For me,
1) Christian McCaffery
2) Derrick Henry
3) Keenan Reynolds (I was really disappointed he didn't get an invite to New York)
4) Deshaun Watson
5) Baker Mayfield
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
I would have McCaffery first, Watson second, and Derrick Henry third.
1) McCaffery
2) Watson
3) Reynolds
4) Henry
Sorry but the heisman isn't a lifetime award. Reynolds is not nearly in the same category is a the others.
1. McCaffery
2. Henry
3. Watson
Not for nothing but Montee Ball got an invite with less offensive output(1923 vs 2057-with one less game) and 31 TD's before the Rose Bowl which Keenan is on pace to break (29 currently, 6 through the air). And he is 2nd on the year for rushing TD's behind only Henry. While Keenan is obviously playing a different position being in the Paul Johnson legacy offense might as well make him just a particularly multi talented RB.
To say he does not have a legitimate pedigree this year is to ignore his actual numbers.
I think an invite would have been appropriate. But he is just not even close to worthy of being the best player in the country.
The Heisman is not for the "best player in the country." Read the mission statement above. It's a holistic award. You're thinking of the Maxwell.
I disagree. If you change the emphasis slightly from what you showed, it's pretty clear that the Heisman is a performance award, and the rest are goals, aspirations, and disqualifiers for anyone who is a jerk.
One player, whose performance in football is outstanding.
He also can't be a jerk, cheater, etc.
Retrospective comment about previous winners and the Heisman Trust's own evaluation of themselves.
So these are responsibilities of the Trust.
Aspirations and goals of the trustees.
The Heisman winner is the one who succeeds on the field and who can be disqualified if he has character issues. It's not meant to be commentary on who does the greatest or noblest thing, or who has moral superiority, perceived or otherwise. It just gives the Heisman Trust and its votes some wiggle room for subjectivity.
Exactly, if we start giving out the heisman to "the nicest guy" that would be stupid.
No, you are putting too much weight on the character part. The qualifications are not weighted equally. Performance has always and will always be the most important part.
1. McCaffery
2. Henry
3. Watson
Same as the consensus so far:
1) McCaffery
2) Henry
3) Watson
1. McCaffery
2. Henry
3. Watson
And next year, McMillian, if he comes close to the goals he's setting:
McMillan Sets Lofty Goal for 2016 via 247Sports
1) Sam Rodgers
Who's that?
It's almost going to be unfair when we release him to the world.
Almost.
I have a feeling Derrick Henry is going to get it, being an SEC player. But I would love to see McCaffrey get it!
Wouldn't really say the sec gets any favoritism when it comes to heisman.
Really? Between them being an East Coast league means more people see him play and people have the perception that he got his stats against top teams.
Uh, the heisman gets spread across conferences. Winston, Mariota, RG3. Cam and manziel were deserving. I don't think there is any bias.
Henry will get it because he plays for Bama.
But McCaffrey to me is the definition of what the Heisman should be. Amazing college player
The Heisman Trust mission statement reads (emphasis is mine)
"
"
As such, my ballot would be:
1. Keenan Reynolds
2.
3.
Compared to the other players he just wasn't quite outstanding enough this year
That is only one of several qualifications mentioned. He's the only candidate who unequivocally meets every facet of the Heisman Trust's mission statement. The post asked for MY Heisman ballot. I gave it, citing the published criteria. We already know he won't win. He never would have in this day and age. But that doesn't mean that the person that does win is any more deserving. And it certainly doesn't change MY Heisman ballot. Keenan Reynolds embodies EVERYTHING the Heisman Trophy is purportedly about, and as such if I had a vote to give, he would get it. But I don't so he'll just have to be happy with his records, the most important of which will come tomorrow, when he completes his sweep of Army. GO NAVY.
I don't know why you are so upset that I responded to your opinion with my own
Not upset at all. I totally respect that you have an opinion. But your response seemed to ignore the vast majority of what I originally posted, so I felt the need to expound on it to be sure that my point was getting across. Wasn't trying to be a dick.
What because he pays for a service academy or makes him a better character than the other guys?
Frankly, yes. Not a knock on any of the others, but once they leave school, they'll be making millions of dollars to entertain guys like us, where as Keenan Reynolds will be making 40k protecting us from cyber attacks. I'd say his commitment to serve his country is indicative of a higher character level than that of most people, the other Heisman candidates included.
That isnt fair at all. Plus it isn't what the heisman is about. It is about who is the best player in the country. I know people like to site the whole character part of the requirements, but those really just to disqualify a player if he is a low character guys. Think of it more as a disqualified than a qualifier. Otherwise why not just give it to the best player on Navy, Air Force, Army every year?
Because it is an award that considers multiple facets. You're confusing the Maxwell with the Heisman (a common mistake these days). Keenan Reynolds is not your typical Academy athlete. He's an all-American level talent, who happens to have the added benefit of being at a Service Academy. It's not often that happens.
