It's Heisman Trophy time again, and this year (unlike most years) the honor has the opportunity to go to the nation's most outstanding football player, rather than the nation's best quarterback. Don't get me wrong, the voters got it right last year when the award was given to Sam Bradford, quarterback for the Oklahoma Sooners, but it really seems like you have to be a running back or quarterback to be considered for the Heisman.
An award for most outstanding football player has been given out annually since 1935, and in that time only five non QB/RBs have won the award. Only two of those won without returning punts and kicks, but both played iron man football (offense and defense).
So why call it the nation's best player when the award doesn't give a fair chance to players who only play defense or a less glamorous offensive position. Clearly the best players all aren't QB/RBs. 26 players have been taken first overall in the NFL draft that did not play QB/RB since the Heisman has been awarded. I realize the two don't directly correlate, but I also know that 26 is a lot more than five.
The voters of the Heisman Award are in a unique position this year to actually make history and vote Nebraska's Ndamukong Suh, a defensive tackle, as the nation's best player. The stars have aligned for Suh. If there was ever a year a defensive player could, and should win the Heisman, this is it (for any of you who are saying, 'hey what about Charles Woodson,' I am disqualifying him as a defensive winner because he also played wide receiver and special teams).
Let's take a look at this year's finalists:
1. Colt McCoy, QB, Texas. Colt led his team to the national championship game after the referees cheated to let a Big XII team advance to the title game. McCoy was absolutely shut down on the biggest stage and Texas should have been beat by a team that barely eclipsed the century mark in offense. He had less than 200 yards passing, three interceptions, and was tossed around like a rag doll by fellow finalist, Suh, to the tune of four and a half sacks. That alone should disqualify him. If it's not enough for you, take a look at how he fared against Oklahoma this year and combine the two games.
2. Tim Tebow, QB, Florida. Tebow already won the award two years ago. This was his least impressive year as a starter and he did not lead his team to an SEC championship like last year. I assume he was invited to pay respect to his overall collegiate resume, and because the media loves him like a newborn baby. Speaking of baby, let's hope he can keep it together while the cameras are on him at the ceremony. Those were some big crocodile tears he was shedding after getting pummeled by Alabama in the SEC championship game.
3. Mark Ingram, RB, Alabama. Bama is the number one team in the country and he is the best offensive player on the team, usually. He has had a great year, and picked up steam in the Heisman talks when Colt and Tebow refused to take the lead mid way through the season. He rushed for over 1500 yards and scored 15 touchdowns. If I look for negatives on Ingram I would say his team can win without him. He is also just a sophomore, his stats aren't as impressive as the other running back finalist, and he did not seem to grab much buzz that is usually required to win.
4. Toby Gerhart, RB, Stanford. Gerhart put together what is the best statistical year of all the offensive finalists. He ran for over 1700 yards, but more impressive, scored 26 times. Stanford also has buzz from their wins against Southern California, Oregon, and Notre Dame. Gerhart ran for over 200 yards and scored four touchdowns against Notre Dame. His team did lose games to Wake Forest, California, Arizona and Oregon State, and Stanford was not in contention for the PAC 10 title.
5. Ndamukong Suh, DT, Nebraska. Suh was the most impactful defensive player in the country. He has already won the Nagurski award for most outstanding defensive player earlier this week. He showed up the biggest in the biggest games. Suh's impact is hard to quantify - 82 tackles (50 solo), 12 sacks, one interception, 10 pass deflections, three blocked kicks - but it was his dominating line presence every play which made him a finalist. His line disruption and the attention he received with blockers made every defensive player around him better. Nebraska almost won the Big XII with the 11th best offense in conference, averaging 317 yards per game.
Most years a defensive player is a finalist for the Heisman there is no chance he can overcome the statistical power of his fellow offensive finalists. This year should be different. There was no clear front runner the entire year. The media desperately wanted Colt or Tebow to take the trophy home, but I don't think even a PR juggernaut like ESPN can erase the images from both their conference championship games. Neither running back attracted significant attention beyond their regions, and if they had a so called "Heisman moment" that most winners have, I don't remember seeing it on any highlight shows.
If I take Suh out of the equation and analyze the four offensive choices, I immediately scratch the QBs. As for the RBs, Gerhart had the much better year statistically, but Ingram plays for a much better team.
The problem with Ingram is I can't say he led his team to the national championship game. He had a weak game in which he was injured against Auburn, and then wasn't the MVP of the SEC championship game. I got the feeling when I watched Bama play that they could win without him, and did.
Gerhart, on the other hand, was invaluable to his team, but lost four games. In the end, Gerhart was more consistent, and I would have to give him the nod. I have read that he didn't have a bad game all year by more than one analyst. I can't claim to be an avid follower of Stanford football (although I will watch every play of the Sun Bowl). I do know that Gerhart put up great numbers and PAC 10 opponents didn't like tackling the 235 pounder when he was at full steam. His conference has also received praise for being one of the best conferences in NCAA football with five ranked teams, most of any conference.
So now let's compare the canidacies of Gerhart and Suh. When I look at the two resumes the first thing that jumps out is both played for teams with unimpressive records. Comparing stats between an offensive and defensive player is useless, which is what you would normally do next. QB/RBs generally win the Heisman because they play positions that allow them to effect the game in a quantitative way. Offense and defense both contribute to the outcome of the game, but you have to score points to win.
Suh was a force strong enough to get himself Heisman recognition at a position that very rarely gets put in that category. The success of Nebraska's defense can be directly related to his presence, whether it was making the play himself, taking on blockers to help a teammate make a play, harassing the QB, pushing back the line or getting his hands on the ball. Suh was unstoppable all year.
As a defensive player he should receive a handicap in the voting. Was Gerhart's impact play after play as big as Suh's? I don't think so. I believe the edge should go to Suh for this reason. What a great way to acknowledge a special defensive player in a year that has no offensive it guy.
This opportunity will not come around again soon and voters would be wise to recognize that and make the right choice for this particular year. I predict Gerhart will win with Suh finishing second, but it would be nice to have the Heisman actually be about the nation's most outstanding football player. I would like to see Suh win the award for all the players on the wrong side of the ball that were deserving but never considered.
