With Heisman Deadline Looming, RGIII Appears to Have Leg Up on Luck
by Scott Allen on Dec 5, 2025 11:20 AM PST
Email
PrintBaylor quarterback Robert Griffin III's name figures to be at the top of a lot of the Heisman ballots that trickle in before today's 2 p.m. PT voting deadline. It's still early, but HeismanPundit.com and StiffArmTrophy.com are reporting that RGIII is the favorite and Andrew Luck is second.
It's a crazy college football world we root in. While Virginia Tech earning a Sugar Bowl berth is a far greater injustice in my mind than Luck potentially losing out to Griffin, the Heisman Trophy race has long featured its fair share of unmitigated BS and media manipulation. At least with the BCS we know it's mostly -- OK, all -- about the money. What is the Heisman about?
It's not all about statistics, or Toby Gerhart would have won in 2009. It's not all about honor and leadership, or Andrew Luck would have won last year. It's not all about winning, or RGIII, whose Baylor squad has the losses to match its QB's catchy nickname, wouldn't even be in the conversation. And it's not all about amazing beards, or Luck would've won the thing at Pac-12 Media Days.
My undeniably biased vote would be for Luck, but I won't be upset if RGIII wins the Heisman. He put up some fantastic numbers this season and set the NCAA record for passing efficiency. He took advantage of being the only top Heisman candidate to play on the final weekend of the regular season with a strong performance against Texas. Beyond the stats, he's been a "program-changer" in Waco.
Still, nobody -- not RGIII, not Trent Richardson, and sure as heck not the Honey Badger -- did, or could do, what Luck did this season, or had a bigger hand in his team's success than the Cardinal QB. In the end, some voters understand what David Shaw has been saying throughout the season and is outlined in the awesome video below, while others can't see past the statistics, or whatever the Heisman is about.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Luck? No way
RGIII is the most complete player in the land and ought to win. He isn’t the best QB, but neither is Luck. Luck is the best one who is 6’4" and 240 pounds though.
Kellen Moore is the best QB, has been for 3 years, and has the numbers to prove it. He is about to go 50-3 (by far and away the all time record in college football at any level), is second in TD’s both this year and ALL time (only 6 year man Keenum is higher), highest passing efficiency of any current QB, least sacks (quick release, smart) and leads in TD’s per completion, TD’s per interception, etc. He is 2-0 against Oregon (unlike 0-2 Luck) and has beaten every single BCS team he has played (Georgia, Virginia Tech, Oregon State, etc). In 2009 as a sophomore, he set the FBS record for TD to pick ratio (39-3), went 14-0 and won the Fiesta Bowl, but came in 7th in the Heisman. Last year he was 4th, and was a chip shot field goal away from 14-0 and another BCS game with better numbers than Newton, Luck, etc. In 2009, Ingram wasn’t even in the top 5 for running backs and not close to Gearhart, but won anyway.
So yeah, its a beauty contest, but maybe the Heisman will get it right if they pick Griffin III.
by HSridge on Dec 5, 2025 12:53 PM PST reply actions
For a smart guy, Luck makes bad decisions
He has 4 pick 6’s this year, two in the 4th quarter in BIG games. Moore has 2 in his 4 year career, neither affecting a game.
by HSridge on Dec 5, 2025 12:55 PM PST reply actions
Um
Pretty sure that when you’re essentially calling the ENTIRE offensive game, a few picks here or there (of which at least 4 of them happened because his receivers slipped) still comes out to a pretty low percentage of bad decisions.
But also, as Scott said, no one knows what this award is about, other than that it most certainly is not a stat contest. And I don’t think stats are everything. I know, I know, you play Fantasy Football and so your NFL stats actually ARE everything. But in reality, and especially in college football, they’re not. That’s not to diminish Kellen Moore’s success at Boise State or his ability at QB, because they’re surely impressive.And yeah, RGIII is pretty good too. I would rather see it go to him than to Richardson. But Luck is a pretty amazing quarterback and has so many intangibles that you can’t easily describe or quantify, and to me, that makes him deserving of the Heisman. I’m also completely and utterly biased. At least I admit it. :-)
by CardiGrl on Dec 5, 2025 1:12 PM PST up reply actions
Luck has made some bad decisions this year
but 2 of the 4 pick-sixes he threw, including the one against Oregon, should’ve been caught by his intended receiver. More than anything, the Heisman has traditionally been about stats. I get that, and there’s no denying that RGIII and Kellen have better stats than Luck. The pick-six stat is just another example of how the numbers don’t always tell the whole story.
by Scott Allen on Dec 5, 2025 1:18 PM PST up reply actions
That’s the nature of turnovers— they are pretty random.
by jksnake99 on Dec 5, 2025 2:51 PM PST up reply actions
Yeah, the pick six argument is useless
Hell, at least four interceptions are directly attributable to receivers either gifting the other team the ball, or completely missing their assignment.
by RickeySteals on Dec 5, 2025 5:56 PM PST up reply actions
I liked Scott Reiss' take
A few similar points. RGIII playing — and playing well — on Saturday while Luck and Richardson were idle was key.
http://www.csnbayarea.com/12/05/11/No-Luck-is-bad-luck/l_college.html?blockID=606104&feedID=2804
by Scott Allen on Dec 5, 2025 1:23 PM PST reply actions
what irritates me
is that the knock on Toby two years ago was that Stanford had too many losses. Baylor has 3 losses
by dblecard on Dec 5, 2025 1:51 PM PST reply actions
But we should be better than that!
