Another GTP offseason project

The last time friend of the blog Travis Fain asked me an innocent question about Georgia football, it led to this, so let’s just say I pay attention when he emails me with a question.

Like this one:

This got me thinking:
What if you used your approval voting system to name an all time team, or a top 25, or maybe go by decade, etc?

That sounds like a brilliant idea.  I’ve already spoken with Peyton, my partner in crime at the Mumme Poll, about it and it’s doable.

The tricky part isn’t the approval voting.  It’s going to be setting up the parameters.  How to decide who makes the ballot?  How do we deal with recency bias?  Do we look at this by position?  By decade?

That’s where we need your help.  Lay your suggestions on me in the comments.  What I’d like to do after hearing from y’all is post a follow up discussing the framework.  From there, it’s all about putting ballots and votes together to come up with what should be a very fun Dawg fan poll.

Let me know what you think.

61 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, GTP Stuff

61 responses to “Another GTP offseason project

  1. Castleberry

    My two cents. Everyone sends in their 3 deep by position. Regardless of era. From the results I’d think you’d have 1st, 2nd, 3rd teams and some honorable mentions.

    Liked by 5 people

    • I like that idea. For a few years now I’ve been keeping a running “depth chart” of my favorite Dawgs from every position, and I’d be interested in seeing who the other commenters on this site would pick.

      My biggest question for something like that would be how strictly you define the various positions. Do you just have a category for WRs, or do you try to break them down into X/Y/Z? Do you classify a guy like David Pollack as a DE, or do you put him in an OLB spot since that’s the position he’d be more likely to play in a 3-4?

      Liked by 3 people

      • Castleberry

        Maybe you get cute with 13 or 14 starters on each team. If you just do RB with no FB there’s some dudes who won’t make it. We’re running 3 receivers, 1 TE, 2 rBs, QB, FB, and 5 OL. 4 LBs, 4 DLs, 3 corners, 2 safeties?? Don’t forget those specialty teams. Deep snappers and what have you. Maybe a separate category for spring game QB?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Harold Miller

      Great. How the hell do you do that at running back?

      Like

  2. NotMyCrossToBear

    Maybe go for two teams: 1939-1982 (Butts to Herschel) and 1983 to 2022 (post Herschel to Championship). Forty years per team and splits it into two distinct eras.

    Liked by 10 people

  3. ApalachDawg aux Bruxelles

    I would group teams into decades…
    Since I attended UGA early 90’s my “adult/educated” memories lean toward the years of 90’s-00’s-10’s…so maybe a grouping of 1892-1939; 40-69; 70-89; 90-22.
    then I think a top 25 list

    Liked by 2 people

    • Down Island Way

      Do an all-timer, only 11 on that list (offense/defense/special teams), do top 25, 11 offense, 11 defense, special teams (25-30 total), do one by decades, if a UGA football player is on the all- timer list, that’s it…shit, I’ll just vote #34 at every position…GO DAWGS!

      Like

  4. Skeptic Dawg

    This is a discussion that I assume all Dawgs fans have taken part in multiple times over the years. Yes, the parameters can be tricky, and every group/individual has their own ideas. My group has agreed to the following points when discussing the greatest to ever wear the Red and Black…
    1). QB – total yards, TDs/INT ratio, titles won (East, SECCG, national title)
    2). RB – dominance within college football, rushing yards, all purpose yards, awards
    3). WR – total receiving yards, TDs, team impact
    4). Defense – level of dominance within college football during their time, sacks, turnovers caused, total tackles
    5). All players – legacy, impact upon the program.

    It will be interesting to see the ideas of others. Hope you guys have a few great ideas that my group can use in the future.

    Hope that the surgery went well Senator. Praying for a smooth receivers and full health moving forward.

    Like

    • Granthams Replacement

      Stats will favor the latest players due to 15 games seasons and rules changes. Holding in 1980 is very different than 2021. Targeting, horse collars, and unnecessary roughness were considered good plays in 1980. Also the 1 platoon football factors into the Butts era players.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Russ

        Agreed. Players should be compared against their peers. Trippi and Sinkwich dominated their peers, yet their numbers don’t mean squat these days. Yet they are two all-time greats.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Skeptic Dawg

        Replacement, you bring up a valid point. My group has debated the stats based upon era, but that’s where titles program legacy coming into play. There are several ways to skin this cat as we can clearly see in the comments above and below. I really like NotMyCrossToBear’s idea if the two eras, 1939-1982 and the 1982- present. It’s not completely apples to apples, but it’s in the ballpark.

