Henry or McCaffrey

Jacketman1

Jacketman1

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
601
Hello everyone! First post on the board, with hopefully more to come.

So obviously, we all saw a good performance from Derrick Henry last night, and we saw McCaffrey's fantastic Rose Bowl. But, based on the whole season, who do you think should have won the Heisman?

In my opinion, I think McCaffrey, for no other reason than that he is the better overall player. For arguments sake, let's say Henry played for Stanford, and McCaffrey played for Alabama. I think that, with McCaffrey's overall ability, McCaffrey would easily win the Heisman. What are yalls thoughts?
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,238
McCaffery is a weapon on a video game level. Dude is a dangerous kick returner, punt returner, RB, WR. He can hurt you so many ways. Was Stanford leading receiver AND rusher. I think he'd be a GREAT option QB if he wanted to be one.

Henry is an old school bruiser of an RB. Definitely worth the 5 stars he was rated out of HS.

At the end of the day, it comes down to value. McCaffery brings so much value to the table because he can contribute at a high level in so many ways, whereas Henry will only contribute at one position.
 
4shotB

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,944
I agree. Henry is good but there are several others (Ezekial Elliott or Fournette or even Chubb pre injury, for instance) that could have replicated what Henry did behind that line/paired with Bama's offensive athletes. Alabama has had/will have several more just like him year over year. I watched the Rose Bowl...first time I had ever seen the Stanford kid. He is athletically freakish. If I could draft one kid for my team, it is McCaffrey. No comparison between the two imo.
 
Boomergump

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,281
Well, I have only had the luxury of seeing McCaffery a couple times, while Henry has been constantly illuminated all over the airwaves of the SEC loving ESPN for the entire season. They are both great players. Either one would make ANY team better, a lot better. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I would like to see that Stanford kid some more so I could make up my mind. That running back for OKLAHOMA is pretty darned good too.
 

Sideways

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,589
Boomergump said:
Well, I have only had the luxury of seeing McCaffery a couple times, while Henry has been constantly illuminated all over the airwaves of the SEC loving ESPN for the entire season. They are both great players. Either one would make ANY team better, a lot better. I don't have a strong opinion either way, but I would like to see that Stanford kid some more so I could make up my mind. That running back for OKLAHOMA is pretty darned good too.
Click to expand...
I would take any of them as a B back for Tech. They are all very good including Chubb. McCaffery's versatility reminds me of that guy at North Carolina a few years ago. Can't remember his name but he was a great player also.
 
Boomergump

Boomergump

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
3,281
Sideways said:
I would take any of them as a B back for Tech. They are all very good including Chubb. McCaffery's versatility reminds me of that guy at North Carolina a few years ago. Can't remember his name but he was a great player also.
Click to expand...
Bernard.
 
4shotB

4shotB

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
4,944
Ibeeballin said:
From all reports, we have McCaffery in Cottrell. Same size but but Cottrell is faster. Luckily McCaffery didn't end up at Duke with his brother
Click to expand...

wow. Let's see the kid play before we "anoint" him (to use a CPJ term). McCaffrey was a Heisman runner up. To put that in modern GT context, think Joe Hamilton level of ability.
 
Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,238
If you don't know McCaffery's lineage, let's just say he's probably the closest you'll come to a genetically engineered football player.

Father played NFL football for the Broncos, mother was a collegiate soccer player at Stanford, and his grandfather was an Olympic sprinter that held records.
 

Skeptic

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,372
Jacketman said:
Hello everyone! First post on the board, with hopefully more to come.

So obviously, we all saw a good performance from Derrick Henry last night, and we saw McCaffrey's fantastic Rose Bowl. But, based on the whole season, who do you think should have won the Heisman?

In my opinion, I think McCaffrey, for no other reason than that he is the better overall player. For arguments sake, let's say Henry played for Stanford, and McCaffrey played for Alabama. I think that, with McCaffrey's overall ability, McCaffrey would easily win the Heisman. What are yalls thoughts?
Click to expand...
McCaffrey, from his performance in the Rose Bowl and two other times I saw him -- I know some of the family and only because of that I watched -- is the best football player I have seen in years. He is a remarkable player with seemingly unlimited skills. Henry is a very good back, no question, though I was prepared to be underwhelmed, given all the Alabama hype, but 157 yards against the Clemson defense is impressive. But if you are talking about one player and his impact on his team/game, it has to be Watson. He does something running or passing almost every play. And those two guys come back in '16. Watson may leave after '16, but my money would be McCaffrey staying four years. His line, as they say, is sports royalty, and the only thing they are more concerned with is education. So we will get to see if he can repeat this amazing performance.
 

takethepoints

Helluva Engineer
Messages
6,098
McCaffery is exactly what was meant by a Heisman trophy winner: the best player in the country overall. But he's a rising junior and Henry is a senior. My guess = they figured that McCaffery would have his chances in the future and Henry had a great season on a good team that play ed a hard schedule. So give it to Henry.

Now the problem with this is obvious; there's no guarantee that McCaffrey can duplicate this year in future and he's the better choice this year in the spirit of the award. Still, I suppose everyone thought that Stanford is unlikely to fall on its face next year or the year after. Soooooo … let the kid wait. It's subjective anyway.
 
Top