So in your opinion, there has never been a low-character guy in the military, nor a high-character guy in the NFL? You might be correct that he has the best character of the Heisman candidates, but the argument that solely because Reynolds will serve after college and the others will go pro means he is of higher character just doesn't hold up, IMO
That's a gross mischaracterization of my comments, and is frankly quite ludicrous. Of course there are high character people outside the military. Of course there are shitheads in the military. But Keenan Reynolds is not a shithead at present, so his commitment to serve his country in a capacity that less than 1% of the population dares to attempt does speak rather highly of his integrity, sense of community responsibility, and service.
This is what you said. This may be a great indication of his character, but you more or less said that because of his career choice he is a better character by default, which just isn't true. Like I said, you might be right that he has the highest character, but your reasoning is flawed
We'll just have to agree to disagree then. I firmly believe that voluntary service to one's country does show great character, certainly enough to elevate a person above three other football players who won't make that same sacrifice.
Again, I'm not disagreeing with you on the fact that it shows strong character to sacrifice a high salary and easier lifestyle to serve, nor am I disagreeing with you in the Reynolds indeed does have the highest character of those mentioned. I'm just saying that serving doesn't show superior character in and of itself. There are plenty of other ways to show your character and serve mankind other than military service. Thanks for the respectful back and forth, have some legs.
1) Mayfield
2) Watson
3) Henry
4) McCaffery
I think Watson has been the best player, but Mayfield played behind an abysmal offensive line. To elevate his team like that (Clemson is better around Watson), especially being a transfer and former walk on, is really impressive.
QB lover? It's going to a RB this year hands down.
Meh.
Let's be honest French, most of the heisman voters are just as big of Homers as anyone else. Tony and Wilbon were talking the other day of how ridiculous the voting has gotten and how so many unqualified people get to vote. There are over 1,000 voters and everyone has an agenda. There will be ppl who always vote for a QB, or for someone from their conference. Do you think it's possible that you subconsciously think the best player is Watson becuase you watch more ACC games and don't get to watch West coast games? How can you honestly have the Stanford RB at #4 behind a guy that didn't get invited? He broke a 30 year NCAA record for all purpose yards. c'mon man
Yes, I have watched Watson, Henry, and Mayfield more than McCaffery. It is a subjective award. My subjectivity comes from watching Northwestern beat McCaffery. I don't believe that Pac-12 defenses are any good (one of the reasons I screamed that the offensive stats RichRod was putting up at Zona were suspect.) UCF held him in check pretty well. Notre Dame did minus kickoff returns. Kickoff return is so tough to measure.
Honestly, the Heisman means about as much to me as a poop flavored lollipop. It doesn't mean anything without conference and national championships. The original post asked, so there is my opinion. Watson is the first player I take in a college draft. Mayfield did the most to elevate the rest of his team.
Doesn't the big 12 have the worst defenses though?
Both collectively are not very good. I give Mayfield the slight nod because his OL makes VT's look like the 1993 Cowboys
I'm really struggling to wrap my head around this comment.
They have a terrible o-line. So much so that we should appreciate ours
I mean, I got that, but I just can't fathom how a playoff team can have an OL worse than ours... I guess there is hope for a title next year!
I thought the ore interesting point they raised was the reverse racism, that a white rb has no chance even though they both felt he was the best player. I found that extremely telling especially since Wilbon is always on a discrimination kick...
Henry will win because he plays for Bama, but McCaffery is the best player this year. Unfortunately for him, he plays on the west coast.
Just putting this in here because I have wanted to use it for so long
A paper with some names and check-boxes beside them?
1) Keenan Reynolds
2) Derrick Henry
3) Christian McCaffrey
4) Deshaun Watson
1- Bud Foster
That's just silly. Beamer is obviously more deserving.
Henry (Come on, 23 TDs and Herschel Walker's rushing yards record)
Watson
McCaffrey
Mayfield
Reynolds
I like this one.
On the Reynolds debate, he is basically Montee Ball with an arm, Ball finished 4th in 2011 so 4th or 5th feel right. But it is a bit dumb as I want to say Ball got an invite that year.
Either way the fact that he is in the #2 spot for rushing TD's behind only Henry is a big counterpoint to people who say he shouldnt get in on the career. Maybe not but he is putting up NCAA top numbers this year too.
My ballot would be an 8.5" X 11" piece of paper with check boxes and names on it.
McCaffery
Mayfield
Henry
Reynolds
Watson
Ryan Malleck
But seriously the man needs more love!
PSA but Keenan now needs just 1 more rushing TD to move into the #2 spot behind Henry for rushing TD's on the year, with one less game I might add. Started the day tied for 5th.
So people want to argue performance on the field this season? Okay.
1. Keenan Reynolds. Why not?
Or 2 or 3. He's got as good a set of numbers as anyone else.
OT:
Too bad the Hokies will never own the longest streak over their rivals record. Go Wildcats!