Andrew Luck for Heisman

 

Here are my reasons why Andrew Luck should win the Heisman, which if you told me I was going to have to do this at the start of the year (other than for the just pure fun of it) I would have been shocked.

1. Stanford lost their coach (who seems to be doing alright for himself in the NFL) and their top 2 wide receivers (with the third being hurt most of this year) meaning that several questions marks came up at the start of the as to whether or not the team could win on the back of Luck.  They went 11-1 and ended up 4th in the BCS on their way to a second BCS game.
2. His passing stats are almost identical to what they were last year (which was good enough to get 2nd in the heisman race).  The big difference came in his rushing stats which went down...which shouldn't be a surprise when the main receiving threats for Stanford became tight ends.  He is 5th in QB Rating, 24th in passing yards, 5th in passing touchdowns, and 9th in completion percentage (all of those rankings are behind Griffin III).
3. He has Heisman moments.  The triple overtime game versus USC is your big game to look at for Luck's Heisman hopes.  He threw a late interception that got returned for a touchdown to put Stanford behind and could have easily been the end of everything for them.  Yet, he immediately came back out and lead a late 4th quarter drive to tie the game back up as Stanford ended up being USC in triple overtime.  He also had a one handed snag that was really something Stanford shouldn't have been doing at any point in the season.

Reasons why I have Andrew Luck over Robert Griffin III

1. Stanford went 11-1 and is playing in a BCS bowl game.  Baylor went 9-3 and is playing Washington in the Alamo Bowl.  
2. Robert Griffin isn't Cam Newton; his team is not undefeated, they are not playing for the National Championship, and he didn't rush for 1400 yards, he rushed for 644.  Andrew Luck would have won the Heisman last year with similar stats to his this year, the only person that got in his way was Newton and Griffin is not Newton.
3. Why does this matter? In 2009 Stanford had a running back finish 2nd in the Heisman race named Toby Gerhart he lead the NCAA in rushing yards and rushing touchdowns as part of an 8-4 Stanford team that looked far better than they had in the past beating teams like USC and Oregon.  He lost though to Mark Ingram who had good stats and was part of a team that was playing for the National Championship, so obviously stats are not the only aspect of the Heisman winner, and just bringing a team that wasn't expected to do much to some kind of good play isn't enough either.
4. Now am I saying that this a direct comparison? Of course not.  But, it does speak to the idea that the guy that wins the Heisman isn't usually a part of a team that goes 9-3. And also whether or not that transfers to quarterbacks from running backs I am not sure, as that seems to be an argument more for why people are talking about Richardson over Ball.

Reasons why Andrew Luck over Trent Richardson 

LaMichael James 2010 Stats

• 294 attempts for 1731 yards
• 17 receptions for 208 yards
• 21 rushing touchdowns and 3 receiving
• Record: 12-0
• 3rd in Heisman (behind Luck)

Trent Richardson 2011 Stats

• 263 attempts for 1583 yards
• 27 receptions for 327 yards 
• 20 rushing touchdowns and 3 receving
• Record: 11-1

If you have anything that you would like to discuss with me as to why Luck shouldn't win the Heisman, I will gladly tell you why you are wrong.....if you would like to tell me how right I am feel free to say so as well.