So was Jay Williams for the most part except for Houston. Right now, we have the #1 pick and are debating between RB/VY/Trade Down, I don't see what other cities have to do with it.
eh - don't see what's so ridiculous about what I said. Both had great seasons - but one player was the focal point of his offense, the leader both on and off the field and was the Heisman leader until Reggie Bush put 500 yards on the 4th place WAC team. It's almost like the previous couple games where he was overshadowed by Lendale White didn't happen. Then overwhelmingly the voters voted Reggie Bush as the best player in college football - and in the Rose Bowl, Vince Young overwhelmingly proved that he was the best player in the nation last year.
If you want to determine who was the best college football player last season (which is the case that Heisman voter and would-be Young voters have made in the excerpted articles) - you should include all of last season - which includes the Rose Bowl. That's a separate debate however. It's not viable to do so in reality because IT'S A HYPOTHETICAL we're discussing and as yet I do not possess the facility for time travel and the other necessary magic powers to make it a reality. But if that is the straw man you want to hang your hat on, be my guest. And I did - there were tons of headlines, columns, editorials, broadcast segments back in January 2006 talking about changing votes and Heisman recounts - and I found two Bush voters out of two that addressed the subject who said point blank that they messed up. I bet I could find more given time and resources. You on the other hand haven't substantiated a single thing to prove your case - which is that the status quo would have prevailed. I'm going outside the OFFICIAL rules and saying that the burden is on you, because I can, and I just did. Soooo Ric, show me the non-vote changers, if you can (which you can't). I never claimed that Young would win unanimously, or even in an equal proportion, so it's nice of you to build that straw man - but regardless what a total absolute cop-out. by you Again, I am victimized by the OFFICIAL rules, which apparently hold me to some amalagamation of scientific method and proof beyond a reasonable doubt for Internet sports hypo arguments Let's apply this new standard to you: if you think Reggie Bush will run for 1000 yards next year. PROVE IT. If not, you should shut the hell up. I want DEFINITIVE PROOF, that is SCIENTIFIC in NATURE. Granted this is a sports discussion board, but you can't PROVE IT under your burden of PROOF. Therefore you must never ever post with regard to football or the Texans again, since you can't PROVE IT I don't see any definitive proof, therefore you're wasting my time. You really shouldn't talk about the draft, since you can't PROVE anything about the future See how ridiculous it is? We're debating hypothetical sports situations in the context of the NFL draft. If you can't stomach speculation - then you're on the wrong message board, discussing the wrong topic, with the wrong people, and should just leave now before your head explodes No, but it means you think Munich is better. That's what I just said in the other context. In plain english. Nobody re-wrote anything. I have no idea why you keep saying this. Some people being Young partisans spin Bush's defensive opposition as weak - you, being a Bush partisan, re-spin it as being strong. I think the evidence objectively points toward it being weak, or it least weaker than Young's, based on previous posts. But re-writing history doesn't enter the equation, except you've done it a few times. Nobody said anything about less than stellar - just not as stellar. Why you excuse one form of speculation and then throw a giant tantrum about another is unclear to me.
see? these are the kind of comments i'm talking about. bush goes off for 294 and 260 yards rushing in his final two regular season games (both against ranked opponents), solidifying the heisman and his status as THE top pick in the draft and then get 120-something all purpose yards (including a dazzling TD) against a great texas D... and there's no question at the end of the season VY was by far the best player....? really? by far?
Yeah, really. By the way, Fresno St ended up 4th in the WAC, and 8-5 after losing to Tulsa - needless to say they didn't end up ranked.
See this is what I mean...."dazzling"? I mean, were you really "dazzled"? I mean, I give it an "extaordinary" , but dazzled? The last time I was dazzled, oh, I don't rember when it was, but I can tell you when a bedazzlement is warranted and when it's not....
