Thursday, November 9, 2006
Tuesday, November 7, 2006
Who will win the heisman??
For some reason, Troy Smith has been on the top of Espn.com's Heisman Watch for almost the whole season. Sure, he's thrown 22 TDs to only 3 INTs, but there are guys with much better stats than his.
After his performance against Oklahoma State, Colt McCoy finally showed up on Heisman Watch. In all, 18 players are listed on the watch, having been scored with a mock vote by ESPN.com's experts. McCoy's first appearance on the list landed him in 4th behind Smith, Brady Quinn, and Rutger's Ray Rice. How does the guy not make the list at all and then all of a sudden jump to 4th? I think the guys at ESPN.com realized he was good and that they better put him up there.
Just for argument's sake I'd like to compare Colt, the #4 guy on the list to Smith, the #1 guy on the list.
So here we go, McCoy vs. Smith.
VS 
So let's look at the stats
Smith: 2,005 YDS passing with 22 TD, 3 INT and 66.7% CMP, Efficiency rating of 165.87
206 YDS rushing with 1 TD
McCoy: 2,051 YDS passing with 27 TD, 4 INT and 69.1% CMP, Efficiency rating of 172.10
180 YDS rushing with 1 TD
The stats are very similar, with McCoy actually getting the overall edge. So why is Smith ranking first in Heisman watch while McCoy is fourth, having just made it into the rankings?
I guess you could make the argument that Smith is Heisman-worth not just because of stats, but because of leadership, or that his team is #1 in the Nation. Those might be legit arguments if Smith were ahead of McCoy in Heisman Watch's point system by a few points, but Smith leads McCoy by 53 points, having gotten all of the first place votes. I know this is just projection by ESPN.com, but Heisman Watch has successfully predicted the last 6 Heisman winners.
To sum up this rant, I don't mind Smith being in the lead in Heisman Watch, even though there are players that have better stats. The part I do mind is that he has all 15 of their 1st place votes and leads McCoy by over 50 points.
I wish ESPN.com's "experts" would get a clue.
After his performance against Oklahoma State, Colt McCoy finally showed up on Heisman Watch. In all, 18 players are listed on the watch, having been scored with a mock vote by ESPN.com's experts. McCoy's first appearance on the list landed him in 4th behind Smith, Brady Quinn, and Rutger's Ray Rice. How does the guy not make the list at all and then all of a sudden jump to 4th? I think the guys at ESPN.com realized he was good and that they better put him up there.
Just for argument's sake I'd like to compare Colt, the #4 guy on the list to Smith, the #1 guy on the list.
So here we go, McCoy vs. Smith.
VS 
So let's look at the stats
Smith: 2,005 YDS passing with 22 TD, 3 INT and 66.7% CMP, Efficiency rating of 165.87
206 YDS rushing with 1 TD
McCoy: 2,051 YDS passing with 27 TD, 4 INT and 69.1% CMP, Efficiency rating of 172.10
180 YDS rushing with 1 TD
The stats are very similar, with McCoy actually getting the overall edge. So why is Smith ranking first in Heisman watch while McCoy is fourth, having just made it into the rankings?
I guess you could make the argument that Smith is Heisman-worth not just because of stats, but because of leadership, or that his team is #1 in the Nation. Those might be legit arguments if Smith were ahead of McCoy in Heisman Watch's point system by a few points, but Smith leads McCoy by 53 points, having gotten all of the first place votes. I know this is just projection by ESPN.com, but Heisman Watch has successfully predicted the last 6 Heisman winners.
To sum up this rant, I don't mind Smith being in the lead in Heisman Watch, even though there are players that have better stats. The part I do mind is that he has all 15 of their 1st place votes and leads McCoy by over 50 points.
I wish ESPN.com's "experts" would get a clue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)