It is official. Today Ron Dayne became the second Badger to win the Heisman Trophy, adding to the Doak Walker, the Maxwell, the Walter Camp POTY and the AP POTY awards (among others).
On the football board, Door County Badger posted an article from one of the Georgia papers stating why Joe Hamilton deserves the Heisman over Ron Dayne. Here is my rebuttal.
"The average game this year for Hamilton: 18.5 completions, 27.7 attempts, 66.7 completion percentage,1 interception, 278.2 passing yards, 2.6 passing touchdowns, 14 rushes, 66.7 rushing yards, half a touchdown."
"Thus, he's good for 344.9 yards a game and about three scores."
"The average game this year for Dayne: 27 carries, 166.7 yards, 1.7 touchdowns. And in four years, Dayne's caught 31 passes, just one this year."
**** This is pure and simple the difference between being a quarterback and a running back. A quarterback of course gets touches on nearly every offensive snap. And, what is the threshold for a quarterback on a per game basis? Is it reasonable to believe that a QB can make 50 or 60 throws EVERY game if need be (and as a consequence, rack up yards)? I certainly believe so.
Running backs on the other hand cannot handle the ball 50 times every game. Yes, you occasionally see someone get close to 50 carries once in a while, but if that were done every game, the guy would be dead by game 7 or 8. A running back can reasonably only handle the ball about 35 times per game before breaking down.
For argument's sake, let's take Dayne's carries per game and double it (to 54...about where Hamilton's touches are). Guess what, he is now right up in that mid 300 yard per game range, just as Hamilton is. (And this isn't even taking into account factors such as running attempt per passing attempt and the substantial difference in how many yards are gained on the typical passing play as opposed on one on the ground).
"One Dayne backer wrote with several points:"
"1.) Ron Dayne led the nation in rushing with over 1800 yards."
"Well, no, he didn't. He was second to TCU's Ladainian Tomlinson by 16 yards - and 35 more carries - and 36 yards ahead of Virginia's Thomas Jones, who had 31 more carries and caught 22 passes for 239 yards and a score, thus having more total yards than Dayne."
"Incidentally, Robert Cooper was 11th in rushing. Robert Cooper plays for Cincinnati, which beat Wisconsin and Dayne, who had 231 yards and one big fumble."
***Well, Tomlinson, though probably a very good back as well, played against a horrible defensive confernce and was the pitch back in an extreme option attack (leading to big yards). He also only passed Dayne with a monster game (400 yards) against one of the worst teams in D1 (UTEP) when he was allowed to play the entire game. How many yards would Dayne have had if he had played the second halves of Indiana, Ball State, or Murray State? Might he have come close to 400 (and at the very least "passed" Tomlinson in total yards on the season)?
As for Jones, Dayne had more yards on fewer carries despite playing in similar contexts (unlike Tomlinson).
Yes, Jones eekes ahead of Dayne when you include receiving yards, but there is an important context issue to consider here. Jones was ASKED to receive the ball in the Virginia offense. Dayne, on the other hand was requuired to be the primary blocker on blitz pick up (and he did it very very well). Is catching a few balls for 30 yards per game really worth more than preventing a sack or two per game by blocking? I certainly don't think so. Including the Jones receiving stat assumes that Dayne wasn't doing anything at the "same" time. However, Dayne WAS contributing to the offense at this time. It is just a contribution that does not show up in the stats.
"2.) Dayne's 1800 yards came against some of the top run defenses (and teams) in the country and in a conference 6-7 teams deep."
"Michigan State is currently No. 5 against the run, 77 yards a game allowed. The next run defense that Dayne faced is No. 26 Michigan. He had 214 vs. MSU, 80 vs. UM."
"Cincy, Ball State, and Murray State check in at Nos. 86, 110, and, oh, Murray State's in Division I-AA and didn't make the playoffs. Oops.
"Hamilton, on the other hand, faced the Nos. 10 and 16 run defenses (FSU and Georgia), as well as the Nos. 15, 17 and 26 defenses vs. pass efficiency (FSU, Clemson, and Wake Forest)."
"Against those good pass defense teams, Hamilton was a combined 67-for-95 (70.5 percent) with 10 touchdowns, four interceptions, and 990 yards."
***I have used stats like this in the past as well, and over time, I have come to the conclusion that in and of themselves, they are not very valuable. Here is why. A team's statistical ranking also comes about due to who THEY are playing. So, a team in the WAC is more likely to have a terrible passing defense (statistically), just because everyone in their conference throws the ball (and exaggeration but you get what I mean). Or look at the SEC run defenses. On paper, they look great. That is, until you look at the SEC run OFFENSES. Where the SEC rushing defenses really great, or did they just not face any decent rushing offenses (or perhaps somewhere inbetween).
