2009 Heisman Trophy discussion

[TheIronColonel]

Ingram wasn't even the best player at his position this year, much less the best player in CFB this year. Hell, Ingram might not even be the best player in his conference. Then again, SEC SEC SEC!

Hell, if OSU had a player nominated, I'd rather have them not even bother showing up. This award isn't worth the bronze it's made out of; I'd rather have one of our guys focused on kicking ass in a bowl game then going to get a meaningless trophy from some sorry old men.

 

[TooTall]

Sorry... But this award is all about the big name now. Throw away the fact that Gerhart outrushed and outscored Ingram statistically... Let alone the fact that Suh was as deserving as anyone.

 

[CentralMOBuck]

Hell, if OSU had a player nominated, I'd rather have them not even bother showing up. This award isn't worth the bronze it's made out of; I'd rather have one of our guys focused on kicking ass in a bowl game then going to get a meaningless trophy from some sorry old men.

Did anyone here watch the part right before where they handed out the trophy? Archie had a nice little bit at the end of it. All of the guys who won it way back talked about how they found out that they won. Archie showed up to the presentation and he was the only one out the 3 three nominated to be there. Most of the others said they were called and told about it. Bobby Sims from Oklahoma said he was in class when the award was given to him. Of course the times are different and we live where up to the second news is king. Maybe the media should take another look at that piece and realize what it really means?

You can't look at Ingram's stats and say he didn't deserve the award. I would have been happy with either Suh, Gerhart or Ingram winning it.

 

[TooTall]

Did anyone here watch the part right before where they handed out the trophy? Archie had a nice little bit at the end of it. All of the guys who won it way back talked about how they found out that they won. Archie showed up to the presentation and he was the only one out the 3 three nominated to be there. Most of the others said they were called and told about it. Bobby Sims from Oklahoma said he was in class when the award was given to him. Of course the times are different and we live where up to the second news is king.

You can't look at Ingram's stats and say he didn't deserve the award. I would have been happy with either Suh, Gerhart or Ingram winning it.

Don't get me wrong Ingram was in the top 3 of deserving the award, but I just feel like the spotty performances leading up to the SEC CG should have hurt him more than they really did. I don't disagree with the fact that his performance in the SEC CG overshadowed his prior outings though.

I just feel like the two players who carried their teams on their back, win or lose (which now it's all about which player from the undefeated teams deserve it most), were Suh and Gerhart. It seemed like there wasn't a single play Suh wasn't at or around the ball. And Gerhart had to have been at least 70% of Stanford's offensive production.

I'm glad the race was as close as it was.

 

[spurrier]

ingram is a machne. he definitely deserved the trophy. he gave a great speech.

 

[powerlifter]

Ingram wasn't even the best player at his position this year, much less the best player in CFB this year. Hell, Ingram might not even be the best player in his conference. Then again, SEC SEC SEC!

Hell, if OSU had a player nominated, I'd rather have them not even bother showing up. This award isn't worth the bronze it's made out of; I'd rather have one of our guys focused on kicking ass in a bowl game then going to get a meaningless trophy from some sorry old men.

Mark Ingram would tear apart the pac 10 defenses. Besides, it's not like he won by some absurd amount.

 

[GeauxTigers]

Don't get me wrong Ingram was in the top 3 of deserving the award, but I just feel like the spotty performances leading up to the SEC CG should have hurt him more than they really did. I don't disagree with the fact that his performance in the SEC CG overshadowed his prior outings though.

I just feel like the two players who carried their teams on their back, win or lose (which now it's all about which player from the undefeated teams deserve it most), were Suh and Gerhart. It seemed like there wasn't a single play Suh wasn't at or around the ball. And Gerhart had to have been at least 70% of Stanford's offensive production.

I'm glad the race was as close as it was.

Spotty performances? He had one bad game against Auburn in which he was hurt. Before that he had 6 straight 100+ yard performances (although 99 yards against Tennessee), including wrecking South Carolina, Ole Miss, and LSU. And of course he dominated Florida.

Gerhart and Suh are also great players but no one can say Ingram didn't deserve it this year. It was a very close race between the two, and I would've been fine with either Ingram or Gerhart winning it. I personally wish Suh had gotten it but it's a stretch to think a defensive tackle will win this award in modern college football.

 

[JDMBuckeye]

Ingram wasn't even the best player at his position this year, much less the best player in CFB this year. Hell, Ingram might not even be the best player in his conference. Then again, SEC SEC SEC!

Hell, if OSU had a player nominated, I'd rather have them not even bother showing up. This award isn't worth the bronze it's made out of; I'd rather have one of our guys focused on kicking ass in a bowl game then going to get a meaningless trophy from some sorry old men.

Really, sorry old men?? Are you sure thats the case? I am not happy with the selection either, but is that the way we go about things? I'm pretty sure that Archie Griffin is one of, if not the, head honcho for the Heisman. Might want to rethink how you say things.

