Did McCaffery actually break Sanders record?

[socaljim242]

The whole argument is idiotic. Some teams play Hawaii at Hawaii and they are allowed to play one more game so now do we have to have separate records for every player whos team played a game in hawaii during his run? I'll answer that. No. It's stupid and so is this whole argument.

 

[TheDayMan]

Again, it shows how flawed your premise is.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, will acquiesce that THAT particular record hadn't ever had a CCG added to it before. I mean it's kind of obvious and we have said as much. CCG's have exploded in very recent years. They didn't have double digit numbers of teams having those extra games pre '88 when Sanders set that mark.

Not one person is saying otherwise.

It's still a moot point. Entirely.

The NCAA changed the criteria for how season records are tabulated. And, this isn't the first time that has happened. We gave you historical context. Hell, at one point they didn't consider bowl games before crowning a national title winner. Should we now go back and change the years where they did? There hasn't ever in the history of the sport been a uniformed number of games in a season and yet those season stats have always existed. They change and evolve.

In the early 2k's they changed and added bowl games. As far as I can tell they have always included CCG stats, however as we already stated they didn't have many games before recent times. The mega conferences are a new thing.

There are a lot of offensive/scoring/yardage type of season record holders and I've already shown you at least one that did include both a CCG and bowl in that total and it's a bonus they were from a mid-major school.

Given that we all know they now add those uniformly across all stats it would be weird not to give it to McCaffrey. Barry still holds a few other records and it makes the ones he does still hold all that much more special because players today are getting 2-3 more games than he played and he STILL owns them all.


The answer to the question of did he actually already break that record is yes. There is no other answer.

The question of should the NCAA add those other games when they were not added pre 2k's is a different question. The question of is it fair to include CCG and even bowl game for today's player and not even adding the bowl game to those historical values is also a great topic for debate and a good question. However, those are not the topics of this thread. The thread topic was already killed. You just didn't get the memo for some reason.

"I'm going to look up more stats for better comparison. They didn't used to count bowls..."

-

 

[TheDayMan]

The whole argument is idiotic. Some teams play Hawaii at Hawaii and they are allowed to play one more game so now do we have to have separate records for every player whos team played a game in hawaii during his run? I'll answer that. No. It's stupid and so is this whole argument.

That's the disconnect here. He's making the distinction that they count bowl games now so he can claim new records aren't valid because they didn't before, but refuses to acknowledge that it's a moot point since the length of the college season has never been a consistant length anyway...

 

[WizardHawk]

should I even read this or have we gone from the did not read defense to but your honor haters gonna hate? The premise is the guidelines in which the NCAA gauges stats do to their record books and history. They have never recognized state in CCGs or Bowl games. Because state from the early eras are sketchy and unreliable. I read an article on this topic earlier . I will run as many state as possible but as it stands to claim the record was broken under the NCAA president and procedure has been clear over decades. I will READ your post in a little bit and see if there is anything of content to support a case that fits the guidelines later. I will also provide more facts. While you may really like mccaffery or dislike the rules. I did not write the rules nor is it my fault McCaffery did not surpass Sanders record within the guidelines set forth through your centuries of college football. From what I did read there are several college football historians whom have also been debunking this topic. So there will always be an asterisk and controversy. It has been proven this is not a clean break

Wait, so you argue something admitting you didn't even read and yet attempt to surmise where my views come from?

You are clearly the one working from emotion. All I did was lay out why he did indeed break the record according to the NCAA guidelines as they exist today. I also clearly said there is plenty of room for criticizing the changes they made. That's a different topic and one many of us might agree with you on.

Why even bother responding if you aren't going to read that which you are responding to? Just plain stupid.

 

[WizardHawk]

"I'm going to look up more stats for better comparison. They didn't used to count bowls..."

-

That's the disconnect here. He's making the distinction that they count bowl games now so he can claim new records aren't valid because they didn't before, but refuses to acknowledge that it's a moot point since the length of the college season has never been a consistant length anyway...

