12-15-2015, 03:43 PM
Great post, CTcard. A few thoughts
The TD argument is definitely dumb, or Gerhart would have won it in 2009, he had WAY more TDs than Ingram. Wright ran for our short yardage situations, and he was perfectly suited to do so.
And with respect to Henry...he's a great back, no question...I just wonder how the scheme, coaching and OLine (especially) at Alabama matches up to Stanford's. How would Henry have done behind our line? How would Christian have done behind their line?
And finally, McCaffrey's versatility just screams out his usefulness as a player. Need to run? Yeah, he'll get you the big runs, for a very high ypc, close to Henry's. Oh you need catches, like every single NFL running back of any substance since 1960? Well gosh, McCaffrey blows away Henry. How about a return? Christian will blow your doors off. Need blocking? Check. Need to throw a TD pass? Or say...more than one TD pass? Double check. Need to add so many yards that you blow away even an NFL 10-time all pro/six-time first team All Pro. Right here. This guy. McCaffrey.
It's not that Voldemort voters have an anti-Stanford bias, it's pro-local/regional team/player bias. They don't hate McCaffrey and Stanford, they just prefer a traditional football factory with a traditional running back from a traditional background. Takes no imagination, and no football sense. In other words, it's absolutely perfect for the Voldemort voters. They're not virulently anti-Stanford, that's that really good school out west that churns out great products and people. Oh, and they have a football team that is occasionally competitive and once in a while they have a pretty good player. Might even make 2nd string at Auburn. And that's the mindset. They're not stupid, they're just smart. It's like letting family members officiate at youth sports games. They will never, ever make a call against their own, and they'll always make calls against yours. Just the way it is.
In my humble opinion, if Christian McCaffrey put up the exact same numbers at an SEC school, he would be a unanimous Voldemort winner.
I suppose. I certainly don't disagree with the above point. But at the same time, it exemplifies poor understanding of what winning football is about.
(12-15-2015, 09:05 AM)CTcard link Wrote:Between ski weekend (in the barely covered with man-made slush slopes of Vermont) and actual work, I'm still catching up on posts and haven't had a chance to throw in my two-bits on the H-man runner up situation. It seems this thread is a better place than the 7 page "Henry wins" thread that has rolled to the second page.
Of our second place finishers, McCaffrey has the biggest gripe. I may disagree with most of those past decisions but could always see the arguments on the other side. McCaffrey vs Henry is a strong enough case that it's hard to really appreciate the counter arguments.
The stupidest pro-Henry argument I have seen: McCaffrey's APY season was not as impressive as Sanders' because ... well whatever. That might be a reasonable argument if the choice was between Barry Sanders and Christian McCaffrey - completely irrelevant with respect to Henry.
While I also think the TD argument is pretty dumb, at least that has something to do with Henry.Â
The TD argument is definitely dumb, or Gerhart would have won it in 2009, he had WAY more TDs than Ingram. Wright ran for our short yardage situations, and he was perfectly suited to do so.
And with respect to Henry...he's a great back, no question...I just wonder how the scheme, coaching and OLine (especially) at Alabama matches up to Stanford's. How would Henry have done behind our line? How would Christian have done behind their line?
And finally, McCaffrey's versatility just screams out his usefulness as a player. Need to run? Yeah, he'll get you the big runs, for a very high ypc, close to Henry's. Oh you need catches, like every single NFL running back of any substance since 1960? Well gosh, McCaffrey blows away Henry. How about a return? Christian will blow your doors off. Need blocking? Check. Need to throw a TD pass? Or say...more than one TD pass? Double check. Need to add so many yards that you blow away even an NFL 10-time all pro/six-time first team All Pro. Right here. This guy. McCaffrey.
Quote:I think many people of the bias angle a little off. Living in the east, I don't see much active anti-west or anti-Stanford sentiment, just many folks having no idea what is happening in the west. This is partly the parochial nature of college football coupled to the west being the most isolated population center and somewhat game times.
In that other thread, I was prepared to be appalled by the Jason Whitlock article. Much to my surprise I liked it. He did a decent job recapping the McCaffrey over Henry case, put some perspective on the level of injustice as these things go (not all that high), and even had some reasonably nuanced things to say about the weight of racial considerations and how that colors all sorts of issues in America. Not bad for a sports article.
http://j.school/post/134988976000/white-...wed-out-of
It's not that Voldemort voters have an anti-Stanford bias, it's pro-local/regional team/player bias. They don't hate McCaffrey and Stanford, they just prefer a traditional football factory with a traditional running back from a traditional background. Takes no imagination, and no football sense. In other words, it's absolutely perfect for the Voldemort voters. They're not virulently anti-Stanford, that's that really good school out west that churns out great products and people. Oh, and they have a football team that is occasionally competitive and once in a while they have a pretty good player. Might even make 2nd string at Auburn. And that's the mindset. They're not stupid, they're just smart. It's like letting family members officiate at youth sports games. They will never, ever make a call against their own, and they'll always make calls against yours. Just the way it is.
In my humble opinion, if Christian McCaffrey put up the exact same numbers at an SEC school, he would be a unanimous Voldemort winner.
Quote: Another article I was surprised to appreciate was from our favourite whipping boy Jon Wilner (a H-man voter). It seems to roughly mirror the discussion on this board - and Wilner did his part by voting McCaffrey first and Henry third. In many ways, Wilner seems to be one of those sports writers who doesn't understand football all that well, and sometimes doesn't seem to like it all that much. However, he does take his voting responsibilities seriously (if not always effectively) and I appreciate his efforts to be open and state his case.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...challenge/
Finally, I wouldn't get too worked up over McCaffrey being left off the RB list on all these All-American teams. It's pretty clear that the primary driver there is the desire to spread the accolades around so that putting McCaffrey in the returner/all purpose slot is taken as an opportunity to give another good RB a nod. In most cases, I don't think the voters are actually ranking McCaffrey as worse than the 5th to 7th RB in the country.
I suppose. I certainly don't disagree with the above point. But at the same time, it exemplifies poor understanding of what winning football is about.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
