Monday, December 5, 2011

UH OH! This literally worries me

If you're in the greater Jacksonville area tonight (and good gravy I hope you aren't because that's a shitty place to be), watch out for a flying Ron Jaworski. During the fourth quarter of tonight's broadcast he announced that he was

literally blown away (!!!)

by the play of rookie QBs this year. Then they went through a sequence of graphics that showed the stats accumulated by Andy Dalton, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert, and Ron was forced to admit that OK fine it's really just Dalton. Dalton's been good--good enough to cause a fat old man to go airborne? Apparently.

Also, left the TV on ESPN after the game and subjected myself to about eight minutes of Sportscenter before Stu Scott's vocal mannerisms caused me to turn it off. In those eight minutes I learned that Robert Smith's Heisman ballot (he actually has a vote, this isn't just a bit for the show) goes as follows:

1) Trent Richardson
2) Montee Ball
3) R. Griffin III

I guess that's what Andrew Luck gets for playing on the west coast and for not having any flashy wideouts (at least after Chris Owusu went down) who can catch 80 yard bombs and make him look super duper badass. Cue up Brent Musberger lamenting Luck's failure to "give us a Heisman moment!!!!!" But yeah, if he's not top three on your ballot... you and Robert Smith can go soak your heads together.


Patrick Magee said...

Look at the numbers... Can you tell me why Andrew Luck deserves the Heisman?

I think the top three is debatable.

And the West Coast? Are you insane? What college player has been talked more about than Andrew Luck this year? Stanford has had a prime TV slot almost every Saturday. He has gotten more exposure than the other Heisman candidates combined.

Larry B said...

I don't know... can you tell me who deserves it more besides Griffin? I'm fine with him winning it, his numbers were better (although he compiled them against slightly worse defenses by most metrics). Putting Richardson ahead of Ball is dumb, and putting either RB ahead of either QB is insanity. Anyone could have put up great numbers (not numbers as great as Ball, but you know what I mean) with Wisconsin's o-line, and Richardson wasn't nearly as good by any estimation against similar defenses. (Most underplayed story of the NCAAF season is how bad the SEC was once you go out of the top 5 teams.)

As for the West Coast thing, apparently you're not familiar with how the whole time zone thing tends to play out in sports. About half of America (and I'm guessing something approaching half the people with a Heisman vote) live by EST. While you're right that Stanford was on prime time TV a lot this year, they had 3 games start after 10 EST and 7 more start after 7:30 EST. Nationally televised NCAAF games tend to go about 3:30. You want to tell me those EST voters were up late watching the second half of those games (or any of the game at all w/r/t the 10:30 EST starts)? These are sportswriters. It's not like 98% of them take their craft seriously.

As for Luck's overall exposure, I agree that he was hyped up and talked about more than any of the other candidates and was the favorite from week 1 until a few days before the award. This worked against him, I think, when he didn't have that "Heisman moment" Musberger is so fond of talking about. He played pretty well against Oregon but of course his team got killed. He was awesome against USC but didn't put up eye-popping numbers. By the time the voting rolled around, everyone was busy asking why he shouldn't win the Heisman rather than talking about why someone else should. Sometimes leading the whole way is a bad thing.

Anyways, the overarching point was that Robert Smith's ballot was fucking stupid. Your snark is appreciated but your time zone comment drops your analysis to Smith's level, or maybe below.