Glad to know others get this most basic element.
Sure, no one before Barry claimed bowls or extra games. There weren't that many back then! It's obvious and no one is suggesting anything other than that. Still, every other category today adds both. A season has been redefined. We can all discuss whether or not they should have, but they did. And other records have been broken that used CCG's and bowls. This one is no different.

 

[TheDayMan]

Glad to know others get this most basic element.
Sure, no one before Barry claimed bowls or extra games. There weren't that many back then! It's obvious and no one is suggesting anything other than that. Still, every other category today adds both. A season has been redefined. We can all discuss whether or not they should have, but they did. And other records have been broken that used CCG's and bowls. This one is no different.

The best part is he said at one point that any time a record is broken through more games than the previous record it shouldn't be considered legitimate. And then he realized what that would mean for his argument and records in general, that's when he latched on to the post season aspect...

When you have to change your argument just to legitimize it in your own head, it's probably time to step back and rethink what you're trying to argue. I mean, if you want to claim that records set with more games aren't legit, fine, but you need to acknowledge that all season records should have an asterisk, which makes a single case like this not worth debating.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Wait, so you argue something admitting you didn't even read and yet attempt to surmise where my views come from?

You are clearly the one working from emotion. All I did was lay out why he did indeed break the record according to the NCAA guidelines as they exist today. I also clearly said there is plenty of room for criticizing the changes they made. That's a different topic and one many of us might agree with you on.

Why even bother responding if you aren't going to read that which you are responding to? Just plain stupid.

Under your logic I'm going to have to award Adrian Peterson Eric Dickersons single season rushing record with retro credit as of 2013 The formula is subtract all post season games from the previous record and add all post season games to the player that "broke" the "record" correct? No point in debating when facts are ignored and none are provided in rebuttal. Lets just skew numbers and rewrite history its fun

 

[SUBuddha]

Clarkson, I say this in jest since you are on your road and will not change course no matter what you hear. Does the fact that he did it in 13 few touches over 2 more games get any weight with you. I know it doesn't for you, but think about it, if we take all of his extra touches from his 2EXTRA GAMES and just push them back into 11 games the numbers should work for you.

Again, this is a joke, but it is close to the logic you are using.

The rules changed. The record is the record as published. Even I, a huge Stanford homer, will never say that CMac is a better RB than Sanders. I will simply say he achieved more yards in what is now considered the regular season by the governing body of the sport.

 

[WizardHawk]

Under your logic I'm going to have to award Adrian Peterson Eric Dickersons single season rushing record with retro credit as of 2013 The formula is subtract all post season games from the previous record and add all post season games to the player that "broke" the "record" correct? No point in debating when facts are ignored and none are provided in rebuttal. Lets just skew numbers and rewrite history its fun

This has nothing to do with 'my logic'. All I'm saying is the body that is tasked with tracking this has made their changes and this is how it is. Why is this so freaking hard for you to grasp? I haven't once said it's the right thing, nor that I agree with the changes they made. I am simply telling you the NCAA is the organization that keeps these records and they have decided to not include bowl games for players prior to 2002 and did add them after that. Sanders record was for 11 games and now the new record is for 13. I don't know if they are still adding bowls as it seems they change their minds fairly often, but if so then the new record will contain the data for 14 games. This isn't MY system, it's theirs.

These are the facts. You keep saying you have somehow provided some opposing facts (and haven't, not once) and that everyone else is just making up shit. That's false. Just admit you aren't happy with what the NCAA has done with these historic records and be done with it. This false premise of asking if it is the new record is just stupid. It IS the new record whether you agree with it or not. It will be in the stat sites after this year and for all of future years until someone else breaks it. They might have 15 or 16 games and that too will be debated as to whether or not it's fair, but it will still be the official record.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Clarkson, I say this in jest since you are on your road and will not change course no matter what you hear. Does the fact that he did it in 13 few touches over 2 more games get any weight with you. I know it doesn't for you, but think about it, if we take all of his extra touches from his 2EXTRA GAMES and just push them back into 11 games the numbers should work for you.

