All-time Heisman "WTF?"s (please add)

Submitted by Topher on
Last night's award got me thinking about Heisman "WTF?" moments. Some Heisman Trophies go down, some almost immediately, as "they got this one wrong" moments. Interestingly, the increase in underclassmen winning the HT increases the chance that a Heisman winner will "bust" before he even leaves college. Ingram becomes one of the more remarkable winners in averaging fifty fewer yards per game than the combined stats of the previous 17 running backs to win it, scoring 35% fewer touchdowns than the national TD rush leader, being outrushed by a backup in three games, failing to break 100 yards in five games and being benched in a rivalry game. My feeling is there's a strong likelihood that this year becomes a quick "WTF" moment in Heisman history, especially if Ingram has a poor bowl game or a mediocre year (after all, the Bama fans were telling us that his backup was so good he had to split time with him, and the situation could easily reverse itself next season). What is even sadder to me is that Suh finishes a considerably distant third despite being the most dominant defensive player in the game since Steve Emtman or Charles Woodson. That result really calls the HT's credibility into question, as it's really just an award for ballcarries (I don't use the term "skill position.") People will probably look back on Colt McCoy and wonder how he got out-Heismaned twice, and Ingram has a LOT of work to do to be as accomplished a ballplayer as McCoy. (My bias admitted: I'm a Stanford grad school alum and I think Toby Gerhart got jobbed - by SEC bias, media groupthink, the power of Alabama's overall team, preseason and early-season hype, and the Pac-10's horrific media deal that puts games on the laughable FSN/CSN and Versus networks. Even people who are looking for the games on the east coast have trouble finding them.) Without further ado, here are some of my other Heisman WTF moments: -1999: Ron Dayne winning over Michael Vick. He won because he broke Ricky Williams' rushing record from the year before, but Dayne was routinely lame against the Big Ten's power teams, particularly Michigan, and benefitted from scheduling quirks that kept him away from the conference powers in convenient years. Vick led VT to the Sugar Bowl that year with routinely spectacular play. -2000: Chris Weinke over Josh Heupel. Weinke was kept in games to run up the score and propel Florida State to an undeserved berth in the national championship game. Heupel was throwing to converted running backs and throwaway receivers and still had knockout stats. This strategy backfired when FSU had no experienced QBs, which begat the Chris Rix Era.) -1995: Eddie George over Tommie Frazier. How did Frazier's sheer running ability AND the skill to run the system that mauled Nebraska's opponents left and right get beat by George, especially after Tim Biakabutuka outplayed George in the Michigan game? -1992: Gino Toretta from Miami. Not sure who he beat in the voting, but he was totally exposed by Alabama in the Sugar Bowl that year, which should have been a sign the voting should be postponed to include the bowl games. -2004: The right guy (Leinart) won it, but Jason White came in third - after having been exposed in last year's Big XII Championship and Sugar Bowl games, and with Adrian Peterson on his team, I'm not sure what business he had getting that many votes the second time around. -1956: Paul Hornung on a 2-9 team over Johnny Majors from Tennessee and two guys from Oklahoma. THIS is the incident that started Big Orange Nation's Heist-man paranoia. Total Notre Dame bias at play. Hornung also turned out to be a gambler and a shirker from his draft duty, both of which bit him in the rear during his pro career. -Not a Heisman WTF, but Major Applewhite should and would have won one if Mack Brown had not benched him for the overhyped, inferior and disastrous-in-big-games Chris Simms.

MinorRage

December 13th, 2009 at 12:41 PM ^

of another instance. But strongly agree with Major Applewhite. For some reason he was one of my all time favorites of a non-Michigan player. Their bowl game over Washington when he lead the comeback was a pretty spectacular game to watch.

Topher

December 13th, 2009 at 12:49 PM ^

Major was an awesome football player and that comeback was unreal. His players always played so hard for him - he was a hell of a leader. Interestingly, he was OC at Alabama for Saban's first year, then was hired back on the staff at Texas, so he will have an interesting experience come January in Pasadena.

TrppWlbrnID

December 13th, 2009 at 1:07 PM ^

you will want to check the regional voting for the heisman in the other post. gerhart lost lots of points in the southwest to suh, which suprises me. i would have expected a pac10 guy to do well in a region that has the two arizona teams and lots of usc support, but he did not and ended up losing by a small margin.

Tim Waymen

December 13th, 2009 at 1:23 PM ^

The Heisman voters suck. Gerhart or Suh should have won. It's like the voters not only didn't watch them play, but didn't even look at their stats. Just lazy. Still, Mark Ingram was an absolute class act. I think part of it is that I hate Tim Tebow so much that I've appreciated other guys winning the Heisman.

TrppWlbrnID

December 13th, 2009 at 1:52 PM ^

hearing sedrick irvin getting namechecked as an intern for alabama by ingram afterwards. how is saban recreating the late 90's spartans AND playing in national championship games? is gus ornstein the qb coach? charles rogers?

jmblue

December 13th, 2009 at 1:53 PM ^

The first WR to win the Heisman did so while catching a grand total of three TD passes, rushing for one, and averaging fewer than 20 yards per kickoff return. (He was an outstanding punt returner, I'll grant.) A classic "Let's vote for the ND guy" case.

