That 2003 season was really a breaking point with me and the Heisman Trophy. I don't lend it much legitimacy of all. It is a lot like any of the other individual awards in college football. Good for the kid who wins it, but I don't care either way because it's so rarely goes to the actual best player.
I mean, I get that it is a college award given to the best player for that particular season. However, shouldn't it occasionally go to a guy who then goes on to star in the NFL? That never really happens anymore. Instead it almost always goes to a guy who is a good player on a team with an exceptionally large fan base.
There have been plenty of other head scratchers in the history of that award but that 2003 season seemed really hard to believe.
I understand that Jason White had a great season statistically and that Oklahoma was a very strong team. However, all one had to do was watch the kid play and you could see that he was clearly a product of the famous Air Raid system.
He had a limited arm and no mobility whatsoever. He was a poor man's Bernie Kozar.
Yes, he put up tremendous statistics. However, so too did every other quarterback who played in that system. I could name some of those luminaries if you like but what would be the point? It is not exactly an impressive list. Basically, everyone who played quarterback for Hal Mumme or any of his disciples during that era put up enormous numbers. Most people have never heard of any of them because none of them were any good.
Baylor is still running that system and no matter who they plug-in, that guy looks like the next Dan Marino.
I guess I just expected the voters to do some actual work. I wanted to see actual analysis and evaluation, not empty headed rote numbers crunching. A seven-year-old boy Who has never actually watched a single game in his life can do that.
I mean the word is supposed to go to the best player, right? If it is purely statistically driven, then I don't need to hear any of those folks' analysis because they really aren't doing any analysis anyway.
I mean, all you had to do was watch Jason White play for 10 minutes then flip over and watch Larry Fitzgerald play for 10 minutes. That basically should have done it for most people because it was not a remotely difficult choice. You didn't exactly need Chuck Noll's legendary eye for talent to quickly understand who was the better football player. However, you did need to actually watch each of them play.
It is long forgotten now but one of the most ironic things about that 2003 season was that the primary criticism of Fitzgerald was that HE was the product of the system, not White. That seems strange in retrospect but it is absolutely true.
Just before the vote, a writer for the Detroit Free Press, I cannot remember his name, wrote an article that appeared in USA Today that was very scathing towards Fitzgerald. It questioned his competition as well as his system. The guy wrote that former Michigan state wide receiver Charles Rodgers – does anyone even remember that guy? – was better than Fitzgerald and should've been given any awards over him. The thinking was that Rodgers was similarly athletic and he played against better competition in the Big Ten. Case closed.
I was incredulous and asked the man if he had ever actually seen Fitzgerald play in an actual game, not just highlights? Because I was seeing that guy play every single week and every single week he did something - and usually multiple times in the same game - that made me jump out of my seat.
His response, and I will never forget this admission, was that he covered college football for a living and did not have the time to sit down on his couch and watch Fitzgerald play.
However, he was well aware of Pitt's pass happy system and the fact that the Big East stunk. In fact, I think he used the word "SUCKED" and he spelled it in all caps so that I understood exactly how highly regarded the Big East was in his eyes.
Basically, he was saying that no Big East player could possibly be that good. That came as a surprise to me given the number of first round draft choices that league had been regularly churning out at that point - many of whom went on to become NFL stars and a few of whom have already been inducted or will one day be inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
That was the mentality then and I'm sure it is still the mentality today for so many voters. I am sorry but that is illegitimate by every reasonable measure. Anyone who lends that type of system any sort of credibility is an imbecile.
He and I went back-and-forth through email (it was 2003 after all) a solid 10–15 times and he would not budge. As we went back-and-forth, and as I was (politely) kicking his ass with facts, he became frustrated with the discourse. He then went so far as to guarantee me that Larry Fitzgerald would be a bust in the NFL.
I wrote back to him that he had just disqualified himself from serious consideration as a football analyst because that was the dumbest opinion I had ever read in my life - especially given the fact that the man making that guarantee had already conceded that he had not actually seen the guy play.
He never responded and history has proven one of us correct. I will leave you to guess who that might be.
My point is the award should go to the best college football player – not the guy who is the best player on one of the best teams. More importantly, these days it tends to go to a guy who is the best player on one of the most popular teams. I just can't get with that.
