Trapper On Sport

My three cents on sport, its players, its fans, its magic, its follies, and it's impact on our lives.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Huntingdon, Great Britain, originally Evensville, Tennessee

Ever go to a sports website or see a TV show about sports and wonder why they don't talk like real guys? They try but end up being just a bunch of washed up celebrities laughing at each others joke. I'm here to try and change that and give you a different perspective on the world of sports.

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

HAS THE HEISMAN LOST ITS LUSTER?

As the college football season gets closer to the end talk of the Heisman trophy is inevitable. Sports bars, break rooms, and cubicles are awash in chit chat over who will win it. Like we don’t already know. The problem with the Heisman these days is that there’s no surprise anymore. Even though the winner is not announced until December he’s usually picked as early as August. No its not the actually official voters who pick him, oh no, it’s the TV networks and their so-called unbiased announcers, commentators, and “experts”

I’ve always felt it was an over-rated award, because even though it says it goes to the best PLAYER, it actually goes to the best Quarterback, Running Back, and maybe a Receiver. If you’re a defensive player, lineman, etc…as the boys from Joysie would say…FUHGEDDABOUTIT. By the way, that’s New Jersey for anyone from Texas reading this.

These days all it takes to win the coveted Heisman is good coverage and hype by the large networks, and by large networks I mean ESPN and ABC. I’ve said in previous postings that ESPN were biased and I stand by it. In baseball it’s pretty obvious that they have a northeastern biased, in College Football, it’s the BIG TEN, BIG XII and PAC-10 (along with a couple of select Florida schools that aren’t in Gainesville). They continually hype, or should I say over hype Heisman candidates from those conferences, and they’ve been doing it for years.

Players from the mentioned conferences and schools seem to get an unfair advantage when it comes to hype. ESPN and ABC commentators and producers will try and usually succeed in driving their choice down the throats of the fans and Heisman voters. They show replay after replay of their favorite while showing only a token glimpse of candidates not from the aforementioned conferences or schools. This year they’ve even taken to highlighting their choice, Reggie Bush of USC, every play he’s on the field, talking about him as if he were the only player alive, and brushing any other candidates aside (regardless of their numbers or achievements). You’d have had to be living in a cave to not know who’s going to win it, but I’d wager even Osama and his crew could tell you the “lucky” guy.

This is not to bash Reggie Bush, far from it, I think he is a great player…just over hyped. But then, most of the recent winners have been also. Gino Toretta over Marshall Faulk or Garrison Hearst, yeah, how’s Gino’s pro career doing these days compared to those other two losers? Or Charles Woodson instead of Peyton Manning, don’t get me wrong, I like that a defensive guy got consideration, BUT COME ON!! He won it because of one over hyped game against Ohio State, and it was Peyton freakin’ Manning. How about Eric Crouch over anyone else to be honest. And Chris Weinke….really?

The voters can’t be blamed too much since ESPN (which is owned by ABC) pretty much has a monopoly on sports commentary and highlight shows, at least ones dealing with College football. And since most voters can see every game or every candidate, they have to rely on Sports Center or Game Day for their information. And since those shows belong to networks with an agenda they get blitzed with whichever BIG 10, BIG XII, PAC-10, Florida State or Miami player that’s been deemed “special” that year. Coincidence that they have HUGE TV deals with those conferences (and the ACC which FSU and Miami belong to)?

While the Heisman has always been questionable about going to the best player, it’s sad that it’s been unofficially renamed from the Award for Best Player to:

the “Best Player, and by Best Player we mean Best Running Back, Quarterback or Receiver, and by Best Running Back, Quarterback or Receiver, we mean Best Running Back, Quarterback or Receiver from a Top School in a Top Conference, and by Best Running Back, Quarterback or Receiver from a Top School in a Top Conference we mean no matter how good you are or how valuable you are to your team if you’re not from a Top School in a Conference we have a TV deal with then don’t even bother to dream of winning it” Award

That’s my three cents

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is one for you: Randel El out of Indiana. Team totally sucked, and he was their offense, defense, and sometimes special teams. How is that for being valuable. He was not even considered even though he was a one man football team. Talk about team player, he did whatever would be best for the team. My hats off to him, but a damn shame he was never seriously considered. //Goodlink//

Thursday, November 17, 2005 6:15:00 PM  
Blogger "trapper" Shawn Wilson said...

you're right, he's should have been considered as a minimum..he was arguably the most valuable player in the country and pretty much kept Indiana in games all season. But he was no Eric Crouch was he (insert sarcasm here)

Saturday, November 19, 2005 12:34:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well put.

Saturday, November 19, 2005 5:01:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home