Yesterday, former USC running back Reggie Bush forfeited his 2005 Heisman Trophy. The unprecedented move comes on the heels of years of NCAA investigation and speculation regarding Bush's receipt of improper benefits from agents. Today, the Heisman Trust announced that it will leave the 2005 award vacant and it will not give the award to that season's runner-up, former Texas Longhorns quarterback Vince Young. Here's my take on the various moving parts of this event...
Bush Did the Right Thing
After its investigation, the NCAA laid down the hammer on USC and its football program. And this past off-season, USC underwent the biggest makeover in its storied history: Legendary coach Pete Carroll resigned; the school fired highly-controversial athletic director Mike Garrett; and the athletic department removed all symbols of Bush from campus, including the school's copy of the Heisman Trophy, jerseys, and banners. Amidst all this, Bush remained unchanged. Whenever a reporter approached him regarding the controversy, he stuck to his guns and stood by his innocence. He never admitted any wrongdoing and he never offered USC and its fans an apology. In fact, he basically swept everything under the rug. Until yesterday.
By giving back the Heisman Trophy, Bush takes the first step on the road to recovery. He enables the NCAA, the Heisman Trust, USC, himself, and even the Saints, to move on. To be frank, I don't think his image/legacy is fully recoverable (more on this later). But for now, returning the trophy is a good start. Up next, how about an apology?
Bush's Image is Irreparable
Sports fans, for the most part, are forgiving. But only when an apology is involved. Bush has yet to admit any wrongdoing, and even though his Heisman Trophy forfeiture may imply his guilt, it does not quite measure up to a true apology.
There has been some discussion over how this scandal affects Bush's chances at induction into the College Football Hall of Fame. Personally, I think his chances are slim to none. While I recognize that his on-field accomplishments warrant induction, it is too easy for voters to pick on a player's blemishes. Furthermore, Bush is now a villain, and he played for a team that much of the country dislikes. I could easily see voters rally against him. Even if you try to separate character issues from performance, one could argue that Bush simply should not have been on the field during that season and thus should not have compiled those numbers and highlights. He is the poster-child of an era when college athletes are often connected to receiving improper benefits from agents and boosters, and I doubt voters want that cloud hovering over the Hall of Fame.
2005 Heisman Trophy Should Remain Vacated
I completely agree with the Heisman Trust's decision to leave the '05 award vacant. Some people speculated that the Trust would re-award the trophy to that season's runner-up, Vince Young. Mack Brown, Texas' head coach, even publicly lobbied for that decision. But in the end, the Trust decided that they were too far removed from that season to render a sound decision. And I'm glad that they felt that way. I don't want to take anything away from Vince Young because he had a great season capped by a magical performance against Bush and USC in the Rose Bowl. But if you take Bush out of the equation, don't you think Matt Leinart would have received a lot of those votes? I remember that season a lot of people thought Leinart and Bush would take votes away from each other, well where is all that discussion now? You cannot simply assume that Young would have risen to the top.
Also, if you are Vince Young, would you even want that trophy now? Imagine displaying the trophy in your living room and knowing that the only reason why you won was because Bush gave it back to repair his image. Not only that, but I think a lot of the prestige of the trophy comes from the actual award ceremony. Every trophy winner in the modern era has video/pictures of them receiving the trophy with a huge smile and then delivering an acceptance speech. They have the opportunity to shake hands with the other fraternity members and officially join the club. Vince did none of that. And now that we are five years removed from that season and Vince is in the pros, does anyone even care about that year's award? I know I don't. I would love to hear the opinion of a rational Texas fan.
But if you take Bush out of the equation, don't you think Matt Leinart would have received a lot of those votes? I remember that season a lot of people thought Leinart and Bush would take votes away from each other, well where is all that discussion now? You cannot simply assume that Young would have risen to the top.
ReplyDelete------
Okay, Heres a thought. USC's record in 2005( Anyone, Bueller, Bueller) 0-12(maybe 0-13). How could Leinart win the award if his stats didn't count either, seriously. Also, Reggie Bush was "the most explosive player that year"? Noo, it was VY by a long shot. Reggie bush had the benefit of a cupcake schedule that year, VY had a lot of tough games. @ Ohio State, vs Texas Tech( undefeated going into that game, I believe) vs a ranked colorado( twice, 70-3 in the big XII game) @ Oklahoma state( Stillwater is tought) @ ATM( Kyle field is tougher). You really can't compare the two schedules, except for 1 game that USC played a great Dfense, and Reggie did that lateral play. VY owned all in his path aside from ATM, and they stilled put up 40 in that game, the game which above anything else lost him the heisman.
Thanks for the comment Liebid.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I'm assuming you are saying that if Bush did not play, then SOME of Leinart's stats would disappear from passes that he threw to Bush. Obviously, that's a valid point. But we just will never know if perhaps those passes would have gone to some other running back in the USC stable or a wide receiver even. And that is precisely the point--we will just never know because you cannot simply take Bush out of the equation and assume that there is a void where he was.
Second, I don't think Bush had the benefit of a cupcake schedule. He may have MADE the opponents LOOK like cupcakes, but it wasn't like the Pac-10 was just a bunch of rollover teams to begin with. I admit that VY was incredible. But how can you not think Reggie was the most electrifying? I am sure you have seen all the highlight videos on YouTube. Nobody has ever athletically dominated the college game like that! He ran circles around defenses. That only happens in high school!