Will Ingram be the weakest winner ever? No, not even close.

On a few of the radio interviews I've done this past week, a number of folks have noted that with the votes split among multiple top finalists, it's possible that Mark Ingram would have one of the lowest vote totals in H------ Trophy history.

Not going to happen. Our projection shows that Ingram will be somewhere in the ballpark of 48% of the max points possible. Sure, that's way below the two biggest landslide winners ever - Reggie Bush (91.8%) and Troy Smith (91.6%) - and even substantially behind the last two winners, Tim Tebow (70.5%) and Sam Bradford (62.1%).

But if Ingram gets 48% of the 2778 points possible, he'll land in the neighborhood of Carson Palmer (48.0%) and Steve Spurrier (48.2%). He'll certainly not be anywhere near 2001's Eric Crouch - who only earned 27.7% of the points possible.

Here's the full chart of the strongest (and weakest) winners ever.

Kari Chisholm | December 12, 2009 | Comment on This Post (68 so far)
Permalink: Will Ingram be the weakest winner ever? No, not even close.



Thanks for that update on the weakest winner... That thought was gaining ground in the posts today, espicially after people start to see that Ingram is probably actually going to win this thing.

Posted by: Beau | Dec 12, 2009 8:13:06 AM

All are deserving and I'm very pleased with your prediction. Gerhart is just a throwback and raked up some very impressive rushing numbers and the total TDs are most impressive. Suh's sacks, tackles, TFLs are unreal for a DT; best athlete of the crew. Ingram's 1005 yards after contact are the most impressive to me, along with sharing quite a bit of carries with Richardson.

Btw, this quite a collection of good human beings as well.

Posted by: Roll Tide | Dec 12, 2009 8:17:00 AM

kari, it was my understanding that the committee chooses the finalists based on a clear gap between candidates, somewhere between 4 and 6. it appears the largest gap is between mccoy and tebow, not between tebow and spiller, and that there should only have been 4 finalists this year. do you think that was done as a sign of respect for tebow or (more cynically) to bring in viewers with the tebow pageclick phenomenon? i'm a huge tebow fan, btw, so this is not intended as a slight on him, i'm just asking objectively.

Posted by: blinky | Dec 12, 2009 8:20:42 AM


Well I have figured one thing out by this post - you are definately not a Nebraska fan. You could have thrown several known weak winners names up there but you chose Crouch. At least we know where some of your bias doesnn't lie!

Thanks for the fun this week- it's been a hoot!

Posted by: BigRedFan | Dec 12, 2009 8:52:24 AM

It's been a blast following your updates Kari. Thanks for all of the hard work and research you have done. BigRedFan, I don't see how Kari is being biased. Facts are facts and if Crouch only won with 27.7% of the vote, that is very weak compared to other winners. Obviously I want Ingram to win, but Gerhart has better numbers and Suh is just a monster stud. I would vote Ingram, Gerhart, Suh and leave McCoy and Tebow off my ballot. Where I'm shocked is the number of Southeastern "journalists" that didn't even have Ingram on their ballots.

Posted by: RollTideIndy | Dec 12, 2009 8:59:24 AM

Tim Tebow voted for Mark Ingram instead of for himself. RTR!

Posted by: Crimsonite | Dec 12, 2009 8:59:34 AM

I have seen no bias by Kari on this site at all, and I am huge Nebraska/Suh fan. Crouch is the most recent low percentage winner, snd the obvious example to use there. I would disagree with the idea that having a low percentage is necessarily a weak winner in any event -- it can mean the winner prevailed in a year in which the number of outstanding players was high.

It is fascinating that two former winners and a second place finisher, quarterbacks all, faded so dramaticallly and couldn't crack the top 3 this year. By mud-season, none of your top three guys was being hyped as a likely winner.

Posted by: cdf | Dec 12, 2009 9:28:12 AM

One thing is for certain, all 5 guys are very classy, and all would be great role models. All are extremely talented.

As someone else pointed out, Ingram's 1005 yards after contact against mostly SEC defenses is the most impressive stat. (Before anyone starts to criticize the 3 creampuff OOC games, he had a total of 29 carries in those 3 games combined, and had his biggest games against the best defenses)

Posted by: TheT12 | Dec 12, 2009 9:31:00 AM

Yes has been a fun week keeping updated on this site.