Again, this is a joke, but it is close to the logic you are using.

The rules changed. The record is the record as published. Even I, a huge Stanford homer, will never say that CMac is a better RB than Sanders. I will simply say he achieved more yards in what is now considered the regular season by the governing body of the sport.

Total yards per touch is not the record. And this is in no way intended at McCaffery. It could be insert name and it's the same discussion. Say it was any other player same scenario. Given the guidelines the NCAA set forth in the previous record . Stating clearly they do not count post season games in stat totals pertaining to records. Due to the fact does not provide clear totals. As a result of post season stats for several eras not being reliable. Do you feel it is considered breaking a record when it is done outside the time frame of the regular season. It's not the player that makes this questionable. It's the past protocol and circumstances involved in the claim. The claim doesn't comply with the standards set forth. I think that's where some posters got lost. They want to think this is about McCaffery but it's not. It's about the history of the game which plays a major role in college football. I'm all for records being broken but when records aren't being held to the same standard. Is that not watering down the history books?

 

[TheRobotDevil]

This has nothing to do with 'my logic'. All I'm saying is the body that is tasked with tracking this has made their changes and this is how it is. Why is this so freaking hard for you to grasp? I haven't once said it's the right thing, nor that I agree with the changes they made. I am simply telling you the NCAA is the organization that keeps these records and they have decided to not include bowl games for players prior to 2002 and did add them after that. Sanders record was for 11 games and now the new record is for 13. I don't know if they are still adding bowls as it seems they change their minds fairly often, but if so then the new record will contain the data for 14 games. This isn't MY system, it's theirs.

These are the facts. You keep saying you have somehow provided some opposing facts (and haven't, not once) and that everyone else is just making up shit. That's false. Just admit you aren't happy with what the NCAA has done with these historic records and be done with it. This false premise of asking if it is the new record is just stupid. It IS the new record whether you agree with it or not. It will be in the stat sites after this year and for all of future years until someone else breaks it. They might have 15 or 16 games and that too will be debated as to whether or not it's fair, but it will still be the official record.

The record was broken during a post season game. Sanders post season games were not included and the NCAA has stated they had not counted the previous recor holders post season stats. Due to lack of sufficient and reliable statistics . Under your premise accepting this record which was broken during a post season game. While all previous records were solely based upon statistics derived from regular season games only. It's no different than saying Peterson broke Eric Dickersons rushing record from 1984. In 2012 because times have changed. This is the best comparison I can give you. That removes the players and leaves a black and white scenario. It's not about the players it's about the standards set forth and the history of the game

 

[WizardHawk]

STOP CALLING THIS MY PREMISE

There is only one person here using facts. The fact is the NCAA has changed how they rank these historical records. Notice I didn't say I changed it, or I want it changed, or it should be changed. I am simply informing you that it has indeed been changed.

And stop with the 'post season' garbage. I already also showed you where prior CCG were added even before bowls were officially added. They are not classified as post season games. Tomorrow marks the official end of regular season. The Army/Navy game has been the official last game going back a very long time. The post season starts AFTER that game, and yet all of the CCG's are done.

This is not MY opinion, it's NCAA fact. You simply don't agree with it and somehow think if you bitch about it enough up here it's going to change? I have no idea what your goal is, but it's not working.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

This has nothing to do with 'my logic'. All I'm saying is the body that is tasked with tracking this has made their changes and this is how it is. Why is this so freaking hard for you to grasp? I haven't once said it's the right thing, nor that I agree with the changes they made. I am simply telling you the NCAA is the organization that keeps these records and they have decided to not include bowl games for players prior to 2002 and did add them after that. Sanders record was for 11 games and now the new record is for 13. I don't know if they are still adding bowls as it seems they change their minds fairly often, but if so then the new record will contain the data for 14 games. This isn't MY system, it's theirs.

