Heisman Watch / Phil Steele / Shea Patterson

Submitted by UESWolverine on June 19th, 2018 at 3:15 PM

I just got the College Football Preview magazine and noticed Shea Patterson at #3 in the preseason Heisman list! SBNation has the Vegas odds at 16/1 as well (#5 on their list)! Have we ever had somebody so high on the Heisman list that we hasn't even played a down as a Michigan Wolverine? I know it's only a preseason list, but this is getting me kind of amped up for the season to start. 35671707_10157517044688989_2246841059193651200_n.jpg

Comments

robbyt003

June 19th, 2018 at 3:23 PM ^

Have we ever had somebody so high on the Heisman list that we hasn't even played a down as a Michigan Wolverine?

Well not many players of his caliber transfer out, so I'm going to guess no.

Mineral King

June 19th, 2018 at 3:23 PM ^

Amped is a severe understatement  of how you should feel about this season.

Michigan has to have a QB win a Heisman at some point. It's long overdue. Why not this year!!

 

HAIL-YEA

June 19th, 2018 at 11:37 PM ^

We are not being coy, the guy is competing against 2 very highly rated recruits for the position. I hope to god he works out because he throws some deep balls better than I have ever seen a Michigan qb throw them. He also makes plays that would land him on the bench so I think its fair to be wait before we anoint him the next savior.

JonnyHintz

June 19th, 2018 at 3:57 PM ^

Eh. In the past, Michigan hasn’t thrown the ball nearly enough to warrant a QB winning the Heisman. 

Only twice in program history have we had a 3,000 yard passer. We generally don’t feature a QB with the mobility to add the necessary running threat. 

Simply put, with the way Harbaugh operates his teams, it’s unlikely Michigan will have a QB that puts up the necessary numbers to win the Heisman. 

For comparisons sake, Andrew Luck completed 71.3% of his passes for 3,517 yards, 37 TDs (all of which would be Michigan records) and still finished 2nd in Heisman voting. 

I don’t want to say it’s impossible, but it would take a lot for a Michigan QB to win the Heisman. 

 

DrMantisToboggan

June 19th, 2018 at 4:11 PM ^

Only twice in program history have we had a QB throw for 3,000 yards, but only thrice in program history have we had a team coached by Jim Harbaugh. 

 

Analysis of Michigan QB play before Jim got here is irrelevant to a Jim-coached QB's chances at the Heisman. Given his druthers, Harbaugh would throw the ball close to 30 times a game, like Luck did in 2010 and 2011 (under Shaw by 2011 but under Pep both years) when he threw for 3338 and 3517 yards, respectively. Luck finished second in Heisman voting both of those years. 

 

This isn't to serve as a direct comparison between Luck and Patterson, but simply to say that predicting Patterson's final stat line on the basis of Michigan QB play pre-Harbaugh is not logical. Jim's ideal offensive comps would be the 2010 and 2011 Stanford teams, which each produced a near-Heisman-winning QB.

JonnyHintz

June 19th, 2018 at 5:24 PM ^

No, which is why I included the Luck comparison. He put up absolutely INSANE numbers in terms of efficiency. 

But even with a QB of Luck’s caliber, he averaged 31 pass attempts per game. He completed an average of over 22 of those per game. Completing over 70% of your passes is almost unheard of. Still, it wasn’t enough to get Luck a Heisman. 

For the sake of comparison, Luck only attempted 15 more passes that season than Rudock did under Harbaugh. Yet Luck had 500 more yards, 17 more TDs, and completed 7% more of his passes than Rudock. If that tells you what kind of season Luck had, and still wasn’t enough to win the Heisman. To give you an idea what kind of season it would take for a Michigan QB to win the Heisman.

DrMantisToboggan

June 20th, 2018 at 12:05 AM ^

Yeah I understand all that. My point was simply that "Michigan QBs have never put up Heisman numbers before Harbaugh got here" is not a good barometer of whether Jim will throw the ball enough to get someone a Heisman. We are now running an offense that damn near won a QB a Heisman in 2011, and now running that offense with a QB who was a consensus five star. 

