McCaffrey Can't Win Heisman
- Thread starter burkek
- Start date
Yes, when only 11 of the past 25 Heisman winners have been white, you know the struggle is real.
I think the fact that Stanford is not in the title hunt and the SEC remains the main focal point of college football will have a lot more to do with McCaffrey not winning, rather than the fact that he's white. But then I didn't wake up this morning determined to feel oppressed.
I think the fact that Stanford is not in the title hunt and the SEC remains the main focal point of college football will have a lot more to do with McCaffrey not winning, rather than the fact that he's white. But then I didn't wake up this morning determined to feel oppressed.
I don't think being white is the issue although it would be interesting to see what % of black past winners vote for him vs the % of white winners.
I think his issues are playing on the west coast where a lot of voters don't get to see him play and his lack of TDs.
I do think he SHOULD win. If you put him behind Bama's line there is no doubt in my mind he would've had more production than Henry. Who couldn't run behind that line with Saban giving it to you 40 times a game?!
It's unfortunate for him that they came out flat and lost against Northwestern. If they win that one I think the voting is much closer.
I think being white doesn't hurt him, if he was a QB. He is a RB, so he automatically disqualified by a lot of voters. Henry is really good, but he benefits greatly from what the Heisman has become. You have to either be a QB or RB from a top five team. McCaffrey could have put up video game numbers(which he actually did) and it wouldn't matter. His numbers aren't from some gimmick offense like the old Houston passing numbers. It is from a real offense, and it don't matter. He don't play for Alabama and he isn't the right kind of running back that Heisman voters approve of. His rushing numbers are only marginally behind Henry, and he has plenty more receiving, yards. Not to mention he also returns kicks and punts, and he even threw two TD's. Henry does none of these things. He is a Saban battering ram that is good at his job. Nothing more, nothing less.
I agree with this, I just don't think it has anything to do with him being white. People who don't follow Pac-12 football closely probably think of McCaffrey as more of a multi-purpose RB/WR/KR type, when in fact he's an outstanding RB regardless of his value in those other roles.
I too would like to see McCaffrey win, but he won't. Lack of preseason hype is also a big factor here, as going into the season Hogan was probably considered Stanford's offensive "star."
What sucks is almost anyone would look like a stud behind the Ala OL and team in general. They truly are a pipe to the NFL!!
I really lost big interest in the Heisman trophyafter Suh lost. He was the best player in college football in 2009 and was voted behind McCoy, Gerhart and Ingram. Last time I checked Ingram only had 846 rushing yards his junior season at Bama. It's an offensive trophy categorized into, like someone else already said, QB/RB/WR(hardly ever) and that's it. No other positions have a chance. The trophy is really starting to piss me off because of the "voters." This is no offense to all the awesome players that get invited there, but I get frustrated with this trophy every year. The trophy is supposed to go to the top individual player in college football. It's a 50-50 shot that it actually does.
Henry is 90% going to win the Heisman this year. The other 9% will go to Watson of Clemson. 1% will go to McCaffrey. Out of all three players, Stanford needs McCaffrey the most to be successful. To me, that's how the Heisman is chosen-- record of the team, and the team that needs that certain player the most. Watson is good. Without him, they lose 2-3 games. Without Henry, bama loses probably 2-3 games too. Without McCaffrey, they lose 4 games. All three are game-changing players, but McCaffrey's yardage practically won Stanford their games. Almost 500 all purpose yards in the PAC 12 Title game? Broke Barry's all-purpose yardage for a single season? 3,200 yards. He's still got 1 game to play, too. That's the other thing about this trophy that pisses me off. They don't take into account the bowl/playoff game. Can someone get a grip on this trophy? It's starting to feel like the MLB baseball awards.