that's not what we're trying to determine. the comments i've quoted throughout this thread have dealt with the heisman. if there are "tons," why have only three been produced thus far? unless three equates to tons in your world, you have a lot of work to do. btw, i asked for proof more than 24 hours ago, and the internet is free. so how much more time and resources do you need to conjure up "tons" of revised heisman thinking? i never said that. nowhere. the only claim being made is that a "ton" of heisman voters were either wrong or foolish. please provide evidence to support the claim or let it go. you've picked up this fight; others have indeed made such claims. dude, you're wearing me out. i've made no such predictions about bush's performance next year. yeah, believe me... i do. i hope mensa can recover from you dropping out of their organization. discussing hypotheticals is one thing; making declarative, but unsubstantiated claims - such as, "there were tons of headlines, columns, editorials, broadcast segments back in January 2006 talking about changing votes and Heisman recounts" - is another. if you want to debate the idea, throw in a "i bet," as in, "i bet a lot would like to change their vote" - that is something, in theory, we could discuss, though, it's still irrelevant because bowl games aren't in consideration. you're not doing that, though. you're attempting to state facts.... while providing no facts. and then throwing it at me... even though i'm making no claims. yeah... i can like several different players; i can even allow my brain to appreciate some equally. you will not find me knocking VY in this, or any other forum. after i saw the rose bowl, i compared him in my forum to randall cunningham in his prime - that's a pretty lofty compliment. i think VY is great, and if the texans were starting from scratch, he'd be my pick. but they're not, and my reasons for wanting bush have nothing to do with VY. at all. as for who was better this year... it's a toss-up, imo - they were both great. but 784 people didn't think it was that close. because there are "tons" of people doing exactly this. you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone here who would agree with you that i've thrown a tantrum.
to beat a defense as good as UT's to the sideline, and then have another gear to outrace everyone up the sideline was indeed dazzling. my jaw dropped. i've never seen that before. you're now free to predictably post some picture of VY, or share your own thoughts of what he did that was more dazzling because i'm sure me complimenting bush is seen by you as somehow offensive to VY.
Ric - i'm not going to bother with the rest of your post because you're being deliberately obtuse. But the only reason why I have only cited 2 articles so far is because those are the only two people who I KNOW were Bush voters who wrote an article saying so. Believe me - there are many more articles like that dating from January. I haven't even touched on the broadcast media (because I don't have access to those archives. Do the Lexis or google search yourself. I still don't understand why it "gnaws at you" so much that Young would have won the Heisman if they had voted after the Rose Bowl - but you obviously feel so strongly about it that you're willign to fall back on reasonable doubt - a standard which is by definition impossible to satisfy. So rather than bang my head against the wall, I will retire and HYPOTHETICALLY celebrate the Heisman Trophy that rightfully belongs to Vince YOung, and that I KNOW FOR A FACT would ahve been awarded to him in January. Hope that doesn't gnaw at you too much Have a nice weekend - and happy revisionism!
Wow, I guess the reference flew right over your head. Ric, can you post Ric's rules and then the rules for the rest of us so that we can avoid misunderstandings like this when it comes to proper/improper usage of hyperbole? Best, SF
Since the lead of the Heisman was changed by big performances against teams like Oklahoma St. and Fresno St. - a similar level performance on the biggest stage against an undefeated USC team would have caused an even greater shift in voting than those two games.
Ric - I'll save you the trouble Yes, Puedlfor, but can you PROVE this? I don't see the space-time continuum warping around me, and there is no documentation - so NO. You lose.
Cheap shot. The only reason Fresno lost to Tulsa and [BOLD] LOUISIANA TECH [/BOLD] is because Reggie wore them down. Also, I believe ucla had one of the best defenses in the pac 10, a conference with alot of underrated defenses.
Reggie wore them out for the last 3 games of the season? They lost to Nevada, LA Tech, and Tulsa. They were a way overrated team.
I like Vince Young I do. But, I love David Carr. Young might be a better prospect than Carr was (and some might say better now), but David Carr, man. Look what he's done for the Texans and this city thus far. DC is the f'n man. You don't just draft another QB after what Carr has done so far. The franchise, the team, the fans, the city, the everyone owe DC a chance with a good coach and a freakin' line. I've always loved the Texans, moreso than I even cared for the Oilers (little too young while they were still here), if they draft a QB instead of Bush or Ferguson this year, I'm gonna lose a lot of respect for management, and I just don't know where I'll stand with them, it'd be hugley dissapointing. Young is great, but the Texans already have an established QB.
This almost sounds like a saracastic post. Exactly what has Carr done for the Texans and city that is so great? 18-46 as a starter, including the previous 2-14 record where Carr was absolutely horrendous. We can blame all the OL and coaching all we want, but Carr was just as big as a problem as anyone else on the team. I liked Carr a whole lot the last 3 seasons, but the only thing that matters is the records. David Carr has gotten a free ride in a fancy car for the last 4 seasons.
Dude, Carr is going to be great. I have nothing but love for the man, and no I wasn't being sarcastic at all. We owe Carr a chance with different coaching. Yeah, his numbers sucked last year because the people surrounding him were so bad. His line has been worthless. Give him the Patriots line and he is putting up Brady numbers - oh yes.