 

I realize that Shea would have to have one of, if not the best, quarterback seasons in Michigan football history to win the award, but Michigan football history before Jim's tenure is not relevant in assessing the likelihood of that happening, right? Like what John Navarre was able to show Heisman voters in our offense in 2003 is irrelevant to what Shea will be able to show in 2018 - we're not running the same offense nor are we coached by the same coaches. Shea will not be constrained by the name of the school he attends.

Leatherstocking Blue

June 19th, 2018 at 4:19 PM ^

But Luck did play on the West Coast and I suspect a lot of voters did not see as much of Luck as they did the SEC, ACC and BIG candidates. Just a guess, but I bet a fair number of Luck's games ended after midnight on the East Coast. If Andrew Luck put up those numbers at Alabama, Clemson or Ohio State, is he a 2-time Heisman winner?

Leatherstocking Blue

June 19th, 2018 at 8:52 PM ^

Good point; I didn’t consider to whom he finished second. My point was more of the role of the afternoon games on CBS or ABC play in the making of the Heisman candidate. I recall Manziel making some play by doing everything wrong: running around 20 yards behind the line of scrimmage, heaving a pass off his back foot, throwing a rainbow late over the middle that should have easily been intercepted. But instead of calling out all errors in the play, CBS (Verne Lundquist, I believe) just gushed like a school girl and said there’s your Heisman moment. Luck didn’t have that luxury.

JonnyHintz

June 19th, 2018 at 6:30 PM ^

Doubtful. I mean maybe one? Even still, RG3 put up some insane numbers in his own right. I doubt he beats Newton. 

But I mean we are talking about a generational QB talent in Luck. I mean he was heralded as potentially becoming the best QB of all-time coming out of the draft.

You have to really grasp the kind of numbers he was able to put up at Stanford, and then try to imagine how difficult it would be to replicate those types of numbers. I mean you’re talking about absolutely SHATTERING Michigan records across the board. 

I’m simply trying to put into perspective the type of season it would take from a Michigan QB to win a Heisman. 

I mean I’d love it if it were to happen, but I just don’t see Shea completing over 70% of his passes and approaching 3,600 yards and 40 TDs while having a good TD:INT ratio. 

Luck’s numbers are the prototype for what it would likely take, and those are some unreal numbers. 

Wolverine 73

June 19th, 2018 at 3:23 PM ^

Seems crazy to me to put a guy on the Heisman watch list when you have not even seen him play in the offense he is going to direct, especially when it is not clear he has even won the starting job, although that seems likely.  If he is even in the discussion for the trophy at the end of the year, this will be an awesome season, because we know the defense will be a championship unit.

Indy Pete - Go Blue

June 19th, 2018 at 3:33 PM ^

 I love this kind of stuff. We are undefeated, and we get better every week this time of year. I am not being facetious, I actually revel in the anticipation of the season with each speculative article that paints Michigan in a positive light. The possibilities of success are endless. Shea for Heisman?  I have no inkling that this could actually happen, but I still love it. 

JonnyHintz

June 19th, 2018 at 3:59 PM ^

Because Wisconsin doesn’t recruit based on recruiting rankings. They go out, they evaluate players on their own, determine who the best fits are for their team, they get those players, and then they develop them.

Getting successful players goes a helluva lot deeper than where they’re ranked by an incredibly flawed system.

JonnyHintz

June 19th, 2018 at 6:44 PM ^

I’d certainly say they’re better at developing talent. I’d say up until Harbaugh got here they’re better at evaluating it, the jury is still out on Harbaugh in that regard.

But all I’m saying is they don’t care what the recruiting rankings say. I don’t think Michigan really does either. They evaluate their own players, find the guys they want and that are the best fit. Sometimes that follows what the rankings say, sometimes it doesn’t.

Wisconsin has a type. They love big maulers on the OL. They love power backs. They love tight ends who can block. They like defensive linemen and linebackers that can get after the ball carrier. 

They identify those players, regardless of where the recruiting sites rank them, they get them in their system, and they develop them. 

You're so caught up in where the kid is ranked according to a recruiting site, while Wisconsin is looking for the best fit for their team.

That’s the difference. That’s why recruiting rankings of individual players don’t really matter. That’s why certain teams are able to have a ton of success without having top recruiting classes. That’s why the fans who bitch and moan about every 3* commit are just pure lazy. 