It wasn’t fair before, it is not fair now. Just evaluate the player’s performance.
I hope that Luck pulls it off, but I think RG3 deserves it and will win it.
by Euler on Dec 5, 2025 4:45 PM PST up reply actions
fine
Luck did what he did without real receivers. His performance is more impressive
by dblecard on Dec 5, 2025 5:18 PM PST up reply actions
I think the award should go to Griffin. I’m a stats guy and Luck has had a great season, but statistically nowhere near as great as Griffin’s. In my opinion, Stanford goes 8-4 or so with an average QB, whereas with an average QB I think Baylor might well have won 3-4 games.
The point about W/L record hurting Gerhart is a good one, and I think do think Toby deserved it— but its also true that the Pac-12 was worse than the SEC two years ago, and worse than the Big 12 this year.
by jksnake99 on Dec 5, 2025 2:54 PM PST reply actions
"I think do think"
Wow, I am awful with typos.
by jksnake99 on Dec 5, 2025 2:55 PM PST up reply actions
Stats wise, Griffin deserves it.
But I think Baylor is a lot better than a 3-4 win team. They have one of the best receivers in college football, and the best running back in the Big 12. When Griffin went out in the second quarter against Texas Tech with a concussion, his backup went 9/12 for 151 yards and two touchdowns, Ganaway finished with nearly 250 yards rushing, and Baylor added another five touchdowns to their final score.
I really don’t think Stanford could ever do anything like that if Nottingham had to come in the game. Although hopefully, we don’t have to find out.
"Sports don't build character, they reveal it."
by Leland's Axe on Dec 5, 2025 3:00 PM PST up reply actions
The backup thing is pretty compelling to me...
Seems like it just might be the system rather than the player.
by RickeySteals on Dec 5, 2025 5:57 PM PST up reply actions
Texas Tech is terrible defensively. I don’t think his backup could have stepped in like that against Texas. No way of knowing for sure though.
by jksnake99 on Dec 5, 2025 6:32 PM PST up reply actions
Luck for Heisman
Andrew Luck put up better numbers in 2011 than 2010, despite having fewer weapons, a conservative new coach, and stiffer opposition. With a receiving corps diminished by injuries and inexperience, he became the all time Stanford leader in touchdowns and total yardage. He led Stanford to its second straight 11 win season and second straight BCS bid - the only two such seasons in school history. And he did it with the intelligence, grace, and humility that is rare among elite athletes.
Robert Griffin III is a great quarterback who got hot at the right time, but he is blessed with two receivers in Kendall Wright and Terrance Williams who outstrip anyone Stanford can put on the field, and benefited from considerable scheduling luck. He played Oklahoma and Texas at their injury-ravaged worst, and TCU before they found their midseason form. He barely edged Kansas on the road in overtime, and was utterly crushed by Texas A&M and Oklahoma State on the road. He threw the game ending pick at Kansas State, into triple coverage, with plenty of time on the clock.
Put Andrew Luck in a Baylor uniform, and that team still goes 9-3, perhaps 10-2. Put Robert Griffin in a Stanford uniform, and we miss the BCS. Luck can do what Griffin does, but Griffin wouldn’t lead this Stanford team to victory on the road in the Coliseum. He couldn’t do it in Manhattan, or Stillwater, or College Station.
Griffin may win the Heisman, but Andrew Luck was the most outstanding, most valuable, and most extraordinary player in college football this year. A twenty-pound statue won’t change that fact, no matter who it goes to.
"Sports don't build character, they reveal it."
by Leland's Axe on Dec 5, 2025 2:55 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Very good points against RG3
But I don’t agree at all that Luck can do everything RG3 does.
RG3 is much faster, and Luck still has to prove that he can throw a consistently good deep ball like RG3 (this year Stanford didn’t have the receivers to do it, and last year he threw less than a third of the deep balls RG3 got this year).
by Euler on Dec 5, 2025 4:50 PM PST up reply actions
You would never find fans on another team website
saying that another player deserved it over their own. But I guess that’s what makes Stanford fans “special”
by dblecard on Dec 5, 2025 5:19 PM PST reply actions
Sigh.
Since we’ll never win the Heisman again (OK, maybe that’s a little fatalistic), I guess we can rest on our Director’s Cup/Capital One Cup/BCS Bowl wins. I honestly think that a lot of Heisman voters were looking for ways not to vote for Luck given the hype that he couldn’t live up to, instead of evaluating the full body of work.
by CardiGrl on Dec 6, 2025 6:39 AM PST reply actions
Yeah...
