Where does 2014 Herd rank all-time?

[flairforherd]

Now that basketball is mercifully over, I thought of a topic that I don't recall seeing discussed here. If it was, sorry.

Where does the 2014 Herd football team rank among the school's all-time best?

Personally, I think it could be as high as 4th.

I think 1999 is clearly no. 1, no further explanation needed.

I have 1996 as no. 2, followed by 1998.

My own top 5 used to include 2002 at no. 4, then 2001 at no. 5, but those teams were weaker defensively, especially 2001. I think I would put 2014 at no. 4 because I think the 2014 D was stronger than those two. Dropping 2002 to no. 5 and 2001 to no better than no. 6.

Thoughts?

 

[Marine03]

1-96
2-99
3-02
4-14
5-01

 

[pdbailey]

19991996201419982002

 

[mufan08]

1. 1999
2. 1998
3. 1996
4. 1997
5. 2002
6. 2014
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[ThunderCat98]

This^^^
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[OVERHERD]

99, 96, 02, 14, 98, 96, 97, 92

 

[Always The Herd]

Wrong reply

This post was edited on 3/13 11:43 AM by Always The Herd

 

[Trebel06]

I've got the 2014 Herd at #5

1. 1999
2. 1996
3. 1998
4. 1997
5. 2014

 

[Gochneaur645]

1. 1999
2. 2014
3. 1996
4. 1998
5. 2002

 

[cocky jeremy]

Originally posted by Marine03:
1-96
2-99
3-02
4-14
5-01

Looks pretty good to me. I'd say 2014 could go either way with the 2002 team.

 

[sistersville]

My personel favorite is 92 then 96. Because of our different schedule its a hard thing to gauge. 2014 was onenof the best.

 

[tradebait]

1. 1999
2. 1996
3. 2014
4, 2002
5. 1998
6. 1997
7. 2001

 

[BT4373]

No. 1 belongs to Coach Archer Reilly. The 1919 Herd went 8-0 and rarely scored on. total score of 302-13. The next year we lost every game (0-8) and never scored a point 0-247. Damn officials.

 

[ohio herd]

1. 1999
2. 2014
3. 1998
4. 2002
5. 1996

 

[blevins]

My top 10 Herd teams by strength of team:
1999, 1996, 1997, 2014, 1998, 2002, 2001, 1992, 1994, and 1995. Could argue 2013 or 2003 with either of the last 2.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Originally posted by BT4373:

No. 1 belongs to Coach Archer Reilly. The 1919 Herd went 8-0 and rarely scored on. total score of 302-13. The next year we lost every game (0-8) and never scored a point 0-247. Damn officials.

Any of the teams people are mentioning would beat them 500-0.

 

[ShadySpring]

wit u ohio herd

 

[SquireJack]

Fun topic; interesting rankings and reasons, etc. Anytime people try to compare teams from different time periods, it's always totally subjective and open to considerable debate (of course). Gauging the Herd's "best teams" in football is even harder since they've bounced around so much in divisions and conferences. Hard to compare when the quality of competition varied so much, and at no time against the kind of top-tier opposition that makes a comparative assessment easier. But probably 1999, IMO. It would have been interesting to have seen what that team could have done in a bowl game against a decent opponent.

 

[murox]

1. 1999
2. 1996
3. 1998
4. 2002
5. 2014

 

[19MU88]

I'm with Rox
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[19MU88]

With 2003 and 1997 deserving mention
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[BigFloyd]

1. 1999 - best team in Herd history

2. 1996 - had the talent in the starting 22 to beat the 1996 team, but depth would have been a problem in that match up.

3. 1998 - an overall great team but wasn't as explosive offensively as '99 or '96

4. 2014 - it sucks that we will never know how great this team was. No Herd defense would completely shut down Devon Johnson.

5. 1997 - Randy Moss made them great. Depth was a problem at times.

6. 2002 - Prolific offense, defense was mediocre.

7. 2013 - A prolific offense, good defense. Coaching was very questionable in '13.

8. 2001 - Great offense. Run defense was atrocious. Chubb Small would've hit the century mark on them.

9. 1992 - Honestly don't know much about them as I didn't start following Marshall/football at all until 1996.

10. 2000 - Just wanted to round out the top 10. This team was really clicking by the end of the year once the offensive line got healthy and built cohesiveness.

 

[19MU88]

Losing to WKU at home is HUGE set back for 2014 team
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[ohio herd]

Since we are on the subject, for the life of me I do not understand why some of you don't see the greatness of this 2014 team. They lost one game in OT by 1 point. They totally dominated the majority of teams this year. Besides the 99 team which most would agree was the best I can not remember any other team better. The 2014 Herd did the following:

> Finished with 13 wins
> Finished ranked in both polls
> Won their bowl game over a quality opponent.
> Had 2 of the best players of all time Herd football play. ( Cato, Shuler)
> The schedule wasn't much different (sos) than other years mentioned.
> Depth, This team had more depth than any of the other teams IMO
> The 96 team as good as it was played a FCS schedule which was decent but not as tough as even the MAC and C-USA.So to say we played nobody so we can't make a judgement leaves me scratching my head.

Go back and look at the schedules of some of the other teams and you will see several games where we were fortunate to win. This team blew out most and could have done more but Doc called the dogs off.

