Manziel wins Heisman

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

NFL mindset applied to a college game.

"If you're not getting sacks or a QB, you don't count..."

I don't believe I said either of those things.

I think Te'o is a good player on one of the best college front 7s I can ever remember seeing. I don't think he's a great player and I think the team would excel without him. I don't think he's anywhere close to being a dominant player like, say, Ndamukong Suh, who was what, 4th in Heisman voting that year (now that was a travesty). I think he's ultimately just one of what will be a bunch of NFL players off of that front 7. As I said, I think it's about the greatness of the unit, not the player.

This was a weird year, in any case. I'd probably have voted for Marqise Lee. Thought he was hands down the best player I saw this year. Although it's hard to vote against Manziel. Both the yardage and the freshman thing. And I think there's very little doubt just how valuable he was to that team.

The award is too much a popularity contest and too much about wins and losses. You see it in this thread, where people are complaining about a quarterback winning because his team lost TWO games. Geno Smith isn't even on the ballot with a 4000-yard, 40 TD, 6 INT season, but his teammate Tavon Austin is? Because Smith's the face of a team that lost five times? (I'm not saying he should have won, just making the point...) Isn't the award supposed to be for the most outstanding player in college football? Or is it the most outstanding player on an team that goes undefeated or loses once in college football? It's like you can't be outstanding if your team loses. There were people a year ago complaining about a 3-loss Baylor QB winning it. I guess it's not about being the best. It's about being on the best team. That's why Smith lost the award (and wasn't even in NYC) once WVU lost. That's why Collin Klein went from front-runner to also ran...with one loss.

[Raiderhater]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

The award is too much a popularity contest and too much about wins and losses. You see it in this thread, where people are complaining about a quarterback winning because his team lost TWO games. Geno Smith isn't even on the ballot with a 4000-yard, 40 TD, 6 INT season, but his teammate Tavon Austin is? Because Smith's the face of a team that lost five times? (I'm not saying he should have won, just making the point...) Isn't the award supposed to be for the most outstanding player in college football? Or is it the most outstanding player on an team that goes undefeated or loses once in college football? It's like you can't be outstanding if your team loses. There were people a year ago complaining about a 3-loss Baylor QB winning it. I guess it's not about being the best. It's about being on the best team. That's why Smith lost the award (and wasn't even in NYC) once WVU lost. That's why Collin Klein went from front-runner to also ran...with one loss.

This. And even more to the point, it changes from year to year, and some times even changes during the season. We always hear about how a certain player needs their team to go undefeated and once they lose they are more or less out of it. Then last year we have, as you pointed out, a winner from a three loss team. This year we hear that Klein has to go undefeated to be able to win. He loses one game (and still finishes the regular season with a conference title, a top 5 team and playing in a BCS bowl). So then a two game loser wins the trophy?

There is no consistency in the requirements. It is all about who the media decides they want to win.