Hating The Heisman

The latest edition of hating on the most prestigious award in sports comes courtesy of Dan Scofield of Fighting Irish Gameday.

It’s ironic that such vitriol would come from a follower of the program that has benefitted more from the Heisman tradition than any other.  Usually the complaints come from fans of programs that lack significant history or success (you know, the sour grapes types).

Anyway, I had a post written up that ripped Scofield’s screed completely to pieces (including the uncredited butchering of the Heismandments), but I thought better of it.  First of all, it’s not worthy of that much of my time.  Second, I’d much rather point out that almost every critique he makes of the Heisman could apply equally to Notre Dame.

[Aside: I respect Notre Dame for its history and tradition, just as I respect the Heisman, so Irish fans please note that this is a rhetorical point I am trying to make in the context of this awful piece]

After all, what program in college football is more talked about than Notre Dame?  And why?  Certainly not because of anything it has done on the football field recently.  He says most Heisman winners don’t deserve the hype because they didn’t earn it on the field.  Well, same goes for the Fighting Irish.  Jason White meet Charlie Weis.     

Like the Heisman, Notre Dame is the product of hype, tradition, politics and bias.  Like the Heisman, Notre Dame stirs up passions and jealousies.  To paraphrase Scofield, you could say that Notre Dame is an ‘unfortunate fact’ for the college football world.  Like Army and Navy, it has outlived its usefulness, but unlike the more noble service academies, it never went quietly into the night.  It still thinks it is relevant.

Scofield bemoans that defensive players are left out of the Heisman equation.  Well, what about all the less-historic programs that are currently better than Notre Dame on the field but don’t get special treatment by the media and the BCS?  Why doesn’t Boise State have its own network? 

My favorite line in the whole piece comes at the end:

One thing other sports have over college football is their connection with their traditions and past times.

Really?  What other sports?  Hockey?  NFL?  NBA?  Good lord, college football reeks of tradition and paeans to the past.  Has this guy ever been to a Notre Dame game?  At this point, I must assume he is a subway alumnus.

Scofield also writes:

The (Heisman) award will continue on the path of self-destruction if legitamacy (sic) is not brought back into the trophy.

Again, could we not say the same about Notre Dame?  How did Bob Davie, Ty Willingham and Weis work out for you?

If Scofield hates the Heisman, he should hate Notre Dame, too.  But if he loves Notre Dame, he should love the Heisman.

Otherwise, I’m not sure why he even bothers watching college football.

About Heismanpundit

Chris Huston, A.K.A. ‘The Heisman Pundit‘, is a Heisman voter and the creator and publisher of Heismanpundit.com, a site dedicated to analysis of the Heisman Trophy and college football. Dubbed “the foremost authority on the Heisman” by Sports Illustrated, HP is regularly quoted or cited during football season in newspapers across the country. He is also a regular contributor on sports talk radio and television.

,

13 Responses to Hating The Heisman

  1. JimmyHeisman October 1, 2009 at 2:50 pm #

    Not all Notre Dame people agree with the aforementioned Dan Scofield. Like any program, we have out black sheep. Many students, like myself, and alumni like the Heisman because we like College Football.

    In addition, ND Football is always seeking to reclaim the worthiness of the prestige that has fallen on its shoulders. Hopefully, a Heisman candidate (like Clausen – its foolhardy not to talk about him) is proof-positive of this.

  2. Roby October 1, 2009 at 4:42 pm #

    I found the problem. He cites rockytoptalk.com as a source at the end of the article. Who better to cite, than a blog written by Tennessee fans. They are fans most disillussioned by the Heisman trophy.

  3. Bob Scart October 1, 2009 at 4:45 pm #

    It’s funny, I think he made some great points in this piece.

    Just because your site strictly relies on the Heisman doesn’t mean you need to be such a homer. All of his points are legitimate. Did you read any of the comments left on the article, because it seems many seem to agree with him.

    Also, the piece had nothing to do with Notre Dame, so how is that related at all?

  4. Anonymous October 1, 2009 at 10:21 pm #

    I guess your livelihood is being attacked so I can understand why you would write this silly piece in response to Scofield. :-0

  5. HP October 1, 2009 at 10:58 pm #

    Bob & Anonymous,

    Clearly neither of you two read the piece very closely.

    1. He uses innaccurate win-loss records to make his point about the Heisman.

    2. He uses a bastardized version of the Heismandments to make his point, while not crediting where he got them.

    3. The points in his article are copped almost entirely from a recent piece by Matt Hinton (a.k.a. Dr. Saturday)

    4. He claims that the finalists for this year are known before the season began, but fails to mention that Sam Bradford is hurt and therefore will not go to NYC.

    5. He claims college football doesn’t use tradition and history compared to other sports.

    Need i go on? It’s a lousy piece.

    Yes, I am a Heisman homer and a college football homer and when morons like this write something this bad, I rebut.

  6. HP October 1, 2009 at 10:59 pm #

    btw, bob, he writes for a notre dame web site, which is why i used notre dame to illustrate the obtuseness of his argument.

  7. CFR October 2, 2009 at 12:02 am #

    Good stuff

  8. GEAUXTIGERS October 2, 2009 at 7:48 am #

    Why the hell don’t we just enjoy college football. I don’t believe my team should be #4 in the country (LSU), because they haven’t shown it should be. Doesn’t mean I’m not enjoying telling my friends form other schools everyday that we’re ranked higher. Enjoy the season for what it is, the greatest entertainment on earth.

  9. Jams October 2, 2009 at 7:26 pm #

    I agree with you that his article was mostly useless, poorly written, co-opted other people’s (your) original material, and was not worth reading.

    However, It’s kind of hilarious that you chose not to react with a logical, point-by-point breakdown of his fallacies, but instead responded with exactly the kind of superficial article that he wrote. And, just because he happened to write something negative about your livelihood and passion, you chose to shoot back a similar attack on his.

    You could have embarrassed him by picking him apart piece by piece, but instead your post just seemed kind of bitter and childish. I normally think your writing is interesting and thoughtful, and even when I don’t agree with it I usually enjoy it, which is why I think this kind of stuff is below you, HP.

  10. John October 3, 2009 at 10:16 am #

    Man, I know he attacked your ‘baby’, but no need to attack him AND his team.

    Get over it and start writing about things that matter, because people don’t care about your personal encounters.

  11. Heismanpundit October 3, 2009 at 9:35 pm #

    John, he displayed stunning ignorance of college football, so I called him out. I write a Heisman site and he was bashing the Heisman, so it’s not like the subject was off topic. As for bashing his team, it was a rhetorical device to illustrated the lunacy of his position. Thanks.

  12. John October 3, 2009 at 10:25 pm #

    Where does he ignorance lie?

  13. Heismanpundit October 3, 2009 at 11:08 pm #

    1. He uses innaccurate win-loss records to make his point about the Heisman.

    2. He uses a bastardized version of the Heismandments to make his point, while not crediting where he got them.

    3. The points in his article are copped almost entirely from a recent piece by Matt Hinton (a.k.a. Dr. Saturday)

    4. He claims that the finalists for this year are known before the season began, but fails to mention that Sam Bradford is hurt and therefore will not go to NYC.

    5. He claims college football doesn’t use tradition and history compared to other sports.

    Need i go on? It’s a lousy piece.