213 ballots: Bradford holding steady at 60%
Well, we're now up to 213 ballots declared - that's 23% of the total vote.*
Sam Bradford is holding steady at 60%, while Tim Tebow has edged a bit closer to Colt McCoy. (Again the percentages are a percentage-of-unanimous. A unananimous #1 pick would get 2778 points.)
There's been a lot interest in the idea that we've got a big regional vote going on this year. (Actually, it's not that atypical.) Here's the regional breakdown so far:
| name | Fan | Formers | West | SW | MidW | South | Mid-Atl | NE | Unknown |
| S Bradford | 2 | 21 | 32 | 133 | 45 | 63 | 40 | 38 | 22 |
| C McCoy | 3 | 11 | 32 | 111 | 53 | 65 | 30 | 36 | 24 |
| T Tebow | 0 | 1 | 22 | 64 | 53 | 128 | 37 | 36 | 25 |
* Note: I've heard some reports that voter turnout is usually around 85%, which would mean that we've got around 27% of the actual vote. Though I've also heard that voter turnout has moved up since they went to online balloting (and bugging the voters with daily emails.)
Kari Chisholm | December 12, 2008 | Comment on This Post (31 so far) |
 |
Comments
SPONSORED LINK
ha ha. The former players know Tebag is not worthy of being the 2nd ever to back to back it; especially this year with his numbers being so far below the other 2 legit QBs.
Posted by: J G | Dec 12, 2008 3:23:25 PM
Based on this regional breakdown, I don't quite understand why, statistically, Bradford is projected overall ahead of Tebow by 7 percent. In terms of reported votes, the South and SW regions cancel each other out (Tebow has twice the points of Bradford in the South, Bradford has twice the points of Tebow in the SW). For the other regions, there's such a small number of publicly reported votes (at least, small compared to the publicly known votes in the South and SW), that those numbers can hardly be suitable to project a result one way or the other. Even if you did use those numbers, the West and Midwest cancel each other out (Bradford ahead in the West, Tebow ahead in the Midwest), and the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast are practically a dead heat. Interested in Kari's thoughts on this.
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 3:42:12 PM
It's probably the second place votes and the Heisman winners' votes that are bumping Bradford's numbers. 22 to 1 is huge if Tebow doesn't have all the second place votes, and looking at the votes McCoy has gotten, it makes you wonder if he's getting most of the former Heisman second place votes.
I agree that it's really interesting that the Heisman winners don't seem to want Tebow to win. They're probably more knowledgeable than most of the sportswriters, especially the local ones, and I would guess they don't vote casually.
Posted by: TM | Dec 12, 2008 4:55:19 PM
TM,
You're correct in noting that the regional breakdown also shows former winners picking Bradford. However, there are very few former winners with votes compared to the 870 media voters. Also, the breakdown shows points, not first place votes. If, as the regional breakdown would seem to indicate, Tebow is racking up the same proportion of points than Bradford across all the regions, then it's a statistical dead heat, regardless of whether those points were from 1st place votes, 2nd place votes, etc. Hopefully Kari can illuminate his projections a little more on his next update.
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 5:01:52 PM
Given Timmy's unprecedented national popularity with the general public, who have no doubt that he is the best college football player of 2008, if he does not win then the Heisman's reputation of being the most coveted award in college football may take a back seat to the Maxwell. Nissan's stock may plummet. ESPN may suffer an even greater degree of fan mistrust. We all know they screwed up the fan vote.
As a side note... The Davey O'Brien's fan vote was also screwed with by the people in charge of conducting it.
Posted by: DeLynn | Dec 12, 2008 5:43:02 PM
Based on this regional breakdown, I don't quite understand why, statistically, Bradford is projected overall ahead of Tebow by 7 percent. In terms of reported votes, the South and SW regions cancel each other out (Tebow has twice the points of Bradford in the South, Bradford has twice the points of Tebow in the SW).
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 3:42:12 PM
The regions are not weighted equally. Accordingly, no regions would statisitcally "cancel each other out." If Bradford has an equal percent of a higher weighted (voters) regions to Tebow's region, Bradford would logically be ahead of Tebow and not effectively equal.
