So is the Heisman McCaron's to lose?

[Hook'Em0608]

He's thrown 13 picks and is constantly throwing the ball up for grabs. He did it constantly against Alabama. That's the reality of Johnny Manziel this year.

That's because he can't waste a drive with his defense. If he has no where to go he can't throw it out of bounds and expect his defense to make a stop. What other Heisman contender has a #100 ranked defense to deal with? Look at the LSU game. LSU came with a good game plan to slow down A&M and they got blown out. If he doesn't put up 40+ they don't win this year. No other contender has had to deal with that. Especially not McCarron who has a defense that has shut out 3 opponents including a good Ole Miss offense.

 

[A New Breed of Bulldog]

I think at some point the body of work a player has should be considered if he has been consistent or not.

I agree. I'm tired of Freshmen and Sophomores winning the award. This used to be, and still should be, a career achievement award.

With that said, I do not think McSharron (hehe) is the most qualified Heisman candidate based on career accolades even in the SEC. Timmy Tebow proved with his 7-5 record that being a proven champion is not necessarily a criterion for winning the award (he was yet to win an MNC as a starter in 2007). If the "body of work" should be considered, I believe that none other than Jordan Lynch, AJ McCarron, and Aaron Murray would be invited to New York. Jordan Lynch because he puts up God-mode like numbers, McCarron because of his team's performance that makes up for his somewhat sub-Heisman numbers, and Murray because of his four years of statistical superiority in the SEC. Who would win, I don't know...

 

[4down20]

That's because he can't waste a drive with his defense. If he has no where to go he can't throw it out of bounds and expect his defense to make a stop. What other Heisman contender has a #100 ranked defense to deal with? Look at the LSU game. LSU came with a good game plan to slow down A&M and they got blown out. If he doesn't put up 40+ they don't win this year. No other contender has had to deal with that. Especially not McCarron who has a defense that has shut out 3 opponents including a good Ole Miss offense.

The majority of his interceptions have come on 1st and 2nd down. And that he has a bad defense is even MORE reason why he shouldn't be careless about turning the ball over, because doing so results in points for the other team. Not at all what you are saying. It's not a reason to be careless, quite the opposite.

He just makes bad decisions period. He is tied for 7th for most interceptions thrown this year.

 

[4down20]

Let's take a look at Manziel in their 3 losses.

Vs Alabama, he had 2 INT's.

1st INT: 2nd quarter, 2nd and goal on the Alabama 4. He throws a pick. How in the world can you blame that on his defense? Alabama drove down the field for 7.

2nd INT: 3rd quarter, 2nd and 1 from their own 43. He throws a pick that is returned for a TD. Once again, how in the world can his defense be blamed for him making such a throw on 2nd and 1. He has 2 more downs and could probably fall forward for a 1st down.

---------

Auburn:

1st quarter, 2nd and 7 and he throws a pick. Once again on 2nd down, no reason to push it at that point.

1st quarter, 1st and 10 at the Auburn 24.

-------------

LSU:
3rd quarter, 3rd and 13 at his own 38. The ONLY interception of these group that did not happen on 1st or 2nd down. Still, not really a time to take such chances as it's in your own territory.

4th quarter, 2nd and goal at the LSU 10.

Your claim that he has to play this way because of his defense is just plain wrong. All but 1 of these interceptions occurred while he had other chances which is evidence that the defensive side of things is wrong.

Nevermind that the entire notion that a lack of defense leads to this is misguided, it's teams that have good defenses and bad offenses that need to take more risk, not the other way around. Stanford certainly didn't keep trying to give Oregon the ball did they?

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Brandon Cooks...Beaver

Set to rewrite the PAC single season receiving/catches records IF someone could just hit em on the fly...no one can cover him...IF only we had an O-line.

Guys like a sophmore this year? Not sure.

 

[HizzleRocker]

Jordan Lynch should get it over McCarron. Seriously I don't care who its against, what this kid is doing is amazing.

Nearly 1800 yards RUSHING. Even as a QB that puts him #2 in the nation in rushing yards. Plus he has right at 2500 yards passing.

