Best Stats and Nickname for a QB/RB in the SEC Trophy

That’s pretty much it, folks. I ranted and raved on my Twitter account all weekend – not because of sour grapes or because I ‘wish ND had won it’. While of course those things are true, they don’t make me want to rant. What I have problems with is the continued claim that the Heisman is for the best player in the game, and that it has something to do with integrity. I have problems with lying is all.

If that definition was, at all, applicable anymore, there’s no way the electric frosh wins over Te’o. And to be honest, the final 3 probably looks very different. Johnny Foosball is a heckuvah QB, especially for a freshman. But he is very much wanting in the ‘best player’ and the ‘integrity’ departments, and that’s just a fact.

Sure, he had awesome stats against a competitive schedule. He also blew 2 games that his team lost.

Sure, he’s probably a pretty good kid. But getting arrested a few months before the award is handed out calls in question the ‘integrity’ part.

So at this point, the Heisman has simply jumped the shark.

The Trust and the voters have accepted that it’s an award for the Best Nickname/Highlights/Stats for a QB or RB in the SEC. And that’s okay! But if that’s what you’re gonna be, then let’s just own up to it, shall we? Let’s re-state the mission, and get back to a little integrity in the award, huh?

Manti Te’o is, literally, the most decorated player in the history of the game. Yet, according to this one award, he’s not the best player with integrity. Huh? Time to hit the reset button, Heisman Trust. Trust? More like Rust.

HAHAHAHAHAHAH. Hilarious. Like jumping a shark.

Powered by
  • Mr. White

    Nothing changed about the Heisman this year except that Te’o didn’t win when we all wanted him to. The idea that this year’s award represents some kind of turning point is, frankly, silly. Paul Hornung won the Heisman in 1956 with 3 touchdowns and 13 interceptions, playing for a 2-8 team. That was 56 years ago. Whatever you think about Te’o or Johnny Manziel, it is impossible to argue that this year’s balloting was more of a joke than that year. If Heisman balloting has been imperfect and sketchy since (at least) 1956, then what is all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth about? I single out 1956 because it is the most blatantly ridiculous result I know of, but there have been plenty of other years where the player who won was not (arguably) the best player or (arguably) did not uphold the ‘integrity’ component of the award.

    They took a vote, our (very deserving) guy did not win. It’s unfortunate, but all of this bemoaning the decline of the Vaunted and Lofty Heisman Memorial Trophy stuff is just impossible to take seriously. It’s the same imperfect popularity contest it has always been and would be even if Te’o had won on Saturday night.

    • NDtex

      It isn’t so much that there haven’t been questionable decisions in the past, but rather that the Heisman voters had a chance to make a change in the thought of how they should vote.

      Instead they stuck with the status quo when they had a damn good reason to buck the trend.

      • Mr. White

        Fair enough, but the article (and the other ND fan laments I have seen) are not saying “it is too bad some voters missed an opportunity to privilege the integrity portion of the award while recognizing an outstanding defensive player.” They are suggesting that Manziel’s resume is somehow especially lacking or that this year’s vote is some kind of a turning point or a symptom of an irrevocable decline. The truth is that an unprecedented number of voters voted for a linebacker whose statistical contributions (beyond interceptions) were hard for people who have not watched ND all year to quantify. That a slightly larger number of voters voted for a very good and very exciting quarterback with great numbers who led a road upset of the #1 ranked defending national champs that a lot of people watched just doesn’t rise to the level of an outrage to me.

        • The Biscuit

          This year is especially egregious because they had a very (relatively) easy way to prove that the award actually does stand for what they claim. And they didn’t.

          Yeah, there are plenty of silly results. But this one was a litmus test: will they ever take it seriously, or not? Not.

    • (@gbsk12)

      I don’t necessarily think Hornung’s win was that bad. Hornung did most everything. He blocked, kicked off, kicked FGs and EPs. ran back punts and kickoffs, was the second leading tackler on the team and broke up many passes. He also was not too shabby as a Pro. Most Heisman winners don’t do much after their college career. Look at Ty Detmer and Tebow.

  • tjak

    They should just cut to the chase and make this an offensive award, because this award is just offensive.

  • MJGazzerro

    We at Notre Dame really ought not complain given that we invented (or at least perfected) the sham award by presenting an honorary degree to a US President after 4 months in office and who we would later feel the need to sue.

  • solo

    Interesting take. I have no problems with Johnny and the season he had. Being military we had a discussion about just this topic about a week ago. The integrity part of it was my biggest problem. The second one is just me in that until the Alabama game, where was Johnny at in the heisman race?

    No doubt a great season for him though and a bright future.

  • Bill Meehan

    Just a thought:

    Why not just focus on the Maxwell award?

    It’s obvious that the Heisman is and has been a sham for years. More often than not the Maxwell seems to go to the guy who “should have won the heisman”. So then why not just realize that the other one is a dead award, and move on?

    If I were yall I wouldn’t give the other award any attention at all, and extol the virtues of the Maxwell. I’m not saying their selections are flawless, but they seem a LOT less susceptible to a certain bias.

  • Mark G.


    Hmmm. Like getting arrested for disorderly conduct and getting in a fight. But wait, he got into a fight because he was defending a friend. That’s showing a form of integrity, isn’t it. Well, maybe not when you are defending a friend who used a racial slur that started the whole thing. And then Johnny boy presented a fake ID to the cops — and had another fake ID in his wallet.

    If these facts had been associated with Manti, they would have been enough to take him out of the running for the Heisman. Just a different standard when we are talking about a S.E.C. player, I guess.