[BostonCard]

I'll give Barkeley the 386 yards receiving he's had as well.  Love still leads him in yards from scrimmage (per game) 218 - 192, and in yards per play 10.9 - 8.5.  Two years ago, McCaffrey beat out Fournette in yards from scrimmage (per game) 190 - 184 and in yards per play 7.0 - 6.9.

Barkeley does have a 25-yard advantage in all-purpose yardage per game over Love, but if McCaffrey's 93 all-purpose yard advantage over Fournette was dismissed as inflated because it included "easy" kick-off return yardage, I don't see how you now include Barkeley's return yardage as well.

BC

[BostonCard]

I'll give Barkeley the 386 yards receiving he's had as well.  Love still leads him in yards from scrimmage (per game) 218 - 192, and in yards per play 10.9 - 8.5.  Two years ago, McCaffrey beat out Fournette in yards from scrimmage (per game) 190 - 184 and in yards per play 7.0 - 6.9.

Barkeley does have a 25-yard advantage in all-purpose yardage per game over Love, but if McCaffrey's 93 all-purpose yard advantage over Fournette was dismissed as inflated because it included "easy" kick-off return yardage, I don't see how you now include Barkeley's return yardage as well.

BC

[North Woods]

I'll give Barkeley the 386 yards receiving he's had as well.  Love still leads him in yards from scrimmage (per game) 218 - 192, and in yards per play 10.9 - 8.5.  Two years ago, McCaffrey beat out Fournette in yards from scrimmage (per game) 190 - 184 and in yards per play 7.0 - 6.9.

Barkeley does have a 25-yard advantage in all-purpose yardage per game over Love, but if McCaffrey's 93 all-purpose yard advantage over Fournette was dismissed as inflated because it included "easy" kick-off return yardage, I don't see how you now include Barkeley's return yardage as well.

BC

Agreed, the arguments used against McCaffrey are now being used for Barkley. Ideally these would also adjust for "normal" for each type of play e.g. a kickoff only adds value to a team if they get past the starting point after a touchback, and is only above average if they get past where a team starts on average.

We're early enough that at this point I'm more amused than frustrated by the inconsistencies. A lot will happen with these and other players to shape the H race. Having said that, this does highlight that the award is far from being an unbiased recognition -- which unfortunately we knew already.

[North Woods]

I'll give Barkeley the 386 yards receiving he's had as well.  Love still leads him in yards from scrimmage (per game) 218 - 192, and in yards per play 10.9 - 8.5.  Two years ago, McCaffrey beat out Fournette in yards from scrimmage (per game) 190 - 184 and in yards per play 7.0 - 6.9.

Barkeley does have a 25-yard advantage in all-purpose yardage per game over Love, but if McCaffrey's 93 all-purpose yard advantage over Fournette was dismissed as inflated because it included "easy" kick-off return yardage, I don't see how you now include Barkeley's return yardage as well.

BC

Agreed, the arguments used against McCaffrey are now being used for Barkley. Ideally these would also adjust for "normal" for each type of play e.g. a kickoff only adds value to a team if they get past the starting point after a touchback, and is only above average if they get past where a team starts on average.

We're early enough that at this point I'm more amused than frustrated by the inconsistencies. A lot will happen with these and other players to shape the H race. Having said that, this does highlight that the award is far from being an unbiased recognition -- which unfortunately we knew already.

[76lsjumb]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17545.msg203909#msg203909 date=1506972651]
Ugh... Barkeley is now down to 14th in total rushing.  His yards per carry is 6.7 is just 60% of Love's (11.1).  He gained all of 56 yards on 20 carries for a jaw-dropping 2.8 ypc against that defensive powerhouse Indiana (3.8 ypc against).  And somehow Barkeley is the friggin H-award leader.

Ugh

BC

But let's be consistent. In 2015, I assume part of your argument in support of CMAC was his leadership in APY. SB currently leads that category @ 244/game compared to BL at 219/game. Leadership in rushing per game is not the be all end all. In 2015, CMAC ended up 20 yards per game behind Fournette in rushing but we all though his APY performance carried the day.
[/quote]

Okay, fine.  Let's be consistent.  In 2015 the "voters" decided that APY wasn't the metric; it was rushing per game.  Then, rushing per game it is... and Love should be the clear front-runner [pun intended].  Unfortunately, it's looking like the only "consistent" metric is ABS... anybody but Stanford.

That being said, history is littered with H-man locks after Game 5 who didn't even make it to NY.  I'm waiting for that 400+ -yard, 4-touchdown Big Game to seal the deal...

[76lsjumb]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17545.msg203909#msg203909 date=1506972651]
Ugh... Barkeley is now down to 14th in total rushing.  His yards per carry is 6.7 is just 60% of Love's (11.1).  He gained all of 56 yards on 20 carries for a jaw-dropping 2.8 ypc against that defensive powerhouse Indiana (3.8 ypc against).  And somehow Barkeley is the friggin H-award leader.

Ugh

BC

But let's be consistent. In 2015, I assume part of your argument in support of CMAC was his leadership in APY. SB currently leads that category @ 244/game compared to BL at 219/game. Leadership in rushing per game is not the be all end all. In 2015, CMAC ended up 20 yards per game behind Fournette in rushing but we all though his APY performance carried the day.
[/quote]

Okay, fine.  Let's be consistent.  In 2015 the "voters" decided that APY wasn't the metric; it was rushing per game.  Then, rushing per game it is... and Love should be the clear front-runner [pun intended].  Unfortunately, it's looking like the only "consistent" metric is ABS... anybody but Stanford.

That being said, history is littered with H-man locks after Game 5 who didn't even make it to NY.  I'm waiting for that 400+ -yard, 4-touchdown Big Game to seal the deal...

[French Rage]

That being said, history is littered with H-man locks after Game 5 who didn't even make it to NY.  I'm waiting for that 400+ -yard, 4-touchdown Big Game to seal the deal...

Voters from the southeast will have already sent in their ballots by then.

[French Rage]

That being said, history is littered with H-man locks after Game 5 who didn't even make it to NY.  I'm waiting for that 400+ -yard, 4-touchdown Big Game to seal the deal...

Voters from the southeast will have already sent in their ballots by then.

[North Woods]

[quote author=76lsjumb link=topic=17545.msg203954#msg203954 date=1506980589]
That being said, history is littered with H-man locks after Game 5 who didn't even make it to NY.  I'm waiting for that 400+ -yard, 4-touchdown Big Game to seal the deal...

Voters from the southeast will have already sent in their ballots by then.
[/quote]
...which means perhaps Jalen Hurts should be the one we're talking about, not Barkley.  :P

[North Woods]

[quote author=76lsjumb link=topic=17545.msg203954#msg203954 date=1506980589]
That being said, history is littered with H-man locks after Game 5 who didn't even make it to NY.  I'm waiting for that 400+ -yard, 4-touchdown Big Game to seal the deal...

Voters from the southeast will have already sent in their ballots by then.
[/quote]
...which means perhaps Jalen Hurts should be the one we're talking about, not Barkley.  :P