Compare:

McCarron: 2399 yards passing; 23 tds; 5 ints.
Lynch: 2457 yards passing; 22 tds; 5 ints.

If based on passing alone, the numbers are basically identical. Now throw in that Lynch will possibly go over 2000 yards rushing with currently 20 rushing tds to boot. It's not even a contest, imo.

We're talking about a kid who puts his entire team on his shoulder each week. A kid who will end up with over 4500 yards of offense, about 45 total tds, and only 5 ints. Oh, and after 250 carries this year and as a drop back passer as well, he only has 1 fumble.

I'm not sure he doesn't already deserve it over Winston.

 

[tabascojet]

McCarron isnt even the best player on his own team....only award he should win is world's worst tattoo.

 

[Hook'Em0608]

Let's take a look at Manziel in their 3 losses.

Vs Alabama, he had 2 INT's.

1st INT: 2nd quarter, 2nd and goal on the Alabama 4. He throws a pick. How in the world can you blame that on his defense? Alabama drove down the field for 7.

2nd INT: 3rd quarter, 2nd and 1 from their own 43. He throws a pick that is returned for a TD. Once again, how in the world can his defense be blamed for him making such a throw on 2nd and 1. He has 2 more downs and could probably fall forward for a 1st down.

---------

Auburn:

1st quarter, 2nd and 7 and he throws a pick. Once again on 2nd down, no reason to push it at that point.

1st quarter, 1st and 10 at the Auburn 24.

-------------

LSU:
3rd quarter, 3rd and 13 at his own 38. The ONLY interception of these group that did not happen on 1st or 2nd down. Still, not really a time to take such chances as it's in your own territory.

4th quarter, 2nd and goal at the LSU 10.

Your claim that he has to play this way because of his defense is just plain wrong. All but 1 of these interceptions occurred while he had other chances which is evidence that the defensive side of things is wrong.

Nevermind that the entire notion that a lack of defense leads to this is misguided, it's teams that have good defenses and bad offenses that need to take more risk, not the other way around. Stanford certainly didn't keep trying to give Oregon the ball did they?

Where the hell did I say anything about all his interceptions coming on 3rd down? I said he can't afford to just throw the ball away when people aren't open. He has to try and make plays. Are plays only made on 3rd down? He doesn't score 40 points his team doesn't win. You will see just how valuable he was starting next year when Bama beats them by 40.

 

[Codaxx]

Johnny has a ton of pressure on him to score on every drive. He is a gunslinger at heart, but his defense puts a lot of added pressure on him. Poor defense inherently means more pressure on an offense if your goal is to win. YOu can not play field position and play it safe, which exacerbates Johnny's weakness. McCarron is responsible for less than half of Bama's total yards. JM is at almost 70%. Huge difference

 

[4down20]

Where the hell did I say anything about all his interceptions coming on 3rd down? I said he can't afford to just throw the ball away when people aren't open. He has to try and make plays. Are plays only made on 3rd down? He doesn't score 40 points his team doesn't win. You will see just how valuable he was starting next year when Bama beats them by 40.

You have it completely backwards. Having a bad defense is more reason to take care of the ball, not less. That his interceptions come on 1st and 2nd downs only goes to prove that he is careless with the ball because he could just wait for the next down.

Bad offenses with good defenses = take more risk.
Good offenses with bad defenses = protect the ball.

People blaming his defense make me wonder if they understand the basic concepts of football.

 

[Codaxx]

You have it completely backwards. Having a bad defense is more reason to take care of the ball, not less. That his interceptions come on 1st and 2nd downs only goes to prove that he is careless with the ball because he could just wait for the next down.

Bad offenses with good defenses = take more risk.
Good offenses with bad defenses = protect the ball.

People blaming his defense make me wonder if they understand the basic concepts of football.

-
I would disagree. If you have a good defense. You want to protect field position. Knowing it is highly unlikely the opposing offense can sustain success on long drive. Short fields are to be avoided. If you have a bad defense that is not important. You give up chunks of yards. There is less of change in expected pts going from your 40 to their 35.