Posted by: srooker | Dec 12, 2008 6:02:38 PM
srooker,
The regions are indeed weighted equally. The Heisman trust allocates 145 votes to media in each of the six regions, to help minimize geographical influence.
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 6:37:42 PM
srooker,
Actually, to clarify my previous note, the regions are weighted equally to the extent that (1) an equal number of media voters are allocated to each region, and (2) if voter turnout is at the same rate in all regions.
So, based on Kari's regional breakdown of publicly reported votes, and assuming that voter turnout is the same in both the South and SW regions, those regions would cancel each other out (regarding Tebow vs. Bradford) based on the current proportion of points reported.
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 7:02:17 PM
Frankly, I am sick of ESPN deciding these things by directing the talking heads to promote one program, or one conference or one player over another. McCoy, Bradford, and Harrell all ran up bigger numbers than Tebow.
Bradfords stats, (Rating, TDs, Int and average yds per pass) are tops. Harrells total yards are tops. If stats are your thing, then Bradford or Harrell should win. My vote would go to Bradford as being more efficient.
McCoy and Tebow perhaps mean more to their team by running, passing and willing the team to win. Neither UF or UT would have gone far without their quarterback. McCoy, however didn't play bad and cost his team a win. McCoy didn't have to have the sensational speach to motivate his team, a team that was not picked to compete for the Big 12 South at the start of the season. McCoys completion percentage is tops. If value to the team is the your thing, the vote should go to McCoy.
So, it should come down to performance vs. value to team. Either Bradford or McCoy. That seems to be the way many are viewing it.
The problem is that the ESPN snake oil pitchmen come in and by running a campaign have inserted Tebow back into the stiff-arm trophy race. It happens in politics. The national media with its decided bias, influences public opinion one way or another. That is what ESPN has done here. They have bamboozed a lot of sports writers who barely covered some of these kids.
In my opinion, for doing what quarterbacks do, generate offense, running, passing and scoring, not turning the ball over, no one has done it better, more efficiently, than Bradford. Watching the games, he is running a complicated offense, reading the defense, going through progessions and thowing the ball with uncanny accuracy. Some have complained that the OU receivers have added to his totals by making yards after the catch. Bradford hits them in stride so they can make those extra yards. Bob Stoops said, I beleive that over the season, Bradford sat out almost two games worth of time due to the lopsided scores.
Finally, If your critera is, who will be the better pro, it is Bradford hands down, so say the draft experts.
ESPN taking heads - Shut up
Posted by: Neil | Dec 12, 2008 7:12:32 PM
Is anyone else more interested in how this site performs than the actual award itself?
Posted by: Ross | Dec 12, 2008 7:33:12 PM
It is obvious that the entire country, other than the SEC territory does not think Tebow deserves the Heisman. Its like winning your own state in a presidential election... anyone can do that.
Posted by: p | Dec 12, 2008 7:38:27 PM
What's really obvious is how obviously ignorant the above poster is. I don't mean ignorant as a personal characteristic. Just ignorant of what we know about the publicly known Heisman votes and what various national polls show, which is that this is a very tight race and that Tebow enjoys significant support in more than just "SEC territory." Read up before you post!
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 8:09:00 PM
Neil,
You said, "Bradford sat out almost two games worth of time due to the lopsided scores." As was demonstrated undisputedly by another poster on here (play-by-play logs for every game are freely available online), Tebow sat out more time than Bradford did.
Who will be the better pro? Who cares? That's not a factor in who gets the award, and never has been. As we all know, there are loads of previous Heisman winners who were not destined to do well in the NFL. Doesn't matter, it's who was the most outstanding player in college football for the season. Period.
Stats are important, and they can be used as a measurement of success. However, if it was all about "efficiency" and statistics, there would be no need to vote. We could just create a "Heisman rating" based on statistics and then let that pick a winner. The whole reason you vote is to look beyond statistics (often greatly influenced by how many plays the offense runs, what kind of offense is being run, quality of the competition, etc.) and look at the qualities of the player himself and other intangibles that can't be measured in a statistic. That's where the debate is, and should be.
