Friendly Irish: Please also include the rushing stats in your comparison so we can have an unbiased comparison. Thanks in advance.
Yes, SEC = C-USA, good one there Kojak. Ignoring the DUAL part of a DUAL threat quarterback makes your post even more hilarious.Hahahahahahahha @ case closed.
Johnny Manziel Stats: 273 Completions, 68.3 completion %, 3419 yards, 24 TDs, 8 Interceptions
Case Keenum Stats: 428 completions, 71.0 completion %, 5631 yards, 48 touchdowns, 5 interceptions.
One of these players is going to win the heisman. The other didn't get an invite.
I took this out of my previous post. There are other awards that are directed at stories like this. Although, if you look at the mission statement of the heisman, one might think differently.OK, so the young man's grandmother and girlfriend died and were buried. That's tragic and makes a great story, but just stop already. I'm sure other college football players lost family members and/or girlfriends, but I don't see their losses trotted out ad nauseum every time their names are mentioned.
If Johnny Football fumbles that ball instead of throwing the touchdown, Collin Klein probably wins the heisman.If Pitt makes that field goal. Notre Dame has one loss. We are playing UF or Oregon, and Te'O wins the Butkus and that's it......
Well then what are we going back and forth about? If he wasn't over-hyped, he wouldn't have a Heisman invite.I am not arguing at whether or not he is over-hyped. I never once said he "deserved the attention he was getting."
My point is that he is not just a "good" player. My point is also that NFL GM's are smarter than any of us, and the fact he is going to be a top ten is proof enough he is one of the best defensive players in college football.
Probably true. There is no RGIII This year.If Johnny Football fumbles that ball instead of throwing the touchdown, Collin Klein probably wins the heisman.
Probably true. There is no RGIII This year.
If Johnny Football fumbles that ball instead of throwing the touchdown, Collin Klein probably wins the heisman.
I agree with you. The only reason he is going to New York is because our team is undefeated ... Maybe Notre Dame has something to do with that, I'm not sure. But the team is undefeated, and we aren't undefeated if he isn't the player he is. If he played at BYU, I agree, he wouldn't get this attention.Well then what are we going back and forth about? If he wasn't over-hyped, he wouldn't have a Heisman invite.
He'll be a high draft pick, and he'll be a starter in the NFL, but I see his career going more like James Laurinaitis than Clay Matthews. That's nothing to be ashamed of. I just don't think he's worthy of the attention he's been getting. If he played at BYU with these stats, it's doubtful we'd even be having this conversation.
Trent is one of the best RB's to ever pass through Tuscaloosa, but I can't agree with you on this statement. I could make arguments for Trent too. He was deserving of the trophy and I wanted him to win, but RGIII winning the Heisman wasn't some robbery like Charles Woodson over Peyton Manning.Trent should have won it last year. Best player not even close. Put Trent in the Big #? or PAC 12 and he may have ran for over 2000 yards and 30 TDs. We were blowing people out so he did what he did in 3 qtrs of basically every game outside of the LSU game. RGIII was getting into offensive shootouts and getting to bolster those numbers.
Was last year Trent's best year?Trent is one of the best RB's to ever pass through Tuscaloosa, but I can't agree with you on this statement. I could make arguments for Trent too. He was deserving of the trophy and I wanted him to win, but RGIII winning the Heisman wasn't some robbery like Charles Woodson over Peyton Manning.
Last year was like this year. If Manziel wins, I would agree with it, and if Klein wins I would agree with it. There's no clear cut winner. Arguments can be made for both.
I agree with you. The only reason he is going to New York is because our team is undefeated ... Maybe Notre Dame has something to do with that, I'm not sure. But the team is undefeated, and we aren't undefeated if he isn't the player he is. If he played at BYU, I agree, he wouldn't get this attention.
You can say that being the most important on the best team isn't the definition of the Heisman. That is fine. I'm not sure if the debate is between JF and Manti, or Manti vs. the world. The heisman definitely is biased towards teams that are in the NC mix. But I could also argue the heisman has turned into the best "second half quarterback of the year," which perpetuates the fallacy of the heisman and actually argues in favor of picking a person like Manti.
We are arguing about over-hype relative to the heisman, but basing it off of past years of who has won and the stats they had, while at the same time arguing the heisman has moved in the wrong direction. It doesn't make sense. What if the heisman voters want to make a statement? What if they want to say that, well, defensive players have a shot also? If they are, they are not going to start with a defensive player on a 2-loss team. They will start with the defensive player on one of the top defensive unit in college football, coupled with that team being #1 in the nation.
Was last year Trent's best year?
I would actually like to see Mark's ballot. That would be interesting.Good points, but the only person I think that would want to prove a point is maybe Charles Woodson, the rest are just a bunch of offensive dingleberries. Other than Mark Ingram who is a bright young man who will vote Barrett Jones or Chance Warmack.
Yup, he's the only RB in SEC history to rush for 20 or more TD's in a season. Trent was more than deserving, but so was RGIII. If we take care of business and make a few FG's against LSU the first go around, Trent takes the trophy home.Was last year Trent's best year?
Or Jason White over Eli. BTW Jason White announced he voted for Landry Jones #3. Homer vote, anyone?He was deserving of the trophy and I wanted him to win, but RGIII winning the Heisman wasn't some robbery like Charles Woodson over Peyton Manning.