 

[4down20]

-
I would disagree. If you have a good defense. You want to protect field position. Knowing it is highly unlikely the opposing offense can sustain success on long drive. Short fields are to be avoided. If you have a bad defense that is not important. You give up chunks of yards. There is less of change in expected pts going from your 40 to their 35.

Even bad defenses get stops and field position is always important otherwise A&M would never punt.

In 2012, A&M had 0 turnovers when they beat Alabama, and Alabama had 3. This year, A&M had 2 turnovers and lost. You can not turn the ball over and expect to win. Especially on 1st and 2nd down when you would still have more chances to move the ball, that makes it especially bad.

 

[Codaxx]

Even bad defenses get stops and field position is always important otherwise A&M would never punt.

In 2012, A&M had 0 turnovers when they beat Alabama, and Alabama had 3. This year, A&M had 2 turnovers and lost. You can not turn the ball over and expect to win. Especially on 1st and 2nd down when you would still have more chances to move the ball, that makes it especially bad.

-
2012 has 0 to do with this conversation. A&M's defense was substantially different. You are suffering from survivor bias. A&M had 2 turnovers. Also threw up several prayers that were answered. JOhnny makes a lot of questionable decisions. Lots of them work out. This is a tangent though. The real issue is that expected pts are less effected with field position. Punting from your 30 is probably an expected slight positive play for teams like MSU and Bama. Considering Bama's opponents have an explosive drive 6.5% of the time and have a scoring drive iof 10 or plays 7.6% of the time. Punting from your 30 is a negative expected play for A&M.

 

[4down20]

-
2012 has 0 to do with this conversation. A&M's defense was substantially different. You are suffering from survivor bias. A&M had 2 turnovers. Also threw up several prayers that were answered. JOhnny makes a lot of questionable decisions. Lots of them work out. This is a tangent though. The real issue is that expected pts are less effected with field position. Punting from your 30 is probably an expected slight positive play for teams like MSU and Bama. Considering Bama's opponents have an explosive drive 6.5% of the time and have a scoring drive iof 10 or plays 7.6% of the time. Punting from your 30 is a negative expected play for A&M.

If you have a bad defense, turning the ball over = points for the opponent and 0 for you. If it was 3rd or 4th down when these interceptions happened I could be more sympathetic, however when you are doing it on 1st and 2nd down it's just a sign of bad decision making because he had more downs available to him.

Stanford had a potential mismatch vs Oregons offense. Their defense isn't bad, however against an explosive offense like Oregon, it was a mismatch of the same nature. What did they do? Kept the ball offensively as much as possible and didn't turn it over.

Bad defense = you can't afford turnovers.

 

[Codaxx]

If you have a bad defense, turning the ball over = points for the opponent and 0 for you. If it was 3rd or 4th down when these interceptions happened I could be more sympathetic, however when you are doing it on 1st and 2nd down it's just a sign of bad decision making because he had more downs available to him.

Stanford had a potential mismatch vs Oregons offense. Their defense isn't bad, however against an explosive offense like Oregon, it was a mismatch of the same nature. What did they do? Kept the ball offensively as much as possible and didn't turn it over.

Bad defense = you can't afford turnovers.

-

Stanford took a big lead and took no chances. That hardly backs up your theory. Not to mention they have an excellent defense. Another straw man. Turning the ball over is always bad, nobody is arguing that. It is worse when you do it with a great defense. There is a reason Saban runs a conservative offense. Your argument is the polar opposite of the program you follow and its coach. Simple logic dictates that if you need to score 40 to win you will take more chances than if you need 20 to win. Bad defense means any punt or turnover is likely to yield pts. Punting the football and giving the opposing offense the ball on their side of the field is unlikely to yield pts if you have a great defense. The likelihood of giving up pts is exponentially higher if you turn it over and give them a short field. A&M gives up 2.46 pts per possession. Bama gives up .94. In a 15 possession game Bama would yield 14.1 pts. A&M yields 36.7. Guess which offense needs to take more chances to win.

