The rematch is on. The haterade is flowing like mad. And their tears taste like divine rainbows from Beckinsale's lips. Keep it coming, simpletons - you can't change a goddamn thing. Argh, it's frustrating, isn't it? Cocky ass Alabama fans, always getting the breaks, somehow sneaking in to the title game without even winning their conference? Blame the REC, blame the white man, blame the Good Ole Boy network, blame it on the rain, blame it on boosters, etc. Or you could blame it on every other team shitting the bed when they had a shot - but let's not let logic get in the way...
HEISMAN - We'll deal with LSU later, but I'm on my Triple-H right now - Heisman High Horse. As a fan of one Mr. Charles Woodson - the ONLY primarily defensive player to win the Heisman - I feel like I understand what it means to be the "most outstanding player in college football". Now, unfortunately for certain players like Case Keenum and Kellen Moore, your little schools have no shot in hell to get you that award - anymore, that is (re: Andre Ware). Now, unless you're from another planet, you have to play for a winning school in a BCS conference to even have a shot. And even then, you have a better shot the better your team is. It kinda makes no goddamn sense when you think about it; I mean, if you're the most outstanding player in college football, what does it matter what the 21 other starters on your team did to affect the win/loss totals?
Considering the criteria that has been shaped and molded over the years, this is who tops my Heisman list:
Tyrann Mathieu - I bet the vast majority of you are saying holy shit! right about now. Well, I'm not your typical "Bammer" who will spout off about how perfect we are and how Trent Richardson should be #1 across the ballot boards. Let me explain.
Like I said, imagine seeing your favorite player ever - in the history of the game and in your lifetime - win the Heisman. It makes you view it a little differently. The sad thing is, in hindsight, people fail to have 20/20 when they bring up the "Peyton Manning should have won it" argument. Those that argue for Peyton over Charles are either Tennessee fans or NFL fans who have let his play at the next level speak for his failure to beat Florida for the third straight time, and his failure to beat out competition in his own damn division. Peyton had good numbers...
60.2% completion rate, 3819 yards, 36 TDs, 11 INTs
...yet Tim Couch was all like:
66.4% completion rate, 3884 yards, 37 TDs, 19 INTS
So why didn't Timmy ever have a shot at the Heisman? Cuz his team sucked, as the formula in place alludes to you having no shot. Which, ironically with the above numbers, should show you how good he really was, relative to Kentucky's players in comparison to Tennessee's talent. Meanwhile, after losing stats to, again, a KENTUCKY quarterback, Peyton was also one-dimensional and beatable compared to Woodson.
Now Wood, on the other hand, could be plugged into any damn position you want him to go, and he'd succeed (took a decade for coaches to learn this in the NFL, but I digress):
Defense - 44 tackles, 5 tackles for loss, 1 sack, 9 PBU, 8 INT
Now add the good stuff - 1 rushing TD, 2 receiving TDs, 1 PR TD, and if Brian Griese had any wheels whatsoever, Wood would have had about a 23 yard TD pass as well.
The above punt return TD was against arch rival Ohio State - when everybody was watching to see what he could do. Then in the 4th quarter he picked off their go-ahead TD in the end zone. Performance under pressure was the key, and he produced. Woodson sealed games on the rare occasion he had the ball in his hands; Peyton Manning did not, even though he had the ball at every snap - and he was outplayed statistically by someone in his own conference. Woodson' Michigan team went undefeated, Manning's Tennessee team did not.
This brings us back to Mathieu. When everybody's focus is on a QB from Baylor with questionable losses, after careful consideration, I think he's the most outstanding player in the nation THIS YEAR. Everybody wants to give it to him next year since the whole "fake weed" issue bumped him from the running this season (which is fine I guess), but I'm talking about this year. As much as I hate to see him keep performing well for the Bayou Bengals - he does, and he does it all the goddamn time, with his terribly dyed hair and smug countenance. Now, is he the best cornerback on his team? No, that's Morris Claiborne, and if you want to argue that with me, I'll rip you apart in that debate, too. But being the best technical cover cornerback isn't the question here; Mathieu's stats match the eyeball test:
70 tackles, 8 tackles for loss, 1.5 sacks, 6 FF (ridiculous), 4 FR for 2 TD, 7 PBU, 3 QB hurries, 2 INT, and 2 PR TDs
That stat line is fucking retarded. His team is undefeated, he's the best playmaker on that defense, and everyone in America knows not to hold the ball near him or kick it to him - yet he's out of the discussion because of drugs. Learn this lesson, kids.