This post was edited on 3/16 9:19 PM by ohio herd

 

[bbcard1]

I think I would go:

1999
1996
2014
2002
1992
1998
2013
1995

FTR, 2000 was probably my favorite team. Had no business winning the MAC or a bowl game but did it. 2004 is the team that should have been on that list but didn't have the intangibles to put it together on the field.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Originally posted by SquireJack:
Fun topic; interesting rankings and reasons, etc. Anytime people try to compare teams from different time periods, it's always totally subjective and open to considerable debate (of course). Gauging the Herd's "best teams" in football is even harder since they've bounced around so much in divisions and conferences. Hard to compare when the quality of competition varied so much, and at no time against the kind of top-tier opposition that makes a comparative assessment easier. But probably 1999, IMO. It would have been interesting to have seen what that team could have done in a bowl game against a decent opponent.

Depends on the time periods. If you're comparing 90's to now, yes. If you're comparing 70's or something to now, no. Guys are so much bigger, stronger, and faster now. Even more so when you do like someone said earlier and bring in a team from 1919 when offensive linemen were barely 200 lbs.
This post was edited on 3/18 7:08 PM by cocky jeremy

 

[BT4373]

Jeremy don't you think we all know that? Those guys did not weigh 200 lbs. Ali against the older generation of course. And the science of the game has progressed like the jump shot vs set shot in basketball. But it is all about how you define the OP question. My comment about the 1919 team was about what they did then. Where were they ranked then? In their league of course.

 

[marshallsig]

I think 2014 ranks number 2 after 1999. I am surprised the number of people that put 2001 or 2002 above them. Those were some shakey defenses those years, and do not compare to the defense that 2014 had.

 

[sportsphantom1]

Originally posted by SquireJack:

...But probably 1999, IMO. It would have been interesting to have seen what that team could have done in a bowl game against a decent opponent...

What are you talking about? In their bowl game they beat the #25 ranked team in the country by 3 scores.

 

[cocky jeremy]

Originally posted by BT4373:

Jeremy don't you think we all know that? Those guys did not weigh 200 lbs. Ali against the older generation of course. And the science of the game has progressed like the jump shot vs set shot in basketball. But it is all about how you define the OP question. My comment about the 1919 team was about what they did then. Where were they ranked then? In their league of course.

You're right. It does depend on how you compare. For me, it's how they would do against each other. Who is the overall BEST. Not best in their time. Because, to me, when I say who is our best team, I want the best team we've ever fielded, not just for their time period.

 

[alphasig1053]

1. 1999
2. 1996
3. 2014
4. 1998
5. 2002

 

[flairforherd]

Originally posted by marshallsig:
I think 2014 ranks number 2 after 1999. I am surprised the number of people that put 2001 or 2002 above them. Those were some shakey defenses those years, and do not compare to the defense that 2014 had.

Even though I personally have 2014 at no. 4, I think that arguably the highest they can possibly, realistically be ranked is no. 3.

IMO the 99 team is the clear no. 1. But I think the 96 team is a clear no. 2. Forget that they were 1AA for a minute. Most of the players that were the foundation of the 99 team were on the 96 team as backups. We had a future NFL QB (although a backup) as our QB. Moss was doing things that were unheard of at that time. We had an explosive offense, a great defense, and solid special teams.

The end of the year Sagarin ratings had them in the top 25, even with an exclusively 1AA schedule. That team dominated all year and Pruett held scores down by handing off to 3rd and 4th team RBs for much of the second halves of games, as well as by spreading the ball around to other players not named Randy Moss. It had two RBs over 1,200 yards.

It's just my opinion, for what little that's worth, that our 96 team would absolutely thrash any of our teams before or since, with the exception of the 99 and maybe 98 teams. I think the 98 team had the defense to hold down the score, but ultimately lacked the firepower to keep pace with 96. 2001, 2002, 2014? I don't think any of them could keep pace and I think the 96 defense and special teams were better.

 

[ohio herd]

Flair that is an interesting take on the 96 team.With all due respect, they most certainly would not have trashed the 2014 team.It is one thing to beat up Western Carolina and The Citadel every week. It is a different animal to do it against a D-1 schedule every week.Look at the 97 team. With Moss and a NFL QB named Chad they certainly didn't thrash everyone and the 2014 team IMO would have been as good as any team(wvu,UM) they faced that year.The depth of talent and the speed of an entire team vs a few would be the difference. Of course this is only my view.Fun post for off season chatter.

 

[flairforherd]

Yes, it is good discussion. I thought it would be a fun topic.

JMHO but the difference between the 96 and 97 teams was not so much the schedule, but I actually think the 96 team was deeper. It was a senior-dominated defense. The 97 team was actually much younger. I think the 96 team would have had better results than the 97 team playing an identical schedule. I think the 96 team would have had a very realistic chance to go undefeated playing the 97 schedule. But again, it's JMHO.

 

[MarshallManiac]

If the question is "how would the 2014 team do if they played the other great Herd teams?" I believe they are no worse than 3rd.

The 99 defense was unreal and with Pennington at QB I think they would squeak one out against 2014.

Same with 98. Much like the 2014 team, they had really just one bad game against Bowling Green. That said, they were very good one both sides of the ball. I think there's a good chance 2014 could be better than this team.

Just behind the 2014 team I'd put 2002 and then 1996.

96 didn't have the depth and would wear down. 2002 didn't have the defense.