Henry will win, but I think McCaffrey should.
Henry will win, but I think McCaffrey should.
Here is the way I look at it. If you were to put Henry in Stanford's offense, would he have exceeded the numbers McCaffrey put up? I say no. If you put McCaffrey in Alabama's offense, would he have exceeded the numbers Henry put up? I say Yes. Henry is good, but he is single dimensional and you have to wonder how much of his success is due to playing with so many other great players on Alabama's offense. In the few times I've seen McCartney play, he seems to have that ability to take any routine play and make it spectacular.
Part of the problem with the Heisman is it's as much about the Hype and the performance. Since McCaffrey was a little late arriving to the party, I doubt he wins. It should be his next year in a landslide though if he puts up comparable numbers.
Excellent point. Ezekiel Elliott and Fournette are every bit as good as Henry, but to the victors go the spoils. In Elliott's most important game of the season he was shut down (by MSU), as was Fournette (by Alabama). Hence, Henry is a finalist and Elliott & Fournette are afterthoughts.
McCaffrey was probably the best football player, but I don't think anyone was as important to their team as Henry.
I'd give it to the QB from Navy.
Reynolds is a very good option QB, a fine representative of the Naval Academy, and a helluva role model. But the Heisman is not a lifetime achievement award, and there is no way he deserves to by in NYC, much less actually lift the trophy.