Reply With Quote
You will.
ATT YDS CMP% YDS/A TD INT RAT
2001 K. Kingsbury 529 3502 0.0 6.62 25 9 67.8
2002 K. Kingsbury 712 5017 67.3 7.05 45 13 143.7
2003 B.J. Symons 719 5833 65.4 8.11 52 22 151.3
2004 Sonny bie 642 4742 65.6 7.39 32 18 138.5
2005 Cody Hodges 531 4238 66.5 7.98 31 12 148.3
2006 G. Harrell 617 4555 66.8 7.38 38 11 145.5
2007 G. Harrell 713 5705 71.8 8.00 48 14 157.3
2008 G. Harrell 568 4747 71.5 8.36 41 7 163.0
That's what it looks like to me.
You will.
Tech fan is all bitter about Harrell not being invited to NY. My point is that he's just not as good as the 3 guys that ended up there. What's worse...being told you're honestly just not good enough, or getting some token invite to a ceremony that you have no business being at?
It's just a discussion, and I have a different opinion than they do. Why can't we just talk about it without it being me diminishing Tech?
no, he just played for the better team.
see: just about any QB Heisman trophy winner in the last 20 years
o? mcFly?
you're assuming Tech is going to score.
You still gotta hit the moving target. Dur.
and there you have it
well golly, it appears a monkey could get back there and fling 45 TDs.
Or miss it 22 times. In one game.
That's 7 three-down possessions where the ball doesn't move one inch...in one game.
And if Harrell had put up numbers like he did at a school other than Texas Tech, even with the same system in place, I think the odds are pretty good that he'd have been seen as a viable Heisman candidate.
My only point throughout has been that Leach is right to support his player and that he has to do that to build a program. Harrell wasn't ever likely to win the Heisman -- certainly not absent Tech running the Big XII -- but I think Leach is right in both: (a) supporting his player; and (b) suggesting that this situation might have been resolved differently if Harrell hadn't played at Texas Tech.
Beyond that, while it's true that McCoy and Bradford might have had better seasons than Harrell, it is ridiculous to say that Harrell doesn't have any business being at a ceremony like that one. I'll hazard a guess that, at worst, Graham Harrell received the 5th most votes for that award (and likely finished 4th). Finishing 4th to the 3 players who were invited doesn't exactly leave him with "no business" being honored similarly.
If you hadn't spent so many posts arguing that Harrell's nothing but a system QB and that Tech isn't a place for those who think about national les, I'd say that discussion could happen. When, however, your argument is entirely about the relative lack of merit of Harrell's university's football team and is aimed almost exclusively at diminishing Harrell's abilities in putting up the numbers he did, I think you've pretty much made the argument you diminishing Tech.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 12-12-2008 at 04:36 PM.
and your opinion is either biased crap or ignorant crap.
Harrell had just as good a year as any of those guys up there. No, he wasn't going to win, but he at least deserves to sit in the audience with a nice suit on.
or perhaps, both.
gosh..... one bad game against arguably the best team in the country.
I guess Harrell isn't Jesus after all.
It appears that way, doesn't it?
Distant 4th = no business being there. That's just the way they do it. Too bad for Harrell, too bad for Leach, and too bad for Texas Tech, but obviously I'm not the ONLY one who thinks his over-inflated numbers were more a product of tossing the ball around 50 times a game than they were a product of Harrell's Heisman-worthy talent. The voters thought the same thing.
It's funny that it's just so inconceivable to his supporters that there just might exist a legitimate reason for him not to be there. Your gripe is not with me. Your gripe is not even with him not being invited. Your gripe is with the voters who saw through his gaudy numbers, and didn't give him enough votes to get him CLOSE to the top 3.
I'm stating what I've observed, and what my opinion is. If, in your eyes, my opinion diminishes Harrell and Tech, then so be it.
He is a system QB...he's put up the exact same numbers that every other Tech QB before him under Leach has put up. He was only in the Heisman discussion more than his predecessors because of Tech's win over UT. And if he can easily thrust himself into the Heisman discussion with big team win, he can just as easily find himself out of it with and big team loss. And that's exactly what happened when Tech crumbled in Norman. Like it or not, that game legitimately removed Tech from BCS discussions, and legitimately removed Harrell from Heisman discussions.
see, now stretch here is a product of the system.
when you post 50 lol,s a day, the law of averages says you are going to have a lot of d-bag posts.
I get invited to the D-bag trophy ceremony because my name is Blake. Stretch should get an invite because of his work in this forum.
If he doesn't get invited, it'll be an outrage.
yeah, I can see how it would seem that way to the observer that thinks that you kick a home run right after you grab the jump ball
I wanted to point that out earlier, but was too lazy to look up stats.
It's not inconceivable to me -- for one -- that he's been excluded; but I do see Leach's point on this one, as well. There's an honor in being invited to the show, even if it's to announce that you finished 4th. I understand the DAC's line-drawing, but it's not as if Harrell is likely to have finished 10th in the voting, either.
Harrell probably won't end up being much of a pro (if he even gets that opportunity) but to say that his season can't be compared favorably to both McCoy's and Bradford's is silly. That's true whether Harrell was invited to the ceremony or not.
I'd say that Harrell is in the Heisman discussion because his team went 11-1 in what was arguably the toughest conference and certainly the toughest division in college football. His team finished the season as one of the 8 best teams (by ranking at least) in college football. It's not like Tech didn't accomplish anything; if all that Harrell did was match his predecessors, then Tech would have reverted to form and gone 8-4 or 9-3, not 11-1. Norman elminated any chance that Harrell would win the Heisman in '08 and eliminated his team from BCS contention, certainly. But the fact that he doesn't win the Heisman doesn't make him a system QB; nor does the fact that his team didn't win the national championship make him unworthy of discussion as one of the elite players in college football in 2008.
Like I say, I understand why Harrell wasn't invited to the ceremony, but I also see Leach's point that excluding Harrell from the ceremony denies him an honor (mention as a Heisman finalist) that he earned this season -- system or not.
Blake, your douchiness is shining though and is blinding all of us.
tech is a damn good team that doesn't deserve this ridicule.
save that for the city.
all wrong.
Harrell was the Heisman leader until the OU game in the eyes of the voters.
newsflash #23,876: Toretta, Weinke, Jason White, etccccccc.....
ALL products of the system. They all got to go not just because of their team records, but because of the logo on their helmets.
and your ignorance is setting the tone for future generations of public school dropouts
Exactly!
wait.....huh?
thanks for sharing.
mental note: fatyuk does not get a Christmas gift from me
So what does that say for you, who have yet to disprove the fact that a monkey could play quarterback at Tech and have Harrell's numbers. Maybe the only disagreement between us is the type of monkey. A spidermonkey might average less touchdowns but could definitely pile up the rushing yardage.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions