Started By
Message
1
Posted on 12/13/15 at 10:30 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
Henry might be better than McCaffrey, and from a national perspective, I don't really have an issue with voters choosing Henry over McCaffrey. I think McCaffrey was more exciting to watch, but in Bama's system, it's hard not to say that Henry wasn't absolutely terrific. That being said, as someone who follows the SEC West very closely, it's kind of weird to see a guy win a Heisman when he wasn't even the best RB in his division. Fournette was simply better. And I don't really have any favoritism like all the swamp kittens do. I dislike LSU and Alabama's winning games pretty evenly. Fournette was on a waaaay worse team, but he would have killed it if he was in Lane Kiffin's offense running behind that line untouched like Henry was able to all year.
It feels like a mix between the Mark Ingram, Troy Smith and Jason White Heisman's.
On one hand, I absolutely believe that Henry doesn't win the Heisman if he plays for any team but Alabama(or a different blue blood). It's the validation that a lot of the old guard media(that has no business voting) has towards the way they think college football should work. And don't discount the concept that media doesn't love their narratives. In the sense of "media getting the narrative they want", the worst example is Mark Ingram. The media hype behind Alabama is real, and a lot of media wanted Alabama to win it's first Heisman Ingram's year. They wanted Bama to be back, and a Heisman Trophy would be validation of that narrative. The fact that Alabama had never won a Heisman should NEVER have mattered but it was the main narrative that carried him to the win.
In Henry's case it wasn't that near bad, the narrative is more the typical, "best player on the best team" thing. In that sense it sort of feels like the Troy Smith one, but Smith's numbers were just bland, at least Henry was a workhorse... Which is why it is probably closest to the Jason White Heisman. White had really great numbers, but he wasn't the best QB in the country. It was in the midst of the early 2000s Oklahoma dominance, and he was the focal point of that offense. At the same time, Eli was clearly a better QB that year, and Larry Fitzgerald was only a sophomore and he was at a program that wasn't revered like Oklahoma was. Wide receiver at Pitt is sort of like white running back at Stanford. They aren't viewed the same as, "Oklahoma QB" or "Alabama RB".
I think the Heisman Trophy does a good job sometimes. Manziel, RG3, and Tebow are examples of losses not holding the media back from naming the right winner. And those are the kind of guys I want winning Heisman's. The guys with the, "it factor". The guy on the field you can't keep your eyes off of. The one that makes a play that makes you think, "damn that was outstanding ". Unfortunately, players get punished even if they are outstanding and the media gravites toward the "safe" concept. To me, Henry was the "safe" concept after the LSU game. Fournette was unfairly punished for LSU's offensive incompetence. McCaffrey was punished for being at Stanford. If he broke Sanders all purpose yardage record at an Ohio State or USC, I don't think the media thinks twice about it. Him and Fournette were the two guys this year that were the most, "outstanding" to me, but McCaffrey had a few bigger moments and didn't have the disappointing moments like Fournette against Bama/Arky/Ole Miss.
That is a lot of words for basically just saying "I don't really know what I am talking about."
Posted on 12/13/15 at 10:35 am to Funky Tide 8
quote:
That is a lot of words for basically just saying "I don't really know what I am talking about."
What did I say that you disagreed with?
Posted on 12/13/15 at 10:53 am to pennypacker3
quote:
That's a lot of words for not giving a f@ck.
Look. You're an Alabama fan. You're not going to like people saying things that discredit or undermine the accomplishments of the Alabama program or it's players. I don't give a frick that Henry won, it's not like he cheated. It was a safe pick, and a voter picking him isn't that big of a deal. However, I wish that Heisman had less "safe" voters so we could see guys that a more deserving. And I thought McCaffrey was more deserving. I thought Larry Fitzgerald was more deserving than Jason White. I thought Suh was more deserving than Ingram. I thought McFadden was more deserving than Troy Smith. But I don't really care. I haven't lost any sleep over this, but on a college football forum I will discuss it. People discuss Heisman snubs is a part of college football. Some gumps are probably still mad that Terry Baker won the Heisman over Lee Roy Jordan or that Derrick Thomas finished 10th in the voting. Sorry if any of this hurts your feelings.
Posted on 12/13/15 at 10:55 am to Grovewater
The Heisman trust never said it went to the best player in the nation.
Heisman.com
quote:
Heisman Trust Mission Statement
The Heisman Memorial Trophy annually recognizes the outstanding college football player whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence with integrity. Winners epitomize great ability combined with diligence, perseverance, and hard work.
Heisman.com
Posted on 12/13/15 at 10:57 am to Grovewater
If McCaffrey had a similar no. of TD's then my guess is he would have won it but a 10 TD difference is significant. Offense is mostly about scoring and I would rather have a player who scored 10 more TD's compared to one who got more yardage outside the redzone.
Posted on 12/13/15 at 11:01 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
hurts your feelings.
I see it. Carry on.
Posted on 12/13/15 at 11:02 am to jatebe
quote:
The Heisman trust never said it went to the best player in the nation.
Such a weird thing for people to note as a counterargument. Outstanding is a loose synonym for best. The criteria is often the same, and most voters wouldnt be able to give you any criters of how they differentiate.
Page 29 of 29
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News