Latest Heisman projections from StiffArmTrophy.com

That is your opinon, not mine. I will voice mine.

If you have a dark horse and you want him in the race you voice it. We did not. Plain and simple.

Not saying that is wrong. I think he actually surprised us somewhat.

 
I wanted to share this. It's from a buddy on another site, an ardent Florida fan. To give you an idea where his loyalties lie, here are his sig/av:

filephpavatar22841_1240082922.jpg
newtebow2gy3.jpg


And here is what he had to say about Suh:

Andrew Luck is underrated as Stanford's QB. If he was not there teams could have loaded the box and made it much more difficult for Gerhart, but they had to respect both. I am willing to bet that Gerhart has a tough bowl game with Luck out. Oklahoma is the best run defense he will have seen all season. Speaking of run defenses he faced:
Wazzu 117

Wake 82

SJST 119

Wash 67

UCLA 60

OSU 25

Zona 22

ASU 18

Oregon 38

USC 42

ND 90

the average run defense he faced was 61 in the country. To his credit he still had solid games against the better teams, but its not like he was facing great defenses all year. I like Gerhart. I think he is a solid player and I said he was going to have a good year before the season started. I agree that without him Stanford would not be the same, but without Suh I think Nebraska would have had a lot of trouble and he plays DT, not running back. He is the best player in the country and like I said before, he controls games from the DT position.

Total Offense of teams they played:

FAU 22 - scored 3 on NEB

Ark St 95

VT 55 - scored 16 on Neb (one TD)

ULL 74

Mizz 32 - Scored 12 on Neb

TT 7 - Scored 24 on Neb

ISU 75

Bay 86

OK 28 - scored 3 on Neb

Kansas 26 - scored 17 on Neb

KSt 83

Col 105

Tex 20 - scored 12 on Neb

Suh led the team in sacks and is 9th in the country, second on the team in total tackles (this is a DT, they are not supposed to have the second most tackles), first in tackles for loss on the team and 14th in the country (again a DT is doing this). They are the ninth ranked defense in the country and outside of Suh they do not have people ranked in the top categories. Florida/Bama are ranked high, but look at the talent on the defenses. NEB defense was Suh.

Gerhart is a good guy and great story. He is a good player, but Suh is the best and most outstanding player. He is the Heisman.
Click to expand...
 
skersfan said:
Which supports my thoughts on us being guilty of not believeing a defensive player should be considered.

If that had been up late last year like other programs do, he might have had a real chance. Being the underdog he needed all the help he could get.

We have promoted players in the past.
Click to expand...
We're Nebraska, we don't promote hype. We promote results.

oregon_ducks_1.jpg


3c14383a8b998-98-1.jpg


 
dammit bob you beat me to it. i went to take a harrington, and you beat me to it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
the truth is, you need to be a good player on a great team, that is why the heisman is bunk. spiller is doing more with less, he is everything for his team, and without him they have a much different season, he is great despite his team. ingram has a good team, which makes him look good. he is great because of his team. the team you are on is more important than whether or not you deserve it, better teams allow for better players (i.e. actual offensive lines that block) and better teams get a lot more national air time and attention.

 
Here's the ironic part about the current situation:

Suh is tied with Gerhart and trailing Ingram by a measly 4%. How many pundits have you seen say, "Suh is the best player. He should win the Heisman, but he doesn't have a chance, so I'm voting for ________ because he might actually win."?

What if the people who voted with that thought process could have seen that Suh actually had a legitmate chance to win? What if they had simply voted for who they felt deserved to win instead of who they thought was the most deserving among the players they thought had a real chance to win? Those people voting the way they did could very well be the reason Suh loses a close race.

 
The thing is though is that Ingram is leading by a percent that is FAR less than their average of being off. Anybody can win this thing.

 
Well it makes the ceremony "Must See TV".

I'm not gonna get my hopes up so if the big man wins it, I'll be quite surprised.

I'm just proud that he was invited. That's a WIN in my book.

 
Many voters didn't think Suh had any chance to actually win it. So, like a political voter who likes an independent candidate with no real chance of winning the election, they voted for Ingram or Gerhart (Republican or Democrat), thinking that would be their only chance to affect the outcome.

Had they known then that Suh was actually going to be this close, they would have voted for him. But they didn't, so Suh is 3rd on many ballots of voters who actually believe he is the most deserving. And if he ends up losing by 3-4%, votes like that could have been the difference.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
People who vote early, and people who vote like that... shouldn't be allowed to vote. But I know what you mean. The poeple who thought SUH was most deserving could lose him the Heisman

 
it's like some people try to validate their selection (to prove they are right when its over) by choosing the candidate that they feel has the best chance to win instead of choosing the candidate that is most deserving. it is truly sickening.

 
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. "

 
Dan_F_30 said:
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. "
Click to expand...
Wow. What a schmuck. This trophy means practically nothing anymore.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top