| | | Editor's Note: One of the more than 1,000 voters for the 2000 Heisman Trophy gave Page 2 an inside look at his ballot.
|  | | Chris Weinke's performance in the Florida game was enough to sway this voter. |
First off, let me say that I did not attend a single college football game this year, and I watched very few on television. But even if I did go to games, I would only go to those in my area, so it wouldn't help me to separate a Josh Heupel from a Chris Weinke from a guy who is playing on the West Coast. This business of going to games is clearly overrated.
Heisman voting involves a simple statistical formula that any football fan can compute. I look at three things: the stats, the winning percentage and how the guy did in big games. That's why no lineman can ever win the Heisman, because there are no stats for the guy.
After many, many years of voting for the Heisman, this was probably the closest race for me. It wasn't quite Bush-Gore, but it was damn close. You have two great quarterbacks who are the leaders of two of the best teams in the country fighting for the national championship. What more could you want?
The first two categories were extremely close, but I determined my winner by reason No. 3. I voted for Chris Weinke over Josh Heupel because he performed better in the Florida game than Heupel did against Kansas State. True, I had to watch Heupel play a very fine game for the Big 12 Championship. But Weinke's last game was just a statistical gem.
This crap about Weinke's age is ridiculous. It bothered people that Frank Thomas was a designated hitter, and therefore didn't deserve his MVP shot. I think that's bull. As long as he abides by the rules of the game, what does six years of riding the buses in the minor leagues do to help him against some 20-year-old 300-pounder? Now, if he had been playing college football for eight years, that would be different.
If you're curious, I picked a wild card -- Northwestern's Damien Anderson -- at No. 3. Anderson, of course, won't even be in attendance at the Downtown Athletic Club this Saturday.
Sometimes, I don't see a clear winner. I didn't see one in 1997, when Charles Woodson beat out Peyton Manning. I voted for Manning. In 1994, I couldn't decide among Rashaan Salaam, Ki-Jana Carter or Steve McNair. I remember calling the University of Colorado and asking them to tell me why I should vote for Salaam. They ran me through all his numbers and his performances in big games and that broke the tie with the others.
You know, it's funny how the ballot just shows up in the mail and then two weeks before it's due they send you a reminder. That's it. It's weird that it arrives at my door of all places. But if they are going to have more than 1,000 people voting, they are going to get football writers, former winners, people who really pay attention and people who have other things to do on Saturday.
I don't mean to imply that I don't take this seriously. I take it very seriously. The Heisman is a big deal. Everybody likes trophies and everyone likes awards. We are talking about 65 years of history. How could you not get excited about all the great players who have won it?
I just hope that this year won't be called "the year they took a recount after the bowl game." If someone mentions computers for future Heisman voting, I think I'll lose it. I hate using computers to determine the national championship. You can't tell people that the championship game or the Heisman Trophy is going to be decided by something they can't understand. At least people can fight and scream over the polls. But how do you fight a computer? You can't.
It has been 30 years since I first cast a Heisman vote. I remember voting for Jim Plunkett over Joe Theismann in the 1970 Heisman race. But I've never been to Downtown Athletic Club.
I wouldn't mind a ticket, though.
|
|
|