Posted by: Spore | Dec 12, 2009 9:45:03 AM

We do appreciate all the work this week - especially w/ jury duty thrown in. I'm actually as much a fan of the methodolgy as the heisman. I's been an entertaining week. Thank you.

Posted by: Bama n Toronto | Dec 12, 2009 9:46:03 AM

As far as him picking Crouch, look at the #s, Crouch is the lowest in the last 20+ years. Yea, he could have picked someone from the 1960's but alot more relevant to pick someone in the 200s. No bias at all.

Posted by: Spore | Dec 12, 2009 9:47:06 AM

"Weak?" The averages are low because there were so many outstanding players that the vote was spread amongst them. Crouch getting 27.7% simply means he won THE MOST VOTES TOTAL with 27.7%, not that he was the "best of the worst." (In 2001, only 86.3% of the ballots were returned by voters. Of 4776 possible total points the top 3 only pulled 2116 and Crouch got 770 of those points. 2d (Grossman/FL) pulled 708 and 3rd (Dorsey/MiamiFL) pulled 658.) Crouch wasn't the "weakest" so much as all three were strong vote grabbers and nearly split the top three vote totals with 1/3 each. Point being you really can have more that one outstanding player in any given season.

All of the candidates this year deserved worthy consideration for sheer numbers OR overall impact on their team's performance. If voters are limited to only evaluate hard statistics, then there was no point in having a vote at all, the computers could have given us out winner.....BUT.....those stats are completely different depending on which position a player plays....so who would set the metrics for the computer and wouldn't those metrics also be based on "human" sensibilities? Computers, in spite of popular belief, are only as smart as the people who program them.

All said, some voters are going to vote with their hearts and some are going to vote based on their personal evaluation of the numbers. For those of us who don't have a vote, maybe we should put ourselves in the place of the voter and remove the "homer factor" to see who we would really put on our ballots. What would you use as your tool for measurement?

The system works, the vote was close, and the vote getter with the most points will win.......Just as many of us don't believe that bowls give a true National Champion many of us will not believe the Heisman winner is the BEST player. This brings up the scarey question....are we now going to insist upon a H------ Playoff too? Someone get on the phone to Orrin Hatch immediately!!!!

Happy Holidays!!!

Posted by: Chip Sahoy | Dec 12, 2009 9:58:55 AM

OH yeah... all the numbers I spouted above are available on H-------.com!!!


Happy Holidays to All!!!

Posted by: Chip Sahoy | Dec 12, 2009 10:00:25 AM

Glad to see that the comments are civil now...last night was crazy. I hate to see that a few Crimson Tide fans make the rest of us look like uneducated morons. This was a tough year as there were so many pros vs cons for EACH candidate. I think it came down to individual voters deciding what aspect was most important to them. As we've seen in previous years, sometimes they even give it as a career award. We get too wrapped up in this thing, forgetting that these guys are students, the voters are human, and it's just fun to love College Football. Roll Tide and best of luck to all the candidates in their bowl games...except Gerhart who will be playing my Sooners :-)

Posted by: RollTideSooner | Dec 12, 2009 10:00:57 AM

Kari, thanks for all the work on this. It's been a lot of fun following along. On your page of the top winners (http://www.stiffarmtrophy.com/topwinners.html), I think you've omitted the comparison that really lets you determine how big of a win it was. I agree that using total points or vote margin is problematic due to the changing number of voters. Using % of perfect (as you currently do) also seems problematic since it doesn't account for voter turnout or the strength of the rest of the field. Instead I would argue that the best comparison is the ratio of points scored by the winner compared to second place.

For example, consider two years. In year 1, the winner gets 87% of perfect (26 points out of 10 ballots) while second place gets 80% (24 points on the same 10 ballots). In other words this was clearly a two horse race with the winner getting 60% of the first place votes as opposed to only 40% for the runner up. In year 2, the winner only gets 75% of perfect, but no other candidate gets more than 40% It's a much deeper pool, but there is a clear choice for the majority of voters.

I would argue in this case that year 2's winner had the bigger win. He was the clear choice of the field. Using ratios would allow us to compare how overwhelming of a choice the winner was. In year 1, the winner scores a 1.08 while in year 2 the winner gets a 1.86 (assuming second place was 40%).

Posted by: D | Dec 12, 2009 10:09:31 AM

Mark Ingram the way. Nobody else played the schedule Bama did and look at the way he performed. It shouldnt even be as close as it will be.