These are the facts. You keep saying you have somehow provided some opposing facts (and haven't, not once) and that everyone else is just making up shit. That's false. Just admit you aren't happy with what the NCAA has done with these historic records and be done with it. This false premise of asking if it is the new record is just stupid. It IS the new record whether you agree with it or not. It will be in the stat sites after this year and for all of future years until someone else breaks it. They might have 15 or 16 games and that too will be debated as to whether or not it's fair, but it will still be the official record.

So you're basically saying the records standards were not met. Requiring changes that make the claim of a record as being questionable. Which is what I've stated from the beginning. Change the standards of the original record in order to justify a record that was not avtually broken under the same guidelines. Thank you That about sums it up and backs up my argument. Changing history is watering down the accomplishment of the true greats from the past

 

[WizardHawk]

So you're basically saying the records standards were not met. Requiring changes that make the claim of a record as being questionable. Which is what I've stated from the beginning. Change the standards of the original record in order to justify a record that was not avtually broken under the same guidelines. Thank you That about sums it up and backs up my argument. Changing history is watering down the accomplishment of the true greats from the past

What kind of circular bullshit is that?

You asked if the record has actually been broken.

There is just one accurate response: Yes it has.

You have NOT asked if it is fair, or if we should petition to have the NCAA change their minds (yet again). You asked a question that isn't up for debate in any way, shape, or form.

The regular season will end TOMORROW after the Army/Navy game. McCaffrey's stats up through tomorrow are all part of that normal season. The Bowl season starts shortly thereafter. Welcome to college football. It seems you are kind of new to this stuff.

 

[TheDayMan]

"The standards weren't met because I don't like it, even though the organization that decides the standards say they were met... I gots facts and stats, post season, POST SEASON!"

Did I do it right clarkson?

 

[TheRobotDevil]

What kind of circular bullshit is that?

You asked if the record has actually been broken.

There is just one accurate response: Yes it has.

You have NOT asked if it is fair, or if we should petition to have the NCAA change their minds (yet again). You asked a question that isn't up for debate in any way, shape, or form.

The regular season will end TOMORROW after the Army/Navy game. McCaffrey's stats up through tomorrow are all part of that normal season. The Bowl season starts shortly thereafter. Welcome to college football. It seems you are kind of new to this stuff.

Due to the changes in guidelines and standards set forth by the NCAA. And clear change in times you pointed out. I will agree that the changes in the sport that have occurred over time have created a new era. And the best way to distinguish it is to say McCaffery holds the "modern day" record for all purpose yards. In order to preserve the integrity and history of the sport Its a lot better than all the asterisks he's getting from the media and social media. At least the facts clarified this and found a resolve to the major discrepancies

/End Thread

 

[TheRobotDevil]

"The standards weren't met because I don't like it, even though the organization that decides the standards say they were met... I gots facts and stats, post season, POST SEASON!"

Did I do it right clarkson?

The standards have been deemed met for most "modern day" all purpose yards . A resolve has been reached and our history remains intact

 

[TheDayMan]

The standards have been deemed met for most "modern day" all purpose yards . A resolve has been reached and our history remains intact

Lol, you are just full of shit. If it makes you feel better to make that distinction, have at it. The rest of us will just say he has the record for most all purpose yards in a single season. Glad you came to terms with whatever you were working through though.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Lol, you are just full of shit. If it makes you feel better to make that distinction, have at it. The rest of us will just say he has the record for most all purpose yards in a single season. Glad you came to terms with whatever you were working through though.

Most modern day all purpose yards is an impressive achievement . This thread was productive Now Ithat we finally found a resolve that protects the integrity and the history of the sport and its records I'm off to another thread
/End Thread

 

[WizardHawk]

Lol, you are just full of shit. If it makes you feel better to make that distinction, have at it. The rest of us will just say he has the record for most all purpose yards in a single season. Glad you came to terms with whatever you were working through though.

Yep, he found a way to weasel out of his main argument for some 15 odd pages plus didn't he?
I mean it should have gone without saying that people wouldn't consider any kind of achievement from today as being the same as it was nearly 30 years ago. Only a noob to the sport takes that much time to come to an obvious distinction.