Do you really care that Khaleke Hudson was a 3*? Do you really care that Bush was a low 4*? Or are you just happy that we have two really good football players who are perfect fits for our team? Do you really care that Higdon was a 3* and Derrick Green was a 5*? Or are you just happy Higdon has proven to be a very good and productive back for us?

Bodogblog

June 19th, 2018 at 5:16 PM ^

Both Jonathan Taylor and Saquon Barkley committed to Rutgers early in their recruitments. 

Laveon Bell was committed to Eastern Michigan, but they didn't have room for him.  They actually turned him away.  The RB coach there helped put him in contact with MSU so he could have a chance at a scholarship.  That coach's name?  Albert Einstein. 

No, really it was Tyrone Wheatley.  So as great as Wheat was, he turned away an amazing RB.  Recruiting is weird. 

Mike Damone

June 19th, 2018 at 3:53 PM ^

I am really excited to watch Shea play - but this early Heisman hype is really dumb.

At beg of 2017, Jacob Eason of Georgia was a top candidate for Heisman.  In 2016, many were saying Deshone Kizer.  In 2015, TCU QB Trevone Boykin was a big-time preseason favorite.

Notre Dame has had a run of them who didnt come close - Ron Powlus and Dayne Crist come to mind as going from Heisman candidates to complete washouts.

Would be happy to have a top 10 QB nationally, and one who can make something happen.  Let's let the guy hit the field before anointing him the New Savior...

Kevin13

June 19th, 2018 at 4:38 PM ^

The preseason stuff is mostly for water cooler and board talk. Sometimes it's even a reach just to generate clicks on a website. 

Shea is a former 5 star and UM should have another top notch defense. So if he can make the offense clicks UM should have a very good season, which would mean he would also so why not might as well include him in the list.

CRISPed in the DIAG

June 19th, 2018 at 4:50 PM ^

I remember thinking that Navarre should have been getting Heisman hype before the start of the '03 season. Not sure why other than he was a senior in a top 10 program. There was no way a Lloyd QB was going to put up the numbers.

ohio

June 19th, 2018 at 5:05 PM ^

Going to the natty in hoops was a fun way to get some national attention; especially since the team grossly over achieved and had hoisted 2 trophies already along the way. I was hardly disappointed driving back to Dallas from San Antonio knowing both basketball and football have an exciting few years ahead. In a few weeks the espn hype train will be on and it will be hard for the haters to ignore us having a heisman candidate signal caller when everyone knows it was the slim difference in 4 of 5 losses that were toss ups in the 4th qtr.

stephenrjking

June 19th, 2018 at 5:36 PM ^

It's just preseason talk. Nice to know that Steele recognizes that Michigan has a lot of developing talent on offense that could break out, but ultimately it's just talk. If there is ever a lick of talk of Patterson being even a marginal Heisman candidate as late as October, it means incredible things for the state of the program, because it means that the offense has been really good.

But even if the offense is off-the-charts great I don't think he will ever be a serious candidate, because off-the-charts great means that the OL is performing well and that means that the team is running the football very effectively. I guess there is a scenario in which his elusiveness overcomes an otherwise stagnant offense and he puts up a series of 300-yard games that win otherwise losable contests, but that is a remote possibility. It is more likely that both Higdon and Evans rush for 1000 yards and Patterson is a terrific but not Heisman-worthy player.

The pre-season stuff doesn't matter. I'm really optimistic about the team on the field, which is good, because the pressure is on to succeed this season. Hopefully Patterson and the OL are up to it.

Birdman

June 19th, 2018 at 9:19 PM ^

Hold  on now, let's say we have 2 1000 yards rushers. No hold everything else constant, including baseline line expectations for Shea.

He probably wins the the Heisman. Just for a minute think about what it would mean.

Almost certainly an undefeated offensive juggernaut with an top 3 defence. There would be a tremendous amount of knob slobbering heaped around all over by the media, and baring a Cam or RG3 or Lamar video game season He's going to be credited with being the final piece of the puzzle. Beat OSU in the Shoe to end the season and he can strike the pose.

But.. I'm only going to be over here hoping how thats how this all plays out, I don't even dare begin to imagine it happening. So I'm willing to allow for everyone approaching with guarded optimism.