        Like

  5. JuanSolo

    All time players should be judged by how dominant they were during their era. Herschel is the outlier because he would be as dominant 40 years prior and in the current era.

    I also like the idea of a 2-deep across all 22.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Spell Dawg

    I would add a survey question asking the decade the survey-taker was born in, did they attend UGA, etc.,. It would give some (albeit vague) context to the prevailing selections and possibly motivate (underrepresented) participation.

    Like

  7. Offshoot of your idea…. March Madness 64-player bracket

    Liked by 1 person

    • Derek

      The problem here is that the other 63 don’t have a chance.

      The race for second may be entertaining. Anyone in Herschel’s side of the bracket is fucked tho.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dylan Dreyer's Booty

        I don’t know about that – the tweet specifically mentions ‘most loved’ Dawg not necessarily greatest athlete. And even then I think a case can be made that Champ Bailey, Hines Ward, Jake Scott and a few others were at least as good an athlete as HW; they just played different positions.

        I like the idea of two stages: 1) a Mumme style poll where everyone votes for, say their top ten (or more), and when that is done, 2) tabulate and take the top 64 votes and set up a March Madness bracket. This has been done a couple of times on a website I frequent picking the Charles Wesley hymns of all time.

        It’s fun and has the added advantage of seeing what others are thinking and maybe making you re-evaluate your original top ten, and it can last several days – weeks even – like a football season.

        Like

  8. You can’t start before 1990.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Russ

      Because that’s when Florida invented football?

      Liked by 5 people

    • rigger92

      You say that, but I will admit that my personal experience with the Dawgs only started in 1988 when I enrolled as a Freshman. Also, my parents and extended family had zero interest in the Dawgs until I went there, so I don’t have all these memories like most everyone else here does.

      All that is to say, my voting would skew ‘90-present unless I just go by Munson clips and following whatever all of you say which seems disingenuous. I know it’s just for fun but c’mon y’all, we’re talking Dawgs here!

      Like

  9. originaluglydawg

    This is a great idea no matter how it gets done.
    I like Castleberry’s (the very top post) idea.
    That would cover a lot of eras and players.
    I would add that limited lists be accepted. For instance if someone lists their fav running back and mentions no other position or name, it should still be counted.
    I have one question.
    Is Reggie ball eligible for nomination?

    Liked by 8 people

  10. Ozam

    It’s a great idea and will lead to lots of fun discussions. We do this all the time among my Dawgs texting group.

    For example, rating Matt Stafford the first pick in the NFL draft!

    Like

  11. Maybe make it a Red and Black game.

    On both sides, you pick your three deep at the different skill positions, so:

    QB
    RB (no variance for TB, FB, SB, just ball carriers)
    WR (again no variance)
    OL (pick 5 here)
    TE
    DL
    LB
    SEC
    K
    P
    KR

    For the Red team, you pick your opinion of who is the BEST at those positions historically; for the Black team, you pick your favorites. Example, I don’t think Robert Edwards was a red team pick, but definitely a black team favorite for me because of 1997 and my time as a student on campus there, as well. I’d even consider Hines Ward as a Black team QB because he was damned fun to watch, but wouldn’t be one of our best by a long shot.

    Just my thoughts.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Castleberry

      I really like the favorites idea. Probably some crossover, but a guy like Knowshon comes to mind and a fave who isn’t in my top 3 at his position.

      Like

    • CB

      I’d have to separate out fullbacks. Too many good ones to choose from especially during the Richt era. Would be a shame to see them all get overshadowed because of all the exceptional tailbacks.

      Like

  12. SoCalDawg

    The more, the merrier. I like by position AND by decade if it’s at all possible. 1892 – 2022

    Liked by 2 people

  13. bucketheridge

    There are tons of ways to skin this cat and some great ideas already. My suggestion is to group it by coaches. Pre-Dooley, Dooley, Goff/Donnan, Richt, and Kirby–maybe grouping Richt and Kirby together, although I think separating them out would prevent some of the recency bias there.

    The thing to keep in mind is how old we are as commenters. Our earliest memories range against all eras, meaning that any love we have for players prior to that is fueled by legend and not what we saw in real time. Which is why I think there should be some sort of division by time period, no matter how it’s done. Having said that, I think a final, all-time favorites team is a must.

