Jump to content

Best College Football Team Ever


HuskerFalcon
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ethanga62890 (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Yeah how did you choose these choices?

My pick is the 1997 Michigan Wolverines that had the only defensive player that won the Heisman.

No way should Charles Woodson have won the heisman. but was it really that long ago? ****.

What Charles Woodson was the man, and if he didn't deserve it than who did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Ethanga62890 (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Yeah how did you choose these choices?

My pick is the 1997 Michigan Wolverines that had the only defensive player that won the Heisman.

No way should Charles Woodson have won the heisman. but was it really that long ago? ****.

What Charles Woodson was the man, and if he didn't deserve it than who did?

Well. I wouldnt say it was all of Charle's defense that won him the Heisman. The guy was 1 man wrecking crew against Ohio State. He picked off a pass. Returned a punt for a TD. And set up Michigan's only offensive TD with that big reception. Eventhough Charles was a defensive player, he doesnt come close to winning the Heisman if he doesnt play offense and special teams.

My vote the year Charles won it still would have went to the senior Peyton Manning. But  that's just me. And it's not like history looks back and says Charles shouldnt have won it. I just thought Peyton was the best player at the most important position in the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Oklahoma teams that went unbeaten for at least 2 years (I believe). It may have been much longer than 2 years, I'm not certain.

The Nebraska team that crushed Florida for the Championship in the mid 90's.

Miami in the late 80's and early 90's (pick any one of them)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Ethanga62890 (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Yeah how did you choose these choices?

My pick is the 1997 Michigan Wolverines that had the only defensive player that won the Heisman.

No way should Charles Woodson have won the heisman. but was it really that long ago? ****.

What Charles Woodson was the man, and if he didn't deserve it than who did?

:unsure:  I really hope you are joking...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jdu00743 (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Ethanga62890 (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Yeah how did you choose these choices?

My pick is the 1997 Michigan Wolverines that had the only defensive player that won the Heisman.

No way should Charles Woodson have won the heisman. but was it really that long ago? ****.

What Charles Woodson was the man, and if he didn't deserve it than who did?

:unsure: I really hope you are joking...

yeah you are right woodson did deserve it.. :P:D;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

xnex (4/9/2008)
The Oklahoma teams that went unbeaten for at least 2 years (I believe). It may have been much longer than 2 years, I'm not certain.

The Nebraska team that crushed Florida for the Championship in the mid 90's.

Miami in the late 80's and early 90's (pick any one of them)

Yeah, Jimmy Johnson's 87 team was pretty nasty for Miami. I also would have liked to see one of Bear Bryant's teams up there. If you won something like 6 National Championships, there was probably a good chance that you had one of the best teams ever, somewhere along the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well. I wouldnt say it was all of Charle's defense that won him the Heisman. The guy was 1 man wrecking crew against Ohio State. He picked off a pass. Returned a punt for a TD. And setup Michigan's only offensive TD withthat big reception. Eventhough Charles was a defensive player, he doesnt come close to winning the Heisman if he doesnt play offense and special teams.

My vote the year Charles won it still would have went to the senior Peyton Manning. But that's just me. And it's not like history looks back and says Charles shouldnt have won it. I just thought Peyton was the best player at the most important position in the country.

Sir you just proved my point and the Heisman voters point that year. Charles excelled at 4 position (CB, PR, KR and WR) in a very good Big Ten at the time not just one position as Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning did.

Also just three weeks later Charles went on to prove that one of the finalist (Ryan Leaf) was not really good at all in the Rose Bowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
What Charles Woodson was the man, and if he didn't deserve it than who did?

:unsure: I really hope you are joking...

Didn't a certain someone disappear in the big games in his career at UT? Or better yet what was his record against UF?

If you consider 3-0 with amazing stats vs. our biggest and most hated rival (Alabama) "disappearing" then Ok...

He also was 4-0 vs. UGA (3rd biggest rival)...all the while putting up great individual stats.

