It is a combo of both. You cannot put up average numbers for the best team in the country and expect to win the Heisman. On the other hand you cannot expect to play a schedule that does not include a team in the top 40 and put up record numbers either. I think the most important thing is how the school markets you, big performances in games that mean a lot to your season especially against good teams, TV time-more specifically prime time when the most people that have votes can watch you, and yes it is true-playing for a big time program automatically gives you an edge in the voting. To be in a smaller program in a much less respected conference means you have to have some eyepopping numbers and it wouldnt hurt if you played both ways or had a significant role in special teams. I do agree that Brennan needs more attention than he is getting now, but plays in the wrong time zone against teams that are not gonna allow him to win it all. But, hey dont feel bad for Colt, he will be playing on Sundays soon enough making the big bucks and he will slip far enough that he will be on a good team instead of a really bad team right off the bat.
2006-11-25 02:06:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by postalclerkgso 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are going to call Troy Smith overated, and want Brennan as the heisman. What big game has Brennan won. What is his record against top five teams. What BCS bowl did Brennan lead his team to. How many losses does he have this year.
Oh he hasn't won a big game this year. Brennan hasn't beaten anybody in the top five. He is not going to a BCS bowl, really. They are not even going to win the conference. Brennan is not going to win the Heisman because he hasn't proven he is the best college player this year.
If Troy Smith wins the National Championship, he will have beaten three teams that were ranked number two when they played Ohio State. Beyond that, Brennan isn't even in the same class as Brady Quinn.
2006-11-25 02:06:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by t r 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It has a lot to do with media hype and the big name schools.
When Carson Palmer won it, he a very good stats in a very weak conference. The same year, Larry Johnson became only the 6th 1A RB to break 2000 yards in a season ever, in a tough Big 10 conference. He also missed about 6 or 7 quarters because Joe PA put the scrubs in during blowouts.
All the media surrounded the Golden Boy in Southern Cal though.
2006-11-25 03:33:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Albert 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The most popular/valuable player on the top # 5 to (maybe) # 10 team is generally the player selected. That is because the top teams get all of the press coverage, and their games are always televised.
It is usually a running back, or a quarterback, sometimes it is a receiver and in the rarest of occasions, a corner-back (defense)
2006-11-25 07:29:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Dave C 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The voters are a select group of experts, and the award has a significant history. The TV show and media hype are recent compared to the big picture.
2016-05-23 01:10:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First you have to be on a high profile, nationally ranked, winning team.
Second, you have to have a Sports information department that is willing to spend big bucks to hype you.
Third it certainly doesn't hurt to have great stats
2006-11-25 04:02:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by blazek79 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
All that may be true but with Adrian Peterson out Smith is by far the best
2006-11-25 02:48:58
·
answer #7
·
answered by oldokie1 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it is the team you play for and who you play against.
If you are good but play in a "weak" conference, you may be perceived as lacking credibility
2006-11-25 01:55:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The most important thing is to never, ever again vote for the likes of O.J. Simpson
2006-11-25 03:51:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by mJc 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
the team
2006-11-25 01:56:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by firealarm92 3
·
0⤊
0⤋