    Lastly, we keep in mind how cumbersome this will be for the Senator to put together. He’s going to be weeding through a hell of a lot of comments here.

    Like

    • What do we pay him our subscription fee for?

      Oh, wait …

      Liked by 5 people

    • I like the “eras” idea better than doing it strictly by decade. I participated in an interesting discussion a while back about when the various decades of American history really began—for example, the ’60s technically ended on 12/31/1969, but in terms of the vibe or the zeitgeist or whatever, people often say that the ’60s really ended with the Altamont Free Concert, or Nixon’s election in ’68, or Kent State, etc. In a similar way, Georgia football is more accurately defined by the different coaching eras than by strict decades.

      The only problem with that method is that some eras end up being longer than others—like, 25 years for Dooley compared to 12 for Goff and Donnan combined—so you’ve got a much larger pool of players to choose from, which means some really deserving players are going to be left out. Maybe do a three-deep for the Dooley and Richt/Kirby eras and just a two-deep for the shorter ones?

      Like

      • Harold Miller

        To be honest with you, even though there were some all timers in the Goff era. It was pretty terrible.

        Like

  14. This is a tough one. I would think you start with a post each week asking for names for a specific position. Read our comments and discussions. Put the player names we talk about on your list. Then, the following week, put the names up and let us vote in a system of rounds, and also open up a discussion for a different position. Example; this week we are discussing all time great DB’s, and voting on last week’s discussion of all time great LB’s, etc. This could be a fun exercise for months. I watched UGA vs. Auburn 2008 the other day on Pluto TV, and had forgotten about Renny Curren, and how much I loved watching him play, so recency bias is a real issue. Maybe a post in between name submissions and voting with links to videos and stats of the players on the ballot. Good luck. Sounds fun, but a lot of work for you.

    Like

    • otto1980

      I like this and breaking it down into at minimum 2 eras. Maybe the up to the end of Dooley and then Goff to now.

      Eric Z, Stafford, Murray, and David Green would be a debate.

      Liked by 1 person

    • otto1980

      I would also just assume Herschel gets all time RB ad start the debate excluding him. Dooley had plenty of good RBs and Herschel is just a given.

      Liked by 1 person

  15. beatarmy92

    Best/favorite 24 (22 + K and P) by decade.

    Like

  16. Clayton Joiner

    My suggestion would be by decade, and then All Time. That way you can hit them all!

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Russ

    I’d do it by decade for every decade we’ve played football. Then use brackets to whittle it down until we get 22 all time greats. We’d need to compare players against their peers and pick those who dominated their peers.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. otto1980

    My thoughts on the up to Dooley and post Dooley era are, offense changed in the 90s. Yes Dooley ran some option veer, pro set and I formation. Goff and Zeier did more shotgun and passing than was common before. Defense also changed to fewer defensive linemen to counter the offense.

    I like decades or an earlier team but how many right guards from the 40s, 50s, 60s etc can many of us really name as being the best? I am a history nerd and love reading Patrick Garbin’s posts on this stuff but outside of knowing Pat Dye, or that a Joe T was playing Center on the ’76 team I am not well versed. I just watched the 77 Sugar Bowl off the DVR from the COVID year when TV aired classic games. Further to be very honest I know more about them because of they did after they played or of course if they were part of a Munson call.

    Whatever is decided, I’ll enjoy reading the post and comments.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. PTC DAWG

    Like anyone here can name a 3 deep on guards from the 60’s…

    Liked by 1 person

    • RangerRuss

      So this is the cranky ol grump section of the thread? Not an exercise that holds my interest. Y’all have at it. I’ll sharpshoot the list when it’s published.

      Like

      • Got Cowdog

        Hell RangerRuss. Just pick your favorite tough old Dawgs. I was fortunate enough to meet a few many moons after their playing days. They still have the look.

        Like

        • RangerRuss

          What part of doesn’t hold my interest didn’t you understand?
          #crustyolbastards’Rus
          Now pour me three fingers of JWB while I fry up these ribeyes.
          😉

          Like

  20. The Truth

    We have drop-down lists or something like it with the Mumme Poll, correct? I’d be hesitant to provide a list of players for this exercise because if someone is truly memorable then you should, well, remember them.

    Liked by 1 person