestern, but it was actually winless UCF! Relative to their performance for the year he averaged 1.1 AYPC. That's pretty atrocious. If you drop the first two games he goes up to 6.3 AYPC, or half the difference between him and Henry. Yeah, I know Henry would improve too if you dropped his worst games, but I was curious about this because I know it takes a game or two to get things figured out for some teams. In fact, Henry's first game is by far his most statistically impressive, and if you assume that Wisconsin hadn't figured itself out defensively yet and drop that game, Henry's AYPC goes to 6.4, meaning that the first couple games are the entirety of the difference between the two players.

Third, neither team's second-best runner gets many carries. Sanders has 48, Drake has 68, and I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to do the same exercise for them and get meaningful results, though I did it anyway and Sanders is at 7.4 and Drake is at 5.8. But like I said, I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to be meaningful, both had multiple games where they didn't touch the ball at all.


I'd still like to have some version of DYAR, or better yet line-adjusted yards (even yards after contact would nice and I don't know of anywhere that does it for college), but looking at this has softened me a bit on Henry being a Voldemort contender. I still think that if you factor in everything else McCaffrey does he should be in front of Henry (Henry has  0.9 receptions/game for 8.8 y/game, as opposed to 3.1 for 37.8 for McCaffrey, plus the kickoffs), but I get Henry being in the conversation.

I applaud yo, Stupac, for this.  It is rare for someone to actually examine a passionately held belief, find out that the other side has some merit, and admit it.  Even much rarer on a fan site.  Good job.  I, too, thought the whole Henry thing was just Alabama hype, but your analysis opened my eyes.  I still think McCaffrey deserves the award for "best player," given that defensive players are only lightly considered if at all.  There are awards for best running back, best quarterback, etc., but best (offensive) player should be McCaffrey.  He won't win it but he    will should Be invited to New York.

[Rally]

Do you really think I don't know that? What I'm saying is that the fact that there is some Alabama running back in the conversation every single year and yet none of them actually do anything tells you that it's not the back that's the good player. I think if you put McCaffrey behind that line his stats look absurd. If you want to give the Alabama OL collectively a Voldemort, fine, but Henry doesn't deserve it. At least Fournette looked like a monster, Henry doesn't, from what I've seen.

I wanted to come up with some kind DYAR-like stat, but the best I could do is adjusting the schedule for the opponent. So I took the opponents year-long rushing stats, factored out the ones against the team in question, and took the difference of what was achieved in the game against said opponent and their year-long stats, then added that to the player in question's total production in the game, which I then summed and divided by their total carries. I learned a few things.

First, Alabama's running game is impressive, Henry has 6.8 adjusted YPC, McCaffrey only has 5.8.

Second, McCaffrey was not the player early in the year. His worst game? You might think it was WSU, or maybe Northwestern, but it was actually winless UCF! Relative to their performance for the year he averaged 1.1 AYPC. That's pretty atrocious. If you drop the first two games he goes up to 6.3 AYPC, or half the difference between him and Henry. Yeah, I know Henry would improve too if you dropped his worst games, but I was curious about this because I know it takes a game or two to get things figured out for some teams. In fact, Henry's first game is by far his most statistically impressive, and if you assume that Wisconsin hadn't figured itself out defensively yet and drop that game, Henry's AYPC goes to 6.4, meaning that the first couple games are the entirety of the difference between the two players.

Third, neither team's second-best runner gets many carries. Sanders has 48, Drake has 68, and I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to do the same exercise for them and get meaningful results, though I did it anyway and Sanders is at 7.4 and Drake is at 5.8. But like I said, I don't think either of those numbers are big enough to be meaningful, both had multiple games where they didn't touch the ball at all.


I'd still like to have some version of DYAR, or better yet line-adjusted yards (even yards after contact would nice and I don't know of anywhere that does it for college), but looking at this has softened me a bit on Henry being a Voldemort contender. I still think that if you factor in everything else McCaffrey does he should be in front of Henry (Henry has  0.9 receptions/game for 8.8 y/game, as opposed to 3.1 for 37.8 for McCaffrey, plus the kickoffs), but I get Henry being in the conversation.