The thing about the Big Ten this year is that unlike the past few seasons, they had some tremendous offensive clubs, really hurting the defensive rankings. Wisconsin, Michigan, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan State, and Penn State all had very good offenses. Even Minnesota and Ohio State had pretty good offensive clubs.
On the other hand, I havn't looked at it, but might the ACC defenses have benefitted by their conference having some really bad offensive teams to fatten their rankings? Since as I said I haven't looked at it, I don't know, but these context issues have to be examined before you start comparing number 12 rush defense ranking of one team agaisnt a number 36 ranking of another. Depending on who the opponents have been, the number 36 team might have a BETTER defense than the number 12.
Secondly, and this is the big one for Dayne, how much did he play against the lousy teams? I know for a fact that Hamilton threw deep late in blowout games against bad teams on more than one occastion. How many yards did Dayne rack up in the 4th quarter against Murray State? Or, how about the 3rd quarter? How many "stat" yards did Dayne get agaisnt IU in the second half?
The answer of course is NONE.
"3.) Hamilton's No. 2 passer rating was certainly bolstered by a conference that is 2-deep. "
"The ACC isn't the Big 10 top to bottom, no question about it. But the ACC does have the team that's been No. 1 all year, and has two of the four teams to win seven games 12 straight years (FSU and Virginia)."
***Would Virginia have won 7 or more in 12 straight in the Big Ten? Who knows, but there is a context issue at work again here.
"And the latest Sagarin strength of schedule ratings?
Wisconsin's is 68th, Virginia Tech's is 60th, and Georgia Tech's is 29th. Wisconsin played four Top 30 teams, Tech three. The Big Ten is No. 1 with an 81.17 average rating, the ACC second at 77.90."
"Not exactly a negligible difference."
***However, was Wisconsin's schedule worse because it was worse all the way through, or simply worse because their NC games were against three lousy teams? And if the latter is true (which it is), how much did Dayne benefit? Well, since he only played limited time against both Ball State and Murray State, I would argue that he really didn't benifit at all.
"4.) It's hard to determine which player helped his team more, but here's something to think about: Name one player besides Dayne on the Badgers."
"First, name recognition of teammates is rather irrelevant."
"Second, how many household names surround Hamilton?"
"And, for the record, Hamilton had one teammate on the all-conference first-team offense, one on second-team offense and one on second-team defense."
"Dayne had two on his conference's first-team offense, one more on the second team, plus two on first-team defense and six honorable mentions."
"Household names aside, it would appear Dayne had a little more talent around him, as well."
***Maybe, but are these all-conference honors because they were better players, or because the team was better (leading to more honors as a result?). Could it be possible that Dayne was SO good, that it resulted in more wins and therefore more all-conference mentions? Would guys like Ferrario made All-Conference without Dayne? We don't know, but there is a very real possiblity that Wisconsin players got some of their recognition BECAUSE OF Dayne.
"And Hamilton never lost 33-6 to Georgia, as Dayne and Wisconsin did two years ago in the Outback Bowl. A game in which, Dayne was held to, ahem, less than 36 yards on 14 carries."
*** I knew this idiot was going to go here. I'm sure we can find some game in Hamilton's career where his team was overmatched and Hamilton did close to zip. Picking out one game three years ago as evidence that Dayne does not deserve the Heisman THIS year is going against his very own argument that it is NOT a career award.
"There is no argument that Dayne is a fabulous player. There no argument that he's had a huge career and is the primary reason Wisconsin is where it is. I pity defensive backs and linebackers. Talk about being tied down to railroad tracks in front of an oncoming locomotive."
"But if I have to pick a guy from this year's final class to take into a big game, to lead my team, to come up with the big play, to confuse a defense. I equally pity defensive coordinators and linebackers and defensive backs for trying to figure out what the hell's coming next from Joe Hamilton."
"This year, the Heisman rewards a career. An impressive career, but a career nonetheless."
"And that, well, is a shame."
**** Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact is, Dayne ran for 1800 yards. He did this on about 100 fewer carries than guys like Ricky Williams and Marcus Allen and Barry Sanders and Herschel Walker had in their big years. He ran for 19 touchdowns. He averaged about 6 yards per carry. He led his team to the Big Ten title in the toughest conference in America. He did this while his coach REFUSED to play him in any garbage time situations, sitting out approximately two ENTIRE games. Ron Dayne will NOT win this awards based on his career, as immense as it might be. Dayne is winning this award based on being the best skill player in the country THIS season.
Contrary to the prior argument, the goal of offensive football is not who is the trickiest, it is who is the most productive. Ron Dayne was the most productive.