No ACC player has won the Heisman since 2000

Also, the award is truly not limited to an individual year, but with an eye towards history. That is why "lifetime achievement awards" like those given to Ricky Williams and Ron Dayne for breaking the NCAA career rushing mark are given out. (The Heisman voters like significant records in general, which is why Tim Tebow got the award for being the first player to rush for 20 TDs and pass for 20 TDs in a season.) It is also why they favor QBs and RBs for the 1 team, guys who come up with big performances in big games, and guys who make eye-popping highlight reel plays.2. The Heisman DOES NOT go to the guy with the best statistics, even if he is on a winning team. Did the guy with the best numbers break any significant records Did he pass a milestone (i.e.

2000 rushing yards or 5000 passing yards) Did he win any big, nationally significant games Did he compile an electrifying highlight reel Having the best numbers is something that clinches the deal only if those numbers are in the context of having an impact on the college game. That's why Navy tailbacks and Texas Tech QBs are rarely if ever serious Heisman contenders. Regional bias does matter, but it is not the evil thing that west coast people claim it to be Yes, "east coast bias" does hurt western players. (Although Pac-10 folks need to be honest: their definition of "east coast" is overly large, and that is an understatement.) Look, only 10 of the 65 major college programs are west of Texas, ok Further, only 28 of the 120 major college programs are west of Texas. (Even the WAC and the Mountain West have TCU and Louisiana Tech in them.) Do Pac-10 fans honestly think that they have the best teams and players EVERY SINGLE YEAR If you do, well so do Big East, ACC, SEC, Big 10, and Big 12 fans and voters. As it is, Pac-10 players and teams do pretty well for themselves No Big East player has won the Heisman since 1992. No ACC player has won the Heisman since 2000. And no RB or WR from the Big East or ACC has EVER won the Heisman.And as for the BCS that allegedly so mistreats the Pac-10, no Big East or ACC team has EVER received an at-large bid to a major bowl, either in the BCS era or in the old bowl system that preceded it.

So, rather than believing that Gerhart lost because he was a Pac-10 player, it is extremely difficult to imagine how Gerhart would have even been a candidate had he played at any school but Stanford.The simple truth is that guys put up numbers like Gerhart for teams similar to Stanford and never come anywhere near the award Consider, for instance, Dion Lewis of 9-3 Pitt. Were the 9 fewer rushing yards per game enough to create so much distance between Gerhart and yet another excellent east coast RB who didn't even get invited to the ceremony When Lewis had 47 carries for 194 yards and 3 TDs in the nationally televised 45-44 loss to 13-0 Cincinnati (Pac-10 fans take note: Jacquizz Rodgers, second to only Gerhart among RBs in the Pac-10, only had 73 yards on 20 carries against that same Cincinnati defense, and that game was in Corvallis!) Yet where everybody in the college football world has heard of Gerhart, practically no one outside the Big East has heard of the freshman sensation Lewis. It appears to me that Gerhart fans have little to complain about.4 Ndamukong Suh. The great Nebraska defender was basically a spoiler, knocking out two candidates. Before the Big 12 title game, the award was basically Colt McCoy's (who broke the record for wins by a QB, currently has the highest completion percentage in NCAA history, and yes his team is 13-0) although McCoy's average season made him vulnerable with a bad performance. Thanks to Suh, McCoy's performance was not just bad but atrocious, dropping him behind both Ingram and Gerhart. Now had McCoy merely had a bad game, then Gerhart would have won.

However, by so thoroughly individually outplaying the Heisman frontrunner head to head in what was the most dominating performance of the season, Suh's own candidacy greatly benefited, but at Gerhart's expense. Suh got a lot of votes that would have otherwise gone to Gerhart, particularly the critical second and third place votes. Also, McCoy's collapse (caused by Suh) helped Suh and Ingram far more than it did Gerhart. Gerhart would have very likely finished 2 to McCoy had he played so much as an average Big 12 title game, with Ingram likely coming in 3rd.