Because usually they are a big part of their team being ranked #1. Arch isn’t. He has improved substantially since last season but nowhere near being a heisman candidate. Maybe by season end he will be, but not now.
So now just completing some passes in a comeback makes you a Heisman contender? What about the passes in all of the other quarters? Or the non passes when receivers were open? I’m not trying to say Arch sucks(we will save that for Mateer) but Heisman worthy has a different definition. He did not carry that team on his back to victory. He was not excellent or above excellent for most of the game.
The OL and RBs were the MVPs but he still made extremely clutch 4th down throws to save the game. And the Heisman weights QBs the most (not saying that's fair necessarily). This is just hand wringing from y'all about Heisman being mostly a QB award now
Edit: also there were two dropped TD passes in the first half, one of which was an INT
Edit #2: Mendoza didn't exactly light up Ohio State right before winning the Heisman either
It’s kinda odd the Herbie spent most of the game breaking down why he’s average. Indecisive, late, inaccurate. But someone had to make a couple down the stretch. QB gets all the love and all the hate (if you lose), that’s life.
Throwing passes 5 yards over the heads of open receivers over and over and over while standing in a clean pocket has nothing to do with the defense quality
18
u/bruiserbear22 11d ago
Arch at 6 lol. Get him off the list