As a Heisman Trophy voter, I’m stumped looking at the results. The winner wasn’t even on my ballot.
Why? We’ll Alabama’s Mark Ingram isn’t even the best RB in the nation, let alone the best player.
Stanford RB Toby Gerhart won the Doak Walker Award, which goes to the nation’s top RB. He was the best choice, and I had a vote on that one, too.
Really, Gerhart and Oregon State’s Jacquizz Rodgers were better RB picks.
As for the others, Texas QB Colt McCoy won the Maxwell Award (most outstanding player), Walter Camp (player of the year), Davey O’Brien (QB of the year) and Unitas (QB of the year).
Nebraska’s Nhamukong Suh swept the defensive player of the year awards. By far, he was the dominating defensive guy in years.
Who where other better picks? Boise State’s Kellen Moore, BYU’s Max Hall and Houston’s Case Keenum.
So what happened here?
15 comments
Mxpx5678 says:
Dec 13, 2009
I was really confused too. When they compared ingrams stats it showed he wasn’t anywhere near as dominant as gerhart.
I think it goes back to the heisman being given to the best player on the #1 team. But even then I think colt would have been a better choice.
BeaverDon says:
Dec 13, 2009
East Coast Bias?
rooruns says:
Dec 13, 2009
Same guys that determine the BCS bowls (i.e., "BSC National Champion) determine the Heisman winner. It doesn't take into account what really happens on the field. Smoke, mirrors and preseason placement in the polls determine a lot. Teams like TCU, Boise State, and even the Beavers start way at the end of the 25 team poll (or off the list) and battle all year to creep up, while preseason favorites stay fat and happy at the top playing a light schedule. Heisman hopefuls were selected before the season and it didn't change much regardless of other performers stats.
zark_dooja says:
Dec 14, 2009
Could have been his performance in big games. Gerhart did, however, put on a clinic against Oregon and USC. But, since Alabama is in the title hunt– tie goes to Ingram. It was only 5 votes difference right?
beavsfan10 says:
Dec 14, 2009
Ingram was the best player on the best team which has consistently been the way they have chosen the Heisman winner the past several seasons. I am not saying I agree with that but it is just a fact on how voters have been voting on it. With that said, I thought he deserved it more than Gerhart anyway. The only person who deserved it more than Ingram was Suh. That guy was just a flat out beast and single handily lead his team to the Big-12 championship game. I mean did you how bad their offense was in that game?
beeverluv says:
Dec 14, 2009
You mean like Tebow when he won? He was the best player on an SEC 5th place team… two years ago. So since he doesn't boast a great stat line against a pathetic schedule, he managed 30 yards on 16 carries in Bama's most important game and he runs behind what many 'experts' say is by far the best offensive line in college football he deserves it.
Good to know.
He needed an extra game against a Florida defense that made Greg McElroy look good to pad his stats. He deserved it.
Tweets that mention Cliff: Heisman talk « Cliff Kirkpatrick -- Topsy.com says:
Dec 13, 2009
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Cliff Kirkpatrick, Bill Garber. Bill Garber said: totally agree here – Cliff: Heisman talk http://bit.ly/5gmktb [...]
heartofbeaver says:
Dec 14, 2009
your question is so easy, I wonder if you're serious?
Love affair with SEC (more than 1/3 of the country thinks every other conference is only 50% as good as the SEC….any success in the SEC is worth 2X anywhere else in the country).
Alabama being in teh SEC and being on the national championship hunt gets 10-20X the press Stanford does.
Some people think the Heisman is like an MVP trophy, it's not about whether you are better than another player, it's about did you help your team make it to the superbowl/world series, etc. Or at least that should be a heavy factor in the voting—you need to be really exceptional to not be on the best team to win MVP.
lack of respect for PAC-10…just heard on ESPN tongiht (Bowl Preview show) again that the Pac-10 doesn't have good defenses as the big time programs (predicting Ohio state crushes Ucks, Oklahoma beats Stanford and Nebraska beats Arizona)….the people who have to set odds and make money see it a little differently, but they don't let bookies vote for the heismen do they?
DaMonkey says:
Dec 14, 2009
They eat, drink and breathe SEC, Big Ten, ACC, Big 12 and Big East… they glimpse Pac 10, Mountain West and WAC. Who could blame them for voting what they know instead of what they "heard".
It's a complete joke. The rankings don't ever truly reflect who is the "best"… but rather who they "think" is the best based on their glimpses and peaks. Schedule more SEC, Big 12, Big Ten and Pac Ten round robins and let's make the pecking order then… but they won't… they'll continue to schedule Yorkstown St. and NWSE SW Arkansas Community College 4 times a year to pad their schedule cuz it makes good money and pumps up their records… all while the Pac Ten goes round robin and plays a relatively tougher schedule, hence beating itself out of any national recognition.
Doing the right thing doesn't always mean getting the "best" outcomes…
sdbeav says:
Dec 14, 2009
Cliff, I notice you don't list Jake Locker which makes sense to me. What doesn't make sense is all of the national media talking about him being possibly the first QB taken and some saying he could be the first taken overall. Did I miss something? Sure he's a good athlete but he has yet, at least in my opinion, to put together a really great season. Am I wrong?
ckirkpatrick says:
Dec 14, 2009
He has size, strength mobility, can stay in the pocket and throws the ball well. He has shown intangibles of leadership. So he's a good prospect.
However, he also said he's coming back his senior year. He'll be a top pick next season.
SnohoBeav says:
Dec 14, 2009
One of the most telling things I've heard; weeks ago on KJR they were talking to Beano Cook (a Heisman voter) about Heisman predictions. One of his quotes about Gerhart: "I hear he's fantastic." I HEAR he's fantastic. He hadn't even seen him play (at that point). That's the biggest problem with polls, awards and perception. Those east of the Rockies know little about the west. I wonder if they really even care.
ckirkpatrick says:
Dec 14, 2009
This is the core of the problem. The LA Times did a story a while back about all the people who have to vote – former winners and such – who are no longer interested in the game. They just watch the last week of college football or tune into ESPN. And ESPN was saying who should win, and here come the votes.
All the other awards are voted on by people still into the game – current media, SIDs, coaches. So they are paying attention. It's telling when the Heisman isn't even the best player in his position, according to the other awards.
JuneauJim says:
Dec 14, 2009
Let's see, Ingram was 15th in TD's scored for running backs; 14th in yards per game and 5th in total rushing yards. He rushed for almost 200 yards less than Toby Gerhart but he played in one more game the TG.
It must have been his 30 yards on 16 carries against Auburn in the second to last game of the regular season that put him over the top.
The Heisman is a joke and the guys that laugh the loudest are the members of the Downtown Athletic Club in New York. Somehow they manage every year to create a bunch of hype around a ridiculous award.
beeverluv says:
Dec 14, 2009
I was reading an article on Ohio State facing the eventual winner of the Civil War, and their expert source thought it was funny that he still thought Dennis Erickson was the head coach of the Beavs.
So my belief is that East Coasters don't pay attention to anything (read: anything) west of the Rockies. They probably think Vegas is a quaint Atlantic City.
They think Indiana and Ohio are the Midwest. What does that tell you?