Jump to content

Talk:1928 Florida Gators football team

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Roster structure

[edit]

@MisterCake: Given the fact that virtually the entire 1928 team played both ways, as was typical in the 1920s, and further given the remarkable interchangeability of '28 Gators backs (QBs, FBs, HBs), I think an alphabetized list segmented by linemen and backfield makes a lot of sense here. The only question is: what to do with the ends? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ends were linemen; cf. "defensive end". Dividing things by line and backs is very typical of the period; goes back to Stagg. In fact I've thought to ask for parameters for line coach and backfield coach for articles years before O and D coordinators. PS Where did you get Van Sickel's jersey number?Cake (talk) 21:13, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I guess the ends were all down linemen in that era; no separate category for "receivers". Combination of modern defensive end, defensive back, tight end and wide receiver. Had to be a hell of an athlete to play the position. I'm pretty sure you were the source for DVS's jersey number; either that, or I got it from his CFHOF profile. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:22, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes; they were all "tight ends". The term "split end" recalls the evolution from end to receiver. On defense, either at end (of course) or linebacker was typical; and the equivalent of a prevent defense in that era was sending your ends back in pass protection with the backs. The 7–2–2 defense was all about fast, blitzing ends. Plenty of the good ones were sent into the backfield to kick or pass as well (try to play all of Lynn Bomar's positions) - it's no wonder one sees lots of coaches having been ends, or do-it-alls stuck at end. I see the hall does not have Van Sickel's number; I must double check where I found it. Cake (talk) 21:30, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Photo selection

[edit]

Cake, the standing group photo of the '28 backfield players is perfect. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it takes little effort to pick a photo, but glad it pleased you. If only the quality were better. I chose the best available. A bit curious how to stick in Johnny Bryson (the shortest player on the team). It is said he was a back, which you'd expect, but he's not one of the 12 pictured, and not in the team picture either. Cake (talk) 21:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Dirtlawyer1: Unfortunately the pictures of Crabtree and the Four in the online yearbook are much too blurry. Also found one of the original for Crabtree but again the black-and-white newspaper cut out is less blurry. There are some great photos of forward passes in the top banner across the yearbook, but no way for me to tell the game. Also, interesting to note there are multiple team pictures aside from the one in the yearbook, with the players in the same order but including the coaches, e. g. here. Here is Bachman coaching up Bowyer and Steele, and here is Tigert at some 1928 game. Cake (talk) 15:25, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Honors and awards vs. "Post-season", etc.

[edit]

@MisterCake: These two sections are apparently redundant, and I suggest combining non-duplicate contents under "Honors and awards". The header "Post-season", without more, is misleading. Also, Van Sickel was the only first-team All-American in 1928, but three other players received second-team or third-team honors (Crabtree, McRae, Steele) -- see List of Florida Gators football All-Americans. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:13, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to fix the section headings - you can do more if it still bothers you. I knew that about first-team, but revised that part if it was unclear. You might check the 1923 All-America team to see how Billy Evans paid attention to southern writers. Cake (talk) 14:43, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me, Cake. I whacked the redundant list of "Honors and awards" at the bottom of the article; you had already rolled everything into the "Honors and awards" subsection of "Post-season". I also added the missing All-American honors for Van Sickel, Crabtree, McRae and Steele, with appropriate footnotes. Oddly, the media guide misses the AA honors for Crabtree, McRae and Steele, and a couple of selectors for Van Sickel, too. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 15:48, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Myths and legends

[edit]

At some point, we need to directly address and dispel two of the major myths and legends of '28, including the Rose Bowl rumors (not true), and the "watering" of Watkins Field (apparently not true). In both cases, there are interview quotes from Gators players and Charlie Bachman contradicting those myths years after the fact. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:13, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do. In that era rain was the great neutralizer, and it seems when upset in the rain teams would often claim the other one watered the field. It seems the Tennessee section addresses it (I think you wrote it) but feel free to expand upon it, especially if there are quotes. The Rose Bowl should (hopefully) be simple enough: we were holding out for a Georgia Tech loss, and few would've disputed UF as co-champions had we beat Tenn. Cake (talk) 14:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Truth be told, the short version is that Bachman lied to the team about a possible Rose Bowl bid before the Tennessee game in order to motivate them. Bachman admitted as much in several interviews after he retired from Michigan State and moved to Port Charlotte. Gators fans, on the other hand, would often wistfully talk about the Rose Bowl that got away. Now largely forgotten, the '28 team was a huge part of the Gators' collective memories until the arrival of Ray Graves in 1960 and Steve Spurrier in 1990, and the Rose Bowl bid and the watered field were parts of the '28 legend. It's also very weird how the UAA/UF SID lost track of some of the All-American honors from 1928, forgetting Crabtree, McRae and Steele. Personally, I think they didn't have much of an athletic department in the 1920s and 1930s, and someone like Norm Carlson reconstructed the newspaper clipping file, years after the fact, during the 1960s or 1970s. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 16:05, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible they ignored those who weren't first-team All-Americans, though that is hard to imagine for the South, unless it was done retroactively as you say. I've heard about the potential Rose Bowl bid as Bachman's creation for motivation–"a play out of Rockne's playbook" is usually the tale, but I did not know he admitted as much. That would be a neat addition. Wish I could see more of that Rose Bowl than this too. Cake (talk) 18:25, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, the UAA/UF SID is pretty good at claiming any kind of All-American honors they can, minor or major selectors, first team, second team, or otherwise. If you compare the media guide to the list article I compiled a couple of years ago, you will see they not only missed Crabtree, McRae and Steele's honors in 1928, they missed Van Sickel's second-team honors in 1929, and Bethea's second-team honors in 1930. They also completely mangled Fergie Ferguson's 1941 honorable mention from Collier's into first-team honors from NEA and Collier's which don't exist. No other Gator received any kind of All-American honors until Charlie LaPradd was a first-term selection by AP in 1952. Given the completely mangled pre-1952 history, as well as the multiple coaching turnovers in the ensuing 22 years -- Bachman, Stanley, Cody, Lieb, Wolf and Woodruff, with World War II thrown in the mix -- I think a small-time program just lost what records they had. Easy enough for clippings files to go missing, and there are also gaps in the pre-1950 lettermen's list, too. Norm Carlson was the long-time SID director from the 1960s until he retired a few years ago, and I am guessing he was the one who reconstructed the All-American honors history retroactively. Thirty or forty years after the fact, and without the benefit of the internet, it's understandable how they missed the other guys from 1928, 1929 and 1930: everyone was focused on Van Sickel being "the first," and he got most of the post-season ink in the Florida newspapers. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:02, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:1928 Florida Gators football team/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 21:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


