I'm glad Tim Tebow won the Heisman last night-- he had a phenomenal year and seems like a good guy, and I'm glad he helped break the silly prejudice about age that surrounded the trophy.
Still, some of the coverage is a bit confusing. I think Stewart Mandel is a good college football writer, but I do wonder about this passage:
Ron Powlus. Brock Berlin. Chris Leak. Jimmy Clausen. All, like Tebow, and like so many others, were anointed saviors before they ever attended a college class. None came close to living up to the overwhelming expectations placed on their shoulders (though Clausen still has a chance), because, quite frankly, not too many could. (emphasis mine).
Mandel praises Tebow for winning a national championship, which Chris Leak did, too. In fact, Leak was the starting quarterback on that team. He didn't do it by himself-- but neither did Tebow. So...Leak wins a national championship, but doesn't win an award that many (including SI) have noted often goes to the wrong person and is subject to any number of biases from its voters-- and that's Leak's fault? Perhaps Leak didn't live up to hype in terms of passing yards or whatever, but I'd say surviving the tumult of the Zook era, dealing with coaching and gamebook changes, and winning a national championship-- while all the while an annointed one was breathing down your neck-- is actually pretty impressive.
Tough room, man, tough room. Then again, I'm not among the wise ones who vote on this award.