I don’t know what it will take… in the last 3 years we have had the best running back in the nation and the best quarterback in the nation, and it sure looks like they’ll both come up empty handed.
What’s crap about it is that Gerhart had the stats but he was screwed because he didn’t play for a “name” team with a BCS-level record. Luck does play for a “name” team with an excellent record, but he is being held to a different standard statistically than other candidates in previous years…
by RickeySteals on Dec 6, 2025 11:31 AM PST up reply actions
Well put, Rickey.
That’s really what it all comes down to.
by CardiGrl on Dec 6, 2025 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
yes that is very frustrating
“but were supposed to be better than that”
by dblecard on Dec 6, 2025 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
Screw that!
Although I suppose it is yet another good life lesson for these kids - life (especially life within sports) isn’t fair. You can only control what you do. Politics and ill-informed biases dominate everything outside of your own performance, so don’t waste mental energy on it.
To his credit, Luck seems to have already gotten this message.
At least politics of it all hasn’t kept the team out of the BCS - our neighbors up at Cal have seen just how bad it can get in that regard.
by RickeySteals on Dec 6, 2025 9:31 PM PST up reply actions
I completely get why a lot of Stanford fans are upset about this.
That said, my personal opinion is that Stanford deserved the Heisman last year (I’m not buying that Cam Newton did nothing wrong) and the previous year (I think Gerhart’s stats were compelling enough to override the SEC/Pac-12 difference and I don’t think team W/L record should factor into the Heisman), but Robert Griffin III has just had an incredible year. His stats aren’t a little better than Luck’s- they are vastly superior. I don’t think he should be punished for Stanford getting the short end of the stick in previous years.
by jksnake99 on Dec 6, 2025 10:43 PM PST up reply actions
Good points jksnake
In my opinion, Gerhart deserved it in 2009 (had fewer yards/carry, but had less talent around and better stats elsewhere), but Newton deserved it in 2010 (nothing proven off the field, and he was the best on the field), and this year should be for RG3.
Luck had two fantastic seasons, but he was unlucky that two other players just had outrageous seasons at the same time (Newton was almost a running back as well as a great QB, and RG3 broke the QB rating record plus 644 rushing yards).
It hurts, especially after not getting the Heisman in 2009, being so close for 3 consecutive years (new record, hah!), but I believe in 2010 and 2011 the second place was deserved.
by Euler on Dec 7, 2025 1:47 PM PST up reply actions
I don't think it matters...
I’m kind of at the point where I wonder if a Stanford player will ever win the Heisman again, due to the politics and biases at play. Looking back at history yields a glimpse at just how difficult it would be: one has to go back to 1994 (Rashaan Salaam at Colorado) to find the most recent winner from (roughly) west of the rockies that did not go to USC, and then back to 1970 (Jim Plunkett) to find the next one!
Whether Luck (or anyone else who actually wins the Heisman) deserves it or not is immaterial. It doesn’t appear to be relevant to the outcome in the first place. It appears that geographical biases are too significant of a factor - and the only school that has broken past them is USC.
Based on all of that, I think Luck should win it this year because a) he could be the exception that proves the rule b) so that we can all feel better the Stanford program or c) because Stanford has a really beautiful campus. Those are just as valid a set of reasons as any other one that appears to determine the final outcome.
by RickeySteals on Dec 7, 2025 5:24 PM PST up reply actions
The hype
Ultimately hurt Luck. Voters who don’t watch enough and love statistics just see unmet expectations.
I think too many voters dismiss the things Luck does as simply being things that look good on a resume for the NFL and don’t mean much in terms of comparing him to another player at the college level.
Combine that, with the unmet extremely high expectations, and the shaky performance vs. Oregon and he’s in for some trouble. It speaks to who SHOULD win it when voters are having to find reasons NOT to vote for Luck.
“Luck is a great QB, but he did ____ and ____ and ____”
“Griffin may have 3 losses and some crucial mistakes, but did _ and ____ and ____”
Heisman voters seem to lack perspective. Tyrann Matheiu heading too NY speaks to that.
by TheFreakSFG on Dec 7, 2025 2:57 AM PST reply actions
Yes, but
He would not even be in the top 5 this year if he hadn’t been hyped because no one was watching Stanford football. They only knew/know about him from the media coverage.
But I do agree that the media set him up to reach unrealistic expectations, and even though he’s statistically better than he was last year, people are expecting a “Heisman moment.” (Even though RG3 doesn’t have one either, he just happens to have played on the last week)
by CardiGrl on Dec 7, 2025 7:36 AM PST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
- Start posting about the Cardinal
- Rule Of Tree on Facebook
- Follow @RuleofTree
- Follow Rule Of Tree on your Android Device!
- Subscribe to Rule Of Tree Stories
Related FanPosts on Rule Of Tree
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
