|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1,584
|
All-In [29823]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8830
Joined: 10/31/10
|
2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 8:12 AM
|
|
Some numbers to consider for Best Ever Status.
1) Since 1900, only 84 teams have had an average win margin of greater than 30 points per game. That's dominant.
2) Since WW2 (the Modern Era), 21 of those 84 dominant teams have done it in an undefeated season of 9 or more wins.
3) Of those 21 teams, 10 have had opponent win percentages =<50% (powder puff schedules), and 11 have had opponent win percentages >50% (legit schedules). At the top of that list are Army45 and Clemson18.
So, you could say those are the two most dominant undefeated teams against the toughest competition, in the modern era.
We won 60% more games than Army45 (15-0 to 9-0), more than a season and a half for them, but they won by more, had slightly harder competition, and everyone played both ways back then. So while we can't say we had the best offense ever (FSU13, 723 points), or the best defense ever (one of the Tennessee scoreless seasons in the late 30's), or the most dominant wins ever (Army44 with a +52 margin of victory in every game), We can say we won the most games ever in the modern era, against the second hardest competition, in top 20 dominant fashion, among the post WW2 undefeateds.
That's pretty d a m n impressive. And I'd say collectively, those achievements make us at least one of the two best teams EVER, with a strong case for #1 given the length of the season. Here's the list of all that sorted by avg opponent win %.
Year Team.......Coach.....Wins...MargVic.....Opp Win%
1945 Army........Blaik...........9..... 40.7............0.68
2018 Clemson..Swinney.....15....31.1............0.62
1945 Alabama..Thomas......9..... 38.9............0.57
1971 Neb..........Devaney....13....31...............0.57
2001 Miami.......Coker........12.....32.9............0.57
2005 Texas.......Brown.......13.....33.8............0.57
1944 Army........Blaik...........9......52.1............0.54
1959 Syr...........Schwarz....11.....30.9............0.54
1995 Neb.........Osborne....12......38.7...........0.54
1949 Pac..........Siemeri.....11......46.3...........0.53
2013 FSU.........Fisher.......14......39.0...........0.52
1997 Neb.........Osborne...13.......30.2...........0.5
1974 Ok...........Switzer......11.......34.6...........0.5
1991 Wash......James.......12.......31.7...........0.5
1947 Mich.......Crisler........10.......34.1...........0.45
1951 Mary.......Tatum........10.......30.6...........0.44
1950 Wyoming.Wyatt........10.......30.4..........0.43
1954 UCLA.....Sanders......9........36.3..........0.41
1949 Army.......Blaik..........9.........31.8..........0.39
1957 ASU........Devine......10.......33.1..........0.36
1956 Ok...........Wilk..........10.......41.5...........0.32
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [67715]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115417
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: 2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 8:48 AM
|
|
certainly given its never done and the media statements about how great the last team they beat was, you could say that
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6825]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6350
Joined: 7/20/18
|
Re: 2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 9:12 AM
|
|
I lean no. Hate to say it. But that is ok, then the next class can be even better.
I think you can say we have the most dominant playoff/post season performance in history. That was the best "Dec/January" team
However, here is they reason why I said no: we took our foot off the gas in the 2nd or halftime is almost every game. Everyone played. Our "early" season were "unbeatable-meh" but we were definitely the best at the end of the season. So we really don't know how good we could be across 15 games. T
I still lean that the 2013 FSU was, wire-to-wire the "most dominant" as they just eviscerated everyone on their path... save the BCS game but they might have the most dominant 2 quarters too. 2001 Miami would be another option, but FSU was better. Our issue is just Dabo's culture (and I prefer that gentleman's approach) and he just does not kick teams when they are down like Jimbo does. That is why they were 39points vs 31 points for us.
Now, if FSU 2013 BCS team played our CFP team, we would beat them in January. If we played them in week 4, they could beat us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11478]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9412
Joined: 10/3/12
|
Re: 2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 9:53 AM
|
|
I would suggest that your argument speaks toward this year's Tigers being the most dominant or best team ever.
Due to Dabo's culture, we had to be that dominant while playing way more players per game than those other teams that you speak of.
A greater than 30 point per game margin while also AVERAGING over 70 players per game playing means that this roster may have been the deepest and most dominant that ever seen before.
Further I would suggest the same about the comparison with the '45 Army team. While they dominated their opponents more on the scoreboard, they only needed 15 or 20 dominant players since everyone was playing both sides of the ball.
I repeat, we used SEVENTY players per game and we still dominated the schedule and the championships in that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6825]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6350
Joined: 7/20/18
|
Re: 2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 10:25 AM
|
|
Definitely that was paying major dividends by the end of the season, but at the same time, it hurts the statistics. How many "out of reach" points were scored against us when we were playing everyone, how often was it that we did not score in the 4th (like against Bama) because it was out of reach. I am sure that FSU and other were playing backups but we play the backups' backups' backups and the tiger band. It is hard to compare those deep roster players and how we compare the first team(s) that would slug it out.
It becomes an 'eyeball test' argument that hurts us for making the case as the stats are at least a baseline for many.
Still, that 2013 FSU team was a blow it out every game team. Their closest game during the season was 14 points and the next closest was 28 points. All but three games (including the NC) they held the opponent to less than two scores.
That being said, the team that played for the NC did not have a good game. Our NC team would beat them handily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11478]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9412
Joined: 10/3/12
|
Re: 2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 10:47 AM
|
|
Very good points.
I guess the difference is whether you are comparing first teams or comparing overall depth of talent on the roster.
The years after the FSU championship showed that the title they won was based on star power at the top. Even the '14 team who made the playoffs was already a major drop in talent and had to squeak their way through the season. In '14 they should have lost several regular season games, including to our Tigers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [65037]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33173
Joined: 12/3/03
|
This is one of those Ali / Marciano discussions that can
Jan 14, 2019, 9:45 AM
|
|
never have a definitive answer. I am content that we are at least in the discussion, because that is the best that you can really do, is to be there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30766]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 34465
Joined: 6/22/03
|
Maybe my anus...... 1st team to go undefeated in a playoff
Jan 14, 2019, 10:29 AM
|
|
Fork you Miami cornhuskers.
Play a conference champ and playoff game... then come to the big boy table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6157]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5084
Joined: 8/30/17
|
Re: 2018 Clemson Tigers Best Ever? Maybe...
Jan 14, 2019, 10:33 AM
|
|
You really can only compare this team to those after the 85 scholarship era started. Teams before that could be ridiculously stacked with talent to keep other teams from getting it and the Army teams of the 1940’s had an even bigger advantage - Uncle Sam wants you to play football. I also read back in those days teams like Notre Dame and who knows, maybe even Clemson, had non students playing on their football teams. Different eras simply aren’t comparable for a variety of reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1,584
|
|
|
50
