epocSoN Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Found this from voter Len Berman, I clicked on his name in the counted votes section of stiffarmtrophy.com and this is the source for his vote. Which he voted Ingram #1. I believe this is a classic example of what is wrong with this award. "4. Full Disclosure My vote was due today. I'm one of those anonymous people who vote for the Heisman Trophy. It's been that way for years. It doesn't matter that I rarely see a college football game in person, they send me a ballot anyway. It also doesn't matter that other than Ernie Davis winning in 1961, I haven't been a huge fan of the award. (Ernie was the Syracuse running back who became the first black Heisman winner.) The Heisman goes to the "best player in college football." And that invariably means a running back or quarterback. I'm waiting for a grunt to win it..... some big slow offensive lineman. Anyway, on the theory of "what have you done for me lately" I voted for Alabama running back Mark Ingram. Obviously I'm all talk. " Please tell me that's a joke? I'd love to get my paws on that man... Quote Link to comment
T_O_Bull Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 The Heisman Trophy is right up there with the Miss America Pageant. To all those voters who have been on TV this week saying SUH is the most deserving but doesn't have a chance to win so they are going to vote for someone else I quite simply say, "You hypocritacal bastards." T_O_B Quote Link to comment
SealBeachHusker Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Seems like StiffArmyTrophy might be trying to hedge their bet a little bit on this year's Heisman. http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/2009/12/digg...n-of-error.html We also analyzed the GAP between the winner and the runner-up. It appears that every year except 2004, we overestimated the gap. In other words, our numbers had a larger win than the actual totals. (That's not too surprising - after all, voters who vote for the favorites are more likely to disclose their vote than ones who vote for long-shots and underdogs.) In 2008, we projected a 5.7% win for Bradford, and it was 4.4%. In 2007, however, we projected a 19.4% win for Tebow, and it was only 9.2%.In general, over the last seven years, we've overestimated the gap between first and second by 4.23%. In the last five years, 2.58%. This has huge implications in a year where we're looking at a projected win of somewhere between 2-4%. Quote Link to comment
ironmike Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Seems like StiffArmyTrophy might be trying to hedge their bet a little bit on this year's Heisman. http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/2009/12/digg...n-of-error.html We also analyzed the GAP between the winner and the runner-up. It appears that every year except 2004, we overestimated the gap. In other words, our numbers had a larger win than the actual totals. (That's not too surprising - after all, voters who vote for the favorites are more likely to disclose their vote than ones who vote for long-shots and underdogs.) In 2008, we projected a 5.7% win for Bradford, and it was 4.4%. In 2007, however, we projected a 19.4% win for Tebow, and it was only 9.2%.In general, over the last seven years, we've overestimated the gap between first and second by 4.23%. In the last five years, 2.58%. This has huge implications in a year where we're looking at a projected win of somewhere between 2-4%. As a math geek, what this says to me is that they have no clue who is going to win on Saturday and their projection has little (if any) meaning. Quote Link to comment
SealBeachHusker Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Yeah, they have quoted various margins of error...usually between 3% and 5%...and this looks to be a tighter race then has occurred before. Statistically it would seem to be a pretty open 3-man race. Seems like StiffArmyTrophy might be trying to hedge their bet a little bit on this year's Heisman. http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/2009/12/digg...n-of-error.html We also analyzed the GAP between the winner and the runner-up. It appears that every year except 2004, we overestimated the gap. In other words, our numbers had a larger win than the actual totals. (That's not too surprising - after all, voters who vote for the favorites are more likely to disclose their vote than ones who vote for long-shots and underdogs.) In 2008, we projected a 5.7% win for Bradford, and it was 4.4%. In 2007, however, we projected a 19.4% win for Tebow, and it was only 9.2%.In general, over the last seven years, we've overestimated the gap between first and second by 4.23%. In the last five years, 2.58%. This has huge implications in a year where we're looking at a projected win of somewhere between 2-4%. As a math geek, what this says to me is that they have no clue who is going to win on Saturday and their projection has little (if any) meaning. Quote Link to comment
SealBeachHusker Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 http://stiffarmtrophy.com/ Just updated again...Suh inching closer! M Ingram 68 81 43 192 409 1232 44.3% N Suh 91 38 45 174 394 1139 41.0% T Gerhart 60 62 59 181 363 1129 40.6% Quote Link to comment
blkshrtz Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 SUUUH in 2nd now according to website Quote Link to comment
skerfan1705 Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 SUUUH in 2nd now according to website HOLY SH*T YOU BETTER BELIEVE IM WATCHINGTHIS ON SATURDAY NIGHT! kinda goes without saying...but I'm just excited... Quote Link to comment
Chucktown Husker Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Yeah, they have quoted various margins of error...usually between 3% and 5%...and this looks to be a tighter race then has occurred before. Statistically it would seem to be a pretty open 3-man race. Seems like StiffArmyTrophy might be trying to hedge their bet a little bit on this year's Heisman. http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/2009/12/digg...n-of-error.html We also analyzed the GAP between the winner and the runner-up. It appears that every year except 2004, we overestimated the gap. In other words, our numbers had a larger win than the actual totals. (That's not too surprising - after all, voters who vote for the favorites are more likely to disclose their vote than ones who vote for long-shots and underdogs.) In 2008, we projected a 5.7% win for Bradford, and it was 4.4%. In 2007, however, we projected a 19.4% win for Tebow, and it was only 9.2%.In general, over the last seven years, we've overestimated the gap between first and second by 4.23%. In the last five years, 2.58%. This has huge implications in a year where we're looking at a projected win of somewhere between 2-4%. As a math geek, what this says to me is that they have no clue who is going to win on Saturday and their projection has little (if any) meaning. So they are just covering their A$$ for when the get it wrong. Quote Link to comment
skersfan Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 I over heard something on ESPN radio this morning, never got the name, but that this is going to be the closest race in history. Suh moving to second is promising. I will be watching, just like I do every year, but way more excited about it than any time before. He is the Heisman. Quote Link to comment
JTrain Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 Damn, looks like this might turn out to be another heartbreaker for the 2009 season, because of: a) the aforementioned voters who voted Suh #3 because they didn't think he had a real chance to win B) the approx. 6% of the voters (that's around 55 voters) who voted before the championship games. Quote Link to comment
SealBeachHusker Posted December 11, 2009 Share Posted December 11, 2009 So they are just covering their A$$ for when the get it wrong. That's what I got out of it. Quote Link to comment
HuskerInLostWages Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 As posted on the ESPN Big 12 blog by a Texas fan under the bcarter username. Just put a copy of McCoy's helmet on the trophy where the ball would be and give Suh the Heisman, the man deserves it because he's a beast. I laughed for a few minutes as I pictured the headlock when McCoy tried to sneak by Suh. Quote Link to comment
alairguard Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 As posted on the ESPN Big 12 blog by a Texas fan under the bcarter username. Just put a copy of McCoy's helmet on the trophy where the ball would be and give Suh the Heisman, the man deserves it because he's a beast. I laughed for a few minutes as I pictured the headlock when McCoy tried to sneak by Suh. They have now him number 2 about 3% behind Ingram! Quote Link to comment
Twodocs Posted December 12, 2009 Share Posted December 12, 2009 Suh has the big thing MO I sure hope Tom O is there it adds so much to our image factor to have him present! Especially if Suh wins! It will be huge!!!!! Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.