 

[4down20]

-

Stanford took a big lead and took no chances. That hardly backs up your theory. Not to mention they have an excellent defense. Another straw man. Turning the ball over is always bad, nobody is arguing that. It is worse when you do it with a great defense. There is a reason Saban runs a conservative offense. Your argument is the polar opposite of the program you follow and its coach. Simple logic dictates that if you need to score 40 to win you will take more chances than if you need 20 to win. Bad defense means any punt or turnover is likely to yield pts. Punting the football and giving the opposing offense the ball on their side of the field is unlikely to yield pts if you have a great defense. The likelihood of giving up pts is exponentially higher if you turn it over and give them a short field. A&M gives up 2.46 pts per possession. Bama gives up .94. In a 15 possession game Bama would yield 14.1 pts. A&M yields 36.7. Guess which offense needs to take more chances to win.

Saban teaches perfection on both sides of the ball.

He didn't even get to the point of punting, he threw them on 1st and 2nd down.

And nobody is saying having a better defense is better. I'm saying that he is careless with the football and having a bad defense is no excuse for it. Alabama doesn't need to be careless with the football to score 40+ points. Scored 49 on Texas A&M without any turnovers. Scored 38 on LSU without any turnovers. Only scored 20 on Mississippi St, AJ threw 2 interceptions, and we had a fumble.

The bottom line is Johnny Manziel doesn't take care of the football, he is careless and throws balls up for grabs. Saying he has a bad defense is no excuse and only punishes the team worse with his mistakes.

 

[Codaxx]

Saban teaches perfection on both sides of the ball.

He didn't even get to the point of punting, he threw them on 1st and 2nd down.

And nobody is saying having a better defense is better. I'm saying that he is careless with the football and having a bad defense is no excuse for it. Alabama doesn't need to be careless with the football to score 40+ points. Scored 49 on Texas A&M without any turnovers. Scored 38 on LSU without any turnovers. Only scored 20 on Mississippi St, AJ threw 2 interceptions, and we had a fumble.

The bottom line is Johnny Manziel doesn't take care of the football, he is careless and throws balls up for grabs. Saying he has a bad defense is no excuse and only punishes the team worse with his mistakes.

Actually A&M and Bama both score 3.3 per possession. Both are highly efficient offenses. Bama pts are not really relevant. A&M's defense could not get LSU off the field. Bama's defense was quite good at returning the ball to the offense. Your scenario hardly applies to a defense starved team. Individual data pts are generally useless. A&M had 2 turnovers vs Bama and LSU, if I remember correctly. The scores were drastically different. LSU was able to run the ball 74% of the time, because their defense stopped A&M. The original posters pt was that Manziel needs to to take more risks due to his poor defense. His margin of error is much slimmer. That is 100% accurate. That additional risk is likely to increase turnovers. I do not see anything wrong with that statement.

 

[4down20]

Actually A&M and Bama both score 3.3 per possession. Both are highly efficient offenses. Bama pts are not really relevant. A&M's defense could not get LSU off the field. Bama's defense was quite good at returning the ball to the offense. Your scenario hardly applies to a defense starved team. Individual data pts are generally useless. A&M had 2 turnovers vs Bama and LSU, if I remember correctly. The scores were drastically different. LSU was able to run the ball 74% of the time, because their defense stopped A&M. The original posters pt was that Manziel needs to to take more risks due to his poor defense. His margin of error is much slimmer. That is 100% accurate. That additional risk is likely to increase turnovers. I do not see anything wrong with that statement.

Turning the ball over 13 times to the other team is worse than punting, and you only need to take risks if your offense isn't good, which isn't the case. Every time he does that, he puts his defense right back on the field. If he and their offense was that good, they wouldn't have trouble scoring 40 without turnovers. Just as Alabama does.

LSU's defense stopped A&M because they kept the A&M offense off the field by running the ball. Same thing Stanford did to Oregon. Keeping your defense off the field is what all the top defenses do, even Alabama. There is a reason Alabama has the slowest offense in college football, even though we have no trouble scoring points.