Call it age discrimination if you want, but I have a problem with someone who is older than Super Bowl MVP Aaron Rodgers winning an award as college football’s most valuable player, especially since Weeden is a former pro athlete … The fact is, Weeden is a psuedo-college athlete. He is 28, married, lives off campus and graduated last May.
Do you really think Weeden spending years on buses en route to outposts like Kannapolis, NC, and Rome, GA, for South Atlantic League play really is an advantage? I don’t. In fact, I think that it’s remarkable that Weeden took so much time off from football and was able to recover to become one of the best players in college and an NFL draft prospect. Weeden should be rewarded for that with the Heisman Trophy if he can finish out the season strong.
I don’t think Brandon Weeden’s age is going to win or lose him the Heisman. I actually think that surprisingly few voters are aware that he is 28 since he has had relatively little press exposure to this point. When Chris Weinke won the Heisman at age 28 in 2000, everyone was aware of it because he played for what was, at the time, the premier program in college football [by the way, have you noticed that Weinke and Weeden each have six letters and begin with 'W'? Weiiird].
But Weeden–who is actually a couple months younger than Weinke was when he won the Heisman– has been under the radar much of the year. I believe that voters will be taking a very close look at him over the next couple weeks. With everything else being fairly equal between Weeden and another candidate, it may well be that a few voters pick the younger player. But Weinke’s precedent certainly shows that it shouldn’t be a major factor, though in an exceptionally close race, it could have a small effect.
I personally would have no problem voting for Weeden if I came to the conclusion that he was the most outstanding player in college football. From what I’ve heard from other voters, it’s not an issue for them either.
What say you?