So who's #2, i.e default #1? For me, there is a logjam here with all the guys being mentioned in the media - Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, and Trent Richardson. So how do you separate them? Let's try best game vs worst game, with weighted discussion on conferences played in:
RG3 best - Oklahoma (14th BCS rank), 551 total yards, 4 TDs (in comparison, last Saturday Weeden only had 217 yards and 0 TDs against Oklahoma)
RG3 worst - Texas Tech (45th BCS rank), 168 total yards, 2 TDs (concussion, I think)
Big 12 - #2 FBS conference at best (tie with Big 10/Pac 12 to be fair)
Luck best - USC (no BCS rank, but they're high up), 366 total yards, 4 TDs
Luck worst - Washington (41st BCS rank), 192 total yards, 2 TDs
Pac 10/12 - #2 FBS conference at best (tie with Big 10/Big 12 to be fair)
TR3 best - Ole Miss (95th BCS), 213 total yards, 4 TDs
TR3 worst - Vanderbilt (48th BCS), 108 total yards and 1 TD
SEC - #1 FBS conference
Each candidate's worst game was against an opponent ranked in the 40s in the BCS, which is one telling stat as to why there is no runaway frontrunner in the race. However, each player's best game favors all but Trent. Yet I could come back with another "however" - as I point out below, the best individual performance against the best team in the nation, LSU, goes to Trent Richardson. Just goes to show you how many things one can look at while dissecting who the most outstanding player should be.
RG3 had the best stats of all candidates - on the worst team in consideration, in a "lesser" conference, having lost BADLY in two of their three losses. These are black marks that must be considered in today's refined (for better or worse) formula. Luck's bad marks are the loss to Oregon and the significant statistical difference RG3 has over him in both the run and pass game. Depending on who you ask, one QB plays in a tougher conference than the other, but I honestly can't say which one that is when the Big 10, Big 12, and Pac 12 all could argue for #2 behind the SEC. Hell, I'm sure they'd find a good argument to be above the SEC, but I gotta draw the line somewhere.
Now I know some Big Ten guys are clamoring for more love towards Montee Ball - as well they should. Better stats all-around than Trent, extra Big 10 game notwithstanding. The difference here, to me, is the talent/competition level of the SEC vs Big 10, the amount of times T-Rich sat on has ass while Bama had the game in hand (save GSU cuz Lacy was hurt, and the Iron Bowl to rub it in) vs Ball still racking up TDs late in almost all their games, and the #1 factor in defining these two backs:
Trent had 169 total yards in his ONLY loss - to LSU, 1st in BCS ranking; whereas Ball had 115 total yards (and 2 TDs) in his SECOND loss - to Ohio State, 51st in BCS ranking.
So again, using the current formula for the Heisman where team performance, strength of schedule, conference rank, etc. come into play - Trent had the better showing. In fact, Trent's performance against LSU tops any individual RB performance against LSU by 54 yards - 115 total yards by LaMichael James in Oregon's high octane offense.
Is this a scoff at Ball's numbers this year? Hell no, he should be commended for even approaching Barry Sanders-type numbers (albeit we all know the *less games played/no bowl stats accounted for* argument for Barry - oh, and that he's one of the best RBs in football history). But Ball plays in a lesser conference, has more team losses to lesser quality opponents, and to be honest - the portrayal of it being a quarterback-heavy Heisman has all but pushed Ball aside. So basically the Big 12 hates Alabama because we are playing for all the marbles, and now the Big 10 hates us because our Heisman candidate gets the nod and theirs doesn't. Sounds about right.
So, in conclusion, Joker's FInal 4:
1. Mathieu
2. RG3
3. Luck
4. Richardson
But in reality, it's more like:
1. RG3
2. Luck/Richardson
4. Ball
Maybe Tyrann Mathieu will get some late love, and maybe Ball, too. It's possible that Richardson's performance against Auburn, and his team's last minute move into the BCS title game, might shoot him above Andrew Luck - but probably not. So I think, with that last win over Texas, Robert Griffin III stiffarms (oh no he didn't) the current "shitty team = no dice" formula and steals the Heisman from the grips of the SEC. So as nice as this is to think about...
..I personally don't see it happening. But hell, I've been wrong a lot this year.
BOWL PICK EM - We have slowly crept up to 15 teams as I'm writing this, and it will soon build up some decent momentum, so quit being lazy - tell your friends, click the link, and get your team signed up. Obviously more bowl game talk to come. Oh, and I'm too lazy to see who won Pick Em...Sebastian emailed me his picks before most games started, so I'll have to do all the math before my next article. Sea bass, you need to put your thoughts on the bowl games out there, too. No more "dude, I'm in the Bahamas" crap, either.
Holla.
Recent Comments