And by the way, I hope you're not one of those people that gives either all of the credit for winning or losing to the QB like Halsey...He takes that whole concept WAY too far.

Check out the final scores to the 95-97 UT- Florida games:

1995: 37-62 Florida win

1996: 29-35 Florida win

1997: 20-33 Florida win

Against an awesome Florida defense, Peyton's offense averaged 28.7 points...that's pretty good.

While the Tennessee defense gave up an average of 43.3 points...How is a QB supposed to win if his defense can't do crap?

Ironically enough, the next year when Tennessee won the national championship, we beat Florida 20-17 in OT...Isn't it funny how Tee Martin gets worshiped for "finally beating Florida" when Peyton put up more points in regulation than that all three of his years? :laugh:

People who blame the Florida losses on Peyton don't know football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Well. I wouldnt say it was all of Charle's defense that won him the Heisman. The guy was 1 man wrecking crew against Ohio State. He picked off a pass. Returned a punt for a TD. And setup Michigan's only offensive TD withthat big reception. Eventhough Charles was a defensive player, he doesnt come close to winning the Heisman if he doesnt play offense and special teams.

My vote the year Charles won it still would have went to the senior Peyton Manning. But that's just me. And it's not like history looks back and says Charles shouldnt have won it. I just thought Peyton was the best player at the most important position in the country.

Sir you just proved my point and the Heisman voters point that year. Charles excelled at 4 position (CB, PR, KR and WR) in a very good Big Ten at the time not just one position as Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning did.

Also just three weeks later Charles went on to prove that one of the finalist (Ryan Leaf) was not really good at all in the Rose Bowl.

Oh I agree. I dont think there is a case against Charles Woodson having won it. I personally liked Peyton the best, but I also saw about 75% more of Peyton than Charles during their respective careers. Like I said, history doesnt look back at that as a bad Heisman winner, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mbrizzle (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Well. I wouldnt say it was all of Charle's defense that won him the Heisman. The guy was 1 man wrecking crew against Ohio State. He picked off a pass. Returned a punt for a TD. And setup Michigan's only offensive TD withthat big reception. Eventhough Charles was a defensive player, he doesnt come close to winning the Heisman if he doesnt play offense and special teams.

My vote the year Charles won it still would have went to the senior Peyton Manning. But that's just me. And it's not like history looks back and says Charles shouldnt have won it. I just thought Peyton was the best player at the most important position in the country.

Sir you just proved my point and the Heisman voters point that year. Charles excelled at 4 position (CB, PR, KR and WR) in a very good Big Ten at the time not just one position as Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning did.

Also just three weeks later Charles went on to prove that one of the finalist (Ryan Leaf) was not really good at all in the Rose Bowl.

Oh I agree. I dont think there is a case against Charles Woodson having won it. I personally liked Peyton the best, but I also saw about 75% more of Peyton than Charles during their respective careers. Like I said, history doesnt look back at that as a bad Heisman winner, imo.

Who did you get that opinion from?

Every college football fan I've ever talked to about it (with the exception of my buddy that is a Michigan fan) agrees Peyton should have won it, no question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jdu00743 (4/9/2008)
mbrizzle (4/9/2008)
Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Well. I wouldnt say it was all of Charle's defense that won him the Heisman. The guy was 1 man wrecking crew against Ohio State. He picked off a pass. Returned a punt for a TD. And setup Michigan's only offensive TD withthat big reception. Eventhough Charles was a defensive player, he doesnt come close to winning the Heisman if he doesnt play offense and special teams.

My vote the year Charles won it still would have went to the senior Peyton Manning. But that's just me. And it's not like history looks back and says Charles shouldnt have won it. I just thought Peyton was the best player at the most important position in the country.

Sir you just proved my point and the Heisman voters point that year. Charles excelled at 4 position (CB, PR, KR and WR) in a very good Big Ten at the time not just one position as Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning did.

