Article on players who should have won the Heisman

#4
#4
Manning should be high on the list, but Johnny Majors or Jim Brown for 1956 should be at #1. Paul Hornung is the worst player to ever win the Heisman; bad stats, played on a 2-8 team; only won because he was the QB for Notre Dame. Both Majors and Jim Brown had incredible seasons and somehow got passed up for a 2-8 QB who threw 4 times as many INTs as TDs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolForLife83, VolDave53, TheBigOne10 and 30 others
#7
#7
DiderotsGhost said:
Manning should be high on the list, but Johnny Majors or Jim Brown for 1956 should be at #1. Paul Hornung is the worst player to ever win the Heisman; bad stats, played on a 2-8 team; only won because he was the QB for Notre Dame. Both Majors and Jim Brown had incredible seasons and somehow got passed up for a 2-8 QB who threw 4 times as many INTs as TDs.
Click to expand...

Which demonstrates the media power of the Boston/NYC/Philly/DC corridor over the Heisman and to my mind makes it worthless. You see how many NCs the Big 10/Notre Dame/Penn State have chalked up since you have to play for the NC, right? Thinking Bama just got their first winner in Mark Engram a few short years ago shows how out of balance and biased the Heisman voting actually was and is to this very day. If there's any way possible they'll try and lock an SEC player out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Plecoptera, VolinMC, feathersax and 5 others
#8
#8
utvolpj said:
Sorry but not over Jim Brown
Click to expand...

That's revisionist history. Obviously Brown was the best player in hindsight but Majors was clearly the best player on a Top 2 undefeated team (the two OU guys cancel each other out some). Brown scored half his TDs against an outmatched Colgate team. Clearly, Brown was the best player in hindsight and would have been a better choice than Hornung.

The only 2 times the Heisman has deviated from its historical formula was 56 and 97 (defensive player).
 
  • Like
Reactions: lukeneyland, VOLINVONORE and Rickyvol77
#11
#11
I love how the article completely ignores ESPN's role in not only creating but driving the Charles Woodson Heisman campaign in 1997. I love how they write that Woodson won because of "a perspective shift of the late 1990s." A far more honest assessment would be that 1997 was the first real demonstration of ESPN's growing control of college football. They anointed Woodson the Heisman winner practically every weekend that season.

Whoever wrote that ridiculous "click through" article is either clueless or they're intentionally choosing not to acknowledge the fact ESPN churned out a season-long advertisement for Woodson.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kcvols1, VolinMC, VolInNW and 5 others
#14
#14
Voltopia said:
They anointed Woodson the Heisman winner practically every weekend that season.
Click to expand...
Oddly enough they didn't do it until late. Not long ago I was rewatching the 97 bama game (not sure why) and they didn't even list CW in the Heisman hopefuls. They tried to manufacture drama to what was going to be a boring race and it backfired
 
  • Like
Reactions: OllVol, VFFL@THE BEACH, 67Vol and 2 others
#15
#15
Here is the historical Heisman flowchart:

Step 1: Pick the clearly best offensive player on national title contender

Step 2: If the answer of Step 1 is a Tennessee player, pick best player from Michigan or ND. Position or record does not matter.

Step 3: If there is no elite players from Step 1 or 2, pick the next clearly best offensive player from the remainder of Top 5.

Step 4: If there is no choice after Step 3, pick player with crazy, historic stats

Step 5: If there is no choice after Step 4, pick best remaining player.


With Jim Brown, by following this flowchart, he would only fit into Step 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VFFL@THE BEACH
#16
#16
utvolpj said:
Oddly enough they didn't do it until late. Not long ago I was rewatching the 97 bama game (not sure why) and they didn't even list CW in the Heisman hopefuls. They tried to manufactory drama to what was going to be a boring race and it backfired
Click to expand...

