Heisman presentation. Stick it where the sun don't shine

#77
#77
tennesseeduke said:
Are you 12? Woodson wasn’t even on the Heisman radar until the 8 th or 9th game. Peyton did nothing to lose the award! It was as big a farce since majors lost it!

💀👽😡
Click to expand...

We all know what happened. Woodson vaulted to the front after making a big INT to beat OSU. Then he was really the ESPN darling. There have been many defensive guys that deserved the Heisman way more since Woodson but have failed to win it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#81
#81
JacketVol said:
I was at the Heisman dinner in New York in 2014 and Billy Cannon himself told me I was right about Peyton getting it stole from him and he said F them as well. And he is a Tiger. It only makes you look dumb to think Woodson deserved it instead. Will take Billy's opinion over yours.
Click to expand...

That’s fine. Hopefully he didn’t convince you to invest in any money with him.
 
#82
#82
tennesseeduke said:
Are you 12? Woodson wasn’t even on the Heisman radar until the 8 th or 9th game. Peyton did nothing to lose the award! It was as big a farce since majors lost it!

💀👽😡
Click to expand...

Majors did not deserve the award that year. That would be Jim Brown.

Peyton did not beat Florida. That’s what ultimately killed his chances. Whether that’s fair or not (it isn’t) that had more of an effect than anything.
 
#83
#83
UTRavens said:
I feel like "politically correct" is an odd choice of words here...care to elaborate?
Click to expand...

Certainly. It's obvious to anyone that ESPN and many of their colleagues in the national sports media are the first to show how pc and diverse they can be i.e. Bruce Katelyn Jenner. I'm not pointing towards racial diversity but their attempt to be outside the box in nominating a defensive player. That in itself is fine and appropriate if they are truly college football's best player with the most impact for their team.
Other than the defensive player argument it was obvious they were going to avoid awarding Manning because of his name notoriety and that they considered him privileged in contrast to Woodson who had a congenital defect (club feet) as a baby and wasn't the prototypical candidate . In other words,Woodson was a better story that made them feel better about themselves.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#84
#84
Just out of curiosity, the ones saying they will never watch again, would you watch if a Vol was the leading candidate?
 
#85
#85
RTVFL89 said:
Just out of curiosity, the ones saying they will never watch again, would you watch if a Vol was the leading candidate?
Click to expand...

I won't hold my breath on that one. It'd require some serious changes in the way sports journalism functions . I'd have to wonder about the motivations of ESPN and others if that happened especially the way our fan base was treated and portrayed during the whole Schiano fiasco.
 
#86
#86
OrangeByBirth said:
Manning got screwed. Johnny Majors got ROYALLY screwed! Hornung won with worse statistics and was on a 2 - 8 team! The 5th place that year was also screwed. It was a young fellow named Jim Brown. Majors or Brown should have won but the Notre Dame connection was too much to overcome.
Click to expand...

Well said.

This is part of the reason I still to this day hate ND. They could be coming off of a 6 win season and get blown out in a bowl game and start the next season ranked 16th..... I will never understand why our nation is brain washed to think ND is " touchdown Jesus's " gift to college football.
 
#88
#88
orange plasma said:
I won't hold my breath on that one. It'd require some serious changes in the way sports journalism functions . I'd have to wonder about the motivations of ESPN and others if that happened especially the way our fan base was treated and portrayed during the whole Schiano fiasco.
Click to expand...

You're avoiding the question. If John Kelly is the odds on favorite to win it next year, would you watch it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#89
#89
Not the only time the guy on the better team won

I’d say Rex Grossman got screwed over just as bad as manning in 01 I believe when Eric Crouch numbers were **** compared to Grossman
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#90
#90
orange plasma said:
I won't hold my breath on that one. It'd require some serious changes in the way sports journalism functions . I'd have to wonder about the motivations of ESPN and others if that happened especially the way our fan base was treated and portrayed during the whole Schiano fiasco.
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought about ESPN and the whole Schiano thing. I'm sorry to get political, but ESPN is the CNN of sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#91
#91
Is there anybody that’s alert and oriented that thinks Woodson should have won by 282 voting points over Manning? Just saying that seems like a lot for basically one big punt return compared to 36 TD passes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#92
#92
Everybody in America remembers that punt return, but only TN fans remember what else happened that day. Manning three for 500 yards and 5 TDs. But ESPN didn’t cover the SEC then like they do now. Maybe CBS had exclusive SEC rights? Idk
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#93
#93
orange plasma said:
20 years later and I haven't forgotten the obvious politically correct shun of a vol legend. The ridiculous campaign to give Woodson the trophy over Manning FOREVER delegitimizes this so called award . I refuse to watch to this day. Anyone more tolerant and forgiving than me?
Click to expand...