Black Socks

December 13th, 2009 at 2:04 PM ^

Gerhard had a great year, but when I look at the overall stats I do not see why he should have been a clear winner. Without Ingram Bama would have lost three games. The O line was rebuilding this year and during the middle of the season Bama rode MI through a stretch where they couldn't complete a pass. I am going on record saying that Mark Ingram will be a much better pro than Toby Gerhard. There is a reason why TG is a 3-4th round projection and Ingram is a first round. The vote was close and could have gone either way. If TG wants to place a blame it should go to Suh, who took many of his votes.

Topher

December 13th, 2009 at 2:22 PM ^

"I am going on record saying that Mark Ingram will be a much better pro than Toby Gerhard. There is a reason why TG is a 3-4th round projection and Ingram is a first round." When you can show where the Heisman criteria includes NFL potential as a benchmark of a player's worth, I'll take this as relevant. NFL achievement does not equal superior football player. The NFL system is very narrow-minded in what types of offensive players it wants to make into successes. And to judge from NFL offenses these days, the pro-system mindset is wacked.

jmblue

December 13th, 2009 at 3:06 PM ^

Without Ingram Bama would have lost three games. The O line was rebuilding this year and during the middle of the season Bama rode MI through a stretch where they couldn't complete a pass. Are you suggesting that Stanford could have withstood the loss of Gerhart more easily?

Wolverine Incognito

December 13th, 2009 at 5:21 PM ^

First, it is spelled Gerhart, with a t at the end. Next, Gerhart had 11 more touchdowns. That alone is all I needed to see, but Gerhart also had almost 200 more yards than Ingram. Third, did you WATCH the two of them play? I don't know how anyone can say that Ingram was more dominating than Gerhart. It seemed clear to me that Ingram benefited greatly from an Alabama team that was loaded with talent on both sides of the ball. Gerhart, on the other hand, carried Stanford. Finally, which three games did Ingram win for them? If one of your answers is Tennessee, I think Terrence Cody would have something to say about that... Not mention that Ingram did not have a single TD against UT.

befuggled

December 13th, 2009 at 2:23 PM ^

I think complaining about third place finishers diminishes the effectiveness of an otherwise excellent post. Gino beat out Marshall Faulk. Faulk was obviously a great talent, but had the disadvantage of playing for San Diego State. If he'd played for one of the Pac 10 schools maybe he'd have won the Heisman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_NCAA_Division_I-A_football_season How about Andre Ware for another Heisman WTF pick? Ware was obviously a WTF first round draft pick for the Lions, but even at the time it was obvious that his great stats came at the expense of miserable opponents. He won over Anthony Thompson, who had the misfortune of playing for Indiana, and Major Harris, a dual threat QB for West Virgina.

bronxblue

December 13th, 2009 at 2:51 PM ^

I just remember 2001 with Crouch - sure, he might have been the best player that year, but he was also competing against the likes of Joey Harrington, Rex Grossman, and Ken Dorsey. Ugh! They should have just ignored the ballot that year and rolled it over to the next year and given 2 to Carson Palmer.

JustToMake-a-Point

December 13th, 2009 at 5:26 PM ^

Darren McFadden would have one if people weren't so afraid of a repeat OJ Simpson. After he got in a bar fight and sat down for an interview he had no chance. But he was the best player in college football. His stats were better than Ingrams were this year and don't forget he also shared the back field with another first round pick Felix Jones. If Tim Tebow wasn't so new and fresh and gave everyone of the Heisman voters a broner, D-Mac would have won.

jim48315

December 14th, 2009 at 10:09 AM ^

In 1956 there was another candidate, too. A fellow named Brown, who was a senior at a school in upstate New York called Syracuse. And Johnny Majors was the guy who was robbed? The ND SID bragged about this one. The yokels who went by regions beat up each other (McDonald and Tubbs from OU and Majors from Tenn), and Hornung won after the other candidates' voters tore each other up. As for the best player, the Syracuse halfback who went on to a pretty good NFL career, there was no Heisman voter in Tennessee or any other SEC town in 1956 who would have voted for an African-American. Maybe they deserve to keep losing until that debt is paid in full. And another ND QB, John Huarte (no, there is no other reason to remember this guy) won in 1964, beating out such second-raters as Gale Sayers, Dick Butkus, Fred Biletnikoff, Floyd Little, and Tommy Nobis, among others. Of course, that year M was a Rose Bowl winner, with such players as Bill Yearby, Tom Mack, Bob Timberlake, and Jack Clancy, and more.

bacon

December 13th, 2009 at 7:03 PM ^

The heisman is a popularity contest. Most of the time the winner is a bust in the NFL (with some notable UM exceptions!). Since I'm hoping my team picks #1 overall, I'm glad it didn't go to Suh.

jmblue

December 14th, 2009 at 8:24 PM ^

I forgot one of the biggest of all: Archie Griffin's second Heisman. The first (1974) was well-deserved. The second (1975) was purely due to reputation. He missed part of that year due to injuries and scored just four TDs all year, yet won the Heisman anyway. He should be a single-Heisman winner like everyone else.

dakotapalm

December 15th, 2009 at 8:27 AM ^

I like your analysis overall, but I disagree in the 2000 voting. Although he finished fourth, I thought at the time that LaDainian Tomlinson was the clear best player in the country. Everyone said that he was unproven because he played in the WAC (like, I dunno, Marshall Faulk?). But he had previously run for 406 yard in ONE game against UTEP. I'd like to go back and do that year over again. Turns out, he was okay against top competition too, huh.