Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2010 Heisman

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by iowatreat54 View Post
    So you're saying every voter (or every voter that had him on their ballot) should have voted Cam #1?

    Cam had a great year, but it's not like he deserved to be the first unanimous Heisman winner ever.
    I think hes saying that if someone overlooked the "allegations" against Newton enough to put him on his ballot then it is absurd to not have him #1 as just based on stuff on the field it wasnt even close

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by P-L View Post
      Anyone else notice that Owen Marecic got THREE first place votes?
      People just know how awesome he is.


      Originally posted by Scott Wright
      Don't be a stranger. Jordyzzzz would want you to stick around. ;o)

      Touch Fuzzy, Get Dizzy

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Chucky View Post
        I think hes saying that if someone overlooked the "allegations" against Newton enough to put him on his ballot then it is absurd to not have him #1 as just based on stuff on the field it wasnt even close
        So if Newton was on a ballot, he should have been #1 is what your saying? Or for all intents and purposes, he should have been the first unanimous Heisman winner ever? (if you discount people who just left him off for non-football reasons)

        Comment


        • #64
          what is yes.


          RIP, Sean Taylor.

          Comment


          • #65
            I though Newton was the clear cut #1. If you are fine with the allegations, then he should easily be #1 on the ballot. If he is on your ballot, the only logical place is at the top. However, not all voters are all that logical.


            Originally posted by Scott Wright
            Don't be a stranger. Jordyzzzz would want you to stick around. ;o)

            Touch Fuzzy, Get Dizzy

            Comment


            • #66
              The thing I find funny are the voters who left him off because the whole integrity part of the Heisman yet they had James as #2 on their ballot. The same guy who gut arrested for hitting his girlfriend before the season. Funny enough the only thing Cam has been convicted of is the laptop thing 3 years ago. If voters wanted to get so technical and argue the character thing than James and Mallett shouldn't have been on any ballots as well as I don't think an arrest record lives up to the "integrity of the award."

              Sig By:The Dynasty

              2 7 Round Mocks: April 20
              http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/...50#post2577350
              Full NBA Mock Draft: Updated May 18
              http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/...=1#post2602966

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by iowatreat54 View Post
                So if Newton was on a ballot, he should have been #1 is what your saying? Or for all intents and purposes, he should have been the first unanimous Heisman winner ever? (if you discount people who just left him off for non-football reasons)
                Yes, just based on on-field play I don't see how anyone could be put ahead of Newton. If that makes him the first unanimous Heisman winner ever than sure...so be it. He had one of the best college football seasons of all time(so far). Of course there will always be voters with a different motive and those who like to stand out.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Ya....those 105 voters were morons....its called being innocent until proven guilty. There is clearly not enough evidence to prove that Cam Newton did anything wrong. If there was he wouldn't have been eligible for the award and couldn't have been put down on any ballots.
                  How about Reggie? I think that double standard is actually worse than the baseball comparison. Reggie was punished because his parents benefited yet Cam wasn't. That double standard stinks and really with all the investigations going on right now it is only a matter of time before he is handing it back if even 10% of the rumours are truthful.

                  So if Newton was on a ballot, he should have been #1 is what your saying? Or for all intents and purposes, he should have been the first unanimous Heisman winner ever? (if you discount people who just left him off for non-football reasons)
                  That is correct and he shouldn't be the first unanimous decision because it should have happened before. Like everything there is a lot of politics involved in the whole process. If you have no ethical objection to Cam Newton then he should get the 1 vote from you because he was on a clearly higher level than anyone else that plays a position that is "eligible" for the Heisman.

                  Throughout the years there are plenty of other guys that should have been in the same situation.


                  Props to BK on the sig!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X

                  Debug Information