I applaud yo, Stupac, for this.  It is rare for someone to actually examine a passionately held belief, find out that the other side has some merit, and admit it.  Even much rarer on a fan site.  Good job.  I, too, thought the whole Henry thing was just Alabama hype, but your analysis opened my eyes.  I still think McCaffrey deserves the award for "best player," given that defensive players are only lightly considered if at all.  There are awards for best running back, best quarterback, etc., but best (offensive) player should be McCaffrey.  He won't win it but he    will should Be invited to New York.

[BostonCard]

One other thing to consider... it's not like the line that McCaffrey runs behind is soft.  He arguably runs behind the best guard in college football.

BC

[BostonCard]

One other thing to consider... it's not like the line that McCaffrey runs behind is soft.  He arguably runs behind the best guard in college football.

BC

[French Rage]

One other thing to consider... it's not like the line that McCaffrey runs behind is soft.  He arguably runs behind the best guard in college football.

BC

Same thing can be said about Henry too.  So I say throw O-line out of the picture and look purely at APY!

[French Rage]

One other thing to consider... it's not like the line that McCaffrey runs behind is soft.  He arguably runs behind the best guard in college football.

BC

Same thing can be said about Henry too.  So I say throw O-line out of the picture and look purely at APY!

[Hulk01]

I've watched all the candidates and Henry more than once, and he deserves it if Mac does not.  Henry is the best power running back I've seen this year, a better Royce Freeman. 

Mac is more dangerous and versatile, however, and  his skills are much harder to find; they are once in every ten year skills, if that.  If I was starting a college team, I'd take him first.  I'd be getting a lethal kickoff returner and receiver in addition to one of the best running backs, and he gives a coach more options than Henry.

I figure I could find a number of backs close enough to Henry, even if he'd be the first pure running back--that is, my first back I'd take, but not the first player.

For similar reasons, I'd take Mac over Watson or any other QB I've seen.  Not a lot of separation there, and, for impact on his team and winning college football games, I might prefer Mayfield,  Watson's numbers--8.6 yards per attempt, 26-10 TD Int--aren't Voldemort numbers.  On a team with a merely decent defense, I'm not sure Watson would be in the talk.

[Hulk01]

I've watched all the candidates and Henry more than once, and he deserves it if Mac does not.  Henry is the best power running back I've seen this year, a better Royce Freeman. 

Mac is more dangerous and versatile, however, and  his skills are much harder to find; they are once in every ten year skills, if that.  If I was starting a college team, I'd take him first.  I'd be getting a lethal kickoff returner and receiver in addition to one of the best running backs, and he gives a coach more options than Henry.

I figure I could find a number of backs close enough to Henry, even if he'd be the first pure running back--that is, my first back I'd take, but not the first player.

For similar reasons, I'd take Mac over Watson or any other QB I've seen.  Not a lot of separation there, and, for impact on his team and winning college football games, I might prefer Mayfield,  Watson's numbers--8.6 yards per attempt, 26-10 TD Int--aren't Voldemort numbers.  On a team with a merely decent defense, I'm not sure Watson would be in the talk.

[stupac2]

One other thing to consider... it's not like the line that McCaffrey runs behind is soft.  He arguably runs behind the best guard in college football.

Right, which is why I'd want to see numbers. Based on the limited amount I've seen it seems like Alabama's OL is more consistent about opening up holes, but that could be wrong. The problem is that short of charting the games myself (which I'm not even skilled enough to do) there's no real way to test it.

Here's an interesting post comparing the top RBs: http://espn.go.com/ncf/story/_/id/141790...k-hopefuls

What really stuck out to me was that in Bush's Voldemort season his two best games were his final two, where he gained >250 yards each. If McCaffrey can manage to finish with a bang like that, he'll have a pretty good shot, especially if Florida shuts down Henry (which they might be able to do).

[stupac2]

One other thing to consider... it's not like the line that McCaffrey runs behind is soft.  He arguably runs behind the best guard in college football.

