Who will win, and who SHOULD win?

[CR4IGG3RS]

Seems to echo the sentiment of the nation, was listening to 'The Herd' on ESPN radio right now, and Colin was talking to an online sports writer (Didn't catch the name) but as his closing question, he specifically made a point to ask in the same breath..."Alright, Heisman trophy time...who SHOULD win and who WILL win?" The caller answered the way that I'm pretty sure 75% of the nation feels, "Ndamukong Suh SHOULD win...[Gearhart will win]."

 

*EDIT* Guess Colin is out today, so it's a fill in talking head, same difference, just didn't want to misquote.

 

*EDIT 2* Andre Ware (83? Heisman winner) was just on the show, and while he didn't give his official ballot, he mentioned that McCoy had had a good year, Ingram had been a great year, and then went on for about 5 minutes to talk about Suh and how his play is completely dominant, even so far as to say that the award should go to the best player of the year "...offense, defense, special teams, whatever..." Sure sounded like he gave him a good, official nod

[knapplc]

Yep. That's the sad reality. Suh deserves it, but won't get it.

 

C'est la vie.

[T_O_Bull]

This pretty much seals the deal on the nations "most prestigeous" college football award. Its basically just a fraud.

T_O_B

[skersfan]

I disagree, I think it shows that people do see who really puts up the numbers.

 

I can live with Gerhart getting the Hypsman. Stanford has doen little to promote him, he like Suh have done it all on their own.

 

Ingram, Mcoy, Tebow and Spillar have been on full promote since last year.

 

Having Suh there, says a tremendous amount about him and the consideration the presenters have given him.

 

He still may win the trophy, but he has won the hearts of America and the media. After the show on Saturday, alot of people will be wishing they had their votes back is my guess.

 

Gerhart has carried Stanford, and has performed extremely well against tough competition. Of all the skill players he has done more, with less, and in argueably a tougher confereence than the others this year.

 

Either one of them gets it, I will be okay, I want Suh to win it, but these two truly deserve the award. They are without question the best of college football this year. Suh may be the best of the last 38 years or so.

[knapplc]

Gerhart's stats aren't superlative, though. He hasn't done anything that Ryan Matthews or Donald Buckram haven't done.

[captain obvious]

At this point I feel like it should be getting harder for a QB or RB to win the Heisman. Compared to the stats of past Heisman-winning skill position players, this current group of contenders looks pretty underwhelming.

 

Suh, on the other hand, has done things that are totally without precedent in college football.

 

This is a trav-sham-ockery.

[Huskerballz]

Anyway Suh can pull a Jordan Shipley and stick around another year?

[In the Deed the Glory]

Anyway Suh can pull a Jordan Shipley and stick around another year?

 

Even if Suh was not a senior he would be an idiot to not go pro at this point. Look at what happened to Bradford. If you are a top 3 pick, you go. Too much guaranteed money there.

[irafreak]

The bradford thing is a rarity. How can you fault a man for staying in school? I think they should make it mandatory to stay until you graduate. Puts the emphasis on education and maturing instead of money. Course now that's all schools are is a big business but that's for another time....

[In the Deed the Glory]

The bradford thing is a rarity. How can you fault a man for staying in school? I think they should make it mandatory to stay until you graduate. Puts the emphasis on education and maturing instead of money. Course now that's all schools are is a big business but that's for another time....

 

That is what a lot of people want to happen, but come on, in the world we live in its not going to happen. If your family needed it, would you turn down that kind of money to get a degree that you could finish later if it is important to you? You're talking tens of millions of dollars.

 

Let's be honest with ourselves on this, but I digress.

 

The OP's point is well served, and I am glad that the truth of the Heisman is finally coming to light. It is a popularity contest, as we have all said. Many voters go by what ESPN and other outlets tell them instead of being an informed voter and making their own decisions. Hopefully it will fix the process, and if not maybe the trophy will lose its luster.

