Read the opposing argument from Loyal Homer.
The Heisman Trophy is touted as the most prestigious award in college football for a reason – it IS the most prestigious award in college football!
The award recognizes the accomplishments of the best of the best. Its importance is undeniable. It is comparable to the various MVP awards of professional sports leagues.
The award offers recognition of achievement on a national scale for both the player and the team. That’s why they give away two trophies, one to the athlete and one to the program that developed him. Analysts start projecting winners long before the season begins because winning the award can be a big boost to a player’s draft status, or it can give universities a big chip to dangle before prospects during the recruiting process. What player wouldn’t want to go to a program that has proven it can produce Heisman trophy winners? I firmly believe that the significance of the award speaks for itself, but today’s debate questions whether it has become just a popularity contest.
In truth popularity plays a large role, but it does so for a reason. Talent leads to popularity. The best players develop huge fan bases. Since the award recognizes the most talented college players it is logical to conclude that they would also be among the most popular.
Admittedly players and universities have begun posturing for the award earlier and earlier, but that doesn’t negate its importance. Instead, it highlights it. Teams know what’s riding on the line and how hard it is to get noticed in the sea of college stars, so they are forced to toot their own horns. In terms of sheer numbers of competitors, selecting the best player in the pros doesn’t even compare with picking the best college player. Plus, standing out among the various college conferences proves challenging enough.
Teams must let the voters know what makes their star special. There is no uniform scheduling committee for college football that ensures parity among every school’s schedule. So, boasting about a stud player is good if their performance is put into perspective with a strong schedule. Similarly, there is not really collaboration among college teams in terms of scheduling games so each voter can watch on TV. These challenges actually encourage players and teams to lobby for the recognition and I can’t blame them.
Since Sports Geek is doing the judging on today’s debate, I feel it is important to include a data-driven intellectual aspect to my argument. To that end I would like to point out that campaigning has become an increasingly necessary evil because of flaws in the balloting system.
The current system lends itself to sectional factionalism. The vast majority of votes, 870 of the 926 total ballots, are cast by members of the media throughout the country. Votes are divided equally among amongst six regions – Far West, Mid Atlantic, Mid West, North East, South, and South West. Although each region receives an equal allotment of 145 votes, the system apportions more votes to the states containing the most media outlets.
That means that states with large populations, and therefore more media outlets, will dominate the voting. This, not surprisingly, gives larger states like California and Texas a decided advantage. Sure the balloters are expected to be somewhat objective, but that really is impossible considering they are making a subjective decision. Seriously, if it were not a subjective decision then why wouldn’t we just let BCS computers make the call? The BCS point may not help my cause, but you get my point – formulas and computers could make a more objective call.
Regional sectionalism is bound to creep into any subjective decision. My opponent’s name, Loyal Homer, is proof of that. Teams from smaller states really have to campaign to overcome sectional loyalties. Our Founding Fathers understood that concept and that’s why we have two houses of Congress – the Senate based on equal representation and the House of Representatives based on representation by population (see this article is educational… even if you don’t agree with it you can at least say you learned something). Schools from smaller states have to advertise early and often to level the playing field. Take Jake Locker for example, he plays for Washington and must contend for votes in the Far West region against a plethora of voters from California. His East Coast campaigning is his best weapon to contend for votes. It may not sit well with some, but if it helps him compete with bigger markets can you really blame him?
The Heisman is still important if for no other reason than the urgency with which it is sought. Players want the recognition as the best player there is, not the most liked or popular player. The award keeps us glued to our television watching games we might not otherwise care for because there are Heisman competitors on the field. The award honors the best today as it has for so many years, the campaigning doesn’t hurt the award’s credibility, rather bringing attention to its importance.
Posted by Babe Ruthless 
