Deletion of List of poorly performing college football coaches

Comment: I'm pretty sure that |Biographies of living persons does not apply to dead people.  Maybe the two guys from Prairie view are still alive...?  I don't think it's "nasty" at all, and certainly not an "attack" -- it's merely a reporting of which coaches had the poorest records
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: This list is a perfect example of , with gratuitous  violations thrown in. Anyone on the Internet can find a |primary source saying that X (a football coach) had a bad week, then add X to this list. Even if a definition of "poorly performing" were provided, it would be total synthesis to list all coaches whose teams (for example) had a certain-sized losing streak (perhaps the ten best players are in hospital after a bus crash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTHESIS||WP:BLP||WP:PRIMARY)

Comment: pure |original research, candidate for 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:FREAKY)

Comment: Per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: as misguided and |biased |original research. When Amos Alonzo Stagg shows up as one of only seven coaches on a list of "poorly performing college football coaches", that seems like a signal that the criteria for inclusion are misguided
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV||WP:OR)

Comment: Unless there was a significant rivalry or other notable comparison between specific coaches (say, SEC coaches), there's no reason for "drilling down" subgroups. I believe  makes it clear that Wikipedia is not a source of indiscriminate information
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: if the editors "blame it on the head coach" then yes.  But the editors of the list are not "blaming" the head coach, the list merely reports on the results of the coach--and many a sportswriter will be happy to assign the blame.  So the "point of view" is of the sportswriters and sources cited,  applies to any editor or the article itself creating the point of view... the POV has already been created by the outside third party
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV)