Over the years, I've come to realize something about the Heisman trophy, something along with many parts of our society that seems to be "all understood": It's a lot like a presidential election.
Much like an election, one must start the fanfare early, gaining national mention on big stages...early being well before the season even starts. One might as well look at it as a two-year plan, not much unlike a presidential election.
You have to achieve attention as an emerging star, a leading rusher, passer, etc. the year before to even be noticed as a potential candidate. This is all supported by the media, who often say when asked about RBs like the Iowa Hawkeyes' Shonn Greene, "...too late in the race."
So maybe Greene wasn't in the conversation last season. He was lost in the depth chart for most of his collegiate career with backs like Albert Young already in place. After taking a year off and redshirting to get his grades up to team standards, the young man returned to "give back" to the team who gave him a second chance.
However, from game one of the season, Greene has done no less than match or beat other leading rushers' numbers. In the first game of the season, Greene had his second-lowest yardage total (109 yards) on only 22 carries, averaging 5.0 yards per carry. In the upset of then-unbeaten Penn State, Greene carried 28 times for 117 and two TDs.
With two 200+ yard games, not a single game under 100 yards, an average of over six yards per carry, and over 1,700 yards rushing (leading all rushers)...no matter what point in the "race" for the Heisman we're in...the man has to be considered.
What are presenters and commentators going to do when mentioning the official candidates' numbers and how they stack up in the NCAA? Skip over Greene's name and hope no one notices they said "second in Div. I-A"?
Give the award to the deserving player at the time it's awarded—not the guy who's put together the best "campaign" over the past two years.
Like the new article format? Send us feedback!