Texas A&M’s quarterback Johnny Manziel became the first freshman to ever win the Heisman Trophy, awarded to college football’s most outstanding player. After chalking up over 3,400 yards through the air and nearly 1,200 yards on the ground for a combined 43 touchdowns, Manziel has a clear case for being the best player in the game of football. But as a college football purist, a football conservative if you will, does the freshman Manziel really deserve the award over Notre Dame’s outstanding Senior Manti Te'o or Kansas State’s Senior signal-caller Collin Klein?
 |
| The Heisman Trophy |
According to Burke, the answer would be an emphatic no. The Heisman Trophy is arguably the most prestigious individual award in sports. First awarded in 1935, The Heisman and its trademark bronze pose is about tradition, something that 8 year old kids in their first years of Pop Warner ball dream of and emulate. By giving Manziel the award in his first year, we are throwing away 80 years of football precedent and discrediting those who have received it in years passed.
 |
| 2012 Heisman Trophy Winner Johnny Manziel |
By throwing away this historical precedent, which has guided the decision making of voters in previous Heisman ballots containing underclassmen, notably USC’s Reggie Bush in his Sophomore year, and Pittsburgh’s Larry Fitzgerald in his Freshman year, the legitimacy of the award gets called into question. Bush and Fitzgerald were much more clearly the best players in the sport in their respective years than Manziel is this year, yet it was well understood that they did not win due to their age. There was no complaining and little debate, their time would come, and in both cases it did.
By altering how the award has historically been decided, we are changing the meaning of the award itself. Tradition and legacy are a large part of collegiate athletics, and having a Burken view on how this should be maintained is a positive for the sport. Should the Heisman committee post-electorally now overrule past decisions given our modernized, revolutionized understanding? Absolutely not, and under the same guide, “Johnny Football” Manziel should not have won the 2012 award.
The interesting aspect will be how college football and the Heisman Trophy are changed moving forward. Will hotshot freshmen now try demanding playing time immediately upon stepping on campus in an attempt to be the “next Johnny Manziel.” The traditional football hierarchy is completely thrown out, adding uncertainty and unpredictability to one of sport’s greatest games and its most prestigious award.
I love your passion for this award and the past prestige that has been associated with it. My comment/question to you would be should there be factors outside of pure football statistics that are taken into consideration. If this is the case wouldn't this in effect undermined the selection process also. I can't agree nor disagree that Johnny Manziel should have won but it is hard to compare his class against those of other Heisman classes and make a definitive rebuttal. Just as people are selected first round of a weak draft year, timing is everything and looking at other factors compromises the validity of the winner. This mimics Malcolm X's ideas of hypocritical democracies. Making exceptions for situations of "extenuating circumstances" in the Heisman trophy is the same as looking the other way for inequalities given to Black American's in the mid 1900's. My personal opinion is that this award should be looked at and dealt with in just manner. In my eyes this means not taking his age or any other factor into consideration and only looking at pure football credentials.
ReplyDeleteBrad, I hate to say it, but I have to disagree with this post. While the Heisman Trophy is very prestigious and has a lot of tradition surrounding it, I have to say none of the tradition surrounding it has to do with giving it to players with more experience. While Larry Fitzgerald and Reggie Bush were both great collegiate players, the fact that they didn't win the Heisman their freshmen years didn't have to do with them being freshmen, but that they didn't deserve it the most. This year, Manziel's numbers were unreal along with some of his broken down plays that turned into touchdowns. Klein had a great year but his statistics/playmaking wasn't near what Manziel's was, and while Manti Te'o might be the best player in college football, it is almost impossible for defensive players to win the Heisman as only one has, and that player was Charles Woodson, who also played some offense. Therefore, if anything, Manti Te'o got slighted because the tradition of the trophy is seemingly not to give the award out to defensive players in general. Whether or not Manziel was a freshmen had no impact on the voters in my opinion. The only difference is this year a freshmen was actually deserving of the award unlike in years past.
ReplyDeleteBrad, I would have to agree that Manziel shouldn't have won the award, but I don't think that age should be a factor. It should be who really deserves the award, and who is the best player in College Football. It really doesn't matter what Burke says.There is no theory that could accurately predict the Heisman every single year. Now I have to admit, that I'm a massive Michigan football fan. I've been a fan my whole life. So, naturally I hate Notre Dame. So, almost right up until the event, I was rooting for Mr. Football. However, right before the announcement I had a major change of heart. Manti Te'o deserved to win the Heisman last night. I have the utmost respect for Te'o as a person for what he went through with his grandma and girlfriend. However, its how he played the whole year that won it for me. He was the unquestioned leader of a ND defense that carried the team to an undefeated season and a birth in the BCS National Championship game. Te'o was relentless emotion and physicality on every play. Without him, Notre Dame would surely not be in the national championship game.
ReplyDelete-Matt McCool
Brad,
ReplyDeleteGreat post. Burke truly is one for tradition and I completely agree with your analysis with this situation. The Heisman has always been about a legacy, one brought about by high performance upper-classmen. While your opinion is exactly how Burke would have complained about the results, I myself am not a big fan of the Englishman. You mention that freshman may now try to fight for playing time more due to this win by Johnny Football, but I don't see how this is a bad thing. In the game of football, age isn't necessarily the thing that drives results. Skill is the biggest factor that must be taken into account. In my high school football days we were constantly reminded how every week the starters could change, no matter what grade said player was in. Everything amounted to skill and effort. This mindset led to extreme competition within our team, which ultimately led us to 3 straight Semi-final games, Back to back state champions, and several more deep playoff runs. I can only see this as a positive note.
Ask yourself, do you think Denard deserves to be quarterback solely because he is a senior? or does he deserve it because he has an arm of gold? Who would you start on Saturday?
I love the connection between the Heisman Trophy and Burke, but I am not so sure about the validity of your argument. The Heisman Trophy, according to their website, "recognizes the outstanding college football player whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence with integrity." This description says nothing about the year that the player is in. Sure Manziel winning the award as a freshman isn't conventional, but neither were his statistics: he broke the SEC record for all-purpose yardage, surpassing the marks set by both Tim Tebow and Cam Newton.
ReplyDeleteLet me also point out that Newton and Tebow won the Heisman in the years they set their personal records. I think the fact that Maziel was able to have such an impressive season as a FRESHMAN should not take away from his, but it should add to the uniqueness and credibility of his case. Just because the award never has been given to a freshman before, doesn't mean that it is tradition not to give it to freshman. It just indicates that there hasn't been anyone like Manziel.
On a biased note, had Manti Teo won, fellow Wolverine Charles Woodson would no longer be the only player to play primarily defense to win the award. I'd rather see the tradition of that honor remain to Woodson, then allow for a lowly Notre Dame player to win it. Go Blue.