- Messages
- 19,555
Compare 2014 to Eric Crouch's 2001 Heisman winning season:
Rushing
Yards: 1115, avg: 5.5, TD: 18
Passing
Eff: 124.3, Compl%: 55.6 Yards: 1510, TD: 7, INT: 10
hmmm....
Rushing yards. Wow.
I agree. I just meant wow. As in that's a big difference in one season.OL. AB. WR. nuff said.
I agree. I just meant wow. As in that's a big difference in one season.
Speaking of the Heisman, where do people stand on the criteria for winning it? Do you favor the original intention of the Heisman or how it is interpreted today? For instance, should academics be part of it and should it be awarded to the most valuable leader on the team or should it simply go to a running back or quarterback who puts up the gaudiest numbers? I ask because it seems clear to me that many players who won the Heisman in the past would not win today because the meaning of the Heisman is different today. Roger Staubach was a gifted, game changing athlete who led Navy to victories over teams like Notre Dame at a time when service academies were not expected to be able to compete with the big boys. But his stats, which do not adequately measure the impact he has on his team, look very pedestrian compared to winners of the Heisman today.
Yup, CM got hosed.The team's record shouldn't really have any impact on whether a player wins the Heisman or not, but unfortunately it does. This probably has more to do with press coverage than anything else. If you're the best player in the country, but your team goes 4-8, you're not going to be all over ESPN every day, so the voters may not see you all that much.
If the Heisman is supposed to go to the most outstanding player, then last year that was Christian McCaffrey, hands down...unfortunately the voters didn't see it that way.
Imo it should go to the player who gives his team the best chance to win. For instance if bama still could have won without Henry than Henry wouldn't win unless his numbers where just that much better than the rest, now if they didn't have another RB that would help win as much he would still be considered. Now if a smaller team has a qb with good numbers and without him the team wouldn't be the same then he should win imo because he was the one to give his team the best shot at winning because he honestly had to do more without the allstars around him making him look better. JT is a perfect example because he was the main reason we did so well in 2014, he made the rest of the team better imo.Speaking of the Heisman, where do people stand on the criteria for winning it? Do you favor the original intention of the Heisman or how it is interpreted today? For instance, should academics be part of it and should it be awarded to the most valuable leader on the team or should it simply go to a running back or quarterback who puts up the gaudiest numbers? I ask because it seems clear to me that many players who won the Heisman in the past would not win today because the meaning of the Heisman is different today. Roger Staubach was a gifted, game changing athlete who led Navy to victories over teams like Notre Dame at a time when service academies were not expected to be able to compete with the big boys. But his stats, which do not adequately measure the impact he has on his team, look very pedestrian compared to winners of the Heisman today.
Imo it should go to the player who gives his team the best chance to win. For instance if bama still could have won without Henry than Henry wouldn't win unless his numbers where just that much better than the rest, now if they didn't have another RB that would help win as much he would still be considered. Now if a smaller team has a qb with good numbers and without him the team wouldn't be the same then he should win imo because he was the one to give his team the best shot at winning because he honestly had to do more without the allstars around him making him look better. JT is a perfect example because he was the main reason we did so well in 2014, he made the rest of the team better imo.
Yes. The best in the land. Easily....
If the Heisman is supposed to go to the most outstanding player, then last year that was Christian McCaffrey, hands down...unfortunately the voters didn't see it that way.
And Peyton Manning was beaten by a CB!Yup, CM got hosed.
Opponents blitzed him nearly 44 percent more often, resulting in a sack rate that jumped 41 percent
A bit of a necro bump. Now that we're close to Toe Meets Leather and know some of the pieces in play, what is everyone's expectations of JT this year, statistically?
Another look back from David Hale:
Full article w/ more stats: Georgia Tech's Justin Thomas hopes supporting cast steps up in 2016