I usually don't like Scarbinsky, but he had some pretty good points in there. Ingram is one of the best RBs in the country. McClain is overall one of the best players in college football today, period. I don't think you could go wrong with either one, but I've just been curious over the past few days why it seems McClain's name hasn't even been mentioned. Maybe because a LB has never won it before?
McClain is good, great even, but I just don't like his (Skarbinski's) rationale.
Alabama is the best team.
The best side of the ball for them is the defense.
The best player on their defense is McClain.
McClain is the Heisman winner.
I just don't get that at all. I mean, I get it in that it makes some logical sense, but "ergo" is no reason to follow logic. Example...gaining yards is good...therefore (ergo), whoever gains the most yards is the best. That just makes no sense, even though it isn't illogical.
I lean towards a combination of "most talented" and "most valuable". To me, both McClain and Ingram are both, but
because they are on the best team, and surrounded by so many other talented players, their individual value is diminished a bit.
I go with my example from a few posts ago. Take McClain out of the lineup and put in Alabama's next best linebacker. They would still be a dominant defensive team. Maybe they'd give up another 20 yards and 3 more points, but still dominant. (ditto for taking out Ingram and using only Richardson and Upchurch....the production would drop some, but they'd still be a powerful running offense).
That "boy named Suh" IS the Nebraska defense. He's surrounded by average talent, yet is able to dominate a football game the way Kobe can dominate a basketball game. One defensive player shouldn't be able to have that kind of impact on a field with 21 other guys. Suh does.
Let me add that I also don't think voting McClain is insane or anything. He's a great player. If someone thinks he is the best player they saw this year, no big deal. I just don't follow his line of thinking and arrive at the same conclusion.