To hell with that. ESPN was the biggest game in town and they made Woodson the star every time college football and the Heisman was a conversation topic. Anyone who was a Vol fan at the time watched it happen. Other players at Woodson's position had similar stats, but it was all Woodson on the recap shows. And people today who didn't experience it live might not understand how great an impact ESPN had at that time; there weren't a million different channels and pundits and the internet was barely a blip on the college football landscape, so ESPN led the narrative from scrimmage to bowl season.

Make no mistake about this - the end of that recent ESPN article even tried to tidy up the mess by closing with an especially stupid Griese quote.

"But I really don't think Peyton lost it. Charles took it from him."

That's utter crap. Charles Woodson didn't take the Heisman, ESPN took it. ESPN took it, and shined it up real nice, and handed it to Woodson after campaigning for him throughout the latter half of the season. "Oh but Manning lost to Florida." Utter crap. Eddie George's Buckeyes were 11-2 but you didn't see anyone complaining about him getting the Heisman over Tommy Frazier or Danny Wuerffel. And if you look through the historical voting, there's plenty of instances where players from teams with blemished records made 3rd, 2nd, or even 1st in voting results.

No, the Heisman was a dumb popularity vote contest and ESPN decided they had a better story to sell than Peyton Manning. That's all. It's in the past now, but don't ever let ESPN paint the narrative for that garbage. They'll try to. Lord knows they'll try to. Try to make it out as if they didn't influence it. But that year's results were manipulated by their presentation, through and through.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#94
#94
Voltopia said:
To hell with that. ESPN was the biggest game in town and they made Woodson the star every time college football and the Heisman was a conversation topic. Anyone who was a Vol fan at the time watched it happen. Other players at Woodson's position had similar stats, but it was all Woodson on the recap shows. And people today who didn't experience it live might not understand how great an impact ESPN had at that time; there weren't a million different channels and pundits and the internet was barely a blip on the college football landscape, so ESPN led the narrative from scrimmage to bowl season.

Make no mistake about this - the end of that recent ESPN article even tried to tidy up the mess by closing with an especially stupid Griese quote.

"But I really don't think Peyton lost it. Charles took it from him."

That's utter crap. Charles Woodson didn't take the Heisman, ESPN took it. ESPN took it, and shined it up real nice, and handed it to Woodson after campaigning for him throughout the latter half of the season. "Oh but Manning lost to Florida." Utter crap. Eddie George's Buckeyes were 11-2 but you didn't see anyone complaining about him getting the Heisman over Tommy Frazier or Danny Wuerffel. And if you look through the historical voting, there's plenty of instances where players from teams with blemished records made 3rd, 2nd, or even 1st in voting results.

No, the Heisman was a dumb popularity vote contest and ESPN decided they had a better story to sell than Peyton Manning. That's all. It's in the past now, but don't ever let ESPN paint the narrative for that garbage. They'll try to. Lord knows they'll try to. Try to make it out as if they didn't influence it. But that year's results were manipulated by their presentation, through and through.
Click to expand...
I remember it vividly. Damn. That makes me feel old that the internet was barely a blip on the radar.
 
#95
#95
SpaceCoastVol said:
So in that instance being undefeated meant something. Now..... finishing third in your conference with a loss to the runner up in the conference championship gets you into the national championship tournament.

My how times have changed.

Oh and Champ Bailey had better overall numbers than Woodson.

Oh, and I am watching Perry Mason.
Click to expand...

Yeah being undefeated then meant so much there were co-national champions.
 
Last edited:
#96
#96
zjcvols said:
Peyton did not beat Florida. That’s what ultimately killed his chances. Whether that’s fair or not (it isn’t) that had more of an effect than anything.
Click to expand...

Horse crap! If UT beat FL by 7 touchdowns, it would not have mattered. It was about TV ratings. When Michigan beat OSU, they had to find a reason to hype the Rose Bowl (Mich vs Wash St). The Rose Bowl had refused to join the BCS and the focus was on the Orange Bowl (UT vs Nebraska) as the BCS National Championship game. ABC aired the Rose Bowl and owned ESPN. Therefore, ESPN went on a rampage to hype Woodson. Their first choice was to hype Ryan Leaf (Wa St QB) but the comparison with Manning was weak.

GO BIG ORANGE!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#97
#97
Also you have to love all these people declaring how much they don’t care, and adamantly making sure you know just how badly they don’t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#98
#98
volzfanz said:
Everybody in America remembers that punt return, but only TN fans remember what else happened that day. Manning three for 500 yards and 5 TDs. But ESPN didn’t cover the SEC then like they do now. Maybe CBS had exclusive SEC rights? Idk
Click to expand...

ESPN had SEC TV rights back then...the Sat 7:45pm window with Mike Patrick was my favorite football window of the week.
 
Last edited:
#100
#100
orange plasma said:
20 years later and I haven't forgotten the obvious politically correct shun of a vol legend. The ridiculous campaign to give Woodson the trophy over Manning FOREVER delegitimizes this so called award . I refuse to watch to this day. Anyone more tolerant and forgiving than me?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the laugh.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top