Posted by: Bret Bray | Dec 12, 2009 10:41:15 AM

There is a case to be made for all of the finalists this year. Suh had a good year, but let him face an SEC O Line then we will talk. Toby had an OUTSTANDING year... In the PAC 10. Let's see him pull off those numbers down South. McCoy, same thing. Come to the SEC buddy. Tebow, well we all know what he is CAPABLE of, yet when his supporting cast drops off, so does he, slightly.

Now, back to the REAL lecture at hand. Mark Ingram carried his team to an undefeated season and a BCSNCG appearance in the SEC. The SEC. You CAN NOt, WILL NOT find a TOUGHER running back in the college game today.

The SEC, where those who can, come to play. Those who can't, go to the PAC 10, Big 12, Big 10, Big East, ACC, etc....

What's gonna upset you people even more is in 2011, after Ingram leaves early, Trent Richardson WALKS AWAY with the Heisman. He will be even better than Mark.

Roll Tide.

Posted by: Stack | Dec 12, 2009 10:45:50 AM

I meant to add... Thanks for running such a cool site. I have completely enjoyed watching the numbers over the past week. Hell, I've even lost a good deal of sleep waiting for you to update. Good job on the site man. I really appreciate it.

Posted by: Stack | Dec 12, 2009 10:47:47 AM


Thanks for your website. This is by far the most unbiased analysis of the H___man race and we refered to it many times on our air.

Nice to see that the uneducated trolls that lurk on the various team websites also found this as another avenue to share their "expert" opinions.

To the winner, congratulations and may you represent the award well.

To those of you who take this award as seriously as if you were in the running, go exhaust your energies for something useful. Perhaps volunteer to help those less fortunate this holiday season.

Posted by: John Bishop | Dec 12, 2009 11:00:18 AM

These are the backs who should get it before Ingram

1 Toby Gerhart, RB STAN 311 1736 5.6 61 26
2 Ryan Mathews, RB FRES 245 1664 6.8 77 17
3 Dion Lewis, RB PITT 297 1640 5.5 85 16
4 Donald Buckram, RB UTEP 259 1594 6.2 52 18
6 Ryan Williams, RB VT 268 1538 5.7 66 19
7 LaMichael James, RB ORE 215 1476 6.9 60 14
8 Joe Webb, QB UAB 227 1427 6.3 71 11
9 John Clay, RB WIS 265 1396 5.3 72 16
10 Alfred Morris, RB FAU 263 1392 5.3 48 11
11 Anthony Dixon, RB MSST 257 1391 5.4 70 12
12 Lance Dunbar, RB UNT 200 1378 6.9 71 17
13 Jacquizz Rodgers, RB ORST 255 1377 5.4 61 20
14 Montel Harris, RB BC 285 1355 4.8 70 13
15 Jonathan Dwyer, RB GT 221 1346 6.1 74 14
16 Vai Taua, RB NEV 172 1345 7.8 89 10
17 Bernard Pierce, RB TEM 224 1308 5.8 68 15
18 Montario Hardesty, RB TENN 264 1306 4.9 43 12
19 Noel Devine, RB WVU 225 1297 5.8 88 12
20 Robert Turbin, RB USU 207 1296 6.3 96 13

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 11:06:55 AM

Suh is the Chuck Bednarik Award for defensive player of the year and he won the most outstanding defensive player of the year award and all you Alabama homers are saying McClain is better then Suh. Try not even in the league. SUH FOR H-MAN!

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 11:12:50 AM

Gerhart, Ryan Mathews (Fresno State) and Suh should be the top 3 finalist.

Rushing Yards Leaders - All Players
1 Toby Gerhart, RB STAN 311 1736 5.6 61 26
2 Ryan Mathews, RB FRES 245 1664 6.8 77 17
5 Mark Ingram, RB ALA 249 1542 6.2 70 15

to compare stats! Mathews has 4 LESS carries, 122 MORE yards and a 6.8 yard per carry average, longer run and TWO more touchdowns. If Ingram wins this award it is the biggest joke in the history of College Football, even bigger joke then the BCS.

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 11:19:39 AM

Where does the 1005 YAC stat for Ingram come from? What are Toby Gerhart's numbers for YAC? I would be surprised if he did not stack up favorably in that statistic because, if you watch him run, his whole game is breaking tackles and dragging defenders to get extra yards. Does anyone know how many YAC he has?