  • No duplicate links present.
  • Images: The team shot in the infobox image - have you got anyway to check to see if the copyright has expired? You've got other shots from later editions of the same publication as free use on this basis.
  • The only other thing about the images is that you should try to use a caption that isn't just the person's name and date
  • Before the season: Is there any background that could be added to expand on Bachman's experience prior to taking up the job?
  • Florida Southern: Stick a convert template in for the 98 pounds mention, probably to kgs.
  • Might be better to specify in the text that all the points came in the third quarter
  • North Carolina: End of the first paragraph needs a cite
  • Sewanee: Same, end of the first paragraph needs a cite
  • Georgia: Cite needed at the end of the first paragraph and at the end of the second paragraph
  • Link fumble
  • Clemson: "Florida effectively used both the run and the pass" I'd move the "effectively" after "used both the run and pass" to improve the flow of that sentence
  • "Bethea's work reminding one writer of Red Grange" - can we say which writer/publication in the prose?
  • I'd move the details of the Clemson touchdown pass up to where you say they took the lead. That way it keeps all nice and chronological
  • Tennessee: Link Knoxville, Tennessee in the prose too
  • I'd drop the "mythical" per WP:FLOWERY
  • Likewise re-write the "came out with a vengeance" per WP:IDIOM
  • "Some sources claim it was blocked." - can we say which sources?
  • Departing seniors: Second paragraph needs to be cited
  • I'd move the quote about the Rose Bowl up to the mention of the Rose Bowl in the Tennessee section as it seems out of place in a section about the seniors.
  • Cite #7: Needs to be fully filled out
  • Cite #19: Needs to be fully filled out - I recommend worldcat.org for finding out publisher details etc for books. You can always format it the same as the two book sources in the Bibliography as well if you'd prefer. I don't mind as long as everything is formatted the same way.
  • Cite #32: Same as 19
  • Cite #44: Same as #7
  • Cite #46: Same as #7
  • @Miyagawa: I think I managed to cover them all. On the infobox image, Cbl62 seems most trustworthy (the one who gave the free use basis on those other images), and a search of the copyright records reveals no hits for "Seminole", so I've changed its status accordingly. Cake (talk) 04:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Non-reviewer comment: I feel a little uncomfortable with the non-free images. We already have (a free) image in the infobox to identify the whole team, so why do we need separate non-free images to identify the backfield, let alone individual players. This is not good in terms of WP:NFCC#3 (minimal use), and generally speaking there is no compelling need (WP:NFCC#8, contextual significance) to identify individuals in articles that are not exclusively about them. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 10:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Understandable and thanks for the interest. As one can see from the above comment left by Dirtlawyer, one relished finding a backfield image. The "Phantom Four" backfield and the scoring it produced are the most significant features of the team. I would be reluctant to see that one go. Not to mention, it would not surprise me if the image were free use anyway, I just tend to use fair use when it's after 1923. The image of Crabtree, say, is in the yearbook (much too blurry and small online, hence the paper clipping), so if the infobox image is free use then so is it. Cake (talk) 10:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The only remaining fair use image in the article now is that one of Dale Van Sickel, which came from photobucket and the original source information isn't listed. I think it'd be fine on an article on the individual if no other images existed, but for this article, it's not needed. So unless the original source can be found and the copyright renewal wasn't completed, then it'll need to go I'm afraid. Miyagawa (talk) 22:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I could not find its source aside from being a 1929ish press photo, and so maybe out there in the aether is a copyright for it. It is nice to have him in his jersey and in a stance of course, but with having another shot of him I removed it from all except his own article. For what it is worth, it is quite a commonly used press shot of Van Sickel, found on sports cards, etc. Cake (talk) 00:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly if you can find out the original source later and can confirm that the copyright isn't renewed, then of course do please add it back again. But for now, I'm happy for this to be promoted to GA. Miyagawa (talk) 09:41, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1928 Florida Gators football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 1928 Florida Gators football team. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1928_Florida_Gators_football_team&oldid=1249716169"