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 8:24:38 PM
Jack, you really are the ignorant one. If YOU look at the facts, Tebow is not leading in any category other than the South. If did not have that territory, he would not be even close to McCoy.
Now before you again engage in diarreha of the mouth, think about what you say (or maybe that was the problem... that you did try to think and that is just a demonstration of your total lack of inteligence).
Go back to your trailer and beat your wife.
Posted by: p | Dec 12, 2008 8:40:41 PM
DeLynn wrote: ....the heisman will "take a back seat to the Maxwell. Nissan's stock may plummet. ESPN may suffer an even greater degree of fan mistrust. We all know they screwed up the fan vote."
"As a side note... The Davey O'Brien's fan vote was also screwed with by the people in charge of conducting it."
First off, hasn't the Maxwell taken a back seat to the Walter Camp? And what makes you think the ESPN and O'brien fan votes were screwed with? Any proof? Or did it just not go your way?
Posted by: Eric | Dec 12, 2008 9:00:36 PM
lol, Ross...you make a good point.
Posted by: Chuck | Dec 12, 2008 9:14:41 PM
Does anyone here have proof that espn screwed up those votes or is this
just your won assumptions because it didn't fit your personal fav.
If so thats idiotic.
And if espn crewed up the votes I for one KNOW it would be in favor of
Tebow just because of thier bias. And anyone who says that there is no bias
is a fool.
I hope Bradford wins the heisman.....he deserves it most!
If tebow was heisman quality he wouldn't have let his team lose to
Ole Miss. end of discussion.
Posted by: chad | Dec 12, 2008 9:40:41 PM
oh and the only thing it says that Tebow played ;less than bradford which you could debate with every canidate every year for the heisman is how weak the sec is on offense that they didn't feel the other team could score and come back so why have him in.....more than the big 12 where the offenses are for the whole a league above.
Posted by: chad | Dec 12, 2008 9:55:20 PM
p, if your username is any indication of intellect (one lowercase letter?), then size must matter. The latest regional breakdown shows Tebow tied with McCoy for the most votes out of the Midwest, and only 2 and 3 points behind Bradford for 1st in the mid-atlantic and northeast. Thus, your argument about Tebow only having support in the South is...well, ridiculous in light of the numbers. Please learn how to count (or, perhaps learn what the different numbers mean, like 9 is greater than 8, things like that) before spouting off. Peace!
Posted by: Jack | Dec 12, 2008 10:26:26 PM
In total Offense and scoring offense all 3 teams were very similar. What you are really talking about here is a style argument. Tebow runs an offense where every single play is a read or a pass, meaning the entire offense goes through him. When Demps hits a lane on the outside, it is because Tim drew the DE in and pitched (as an example).
Stats are nice, but if you are going to win primarily because of stats, then normally they should be unique in some way. As a hypothetical, if last year Ryan Perriloux had started for LSU and run for 20 TDs and passed for 22 in the same conference as Tim, would Tim have won the Heisman? The answer is most assuredly no.
By that same token, there are a lot of QBs with similarly gaudy stats in the Big 12. Heck, Chase Daniel had a 74% completion percentage, 4,135 yards passing, and 37 TDs ... and he was widely considered to have a disappointing year. Joe Ganz completed 70% of his passes ...
Bradford gets the boost from OUs attempts to win style points down the stretch of the season, running an up tempo, no huddle attack well into the 4th quarter against teams they were already up by 30 or more against. And even then, his numbers aren't that unusual inside the Big 12.
led by Tebow, the UF attack put up very similar numbers (and better in some cases) as OU and Texas, and they did so against better defenses. UFs numbers were much different than a majority of the SEC, and do stand out. And they did so while still taking their foot off the gas much earlier in games, and by taking Tim out earlier than both Bradford and McCoy.
Posted by: Doug | Dec 12, 2008 10:28:53 PM
Oh, and Tebow didn't let his team lose to Ole Miss. We inexplicably had 3 fumbles inside our own 35 ... and our Defense gave up 3 long plays that accounted for about 70% of the Rebels total offense (one a glaring botched assignment by Wright).
