The Heisman was rigged

The rest can stop citing teams with bad records that had Heisman winners lol.

It's not hard to see that some teams can get away with that, while others get excluded the moment their team has a loss. We see it every year. There isn't consistency in the standard. That's the point.

I don't think anyone is saying those that have been able to get away with bad teams weren't good/great players worthy of discussion. Doubt anyone is saying Daniels didn't have a great season and was a dynamic exciting player to watch.

Subjective awards and committee/media rankings will forever have controversy. It's just how it is.
 
Wizardhawk said:
The rest can stop citing teams with bad records that had Heisman winners lol.

It's not hard to see that some teams can get away with that, while others get excluded the moment their team has a loss. We see it every year. There isn't consistency in the standard. That's the point.

I don't think anyone is saying those that have been able to get away with bad teams weren't good/great players worthy of discussion. Doubt anyone is saying Daniels didn't have a great season and was a dynamic exciting player to watch.

Subjective awards and committee/media rankings will forever have controversy. It's just how it is.
Click to expand...

The Heisman is not a TEAM award. It's based on the performance of the individual.

So whether the TEAM went 13-0 or 0-13 should not be the divider on who is worthy of a heisman based on INDIVIDUAL performance
 
Bamagrad75 said:
The Heisman is not a TEAM award. It's based on the performance of the individual.

So whether the TEAM went 13-0 or 0-13 should not be the divider on who is worthy of a heisman based on INDIVIDUAL performance
Click to expand...
Again, that doesn't appear to be the case for all. That counts for SEC and blue bloods, but not so much any other team.

Bo Nix had the stats, but his team lost twice. Both losses dropped his stock to where he got very little vote.

Penix had worse stats in many/most categories than Nix, but carried a fairly close second place on the back of an undefeated season.

Most years we see guys with a solid season said to be out of it the moment their teams lose.

So the only people who make your blanket statement are those trying to defend why their preferred finalist deserves it despite their team, while other years they will tell us player x is out because his team lost.

There are different standards for different players even within a given year. That's how these work.
 
Wizardhawk said:
The rest can stop citing teams with bad records that had Heisman winners lol.

It's not hard to see that some teams can get away with that, while others get excluded the moment their team has a loss. We see it every year. There isn't consistency in the standard. That's the point.

I don't think anyone is saying those that have been able to get away with bad teams weren't good/great players worthy of discussion. Doubt anyone is saying Daniels didn't have a great season and was a dynamic exciting player to watch.

Subjective awards and committee/media rankings will forever have controversy. It's just how it is.
Click to expand...
For example, Penix had almost identical stats last year, he got very little to no Heisman consideration outside of the PNW on a 10-2 team. If UW wasn't 13-0 he would have got little consideration this year, we know this, there was a bunch of media hype surrounding the Pac 12 CCG regarding the QB who wins that game should be the guy.

That doesn't mean that Daniels or anyone else over the years isn't deserving. Let's just not pretend there aren't different standards applied depending on different factors like exposure/region. It's always been next to impossible for any UW player to get serious Heisman consideration, even getting the invite to NY was a goddamn miracle.
 
Lol @ op for caring about who wins a glorified popularity contest in 2023.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
For example, Penix had almost identical stats last year, he got very little to no Heisman consideration outside of the PNW on a 10-2 team. If UW wasn't 13-0 he would have got little consideration this year, we know this, there was a bunch of media hype surrounding the Pac 12 CCG regarding the QB who wins that game should be the guy.

That doesn't mean that Daniels or anyone else over the years isn't deserving. Let's just not pretend there aren't different standards applied depending on different factors like exposure/region. It's always been next to impossible for any UW player to get serious Heisman consideration, even getting the invite to NY was a goddamn miracle.
Click to expand...
It's a fact that there is no way UW would ever get a guy as even an invite on a 9-3 team. Doesn't matter how great the player is, there is no chance at all it could happen here. They aren't blueblood enough.
 
Knight&Day said:
Lol @ op for caring about who wins a glorified popularity contest in 2023.
Click to expand...
My favorite part was how pained he was to have to say Penix might have been snubbed lol.

Mince no words though, he believes Bo should have easily won it. That's pure OD.
 
Wizardhawk said:
It's a fact that there is no way UW would ever get a guy as even an invite on a 9-3 team. Doesn't matter how great the player is, there is no chance at all it could happen here. They aren't blueblood enough.
Click to expand...
It's the exposure more than the blue blood status. RGIII was able to win it on a pretty not great team. Joining the Big 10 might help a little, but we're always going to be on an island out here. We're in a decent sized market, but that's pretty much all we got. The rest of the west coast will focus on the California markets. Other than that we're just lucky to have ESPN throw us a bone sometimes.

It's always been this way and not intending this to be some kind of bitch session, but it does really show itself in years like this. What'd we end up with? a top 10 strength of schedule by most metrics? Had to beat a really good rival two times to run the table and win the conference, but if UW dropped one game they would have got 0 playoff consideration this year with the other 1 loss teams. A Heisman caliber quarterback who checks all the boxes, stats, moments in big games, leadership on an undefeated team. But we knew going in he was a long shot paired against someone who checked one of the boxes a little better.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
It's the exposure more than the blue blood status. RGIII was able to win it on a pretty not great team. Joining the Big 10 might help a little, but we're always going to be on an island out here.
Click to expand...
You're right. It's more region than conference. Big 12 is also down in the area that intersects several of the voting zones for the Heisman. Out west we get our zone, and maybe a little help from the Midwest zone.

It's a numbers game and playing so many games at night and having so many voters in the east/south gives us a much smaller margin of error to get a guy in. You have to be near perfect.

