scooter1369
HTTR Forever.
They likely can't pronounce Youboty correctly and say it like "Booty".
Upvote
0
-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter DaddyBigBucks
- Start date
buckeyeboy
Still fortitudinous
I agree. But this far down on the list are only players who have no legitimate shot at winning it (e.g., a fullback from Rutgers is at #68). Therefore, considering Wells is only one injury away from being the feature back at OSU, I think #65 is realistic.
For what it's worth, I love the fact that Wells is #65 and Williams from PSU is #66. I'm sure those crybaby PSU fans are having a fit right now, b/c they probably think he belongs in the top 5.
Upvote
0
That fullback from Rutgers, Brian Leonard, is (IMHO) one of the 10 best all around players in the game right now, and arguably one of the Top 5 backs. 40 career games, 40 TDs, and 3900 yards, and the kid is returning for his senior year. He has hit 100+ yards running/receiving in 25 games, and has only missed one game since becoming a starter as a RS Frosh.
I don't care whether or not he plays for Rutgers in the weakened Big East. The kid is an amazing talent. He's a less physically punishing, but more athletic version of Mike Alstott (see his rediculous hurdle to avoid a tackle against Illinois last season).
He should be far, far higher on the list.
2005:
768 yards rushing, 4.28 ypc avg., 11 TDs
568 yards receiving, 10.37 ypc avg., 6 TDs
2004:
753 yards rushing, 3.68 ypc avg., 7 TDs
518 yards receiving, 8.49 ypc avg., 2 TDs
2003:
880 yards rushing, 4.13 ypc avg., 9 TDs
488 yards receiving, 9.21 ypc avg., 5 TDs
Upvote
0
buckeyeboy
Still fortitudinous
I'm not disputing whether he's an "amazing talent." He might be. But we both know (at least I know it, and I'd guess that you watch enough college football that you're knowledgeable enough to know it) that this coming fall there's no way in the world that he'll win the Heisman.
Your conclusion (that he "should be far, far higher on the list" and hence that he has a shot at the Heisman) does not follow from your premises (that he's an amazing talent, and you don't care if he plays for a weak team in a weak conference). No offense, but your logic is flawed -- what conference a player plays in and what team he plays for most certainly matters in regards to whether he has a legitimate chance to win the Heisman.
Upvote
0
What is flawed in knowing and recognizing the fact that good players sometimes get stuck playing for mediocre teams and/or good teams in otherwise forgettable conferences? 
You probably think that that string of bums from Marshall (Randy Moss, Chad Pennington, Byron Leftwich) didn't deserve to be Top 6 or better vote getters, nor did Alex Smith, Ladanian Tomlinson, Damien Anderson, David Carr, or Antwaan Randle El -- which are all just from this decade.
You don't have to play for a national power, or even a national title contender, to be recognized among the elite in your sport, let alone at your position.
Is Brian Leonard a legitimate candidate to win the Heisman? No. But he is a legitimate candidate to finish in the Top-10 in the voting. With a true RB and big-play threat on the roster now (Ray Rice, a 1100+ yard back in 2005) Rutgers has a pair of gamebreakers in the backfield, and the least talked about or respected backfield in America.
Hypothetical, but truly plausible: Rutgers goes to Morgantown on Dec 2 and upsets an undefeated and National Title bound West Virginia team. If such a scenario were to happen, Leonard will get votes.
You probably think that that string of bums from Marshall (Randy Moss, Chad Pennington, Byron Leftwich) didn't deserve to be Top 6 or better vote getters, nor did Alex Smith, Ladanian Tomlinson, Damien Anderson, David Carr, or Antwaan Randle El -- which are all just from this decade.
You don't have to play for a national power, or even a national title contender, to be recognized among the elite in your sport, let alone at your position.
Is Brian Leonard a legitimate candidate to win the Heisman? No. But he is a legitimate candidate to finish in the Top-10 in the voting. With a true RB and big-play threat on the roster now (Ray Rice, a 1100+ yard back in 2005) Rutgers has a pair of gamebreakers in the backfield, and the least talked about or respected backfield in America.
Hypothetical, but truly plausible: Rutgers goes to Morgantown on Dec 2 and upsets an undefeated and National Title bound West Virginia team. If such a scenario were to happen, Leonard will get votes.
Upvote
0
buckeyeboy
Still fortitudinous
What is flawed in knowing and recognizing the fact that good players sometimes get stuck playing for mediocre teams and/or good teams in otherwise forgettable conferences?
You don't have to play for a national power, or even a national title contender, to be recognized among the elite in your sport, let alone at your position.
Hypothetical, but truly plausible: Rutgers goes to Morgantown on Dec 2 and upsets an undefeated and National Title bound West Virginia team. If such a scenario were to happen, Leonard will get votes.
1. Your reasoning is flawed b/c it assumes that just b/c someone is an amazing talent, as you like to say, or is a good player, than that player has a shot at getting Heisman votes, his weak school and conference notwithstanding. Sorry, but that's just not the way things work. There are good players every year who put up fantastic numbers but who are overlooked when it comes to any Heisman consideration b/c they play for a loser or b/c they play in a loser conference.
2. There's a huge difference between being "recognized among the elite in your sport" and getting Heisman votes. Although the former category is so nebulous that it could possibly include anyone who had a good year.
3. Much, much more plausible scenario: Leonard gets no Heisman votes and you are the only one outside of Camden, NJ who thinks he actually deserves some votes.
Upvote
0
It's extremely difficult to develop a list of more than 25 or 30 guys that are likely to get some Heisman votes.
You could make the statement "that guy probably won't get any Heisman votes" about every player above #35, and probably be correct 95% of the time.
You could make the statement "that guy probably won't get any Heisman votes" about every player above #35, and probably be correct 95% of the time.
Upvote
0
IronBuckI
Calmer than you are.
I actually think that all the preseason hype for Quinn is going to be a negative. Look at Matt Leinart. After winning the Heisman, he has a better year, and ends up finishing third. Yes Bush and Young had very good years, but Leinart was held to such ridiculous standards that every INT and sack lost him votes, for not being other worldly. The day that Brady has a two interception game, and shows the first signs of happy feet, the dogs will be unleashed talking about how he hasn't progressed as much as expected, and about how he is unworthy of the Heisman.
Upvote
0
The very same thing can happen to Troy Smith. If we lose the Texas game and Smith plays the whole game, you can basically forget about his winning the Heisman. Fair? No, but that's how it'll be because he "failed" to lead his team to victory in such an important game.
Upvote
0
Doubtful, if smith goes out and throws for over 300 yards and 4 tds, and we lose because the defense gave up a last second score to cost us the game it won't hurt smith that much. Plus he will have the rest of the year to build upon the stats and show the media what kind of player he is.
Upvote
0
I think the media dogging of Heisman candidates is really much worse for guys that return after winning it, as opposed to just being the preseason favorite.
It happened to Jason White as well as Leinart.
Upvote
0
IronBuckI
Calmer than you are.
I think that a lot of the Jason White bashing was due to the media people that voted for him being pissed for making them look like such idiots. Remember that most of Jason White's Heisman winning votes were submitted before the Big 12 title game. He then managed to follow that crappy game up by laying an egg against LSU. People weren't going to be fooled by him two years in a row. A lot of the hype surrounding White was negative. Leinart on the other hand had a very good game against Oklahoma, after winning the Heisman, and followed it up with a better year statistically than his Heisman year.
Upvote
0