- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Where the Heisman got it wrong
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:48 am to sms151t
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:48 am to sms151t
quote:
Jason White was a Junior, Billy Sims was a Junior, Doc Blanchard was a Junior also. So are you calling just FR and Sophomores underclassmen?
Considering that the literal definition of an upperclassman is a junior or senior, then yes?
1
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:49 am to BluegrassBelle
Literal and athletic definitions differ as some call any non SR an Underclassmen. But okay. At SMS we called Sr's only Upperclassmen.
This post was edited on 7/27/17 at 11:51 am
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:51 am to BluegrassBelle
Not giving it so a sophomore was the reason they didn't give it to Fitzgerald or dmac when he was a sophomore. then dmacs junior year rolls around (the year he still had a very good argument for it considering he ran for over 1800 yards) and they give it to Tebow who is a sophomore 
. Basically it came down to Jason white and Tim Tebow played for Oklahoma and Florida, 2 of the ncaa's golden children and were in the hunt for a natty and Fitzgerald and dmac played for pitt and Arkansas. Name recognition and title hunt mattered more than actual product on the field.
. Basically it came down to Jason white and Tim Tebow played for Oklahoma and Florida, 2 of the ncaa's golden children and were in the hunt for a natty and Fitzgerald and dmac played for pitt and Arkansas. Name recognition and title hunt mattered more than actual product on the field. 
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:53 am to Grandioso
quote:
I want to say Vince Young > Reggie Bush, but Bush had an incredible year as well.
VY's numbers weren't mind blowing because he almost never played meaningful minutes in the second half of any game that year.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:54 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
What I hate the most was the hypocrisy of the ncaa. All you heard about when dmac was a sophomore was how basically even tho he had the better season a sophomore had never won it and that would just be too much to overcome. Then the very next year it's all hail tebow!
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:54 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
The year Tebow won it Florida was not in the title hunt. They played Michigan in their Bowl game.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:55 am to Hawgnsincebirth55
quote:
Name recognition and title hunt mattered more than actual product on the field.
Sadly that's been consistent over time. Just look at the long time west coast bias with Southern Cal, Notre Dame's winners, etc.
The anti-DMac bias was always mindblowing to me knowing your Hawgs just straight up hiked it to the kid, everyone KNEW it was coming, and still couldn't stop it. The only reason Kentucky beat him was because I believe he had the damn flu.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:55 am to sms151t
Mark Ingrams stats the year he won it were almost embarrassing by Heisman rb standards
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:56 am to Forkbeard3777
Gary Beban of UCLA over OJ in 1967.
Not only did OJ beat UCLA in the Game of the Century the last game of the year and win the National Title but he scored the winning TD on an amazing 64 yard run.
Beban threw for 1,300 yards, 8 Tds and 7 Ints for the season.
Simpson had 1,534 yards and 13 Tds.
The next year OJ won the Heisman by the biggest margin ever. He should have been the first back-to-back winner.
Paul Hornung over Jim Brown (hell Brown finished 5th in the voting.)
Marshall Faulk probably should have won it in 1992.
Deion Sanders
Adrian Peterson has a strong case over Leinart in 2004. Peterson almost had 2,000 yards with 15 Tds. But it's hard to pass over a QB who has 33 Tds and just 6 Ints.
Not only did OJ beat UCLA in the Game of the Century the last game of the year and win the National Title but he scored the winning TD on an amazing 64 yard run.
Beban threw for 1,300 yards, 8 Tds and 7 Ints for the season.
Simpson had 1,534 yards and 13 Tds.
The next year OJ won the Heisman by the biggest margin ever. He should have been the first back-to-back winner.
Paul Hornung over Jim Brown (hell Brown finished 5th in the voting.)
Marshall Faulk probably should have won it in 1992.
Deion Sanders
Adrian Peterson has a strong case over Leinart in 2004. Peterson almost had 2,000 yards with 15 Tds. But it's hard to pass over a QB who has 33 Tds and just 6 Ints.
This post was edited on 7/27/17 at 11:58 am
Posted on 7/27/17 at 11:57 am to BluegrassBelle
Was that the first time they had played after the 7 OT game?
This post was edited on 7/27/17 at 11:59 am
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:01 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Deion Sanders was going to win over Barry Sanders or Aikman? What?
I think Rodney Peete was a Senior that year also.
I think Rodney Peete was a Senior that year also.
This post was edited on 7/27/17 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:03 pm to 12Pence
quote:
2016 - Watson
Watson was terrible most of let year.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:07 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
Adrian Peterson has a strong case over Leinart in 2004. Peterson almost had 2,000 yards with 15 Tds. But it's hard to pass over a QB who has 33 Tds and just 6 Ints.
it's weird that everyone shits on jason white for winning in 2003 (citing his horrible bowl performance, and disregarding the regular season), but argues that peterson should have won over leinart, while ignoring what happened in the orange bowl.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:07 pm to TexasTiger08
quote:
If Heisman was done post-bowls, we would solve this issue, and incentivize some of the best players to finish out their career in a bowl. 2005 Heisman would have gone to VY Last year would have been Watson Those are two off the top of my head that were snubbed in my opinion, and the bowls proved it.
Doing the Heisman after the Bowls just creates another set of problems mainly it would just go to the guy that had the best Bowl and no one would care since the season is over (think anyone is watching or talking about the Heisman during the NFL playoffs?
VY and Watson should have won anyway and those are really the only 2 that would have changed for the better. Both got titles so they have the last laugh
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:07 pm to sms151t
You're correct I was thinking about 06. Even more of a reason as to show the bias against dmac
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:10 pm to Forkbeard3777
Just about every year for the last 40 years or so.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:51 pm to sms151t
quote:
Literal and athletic definitions differ as some call any non SR an Underclassmen. But okay. At SMS we called Sr's only Upperclassmen
This may be the dumbest thing I've read this month, and I have read some dumb shite
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:55 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
Paul Hornung over Jim Brown (hell Brown finished 5th in the voting.)
Won the Heisman on a team with a fricking losing record.
They were 2-8. How "valuable" could you have been?
This post was edited on 7/27/17 at 12:57 pm
Posted on 7/27/17 at 12:59 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Paul Hornung over Jim Brown (hell Brown finished 5th in the voting.)
Hell Brown even got outvoted by the Board of Education
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News