Jadeveon Clowney Still Not Justifying Heisman Hype After Week 2
Jadeveon Clowney is going to have a hard time convincing Heisman voters he is worthy of the prestigious prize after back-to-back weeks of underwhelming football.
Week 1 saw Clowney looking gassed for most of the contest as he recorded no sacks. Michael Haney of 107.5 The Game reported that Clowney was suffering from a stomach virus, but that won't hold up with voters who want to see big stats, not just effective play that does not get recorded on a sheet.
Clowney certainly did not help his case in Week 2 as South Carolina traveled to Georgia and lost by 11. Clowney spent a large amount of time on the bench as he nursed a foot injury suffered earlier in the week during practice when a teammate stepped on him.
While he had an impact in the game when actually on the field, including his first sack of the season, Clowney limped off several times and was even flagged for not getting off the field fast enough. Those issues will stick out more to voters than the quiet effectiveness and one sack in a very important contest.
Winning the Heisman is not the impossible task it used to be for defensive players. Names such as Manti Te'o, Ndamukong Suh and Tyrann Mathieu have helped to ease voter's minds on the idea in recent years, but Clowney's flopping performance with one sack through two games is not going to make his path easier.
Injury or not, Clowney has looked gassed in two contests. As Draft Breakdown's Ryan Lownes points out, there was a much better Heisman candidate on the field during the contest:
Reiterating a point many have made tonight: #Georgia Soph. RB Todd Gurley has looked more the part of a superstar than Jadaveon Clowney.— Ryan Lownes (@ryanlownes) September 7, 2013
Clowney's No. 1 priority should be getting healthy for his team. South Carolina is now in a hole after losing a critical SEC showdown. If he gets healthy the little things will take care of themselves, but his Heisman candidacy may have taken an irreparable hit after two weeks of disappointment.
Most recent updates:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?