What is wrong with college football?
Why on God's green earth would you give the Heisman to Jason White instead of B.J. Symons of Texas Tech or Phil Rivers of NC State (Who both have had better numbers and stats this year)??? Could it be because we live in an age where you don't have to win your Conference Title and still be in the running for National Champ? Is it because we live in an ultra political world where the more you talk up a candidate to the voters the more rosy the picture? Is it because we have a sad sap with a super sad story? A young man who has tried to break, pull and bust just about every muscle and bone in his body but still keeps going, showing the world how tough he is?
Bah, I've seen smaller, tougher quarterbacks risk their lives on the run thousands of times more than I've seen this chicken-shit do one of those Rich Gannon pussy slides when a defender gets within 5 yards....Hell, I don't even think a quarterback should be up for an award, it's an award enough that they get to be the Rock-Star of the team! You know those guys are getting the majority of the tail and kickbacks that are thrown at the team. I mean, what about those poor bastard WRs or RBs that have to risk a concussion or severe injury every time they run down the field!!! I mean, they sprint at least 10-15 yards EACH PLAY, while the QB can back-peddle for 10 seconds or so if their line is worth their weight.
I'm still just boiling because of this stupid, lame BCS score crap! 4 out of the last 5 years we've had issues with possible Co-Champion scenarios! I still think BCS is fine, as long as you've won your own conference. How can you even be considered number 1, when you've been beaten by a team that wasn't in the top ten? For that matter, if you WERE considered number 1 and were even beat by number 2, you would still NOT, by any matter of doubt, be number 1 anymore...you've been beaten. How does Oklahoma still keep ahold of a number 1 berth??? Because of a stupid program that has already proven that it simply does not work.
Comments
what does it matter if you are beatin in a conference championship game by a team who is playing with everything they have just to earn a bcs bid. Your knowledge of football is pathetic because you fail to realize that the heisman is not only won by the best overall player in college football but that a person with a losing team is rarely going to make an appearance at the award show. So you think a quarterback from texas tech should have won the heisman. May i bring to your attention the fact that against oklahoma which by the way texas tech lost by more than 20 points B.J. showed that he was nothing special against anyone who is anyone. But i guess phil rivers is a good candidate...No who is he playing in his bowl again. Oh that's right Kansas university that right their speaks for itself how can you hope to win a heisman with a team that is only played with enough skill to find themselves matched with possibly one of the worst big 12 football teams in the tangerine bowl. Rivers is doing exactly what he should be doing preparing for the bowl which may be the climax in his career. Neither one of these quarterbacks deserve to be in the top 5 or 100 for that matter.
Posted by: Nolan | December 15, 2003 11:19 AM
I concocted a whole HUGE response to this, and I'll still post, but it's my opinion versus yours. BCS is still SHITE and the voting for awards is still way too political. I may not know the most about football, but I know stupid when I see it.
_________________________________________________
True, I kind of ran two different subjects together, it happens when you rant and rave as much as I do. I'm not too pissed that the cat won the Heisman, I mean, he may go well in the draft, but odds are against the poor guy doing anything GREAT in the NFL for a while. If Symons sucked that bad then why are his completions per attempt and his overall stats a little better? I mean, dude, negative yards on rushing and the same amount of sacks! Are we going on likeability or are we voting on prowess? I was just ranting at how damned political it is getting. The mark of a good quarterback is not how good a team he leads, that's the amount of positive recruiting someone did 2-3 years ago! The mark of a good quarterback can only be quantified by his stats...THAT'S WHY WE KEEP THEM!
And the BCS system is crap, you have to admit it hasn't lived up to the hype of a few years ago. A championship should never be playing against someone so that you might have the off chance of earning the title of "co-champion". It should be #1 versus #2, period.
Also, I'm not sure that your assessment of KSU in the late season is correct. They had been in a mid-season slump and who wouldn't want a BCS bowl game, but if Oklahoma is all-mighty enough to be #1, they should be able to beat or at least squeak out against a #12 team at the time, right? Or, you've basically said that the rousting KSU gave them basically means KSU should be ranked higher(in converse Oklahoma should not therefore be #1)....it's a Catch22. And of course, coming from Kansas and being a wildcat alum, I'll admit that the mid-season was more of a fluke than their beating of Oklahoma was.
Posted by: norby | December 15, 2003 04:25 PM
Ah, another thought came to mind, if these other quarterbacks aren't so great only because their teams suck and stats get better if your team is better...which we can all agree happens to a small degree... that means that the other two QBs I mentioned are much better than White...he supposedly heads the #1 team and his numbers are either the same or lacking compared to about 75% of the "big" stats we keep. That means they had to fight tooth and nail to kick ass with mediocre teams and White got a free ride to where he is, right?
Posted by: norby | December 15, 2003 04:35 PM
Just to comment on the Heisman issue here, first of all, I want to agree with the original article that it is completely political and that Jason White did not deserve to win it. On the other hand, if you are looking statistically neither Phillip Rivers or BJ Symons are any better than Jason White. Breaking it down by what are considered to be the big stats, TD to Int ratio as well as overall QB rating, they break down like this...
White - 40 TD / 8 Int with a 168 Rating
Rivers - 29 TD / 7 Int with a 166.7 Rating
Symons - 48 TD / 21 Int with a 149.2 Rating
These are typically considered the big stats, and if you are just looking at this, White does deserve the Heisman. The problem is that a large reason for his stellar stats are because he is on such a great team. If you want the best player in the country, it is probably Fitzgerald or Eli Manning, both of which have made their teams far better than what they would have been without them. White is just another piece on what is a great team.
Basically, anymore the Heisman is not for the best overall player, but it is for the best story, or for the leader on the best team. All political, and all total BS.
As for the BCS, it sucks. A playoff is clearly needed. I hope we have two champs this year, just so we can move closer to having a playoff of some sort.
Posted by: Mike | December 30, 2003 04:08 PM