For Heisman, Backing Barkley, a Dark Horse With Golden Hair
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
When did the Heisman Trophy race become lengthier and costlier than a presidential campaign?
Welcome to this week's column, presented by Jack Link's Beef Jerky ("I love beef jerky"), entitled, "The Heisman Trophy: A History Lesson, a Slouch Rant and Your Unexpected 2009 Winner."
We began this college football season with three presumptive nominees for the award -- the current Heisman holder, Sam Bradford; the former Heisman holder, Tim Tebow, and the upstart Heisman hopeful, Colt McCoy.
This is eerily similar to the three-way presidential race in 1912*, contested among the then-White House occupant, William Howard Taft; the former White House occupant, Theodore Roosevelt, and the upstart Oval Office hopeful, Woodrow Wilson.
(*Note to Younger Readers: I understand many of you are unaware of the year 1912. It was part of what was known as "the 20th century" and part of a very different America -- Los Angeles, for instance, was livable; very few people brought firearms to town hall meetings, and there was, I believe, only one ESPN.)
What can we learn from 1912 that applies to 2009? The incumbent, Taft, saw his vice president, James S. Sherman, die in office late in the campaign, leaving him without a running mate; similarly, Bradford must deal with a sprained right shoulder. Roosevelt appeared to be the man of the people -- like Tebow -- but couldn't overcome larger institutional forces. And the winner was the new face, Wilson, which bodes well for McCoy.
Still, presidential comparisons aside, I am flabbergasted by the nature of Heisman voting these days.
(Memo to Editors: Cue Slouch rant.)
In the old days, you would vote for the Heisman at season's end after seeing virtually none of the contenders' games. Nowadays, you can see all the contenders' games if you wish, but we pretty much anoint the Heisman favorites before a single snap is taken. And after each week, Heisman panels are polled.
Miss America doesn't work this way, does it? Is there a three-month buildup in which we hear Miss Florida has "great legs," Miss Wisconsin "is a lock for Miss Congeniality" and Miss Rhode Island "plays the hell out of the accordion"?
Not only is the current Heisman hype unceasing and irritating, it denies the un-hyped any chance. I spent two years of my life tirelessly campaigning for Hawaii's Colt Brennan -- he only happened to throw 58 touchdown passes his junior year and then led his team to an undefeated regular season his senior year -- but my message was met with mainland malaise.
This year, I bring Sports Nation the most unlikely, yet most obvious, Heisman Trophy winner ever -- unlikely because he is a freshman, obvious because he plays under the brightest lights.


