What is the "Biggest Name" School Without a Heisman Winner?

#101
#101
those LA thugs were recruited by the finest gentlmen to coach in the NCAA. heh heh
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#102
#102
Yeah, I know that seemed obvious, but sometimes the obvious is not oblivious to everyone on here.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#103
#103
Godfatha said:
Watch his 4 TDs? That won't take long.

Hell, Tennessee has had better shutdown corners than Woodson and more explosive ones...you're too young to remember Terry McDaniel or Terry Fair.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Dwayne Goodrich wasn't too far off either.
 
#106
#106
Throw in Jason Allen also. If he hadn't got injured his senior year he could have put up numbers just like Woodson did on defense. We didnt use Allen the way Michigan used Woodson for obvious reasons. He ended up getting injured but at least it wasn't on a punt return or taking a hand-off. He was playing his natural position when he got hurt.:superman:
 
#108
#108
Jason Allen had some incredible numbers. Was the leading tackler by far in the SEC. I do remeber when Cadillac ran over him though. But, Saban liked him enough to take him to Miami
 
#114
#114
sickemsmokey10 said:
Princeton....look at all those National Championships with zero heismans
Click to expand...

Actually, you're wrong. Dick Kazemier, a Princeton single-wing tailback, won it in 1951. I didn't even realize it till I was doing some research on the old school Harvard teams in the early 1900's.(Another hobby I have is really old school football history, basically anything pre 1960)

Here was the vote

1 Dick Kazamaier, Princeton Sr. HB 1,777
2 Hank Lauricella, Tennessee Sr. HB 424
3 Babe Parilli, Kentucky Sr. QB 344
4 Bill McColl, Stanford Sr. E 313
5 Johnny Bright, Drake Sr. HB 230
 
Last edited:
#117
#117
TrueOrange said:
Looks like UT or Bama...maybe throw Va Tech in their too

...and harvard :p
Click to expand...

VT is not a big name program when you compare their histories to schools like UT or Bama....without michael conVICKt you would be saying "VT who?", they base their entire prestige and program on that one individual and have never won a national title nor even played for one other than that one time....duke has more national titles than them, case closed.
 
#118
#118
VOLnMiami said:
We have had 3 legit candidates to win it and two of them got screwed...I still can't figure out how you can give that trophy to Paul Horning on a 3-8 ND team over Majors...I will not comment on the Woodson case....Makes me ill to think about.
Click to expand...

Majors did not get screwed. Jim Brown should've won it that year and Majors will tell you that. Peyton on the other hand...yes...yes he did infact get screwed! If Charles Woodson deserved the Heisman that year, then Eric Berry absolutely should've ran away with it last year.
 
#120
#120
Rasputin_Vol said:
I'm not sure the case for Majors is that strong, considering he finished ahead of Jim Brown...
Click to expand...

Yea, Brown was pretty good that year. However, nobody on a 2 win team should ever win the Heisman Trophy. I don't care if you're freaking Tebow, Thorpe, Hourning, whoever, if your team only won 2 games, maybe you're not as valuable as your stats or skills denote.

I guess my gripe is not so much that Majors didn't win. It's that Hourning won it, while only winning 2 games.
 
#122
#122
I don't particularly care about the Heisman and never have, so I didn't particularly care that much when Manning lost it in 1997. Individual awards in team sports are vaguely interesting, I guess, but I can't imagine holding anyone other than the athlete himself holding a grudge about it for a decade.

That said -- it was pretty instructive to me to watch some of the 1997 Tennessee/Arkansas game on ESPN Classic last year. That game was played midway through November, and the announcers spent a fair amount of time speculating about Manning, and the Heisman, and how basically they thought he was going to win it by default. The consensus at the time seemed to be "Who else can you give it to?" The announcers listed a couple of other guys -- and I was pretty astonished to hear that Charles Woodson's name didn't even come up. Keep in mind that this was only about three weeks before the award would have been handed out, and Woodson didn't even get mentioned on these announcers' short list.

It seems pretty clear in retrospect that the voters were never very thrilled with Manning to begin with, and he became the overwhelming favorite mostly by default. The fact that they were so quick to give the award instead to a guy who had basically three great games at the end of the year doesn't say as much about Woodson or ESPN as much as it does about how blah the voters were about Manning to begin with.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top