Posted by: dwiesen | Dec 12, 2009 11:24:31 AM

I agree with you. I find it a little hard to believe Ingram got by far the majority of his yards after contact. This must be one of the Alabama homer stats where they consider it contact when he runs through the line right by a guy who is engaged in a block with his O line. I dont believe that stat one bit.

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 11:35:56 AM

ingram is gonna win get over it all those other running back dont play any good defenses and if the were any good they would get invited .. to lose anyway GET OVER IT roll tide roll

Posted by: jonthan saliba | Dec 12, 2009 11:38:39 AM

ingram is gonna win get over it all those other running back dont play any good defenses and if the were any good they would get invited .. to lose anyway GET OVER IT roll tide roll

Posted by: jonthan saliba | Dec 12, 2009 11:38:40 AM

Jonthan Saliba,

That post added no value to the discourse here. I agree that Ingram will probably win. Congratulations.

Posted by: dwiesen | Dec 12, 2009 11:41:57 AM

I agree that M. Ingram should win the Heisman ...he would have crushed Gerhat #'s if he had been left in against several teams, instead Saban chose to give other running backs a chance to play and pulled Mark out, also this could have been to protect him from getting hurt, he is a big part of the Alabama team, when their QB was having a few bad games he carried the team on his shoulders. If this young man wins the Heisman, he is very deserving, and should be be supported by all. He is a powerful runner and a team player.

Posted by: she loves football | Dec 12, 2009 11:43:59 AM

This is all I have to say:

All America Candidate
Walter Camp Finalist
Lombardi Award Winner
Lott Trophy Finalist (not awarded yet)
Chuck Bednarik Award Winner
Outland Trophy Award Winner
Nagurski Award Winner

Ndamukong Suh. The real Suhperman.

Posted by: Suh-nami | Dec 12, 2009 11:45:12 AM

rofl.. obvious you're a dumb shit, ingram has more yardage than 3/4ths of that list you just made, nice try.

Posted by: nd | Dec 12, 2009 11:45:32 AM

to dwiesen, have you ever thought about checking stats...when you watch Alabama games, there were many on tv, they always mention his stats...if you have ever seen him play, you will notice he carries tacklers down field and across the goal line. This young man is a hoss and hard to bring down...his running is truly a sight to see. I think all the guys mentioned for the Heisman are good and deserving but, none more that M Ingram.

Posted by: she loves football | Dec 12, 2009 11:52:17 AM

"she loves football",

I am more interested in Gerhart's YAC stats, which don't seem to be readily available. Everyone is touting Ingram's YAC stats as a big differentiator between the two players, and my suspicion is that Toby Gerhart's YAC numbers are similarly impressive.

Of course, it bears mentioning that most of the people voting for this award probably don't take the time to look at stats in the kind of detail that people on this site do.

Posted by: dwiesen | Dec 12, 2009 11:56:54 AM

dont forget.....BIG 12 defensive player of the year!

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 12:07:18 PM

SEC has 2 teams in the top 10 in total defense.(Alabama, Florida)
Big 12 has 3 teams in top 10 in total defense. (Texas, Nebraska, Oklahoma)
Sometimes you SEC/Bama homers need to look at the stats before you speak.

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 12:14:12 PM

the people who vote on this award just follow the bias...SEC defenses are so good. Above I have just proven that wrong. Ingram should win because he does that on SEC defenses. Its a complete joke if Ingram wins this award.

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 12:16:25 PM


β€œHe's a one-man wrecking crew out there,” Dave Rimington said Friday. β€œI'm sure glad I didn't have to play against him.”
--Rimington, 49, won the Outland Trophy in 1981 and 1982 and the Lombardi Award in 1982.

Posted by: Suh in for H-man | Dec 12, 2009 12:26:24 PM

Funny how the award that has been given to 4 previous Nebraska players is now all of a sudden a "complete joke" when their guy might not win. I hate to disappoint you, but nobody but you and a handful of cornhuskers will ever consider this a complete joke, no matter how many times you say it on numerous threads. The nation will remember the winner regardless and Suh will be a side note whenever another defensive player comes up for the award.

Posted by: obviouslyNOT | Dec 12, 2009 12:42:32 PM

Obvious, you fail to mention that Nebraska and Oklahoma have a combined 9 losses. So the real question should be were the defenses of those 3 teams that good or were the opposing offenses that bad? Nobody knew who Suh was before last Saturday night. Tebow is there as a lifetime achievement appearance, Gerheart is a great player but would he really be there if Notre Dame had beaten Stanford? No. Up until last Saturday night I thought McCoy had it in the bag. Ingram has been consistently good all year save for one game. That get's washed away when you compare what McCoy did against OU and Neb. Ingram will win tonight and he will deserve it. I doubt seriously that McCoy, Suh or Gerheart would have had the season's they had if they had played an SEC schedule.