Right, which is why I'd want to see numbers. Based on the limited amount I've seen it seems like Alabama's OL is more consistent about opening up holes, but that could be wrong. The problem is that short of charting the games myself (which I'm not even skilled enough to do) there's no real way to test it.

Here's an interesting post comparing the top RBs: http://espn.go.com/ncf/story/_/id/141790...k-hopefuls

What really stuck out to me was that in Bush's Voldemort season his two best games were his final two, where he gained >250 yards each. If McCaffrey can manage to finish with a bang like that, he'll have a pretty good shot, especially if Florida shuts down Henry (which they might be able to do).

[Hank 91]

I've watched all the candidates and Henry more than once, and he deserves it if Mac does not.  Henry is the best power running back I've seen this year, a better Royce Freeman. 

Mac is more dangerous and versatile, however, and  his skills are much harder to find; they are once in every ten year skills, if that.  If I was starting a college team, I'd take him first.  I'd be getting a lethal kickoff returner and receiver in addition to one of the best running backs, and he gives a coach more options than Henry.

I figure I could find a number of backs close enough to Henry, even if he'd be the first pure running back--that is, my first back I'd take, but not the first player.

For similar reasons, I'd take Mac over Watson or any other QB I've seen.  Not a lot of separation there, and, for impact on his team and winning college football games, I might prefer Mayfield,  Watson's numbers--8.6 yards per attempt, 26-10 TD Int--aren't Voldemort numbers.  On a team with a merely decent defense, I'm not sure Watson would be in the talk.

I don't have the time to sift through threads from two years ago, but now's a good time to remember that it was around that time -- before McCaffrey officially signed -- that Hulk predicted he'd be Stanford's next Voldemort candidate, a statement that really opened my eyes. So, Hulk -- did you ever think he'd arrive at that status this soon?

[Hank 91]

I've watched all the candidates and Henry more than once, and he deserves it if Mac does not.  Henry is the best power running back I've seen this year, a better Royce Freeman. 

Mac is more dangerous and versatile, however, and  his skills are much harder to find; they are once in every ten year skills, if that.  If I was starting a college team, I'd take him first.  I'd be getting a lethal kickoff returner and receiver in addition to one of the best running backs, and he gives a coach more options than Henry.

I figure I could find a number of backs close enough to Henry, even if he'd be the first pure running back--that is, my first back I'd take, but not the first player.

For similar reasons, I'd take Mac over Watson or any other QB I've seen.  Not a lot of separation there, and, for impact on his team and winning college football games, I might prefer Mayfield,  Watson's numbers--8.6 yards per attempt, 26-10 TD Int--aren't Voldemort numbers.  On a team with a merely decent defense, I'm not sure Watson would be in the talk.

I don't have the time to sift through threads from two years ago, but now's a good time to remember that it was around that time -- before McCaffrey officially signed -- that Hulk predicted he'd be Stanford's next Voldemort candidate, a statement that really opened my eyes. So, Hulk -- did you ever think he'd arrive at that status this soon?

[thunder_chik]

Reality check:

13 of last 15 Heismans have been awarded to QBs;
With few exceptions, winner's team has been ranked in the top 5 in the country;
There is an "excellence with integrity" phrase in the HT award criteria that often is ignored (need I give examples?).
Voldemort award has definitely lost some of its prestige over the last decade.  And then there's the "curse"...

Hope CMAC is invited, but I don't expect he'll win it even if he breaks Sanders's record.  And he definitely won't win it if we lose to UDFG.

Go Cardinal!

[thunder_chik]

Reality check:

13 of last 15 Heismans have been awarded to QBs;
With few exceptions, winner's team has been ranked in the top 5 in the country;
There is an "excellence with integrity" phrase in the HT award criteria that often is ignored (need I give examples?).
Voldemort award has definitely lost some of its prestige over the last decade.  And then there's the "curse"...

Hope CMAC is invited, but I don't expect he'll win it even if he breaks Sanders's record.  And he definitely won't win it if we lose to UDFG.

Go Cardinal!