In retrospect, I should have seen it coming.
For the past three years, I have sat, anxiously in front of my television. For the past three years, I have hung my head in disbelief. For the past three years, I have dampened my Cardinal attire with tears of anguish. For the past three years, the Stanford Cardinal have had the Heisman stolen from them.
Whether it be the rumblin’, bumblin’ and tumblin’ Toby Gerhart or the automatic Andrew Luck, the result has remained a constant, terrible truth. Stanford is yet again the runner-up to yet another southern school in the race for the Heisman.
Why exactly am I so P.O.’d about this you may ask? The answer should be clear. After three tumultuous years of cock-eyed voting, the Heisman voters have made Bernie Madoff look like a classy guy in the wake of their theft of three consecutive Heisman Trophys from Stanford University.
Let’s start off in 2009 with Toby Gerhart, shall we? Gerhart, a senior at the time, was breaking records left and right as he came to New York as a clear front-runner for the prestigious award. Gerhart’s stats were staggering, as he amassed 1871 yards on the ground and 27 TDs, both of which led the country by considerable margins.
Gerhart lifted a mediocre Cardinal squad back to the national spotlight after his record-breaking streak in Palo Alto. However after all the ballots came in, Toby Gerhart was edged out by Mark Ingram in the closest Heisman vote ever. Yes, Mark Ingram.
Ingram, who was a mere 4th in rushing at 1658 yards rushing and had 10 less rushing TDs than Gerhart, wriggled the award out of the grasp of Gerhart because of one reason. SEC bias. Ingram murdered Gerhart in the Southeast. Eerily reminiscent of 1861 America, the country was split.
The South claimed that its “storied SEC defenses” made Ingram’s accomplishments all the more impressive. Really? Mark Ingram faced not a single rushing defense in the top 25 according to Rivals.com and only two rush defenses in the top 50 in the regular season, which were Georgia at #37 and LSU at #42.
Gerhart on the other hand faced three in the top 25 and six in the top 50, including Arizona State at #17, Cal at #27, USC at #39, Oregon at #36, Arizona at #22 and Oregon State at #25. In said games Gerhart rushed for 697 yards and for 12 TD, while Ingram rushed for only 267 and 3 TD against rush defenses in the top 50.
Looking objectively at the numbers, Ingram didn’t stand a chance against Gerhart. However much to the dismay of all Palo Altans, Gerhart was sent home without the trophy. That being said, he didn’t go home empty-handed. Gerhart came home with a deluge of awards which would have made it almost seem that it would lock up his victory as the uncontested Heisman winner.
Gerhart won the Doak Walker Trophy for the best runningback in the country, yet strangely enough, Gerhart was beat out for the Heisman by a fellow runningback. Contradiction? No, not at all, not in South at least.
Voters again showed sporadic and inconsistent behavior as they awarded Gerhart the Archie Griffin Award for the end-of-season MVP. Again, really? Toby Gerhart is suddenly the MVP and best running back but not the “most outstanding player?” The logic behind that decision was certainly beyond me.
One year later, my wounds were almost healed as I came back to the same fateful spot in front of the television. Andrew Luck, Stanford’s new poster child, had become a demigod throughout the nation and was hands down the first overall pick in the 2010 NFL Draft if he were to leave Stanford. After months of thought, I had finally come to a conclusion about my opinion of last year’s eyebrow raising decision to give the hardware to Ingram. Since Toby’s stats were head and shoulders above Ingram, I convinced myself that statistics were superfluous to the Heisman voting. Ingram’s improbable victory was that it came down to a matter of skill rather than stats.
Oh how disillusioned I was. For the second straight year, my heart was torn out of my chest and old wounds were reopened. After Luck made ridiculous throws, 50 yard runs to pay dirt, and absolutely throttled defenders from Cal and USC, I thought it was a foregone conclusion that Luck would bring the goods back home to Palo Alto. Yet the words rang in my head taunting me. Cam Newton, Cam Newton, Cam Newton.
Even though Cam’s horrific acceptance speech highlighted him saying that his parents “do a lot behind the scenes,” made the entire country snicker at his blunder, it did little to alleviate my ailment.
I was sick to my stomach at the decision. Luck was, hands down, the best player who could come out of college football that year so I was again shocked, but Newton’s statistics were so astronomical, I simply swallowed the tough pill of Luck’s defeat and cherished in Stanford’s thorough routing of the Virginia Tech Hokies in the Orange Bowl. Reminiscent of Gerhart, Luck brought home the Archie Griffin award for the end-of-season MVP but, yet again was snubbed from the Heisman.