Prior to that we were in control the whole game. But even still Tim led us 80 yards straight into the end zone with like 4 minutes left to tie the score up, but an Ole Miss player literally hurdled our guard on the extra point attempt and blocked it (never seen anything like it). So then, we get the ball back with less than 2 minutes left, and Tim drives us another 45 yards into FG territory. If we didn't get cute and just kicked it we would have won. Instead our center and guards get completely driven back on a 4th and almost 2 and we lose.
Tim takes the blame for everything, but he didn't lose the game by any stretch
Posted by: doug | Dec 12, 2008 10:37:23 PM
Here’s a recap of Sam Bradford’s 4th Qtr production:
UT-Chattanooga - 0
#12 Cincinnati (Big East Champs) - 1 TD Pass
Washington - 0
#11 TCU - 0
Baylor - 0
#3 Texas - 1 TD Pass
Kansas - 1 TD Pass
K-State - 0
Nebraska - 0
Texas A&M - 0
#7 Texas Tech - 1 TD Pass
#13 OSU - 2 TD Pass
#21 Missouri - 0
So, he’s had 6 TD’s in the 4th Qtr this entire year (all but 1 against ranked opponents). That means he as 42 TD’s in 1st three qtrs. Which is 10 more than McCoy’s four-qtr total and 14 more than Tebow’s four-qtr total.
Next argument?? I love the "surrounded by superior talent" one...especially coming from the UT fans that say they got screwed. Shouldn’t the "superior talent" team be in the NC? I know, I know head-to-head...tell me again why TT isn’t playing Ohio State in the BCS??
One more point (no pun intended) -- OU has outscored their opponents 702-319 this year, but only by 8 points in the 4th qtr. So much for padding the stats. Bradford could have 70 TD’s if he would have played in the 4th qtr.
Bradford -- Heisman ’08
Posted by: Ron | Dec 12, 2008 11:06:11 PM
I think people often overlook the differences in defenses faced. if you added up the defensive ranks and average them of the opponents played, the for Oklahoma, Florida, and Texas respectively they are as follows:
Total Defense (yds/game)---------77.5-----27.75----91.58-----
Scoring Defense (pts/game)-------71.75----42.17----86.83-----
Now with those numbers in mind, do you really think you can compare what an SEC quarter back did in his context, to what a Big 12 quarterback does, stat to stat. You can't. Yes, Sam Bradford and Colt McCoy's numbers are much higher than Tim Tebows, but the defenses Tebow faced are a world above those Bradford and McCoy faced. All i am saying is dont look at just the stats that favor your canidate without asking if there are any outside factors that could influence their numbers.
Posted by: flypat34 | Dec 13, 2008 4:29:32 AM
I can live with the fact that Tebow had another good year, My problem is his numbers are down as is the SEC. Almost all can agree with that. Last year he won it on #'s and he deserved it in my opinion. Now this year he didn't have those great #'s but every one say's he should get it because of his great leadership ability.
The question I have didn't Colt MCCoy, and Sam Bradford lead there team. Or were they just along for the ride.
Posted by: Craig | Dec 13, 2008 7:45:01 AM
How can you say the defenses in the SEC were that much better when it is obvious that the SEC offenses are not nearly as good as the Big 12 offenses(especially the top 4 in the South). I am sure the Big 12 defenses would look much better if they were playing against pitiful offenses like the majority of the SEC's this year. Your rational just doesn't make any sense.
Posted by: Sam | Dec 13, 2008 8:49:40 AM
The Trophy should be given to the best overall college football player in the country. How you determine that is really the hard part. You can make the case for any of these 3 guys, and I'll be the first to say that all of them deserve it. If it's a numbers game, than Bradford wins easy. But then why isn't Harrell involved in the discussion, since I believe his numbers were as good if not better than Bradford's in the same conference? You can't blame it on one loss, because they all had one bad loss. The trophy is not about who will be best in the NFL, as evidenced by past winners Gino Torreta, Danny Wuerffel and Eric Crouch. The question is who is the absolute epitome of what a college football player should be and who is the most outstanding player in the nation? With all due respect to McCoy and Bradford, who played a great season, who both deserve a shot at the national championship, and who both will no doubt be successful QBs for years to come, I'd have to give my vote to Tebow.