Ah, then my bias has stained my memory of that season - it felt like an entire season to me. But in reflecting, what you say makes sense. Ohio State - Michigan was the crescendo. For some reason I thought it was earlier in the year, but maybe it just felt like the highlights lasted a year from my memory. It was all "Woodson, Woodson, Woodson," and then he had a good game and the tone became "See? See? Peyton couldn't beat Florida but Woodson beat Ohio State so he's clearly the better choice." It was crap then and it is crap now.

I think if Tennessee had beaten Florida that year Manning would have overcome the ESPN effect, sadly, but we all know how that went.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kcvols1, MemphisVol77 and Rickyvol77
#17
#17
Voltopia said:
Ah, then my bias has stained my memory of that season - it felt like an entire season to me. But in reflecting, what you say makes sense. Ohio State - Michigan was the crescendo. For some reason I thought it was earlier in the year, but maybe it just felt like the highlights lasted a year from my memory. It was all "Woodson, Woodson, Woodson," and then he had a good game and the tone became "See? See? Peyton couldn't beat Florida but Woodson beat Ohio State so he's clearly the better choice." It was crap then and it is crap now.

I think if Tennessee had beaten Florida that year Manning would have overcome the ESPN effect, sadly, but we all know how that went.
Click to expand...
I thought it was the whole season too and was really surprised when I saw the graphic. I think it's even worse that by the tsio CW still hasn't made the watch list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia
#19
#19
utvolpj said:
Oddly enough they didn't do it until late. Not long ago I was rewatching the 97 bama game (not sure why) and they didn't even list CW in the Heisman hopefuls. They tried to manufactory drama to what was going to be a boring race and it backfired
Click to expand...


Yep, I never heard of the guy until like 2 weeks before the vote. That award will forever be the HEISTMAN for me. Never watch that Dog & Pony Show again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OllVol and Big Al Orange
#21
#21
Remember Gino Torretta of Miami. He was a mediocre QB at best but played on one of Miami's best teams ever and won the NC. He never started for an NFL team. Just another biased pick. And, other than the ESPN driven Woodson win, you still have to be a QB or RB to win it. That's biased also. Its supposed the be the best athlete.
 
#22
#22
My biggest problem with Woodson winning over Peyton was the fact he is still to this day the only defensive player to even come close to winning much less actually wining. I know he had a few offensive snaps and a punt return against a down OSU team that year but still he is not in the top 10 best defensive plyers list of all time imo. Then they get to hide in the Rose Bowl and play WSU the number 4 team in the country instead of playing Nebraska or us for their share of the NC. I take nothing away from Woodson, he was a great colligate and NFL player and a legitimate HOF'er but I mean would Deion Sanders or Lawrence Taylor or any other number of great defensive players not been more deserving?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolinMC, MemphisVol77 and Rickyvol77
#23
#23
utvolpj said:
I thought it was the whole season too and was really surprised when I saw the graphic. I think it's even worse that by the tsio CW still hasn't made the watch list.
Click to expand...
My favorite BS late in season was when ESPN talking heads said Woodson should win it because he grew up in hood and Peyton came from great rich family
 
  • Like
Reactions: feathersax, LittleVol, lukeneyland and 1 other person
#24
#24
Remy said:
Which demonstrates the media power of the Boston/NYC/Philly/DC corridor over the Heisman and to my mind makes it worthless. You see how many NCs the Big 10/Notre Dame/Penn State have chalked up since you have to play for the NC, right? Thinking Bama just got their first winner in Mark Engram a few short years ago shows how out of balance and biased the Heisman voting actually was and is to this very day. If there's any way possible they'll try and lock an SEC player out.
Click to expand...

Bama would have had some, but Bryant didn't believe in individual awards and would not allow any bammer players to be promoted. Much as I can't stand him or bammer, I do respect that about him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and DiderotsGhost
#25
#25
Rickyvol77 said:
My favorite BS late in season was when ESPN talking heads said Woodson should win it because he grew up in hood and Peyton came from great rich family
Click to expand...

I was 4 years old at this time but I would actually love to see proof of thus because I’m calling BS lol
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top