Also just three weeks later Charles went on to prove that one of the finalist (Ryan Leaf) was not really good at all in the Rose Bowl.

Oh I agree. I dont think there is a case against Charles Woodson having won it. I personally liked Peyton the best, but I also saw about 75% more of Peyton than Charles during their respective careers. Like I said, history doesnt look back at that as a bad Heisman winner, imo.

Who did you get that opinion from?

Every college football fan I've ever talked to about it (with the exception of my buddy that is a Michigan fan) agrees Peyton should have won it, no question.

True story, I hate that goofy looking ##### with almost every fiber of my being and there's no doubt in my mind he should have won the Heisman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charles Woodson lead his team to a National Championship and Peyton did what again? Hands down he was the best player in college football in 1997

Peyton didn't get it because many believed he disappeared in the big game's period.

Oh yeah wasn't Alabama on one of there many Suspension '94-'97, not that big of a deal that UT or Peyton was 3-0 against them and UGA, I won't even go there during that time period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Charles Woodson lead his team to a National Championship and Peyton did what again? Hands down he was the best player in college football in 1997

Peyton didn't get it because many believed he disappeared in the big game's period.

Oh yeah wasn't Alabama on one of there many Suspension '94-'97, not that big of a deal that UT or Peyton was 3-0 against them and UGA, I won't even go there during that time period.

He was the best player because he lead his team to a national championship??

Was Tim Tebow not the best player this past year because his team went 9-4??

That is such a stupid argument, I can't even begin to try and reason with you.

Giving all the glory of wins to one player is beyond stupid.

Hey, should Matt Flynn have won the Heisman since he "led" his team to the national championship??

:laugh:

Not to mention, Woodson led you to HALF of a national championship...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/9/2008)
Yeah how did you choose these choices?

My pick is the 1997 Michigan Wolverines that had the only defensive player that won the Heisman.

When Woodsen won it, Champ Bailey should have won it in 98 he did things Charles Woodsen could only dream about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was the best player because he lead his team to a national championship??

Was Tim Tebow not the best player this past year because his team went 9-4??

That is such a stupid argument, I can't even begin to try and reason with you.

Giving all the glory of wins to one player is beyond stupid.

Hey, should Matt Flynn have won the Heisman since he "led" his team to the national championship??

:laugh:

Not to mention, Woodson led you to HALF of a national championship...

OK maybe lead is a bad word to use let use played a big part in the process or journey to the National Championship.

That is such a stupid argument, I can't even begin to try and reason with you.

Regardless if you agree or disagree with the logic behind that or not just look at history dude, that is almost an unwritten requirement to Win the Heisman. Now obviously it is not an exact science as because the Heisman trophy winner does not always win the National Championship or even play in it as this past season is evidence of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Demetrius Dew (4/10/2008)
He was the best player because he lead his team to a national championship??

Was Tim Tebow not the best player this past year because his team went 9-4??

That is such a stupid argument, I can't even begin to try and reason with you.

Giving all the glory of wins to one player is beyond stupid.

Hey, should Matt Flynn have won the Heisman since he "led" his team to the national championship??

:laugh:

Not to mention, Woodson led you to HALF of a national championship...

OK maybe lead is a bad word to use let use played a big part in the process or journey to the National Championship.

That is such a stupid argument, I can't even begin to try and reason with you.

Regardless if you agree or disagree with the logic behind that or not just look at history dude, that is almost an unwritten requirement to Win the Heisman. Now obviously it is not an exact science as because the Heisman trophy winner does not always win the National Championship or even play in it as this past season is evidence of that.

I won't get into the middle of this, but IMO someone can't say Woodson didn't deserve the heisman. He was vital to that championship run for Michigan. That doesn't take away how much Peyton did for tennessee, but the awards are also based on team's accomplishments or what they are about to accomplish and we saw that with troy smith. it's just not on stats alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...