Posted by: ChrisNBama | Dec 12, 2009 12:57:06 PM

There are better offenses in the Big 12.
In the top 10
SEC has one team (Arkansas)
Big 12 has TWO teams (Texas, Texas Tech)

SEC has TWO teams in top 10 (Alabama, Florida)
BIG 12 has THREE teams in top 10 (Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska)

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 1:05:27 PM

The SEC will expose the Big 12 in Pasadena, CA. Mark my words.

Posted by: Todd nicholas | Dec 12, 2009 1:11:11 PM

A quick note on Suh, there are a few people who say that he wasn't a legit candidtate until the big12 game and others point out that his stats aren't impressive compared to Derrick Thomas. I have watched every game and a lot of the things he does just don't make it to the stat sheet. Unfortunately it'd be pretty difficult to watch all the games of all the candidates, but Suh impresses every down he plays. The Missouri game was possibly Suh's best game of the year, and even though his stat line wasn't overly impressive (6 tackles, 1 sack, 1 ff, 1 pbu, 1 int) he absolutely domintated that game and literally affected every play that Missouri ran. If you just look at his stats nothing really jumps out (other than the int) but watching the game you understand how there is no other individual who can change the game on either side of the ball the he does. He does this EVERY GAME.

Posted by: Ryan | Dec 12, 2009 1:15:35 PM

There you go with the SEC bias. "I doubt seriously that McCoy, Suh or Gerheart would have had the season's they had if they had played an SEC schedule." That is a ridiculous statement. Nebraska's scoring defense is right behind Alabama's by .2 points. Nebraska has 4 losses and Alabama has zero. The difference you speak of is the offense. Nebraska's offense is ranked 102 in the nation while Alabama is 30 something. Yes Nebraska has 4 losses but 3 of those is by a combined 5 points. Are you kidding me. We lost 3 games by a COMBINED 5 points? Alabama is a better team overall and I never once denied that. Good thing this is not a team award but and individual award that is supposed to go to the MOST OUTSTANDING COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYER and not the best offensive player on ONE of the best teams! Suh has already racked up 4 awards which just proves he has been consistent not only this year but last year as well. Most outstanding defensive player, Defensive player of the year and your telling me he won that because of ONE game. Obviously you dont watch any college football and never caught one big 12 game all year because if you did you would for sure know of SUH. You cant and wont miss him if you watch a game.
There are better offenses in the Big 12.
In the top 10
SEC has one team (Arkansas)
Big 12 has TWO teams (Texas, Texas Tech)

SEC has TWO teams in top 10 (Alabama, Florida)
BIG 12 has THREE teams in top 10 (Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska)

I just stated facts now where are yours?

Posted by: obvious | Dec 12, 2009 1:16:42 PM

Blinky, remember that the cmte announces the finalists before the voter deadline (just a few hours before this year, usually several days before). So, they didn't have all the info. Not surprising that they would err on the side of inviting a former winner.

BigRedFan, Eric Crouch was the weakest winner in this decade. That's all. And remember that by "weak", that's not a reflection on the winner - mostly just a reflection of the strength of the oppostiion.

D, you're right that ratio of first to second would also be a nice way to evaluate strength of win. Sure. I also think "how close to a unanimous selection?" is legit.

John Bishop, thank you.

Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Dec 12, 2009 1:18:21 PM

Ok TODD. Marked. We will see. Like I said before a million times. Texas will put up 24 points and Colt will light Alabama's defense up like a Christmas tree and show you Bama homers how much more dominate Nebraska's defense and SUH really are!

Posted by: Suh in for H-man | Dec 12, 2009 1:19:24 PM

It is a complete joke this year because Ingram is not THE MOST OUTSTANDING COLLEGE FOOTBALL PLAYER like in years past when Nebraska players had won it. Eric Crouch won the award in the game against Colorado in which Nebraska lost the game. He single handedly scored all of Nebraska's points because he was just that good and nothing else we did was working. It was a close race between Crouch but Nebraska also got robbed when Tommy Frazier did not win it against Eddie George.

Posted by: obviously | Dec 12, 2009 1:23:28 PM

1. Suh
2. Kellen Moore
3. Jerry Hughes (TCU defensive end)

Go Broncos!

Posted by: Boisebronco | Dec 12, 2009 1:24:55 PM


Posted by: KC CRAWFORD | Dec 12, 2009 1:29:56 PM

I don't really have anything to add statistically that hasn't already been said, I'm just posting to laugh at the Ingram haters. If Ingram wins, the award is officially a joke? Really? Truly pathetic to get so butthurt over your player losing in the projection. This has to be your first time watching this award if you didn't realize that strength of team and National Championship implications didn't have a big part of it. Now it's a joke? Spare the hatred and get a life.

Posted by: Justin | Dec 12, 2009 1:40:06 PM

Excuse me... "Poor OBVIOUSLY"

Posted by: Greg | Dec 12, 2009 1:59:22 PM

Tough year... I'm a Pac-10 fan, but I have to go with Suh for sheer dominance. Suh has consistently beaten a double team and lives in the backfield. Even if you run plays away from him, he is very good in backside pursuit. As we saw in the Texas game, no single player dictates to an offense what it can and can't more than Suh. I think if the Heisman is intended to go to the best player in the country, regardless of position, Suh has to be the choice. What will hurt him is the people who keep him off their ballot altogether because they can't think of a DL as a Heisman winner.

Posted by: Jeff | Dec 12, 2009 2:16:23 PM

Comparing apples to apples ...

How many points did Nebraska and Alabama surrender to like opponents?


Against Virginia Tech and playing at home, Alabama gave up 24 points and was in a battle for survival the entire game. Nebraska played Virginia Tech at Blacksburg and only gave up 10 points until the final 3 seconds of the game on a miracle pass and two-point conversion. Nebraska's offense scored 14 additional points on offense, both of which were negated by a penalty.

Many toothless Al-Obama supporters here have been claiming Suh's stats are less than stellar when compared to some linebackers and defensive ends.

Mark Ingram should not even be on a single ballot - he had no sacks this season, no tackles whatsoever and no interceptions. Loser.

Posted by: skippy poopy | Dec 12, 2009 2:22:28 PM

"Nebraska also got robbed when Tommy Frazier did not win it against Eddie George."

This is perfect. Anytime a Cornhusker doesn't win, they were robbed or it's a joke. I get it. For all the years this award has been given away (subtract out the joke years that a Cornhusker was in it but didn't win it), this award is legit. Including this year, but ONLY if Suh wins, then we were robbed and it was a joke again. It all makes perfect sense. When every voter I've seen or heard has mentioned that all 3 of the top 3 would make a reasonable candidate. I guess only "Husker nation" is completely objective and has all the facts. They should just consult Nebraska fans every year for the award, since they are the only people who really know what counts in football.

Posted by: obviouslyNOT | Dec 12, 2009 2:33:49 PM

Richardson ran pretty well behind that Alabama O-line too. Gerhart was stuck in Stanford and managed to do it all by himself, pretty much. But Suh's impact cannot be denied. When the offense has to devote 2 blockers to you every time, and you still break into the backfield, the offense is screwed, because they are outnumbered everywhere. The fact that Suh managed to have a dominant season statistically while also absorbing two (or three) blockers all game from the offense is doubly impressive.

Posted by: Jeff | Dec 12, 2009 2:40:23 PM

I totally agree with your post!!! I live in the Midwest and it amazes me how they hate the SEC.... however to be the best, you have to play the best, and until the sec is beat, they remain on top of the football world. They are exciting to watch and always entertain the tv viewers. I enjoy watching the sec teams play as well as the big ten, but the big ten has been lack luster the last couple of years. I enjoyed watching Ingram play last year and this year, he is truely an asset to the Alabama team. Now they have another young player that is going to be remarkable in the future, showed tremendous talent this year.#3,
I believe his name is Richardson. He is a stud, waiting to be released.

I spend a lot of time watching college football, probably too much, but I have a lot of friends that love the game....We usually watch the games together and last night we held our own Heisman voting...out of 10 of us present, Ingram had 9 votes, McCoy got the other.

