Who should win the Heisman Trophy? Not Andrew Luck

Annually, the Heisman Trophys is given to "the most outstanding player in collegiate football." The consensus at this point seems to be that it is Stanford junior quarterback Andrew Luck. But would that be the right choice?

No.

Luck, as we all know here at an NFL Draft site, is far and away the top prospect for the 2012 NFL Draft. That's a given. Luck may have the best mind and skill set in college football. But that doesn't mean he's the "most outstanding player" this season.

The all-knowing Heisman Pundit makes the case that the award doesn't simply go to the best player on the best team in the nation. After all, what LSU player would even get invited by the Downtown Athletic Club to be a finalist?

The immediate answer would be cornerback Morris Claiborne. In this day and age, however, that will never happen. In fact, if you're anything but a quarterback or running back, you're screwed. Since the award was started in 1935, only five players who didn't predominantly run or throw the ball won the award. Further, Charles Woodson in 1997 was the last player who wasn't a running back or quarterback to win the award. So not only is it improbable, but nearly impossible for those players to win the award.

Instead, Heisman Pundit suggests the award goes to a player with the combination of being on a successful team, being the major reason that team won so many games and other less specific reasons.

So with that all said, who should win the Heisman Trophy? If you based the award on a combination of stats, team excellence those stats lead to and general importance to the team, the answer seems obvious.

It would be Houston quarterback Case Keenum. Disconnect yourself from what I've written about Keenum as a pro prospect. That's not what this is about. This is strictly about college football achievement.

If you base part of the award on stats, Keenum is considerably ahead of Luck:

It is a fair argument to bring up Keenum playing in a much more passer-friendly offense than Luck. But that shouldn't be something Heisman voters should hold against Keenum. If you want to hold that against Keenum, you'd have to consider Luck's offense. The run-first Stanford playing style gives the impression another quarterback could have similar success running it. For a quarterback, which is easier, relying on a power run game or completing such a high rate of passes? Remember, that's strictly talking about what the players are doing right now in college for the team they're not. This has nothing to do with how successful Luck would be playing in a Houston-style offense.

For evidence on how important he is to his team, you just need to look at Houston's play last season. With Keenum, the team was 2-1. Without him following injury, the Cougars were 3-6. With a healthy Keenum this season, Houston is 10-0. Because it's been against weaker competition, though, in Conference-USA, Keenum's Cougars probably won't sniff a BCS game, much less the title game like Luck could. Without that, he's unlikely to get more than a token invite to the Heisman Trophy presentation. But if you base the award on how it's defined, Keenum deserves much more than that.