 

[JDMBuckeye]

Lets be real here, Ingram clearly didn't do as well as Gerhart, all people saw was that Ingram was on Alabama, and probably know nothing about Gerhart, or his team. It all comes down to the size of the names. If Florida would have won the SECCG, we would be talking about how McCoy should have gotten it over Tebow, because I am almost certain Tebow would have gotten it. This award is basically for whoever stands out the most - this being addressed in the definition of the award. Therfore, it goes to whoever was in the public eye the most. That is all. Its not based on how good the player is. That being said, I think I have lost all hope in College football and its systems. Go buckeyes. Until there is justice in the NCAA Div - 1 FBS, I will not be nearly as attentive to the small details.

 

[TheIronColonel]

Really, sorry old men?? Are you sure thats the case? I am not happy with the selection either, but is that the way we go about things? I'm pretty sure that Archie Griffin is one of, if not the, head honcho for the Heisman. Might want to rethink how you say things.

You can name maybe a handful of guys who vote who haven't made retarded statements about the award in the past two weeks. There are hundreds of voters. I stand by my statement. The Heisman trophy voting is probably is less objective than the coaches' and Harris polls, and that takes some real doing.

They voted for a guy who, playing on probably the best team in the country, still couldn't put up the same numbers as a guy playing on a traditional cellar dweller in (arguably) the deepest conference this year. I would even argue that, if you just want to play the SEC card, Ryan Mallet was more deserving. I really don't believe you can argue that Ingram was the best RB this year (Gerhart) or the best player in his conference this year (Mallet). Given those beliefs, the only possible explanation for giving him the award is that enough of the Heisman voters have bought into the SEC hype machine and apparently think that rational thought is a bad substitute for picking the flashiest name offensive player in the SEC.

Heck, even if you argue that Ingram won it with his CCG play, I would argue that Suh had an even better game on the same damn night.

I really don't like dumping on Ingram - he's good. Very good. He didn't have a bad year by any stretch. But the notion that he had a better year than Suh or Gerhart is absolutely absurd. In virtually every aspect, there was someone who was better. If either of those guys played for a contender, this race probably wouldn't have been close. But they don't, and that's a tragedy. I put this award on the level of giving the award to Gino Torretta or Andre Ware.

Mark Ingram would tear apart the pac 10 defenses. Besides, it's not like he won by some absurd amount.

Gerhart's Pac-10 opponents allowed an average of 137.7 rushing yards per game.

Ingram's SEC opponents allowed an average of 144.2 rushing yards per game.

It's hard to measure it, but I would also argue that Ingram played behind a better OL this year. So I guess I disagree with you.

 

[Taosman]

Alabama would still be very good without Ingram. How good would Texas be without McCoy? Or Stanford without Gerhart? The Heisman Trophy has become a regional bias Trophy.

 

[Merih]

Alabama would still be very good without Ingram. How good would Texas be without McCoy? Or Stanford without Gerhart? The Heisman Trophy has become a regional bias Trophy.

It's not a Most Valuable Player to his Team trophy either.

Before the season started I said as long as it's not Tebow. And that panned out. Therefore visa vie that's enough for me

 

[powerlifter]

Gerhart's Pac-10 opponents allowed an average of 137.7 rushing yards per game.

Ingram's SEC opponents allowed an average of 144.2 rushing yards per game.

It's hard to measure it, but I would also argue that Ingram played behind a better OL this year. So I guess I disagree with you.

So you are saying Pac 10 defenses are better then SEC defenses based on this statistic,correct? I'm doubting you could field an all Pac 10 defense that is better than an all SEC defense.

 

[jwinslow]

That's not really a rebuttal, powerlifter. Teams can have great players and still not play well as a unit.

The two leagues hold backs to about the same average. What is your rebuttal for that?

 

[powerlifter]

That's not really a rebuttal, powerlifter. Teams can have great players and still not play well as a unit.

The two leagues hold backs to about the same average. What is your rebuttal for that?

Exactly what I meant.. Pac 10< SEC..

Read through the ongoing threads about how oregon's defense isn't really that good and how OSU will beat them,because Oregon hasn't seen a defense like OSU all year long. Oregon is the best that the pac 10 has to offer this year..

There were 3 backs who had more rushing yards then Ingram.If the award was based on statistics alone..then yea he didn't deserve to win,but in that case Keenan and Clausen should have been there last night instead of Tebow and Mccoy.Ingram is the only SEC back in the top 10 in rushing yards (overall).

It was the closest heisman voting ever..It's not like Ingram won by a huge margin that would make it appear to be some travesty.

Best team+Big time player+Big time performances in crucial games= Win. Would I say the lack of a clear cut winner this year makes it more debatable? Absolutely.