[REDSTEEL]

Anyway Suh can pull a Jordan Shipley and stick around another year?

 

Even if Suh was not a senior he would be an idiot to not go pro at this point. Look at what happened to Bradford. If you are a top 3 pick, you go. Too much guaranteed money there.

I agree what would the reason be of even staying. Championship? That's out of the question. The only reason I could think of is if the Raiders had the first draft pick choice.

 

If Suh gets the 4 defensive awards that in opinion is more impressive then winning the Heisman. How many times have one defensive player been nominated for all the defensive awards that he could have been included in and won them all?

[cornhuskersftw]

I disagree, I think it shows that people do see who really puts up the numbers.

 

I can live with Gerhart getting the Hypsman. Stanford has doen little to promote him, he like Suh have done it all on their own.

 

Ingram, Mcoy, Tebow and Spillar have been on full promote since last year.

 

Having Suh there, says a tremendous amount about him and the consideration the presenters have given him.

 

He still may win the trophy, but he has won the hearts of America and the media. After the show on Saturday, alot of people will be wishing they had their votes back is my guess.

 

Gerhart has carried Stanford, and has performed extremely well against tough competition. Of all the skill players he has done more, with less, and in argueably a tougher confereence than the others this year.

 

Either one of them gets it, I will be okay, I want Suh to win it, but these two truly deserve the award. They are without question the best of college football this year. Suh may be the best of the last 38 years or so.

 

I disagree. I think Spiller was much more beneficial to Clemson than Gerhart to Stanford. Just look at Spiller's all purpose yards and TDs. He touched the ball in so many different aspects of play, the only player to have a TD in every game, and holds the ACC record for most all purpose yards! He was the game changer in offense, special teams, break out speed, etc. He almost won the conference title game by his own doing. Kind of, well, just like Suh! The only travesty here is that two undeserving and unworthy QB (Tebow and McCoy) got an invite because of all the hype around them instead of Spiller. This year those two QB were all talk and no show! And Suh should win... it's not even close!

[UvaBlackshirt]

Win or not, Suh single-handedly (literally!) threw Colt out of the Heisman race. That sort of dominance alone should win it for Suh--the fact that he performed well not only against Big XII teams, but that when he went head-to-head with Colt McCoy (who everyone was drooling over after the A&M game), he flat-out owned him.

 

Regarding the comment about C.J. Spiller's dominance in the ACC: being a student at an ACC school (UVA), I would compare the the position of the ACC's leading rusher to my high school JV team's leading rusher. The conferences just don't compare.

[JTrain]

Here's the process I would go through if I had a Heisman vote, and wanted to be a responsible voter. I would narrow it down to 12-15 candidates. I would then attain game tape of as many games involving those players as possible. I'd watch closely and as objectively as possible. I'd compare stats of equal positions, breaking down how good of defenses (or offenses, in Suh's case) each player faced, and how well they did. I would analyze everything half to death, and then decide.

 

That's the only way I can imagine really feeling good about my vote. How many of the 900+ Heisman voters actually take that much time with their vote? I would say less than 2% of them. 900 voters is way too many, the more you have, the more likely that a large percentage are not good voters. Why not pick 40-50 great critical thinkers, who have a history of responsible, educated, unbiased voting patterns, and let them vote?

[cornhuskersftw]

Win or not, Suh single-handedly (literally!) threw Colt out of the Heisman race. That sort of dominance alone should win it for Suh--the fact that he performed well not only against Big XII teams, but that when he went head-to-head with Colt McCoy (who everyone was drooling over after the A&M game), he flat-out owned him.

 

Regarding the comment about C.J. Spiller's dominance in the ACC: being a student at an ACC school (UVA), I would compare the the position of the ACC's leading rusher to my high school JV team's leading rusher. The conferences just don't compare.

 

And that's how a lot of people feel about the Big 12 North. But that doesn't mean a great player shouldn't be commended for their accomplishments. Especially when two people attending have had very sub par years and don't deserve to go based on their career history.