In no way do I intend to take away anything from Newton’s accomplishments, but the voter consistency was simply off. The previous year, the voters had turned a blind eye to stats, and simply voted for Ingram. This year, their decision had such an emphasis on stats, Luck wan’t even a close second. I would be perfectly fine with either decision, IF the voting had stayed consistent. If the voting is influenced heavily by statistics, thats fine. If the voting is influenced heavily by subjective opinion on skill, so be it, but the slightest hint of consistency would be appreciated. I can understand either decision, but please voters, act like you actually analyze College Football and be as objective as possible, rather than circling the name on the ballot that plays in the SEC. I’m sorry, but last time I checked, football is actually played outside of the South, so if  in perhaps in the next, say decade or so, if you could come to said shocking realization, it would be greatly appreciated.
And alas, we come to Saturday. As I said, I should have known better. It was a foregone conclusion that Andrew Luck wasn’t going to win. Voters would not and could not vote for him. The expectations coming into the year were that Luck would throw for 5000 yards, have over 50 TDs, have an 80% completion percentage, and destroy man’s original sin. They were simply impossible, impractical, and unfair to Andrew.
After lighting up defenses with ease and leading the Cardinal to its second straight 11-1 year, Luck had not met expectations. But in retrospect, how could he have? Luck defeated USC and Notre Dame for the third straight year and led Stanford to an FBS record 10 game winning streak of over 25 points or more, something that no team had ever done before, yet it did nothing to satiate the voracious appetite of the media.
Although he was the preseason Heisman favorite, Luck’s defeat almost seemed inevitable.
Like a fool, I was on the edge of my seat upon the announcement, paralyzed with anticipation. Yet once the words: Robert Griffin III, were uttered, all my faith in college football dissipated.
The decision was simply mind boggling. If the Heisman were based on most losses or Roman Numerals in the Finalist’s name then by all means, Robert Griffin III was hands down the right choice, but if you look at every other candidate, Griffin doesn’t hold a candle to them.
If one were to base their decision on statistics, Montee Ball’s unheard of 38 total TDs would make him the runaway favorite. If one were to base the decision on skill, Andrew Luck would be hoisting the Heisman high above his head. If one were to base the decision upon strength of schedule, it would go to Trent Richardson or Tyrann Mathieu. If one were to base it on the “wow factor,” it would again go to the “Honey Badger,” Mathieu. (Note: Coby Fleener is the real “Honey Badger.” He takes what he wants.)
But again, voter consistency was as absent as Ferris Bueller on his “Day Off.” Maybe it was Griffin’s flamboyant Superman socks that charmed voters or perhaps it was his excessive celebration after every touchdown he scored that put him above the soft-spoken Luck.
Yet again, the Southern voters barred Stanford from the hardware as Luck finished a measly third in that region. But hey, at least they are consistent. Luck won the Maxwell award for best player in college football and the Walter Camp Player of the Year award, but was snubbed again from a once thought sure-fire victory, proving that the third time was not a charm for Stanford.
In reality, it didn’t matter what any player from Stanford did. Inconsistent voting patterns and a profound SEC bias barred two of college football’s greatest players from receiving proper recognition for their performance.
While I may seem like a bitter and boisterous young high schooler, the class and grace in defeat displayed by Toby Gerhart and Andrew Luck over the past three years has been absolutely astounding. Andrew Luck has shown incredible class over the past two years as he was the first one to congratulate the winner and accepted his defeat with grace and a humble attitude.
However this class and character isn’t restricted to solely when the cameras are watching him off the field. Luck’s winning and losing with grace is unparalleled in the sports universe. After a nerve-racking victory against USC, Luck only attributed the victory to his teammates and had compliments for USC’s playing and coaching, something which many a NFL quarterback wouldn’t have done.
While the SEC bias and lack of voter consistency robbed the Cardinals of the Heisman for three consecutive years, I have learned invaluable lessons from the events which have transpired. Luck’s grace and humility has taught me to win and lose with dignity and that nothing in life is ever given. I have learned that being a loudmouth  is much less productive than keeping your head down and working hard. Luck’s relentless work ethic is summed up in a single quote from him.
“My actions speak so loud, that I can’t hear your words,” he said.
Even though I will remain bitter for years to come about the past three decisions regarding the Heisman, I can take solace in the fact that I know Palo Alto has been home to college football’s finest and “most outstanding” for the past three years, regardless of what the media says.
On behalf of The Viking and all of Palo Alto, I would like to wish Andrew Luck the best of luck, no pun intended, in the NFL and in the upcoming Fiesta Bowl.