Alabama seems to be on the way back, to be counted amoung the elite programs. After watching Texas and Alabama play..I believe it will be a close game, but I see Alabama being the next National Champions. May you, your coaches, players and fans enjoy this glorious return to the top. I'll be watching and wishing you
GOOD LUCK.... Also I'm sure congratulations are in order for your great running back #22, Mark Ingram. as you guys say..roll tide

Posted by: she loves football | Dec 12, 2009 2:41:25 PM

thanks kari, i thought the finalists were announced once all the numbers were known. if it is announced beforehand, doesn't that mean a "nonfinalist" could end up higher than a "finalist"? but thanks for the clarification, i was mistaken.

Posted by: blinky | Dec 12, 2009 2:51:20 PM

skippy poopy,

When did the Georgia Dome in Atlanta become home to Alabama. I was under the impression that it was in Tuscaloosa (sp)... Ingram is an offensive player, hence RB..he blocks, runs the ball and catches passes some times...why would he have tackles,interceptions or sacks??? remember offense not a defensive player, as not in when your offense is on the field. After the Alabama game I do believe
VT had some injuries, that lasted a few weeks, could it have been at that time you played them..I think you better do some research, I'm trying really hard not to laugh at your post, but your username is cracking me up!!!!!

Posted by: she loves football | Dec 12, 2009 2:56:29 PM

While I'm not here to whine that the Huskers are 'always robbed'- the TX loss was a kicking error and offense problem and not a clock mistake. BUT...

I really do think Tommie Frazier was a better Heisman candidate than Eddie George. Especially when you consider Frazier significant health issues, which prevented him from pursuing an NFL career. I think he could have been a Kordell Sterwart/ Hines Ward type of guy.

That said, GO SUH! All the others are quality young men too, as some posters have pointed out.

Posted by: Chuck | Dec 12, 2009 3:05:06 PM


One common opponent, Proves Nebraska has a better defense. Since Nebraska is still ranked so highly and allowed fewer points and yards then Alabama.

Suh wins this award for Most outstanding College football player.

5 Time National player of the year award winner, 4 time trophy winner and soon to be Heisman trophy winner! The single most dominate player in College Football this/all season!

Suh is the only one

Posted by: obviously | Dec 12, 2009 4:50:10 PM

OFFICIAL STAT FROM ESPN.......Ingram yards after contact. 115.6 Yard after contact. Hardly the stat Bama HOMERS put up all week of 1005 yards after contact. Nice fake stat you Bama Homers.

Posted by: obviously | Dec 12, 2009 5:41:27 PM

OFFICIAL STAT FROM ESPN.......Ingram yards after contact. 115.6 Yard after contact. Hardly the stat Bama HOMERS put up all week of 1005 yards after contact. Nice fake stat you Bama Homers.

Posted by: obviously | Dec 12, 2009 5:42:37 PM

The 115.6 was per game against ranked teams dumb ass

Posted by: bamajoker | Dec 12, 2009 5:50:05 PM

and the alabama VT score 1 TD was a kick off return so they scored 17 on our defense =( sorry try again.

Posted by: bamajoker | Dec 12, 2009 5:51:20 PM

Wow. against competition that matters he got 115 YAC? WoW. mindblowing stats

Posted by: terrible | Dec 12, 2009 6:36:45 PM

Congratulations on your prediction.

Great math.

Great site.

Good thinking.

See you next year.

Posted by: Viking | Dec 12, 2009 6:46:15 PM

Looks like all the Gerhart lovers were wrong after all. The voters realized that Ingram was 10 times better than the guy who stumbles around and puts up good numbers against inferior defenses. (all of the PAC 10 and of course Notre Dame). Looks like they went with the guy who dominated quality defenses week in and week out. They got it right. Only one thing left to do. Lets donminate Texas! Roll Tide!

Posted by: Garrett | Dec 12, 2009 7:00:26 PM

Nebraska didn't get robbed when Eric Crouch won it. He is probably the worst Heisman trophy winner of all time.

Posted by: Garrett | Dec 12, 2009 7:03:53 PM

Bye obviously, you can go back to your miserable life as a Corn-whiner, making up idiotic comments and flaming away on message boards for the next 10 years with your Corn-whiner buddies. You're the only people in the country that will care now, since your beloved Suh finished a distant fourth.

Posted by: obviouslyNOT | Dec 12, 2009 9:04:29 PM

Congratulations to Mark Ingram

Also thanks for the work on this site this year . You learn a lot here . Who knew you could combine husked corn and sour grapes to create such a powerful WHINE ??? .....

Posted by: Rolling Rolling Rolling | Dec 12, 2009 11:40:41 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.