Nevermind that he is a linebacker that plays QB. Nevermind the speech he gave to the media after the Ole Miss game (which was his Babe Ruth moment calling his shot). Just remember the FSU game. Late in the game Percy Harvin gets injured -- 3/4 of the FSU crowd cheers for the injury. Tebow runs over to the coaches, demands that he get the ball because "he needs to hit someone really bad." And on the next play he takes the entire left side of the FSU defense into the endzone with him. I'm sorry but I just don't see Bradford or McCoy ever doing anything like that.
Does that make Tebow the Trophy winner? We'll find out tonight. I honestly don't know who deserves this award this year. But what I do know is that there has never been (and maybe never will be) another player in college football quite like Tim Tebow. If anyone deserves to stand next to Archie Griffin as the only other guy to win 2 trophies, it is Tebow.
Posted by: Steve | Dec 13, 2008 9:33:06 AM
If the plays on offense go through the QB, then Bradford and McCoy where not along for the ride.
Posted by: Philosophy | Dec 13, 2008 9:38:28 AM
Are there going to be any more updates? Is Sam Bradford the projected winner?
Posted by: CJ | Dec 13, 2008 9:54:17 AM
Ron...first of all, your comparison of the defenses that Tebow (sec) and Bradford (Big 12) face is so far incorrect it is almost funny. Anyone that knows football would know that when you have a very strong offensive conference like the Big 12 was this year (probably the best offensive conf. in one year in college history) even great defenses get big numbers put up against them which results in lower rankings for team defenses. I would put at least 6 of the Big 12 defenses as good as any in the SEC and the Qb's still put up huge numbers. Tebow is a great player but his numbers this year are not even close to worthy of winning the heisman this year (if so...it will be a joke) and Tebow better be glad he didn't play in the Big 12 (defenses), he wouldn't have looked anything close to as good as the SEC. If he was in the Big 12, he would be the 5th best QB in the Big 12. Besides, between Bradford, McCoy and Tebow.......Tebow will have the SHORTEST NFL qb career if not shortest NFL career overall.
BRADFORD should win the hsisman by a landslide this year......PERIOD!!!!!!
Posted by: Robert | Dec 13, 2008 9:57:35 AM
Sorry Ron, it wasn't your post, it was flypat34's!!!! that I was referring to.
Posted by: Robert | Dec 13, 2008 10:06:18 AM
Sorry big 12 fans, but you don't even need stats to see the differences in defenses between the two conferences. You can just use your eyeballs.
Even in you match up of "better" teams, the window to hit the open receiver was like 5 feet wide. Overall, I'm not sure I've ever seen worse coverage and tackling. And it wasn't just the big 4 doing it. Hell, Iowa States QB completed 62% of his passes in that conference, and he is god awful.
If one team, or maybe even two teams were doing what they were doing, and the defenses didn't look so crappy to the naked eye, then you guys might have a point. But conference wide big numbers were given up.
And the assumption that the SEC has no offense is a tad erroneous. Especially considering the highest rated pro prospect right now at the QB spot in publications is Matt Stafford. You got a team with Stafford, Moreno, King, Massaquaoi, and Green ... and they are offensively inept?
Let's put it this way: the next three years will be just like the last 3 years, where people will say we have no offense in the SEC, and yet, dramatically, the SEC will end up putting more offensive players in the NFL than conferences like the Big 12.
Posted by: doug | Dec 13, 2008 12:56:35 PM
The H------ Memorial Trophy is a registered trademark of the H------ Memorial Trophy Trust. This site is not affiliated with the Trust, not even a little. We're not even using the H------ word, since they don't want us to. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.
Copyright to and responsibility for all posts and comments are owned by their respective authors.
Obviously, the posts and comments here are the views of their authors, and not of anyone else.
While we're strong believers in free speech, we reserve the right to delete comment spam or other offensive material. Our contributors, however, reserve the right to embarass themselves in public.
Whose crazy idea is this?