Henry is 90% going to win the Heisman this year. The other 9% will go to Watson of Clemson. 1% will go to McCaffrey. Out of all three players, Stanford needs McCaffrey the most to be successful. To me, that's how the Heisman is chosen-- record of the team, and the team that needs that certain player the most. Watson is good. Without him, they lose 2-3 games. Without Henry, bama loses probably 2-3 games too. Without McCaffrey, they lose 4 games. All three are game-changing players, but McCaffrey's yardage practically won Stanford their games. Almost 500 all purpose yards in the PAC 12 Title game? Broke Barry's all-purpose yardage for a single season? 3,200 yards. He's still got 1 game to play, too. That's the other thing about this trophy that pisses me off. They don't take into account the bowl/playoff game. Can someone get a grip on this trophy? It's starting to feel like the MLB baseball awards.
Why don't you posts all the Heisman winners from Alabama since they obviously are biased for players from Bama. Anyway, he won't win it because DH DESERVES the Heisman over anybody in the nation this year. He is carrying Alabama on his back and doing it against some of the better rushing defenses in the country this year.
McCaffrey epitomizes what the trophy is all about. Derick Henry runs in a straight line better than most.
The award is supposed to go to the best player in College Football. Do you think Derrick Henry is a better football player than McCaffrey? Just curious...
McCaffrey is very impressive but how is being white ever a disadvantage lol? I would give it to Watson because he's been the best and MVP of the #1 team.. McCaffrey would be next in line..
After Tommy then Suh got F'd I have not watched the presentation. This yr ESPN is all over Henry when McCaffery is the best all around FB player in the country, it's flat out BS to me.
I don't. Have you had a chance to actually watch everything McCaffrey has done this year?
The way Saban has treated Henry this year is damn near criminal for a college kid not getting paid (prolly is) no kid should get the ball 40+ in multiple games...he will be a bust in the NFL
Sure have, and I can say without a doubt CM would have no shot of doing what DH has done at Alabama.... none, DH is a man right now playing against boys. CM had a nice year compiling stats that tons of other guys could do if they were allowed to play special teams, etc...
You must be kidding. There are a number of guys who you could put back there in place of Henry and do what he did, and probably better. Henry probably isn't a top 5 RB. He's big and strong, and for that, he won the Heismann. No, "tons of other guys" couldn't do what CM did, as history shows, since he is the best and most effective all-purpose player, of all time. So what you're saying is, all these coaches have had all these electric players that could be really helpful in various areas of their game, and they choose not to use them? That makes perfect sense. And when did being versatile and athletic enough to play multiple positions become a negative? Henry had most yards and td's, so it isn't completely meritless, but the guy wasn't even the best rb in his conference.
Like some of you I blew off the Heisman after they Fvcked Peyton out of it. If I had a vote I'd vote McCaffery because he's what college football should be about but, sadly, isn't.
Henry is a darn good workhorse RB in an offense that doesn't have a lot of flash elsewhere. The team has a really good defense. Don't think he is the best in the game would have voted for either of the two other finalists ahead of him.
Will see vs MSU that he isn't what he is shown to be. $EC was down and bama didn't play that many great teams, look at the schedule. He is a very good player but not the best this year.
Will see vs MSU that he isn't what he is shown to be. $EC was down and bama didn't play that many great teams, look at the schedule. He is a very good player but not the best this year.
Wow, hard to believe that we've been watching the same players all year. I couldn't disagree more. IMO, a lot of players could get 200 yards if given the ball 40 times a game.
I'm taking McCaffrey if I'm starting a team first over Henry. And yes he isn't even the best RB in his conference division.
Hell Leornard Fournette is better than Henry ... If LF was running behind the Line of Alabama I would say it would be obvious that he's better. McCaffrey is a freak and that's what this award should be about. Hell I like Watson ahead of Henry. I have actually watched numerous games played by all three to base my opinion unlike many. Don't get me wrong about Henry .. Hes a damn good back but I wouldn't vote him ahead of McCaffrey or Watson.
I cannot remember ever caring less about the Heisman than I did this year. There was no runaway favorite, and I think a lot of backs could do what Henry did if they had 'Bama's line.
Similar threads