Joining the B1G no doubt helps, but still doesn't level the playing field. We are still going to play a bunch of night games to pad TV revenue.
 
Wizardhawk said:
Then why not give it to Shedeur?

You can't say there should never be consideration for record when it is largely a QB award, they are the most consequential position on the team, and the one position that can carry a team more than any other.

Hell, Penix was penalized for having games too close they should have blown out. Doesn't matter he was clutch and made many 4th quarter plays that were comebacks or game saving?

People threw Bo out because his 'team' lost to UW twice. If it's more stats than wins Bo gets more votes than he did.

Piling up stats against bad teams shouldn't be the primary factor in judging the best player.

That alone isn't the problem. It's the inconsistency of how each are judged. One can be out for a single team loss while others are rewarded for stats on a shitty team.
Click to expand...

Why would they give it to Shedeur? He had less yards, touchdowns, a worse QBR by a ton and only one less interception?

If a player performs outstanding against a good enough schedule but his team falls short through no fault of his own then it should not go against him for the most outstanding player award
 
The one-sided bias and overall favoritism for the B1G/SEC over the other 3 P5 conf’s is a cancerous tumor to CFB and the main cause of the sport’s death, tho.

The Big XII & Pac 12 both also deserve a “fuck you, bitch” or two since they didn’t exactly help their cause (see: Bob Bowlsby & Larry Scott).
 
fishinabarrel said:
Why would they give it to Shedeur? He had less yards, touchdowns, a worse QBR by a ton and only one less interception?

If a player performs outstanding against a good enough schedule but his team falls short through no fault of his own then it should not go against him for the most outstanding player award
Click to expand...
If pure stats alone are the indicator then why was Bo so far behind Penix in the voting?
 
OregonDucks said:
Sorry. But a QB of a 9-3 team shouldn’t win the heisman. Hell they shouldn’t even be invited to the ceremony.

I’m sick that the SEC bias that has taken over college football, see FSU, has ruined and taken away a special moment for players like Bo Nix, who deserve and are worthy of the prestigious award of the Heisman trophy.

They screwed over FSU and now they screwed over Nix and dare I say, Penix. Yes, that’s how stupid this is, you got me even considering Penix more deserving of this award than Daniels.

Bottom line, Daniels shouldn’t have won it. He didn’t deserve it. Marvin Harrison was a joke to even be there, seriously wtf was that?

Thank you Bo for all you did for Oregon. Heisman in my book!

SkOO Ducks! Let’s get it one more time on January 1.
Click to expand...
Shut up and be thankful for what we allow you to have (but it will never be a natty).

Sincerely,

SEC Overlords.
 
Wizardhawk said:
This is part of the problem. People making blind arguments without any context.

Penix didn't play in the 4th quarter of any game until week 5. He was pulled sometime mid/late 3rd quarter in every shit stain game they were in. As I already stated, they opted for giving younger kids more game experience vs running up stats for either their team ranking (which for sure hurt early on) or award considerations such as Biletnikoff/heisman.

Daniels played every snap against Georgia State for example.

Sagarin has LSU at 28th SoS and UW at 5th.

So no, they are not equal.
Click to expand...
That's cool.

FWIW, Penix had at least 25 pass attempts in every game. The Cal game was his lowest for attempts (25).

Meanwhile, Daniels had 5 games with under 25 attempts: Texas A&M (24), Alabama (24), Army (15), Mizzou (21) and Grambling (24).

So, Penix was definitely throwing the ball more than Daniels. Daniels only threw 327 passes while Penix threw 466 during the year. Daniels won the Heisman because he ran for 1,134 yards (not 1.300 as I stated off the top of my head previously) TOO - which is hard for a running back, let alone a QB.

I do agree all things being equal it is easier for an LSU player (3) to win a Heisman than a Washington player (0) - especially NOW. Once upon a time it was really, really hard for SEC players to win it. That is a recent thing. Sheesh, it took Alabama until 2009 to have their first Heisman Winner! They had 8 Undefeated, Untied Bowl Championship Teams (5 in the Hesiman Era) and 6 AP National Championships (all in the Heisman Era) before they had a Heisman Winner.

BTW, good luck to Washington in the Sugar Bowl. I will be rooting for the Huskies, and I hope Penix lights up the Longhorns.

G-E-A-U-X, Go Huskies Go!:)
 
Wizardhawk said:
If pure stats alone are the indicator then why was Bo so far behind Penix in the voting?
Click to expand...
Because the award has actually never been advertised as being about stats alone. But you know... when convenient.
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Having watched LSU once the first week of the season and only having stats to go off of, Daniels was no doubt worthy.

However, if you flip it, put Daniels on 9-3 UW and Penix on 13-0 LSU with all the same stats, it’s a different result.
Click to expand...
Penix has never come close to the stats that Jaylen Daniels put up. Penix and Daniels passing stats were similar, Daniels also ran for 1000 yards. He put up video game stats. Just think this is a weak class and the gaudy numbers won it for Daniels
 
DayButtAssMans’s said:
Because the award has actually never been advertised as being about stats alone. But you know... when convenient.
Click to expand...
In that case, how about answering 1 question for me. Do you think Penix is the best player on Washington? I can tell you I don’t
 
Codaxx said:
In that case, how about answering 1 question for me. Do you think Penix is the best player on Washington? I can tell you I don’t
Click to expand...
I don't know if I'd say he's the best, probably a real good argument for Odunze (who should have been in NY, BTDubs). He's definitely the most valuable though. He's no question the one piece they couldn't lose and be 13-0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top