Do you think Joe should have won the heisman in '99?

Yeh the hook-and-ladder was '01 but in that 45-38 loss up there to the Hoos in '99 we did have a 17-0 first quarter lead, and if I'm not mistaken we were driving again when Joe and Sean Gregory(maybe?) messed up an option pitch for a turnover. And from that point on, Tech's D didn't do a thing in that game. The Wake loss was placed so unfortunately for Joe, because he needed a statement performance toward the end of the year when Dayne was passing the record.
 
Late season poor performances do not keep QBs from winning the Heisman Trophy.

Troy Smith S-T-U-N-K against Illinois last November. A far worse team and a far worse performance than Joe's in 1999. The difference? Troy Smith's defense only gave up 10 points, so his wretched performance was not held against him because OSU won.
 
Absolutely, Joe Hamilton is the best quarterback Georgia Tech has ever had (including Lotheridge, who was damn good)
 
mm42 said:
Late season poor performances do not keep QBs from winning the Heisman Trophy.

Troy Smith S-T-U-N-K against Illinois last November. A far worse team and a far worse performance than Joe's in 1999. The difference? Troy Smith's defense only gave up 10 points, so his wretched performance was not held against him because OSU won.
Click to expand...

I think it's a moot point. Our defense stunk all year but we didn't lose every game. When Joe had a poor performance, we lost. The offense couldn't perform well when Joe didn't perform well.

So, he lost the Heisman because we lost a game or he lost the Heisman because of a poor performance that we happened to lose because of that poor performance. Either interpretation leads to the same result because if he performed at his normal level then we don't lose.

Given, our defense was pretty non-existent. Was it an announcer or a fan who said that the two most powerful offenses in the nation were GT and whomever was playing GT?
 
lonestarjacket said:
When Joe had a poor performance, we lost. The offense couldn't perform well when Joe didn't perform well.

So, he lost the Heisman because we lost a game or he lost the Heisman because of a poor performance that we happened to lose because of that poor performance.
Click to expand...

:wtf:

Joe Hamilton DID NOT LOSE THAT GAME.

I don't know where this ridiculous idea even came from.

You would think from the crap being shoveled around here that he had a "Reggie Ball vs. UGAg 2006" style meltdown or something.

Against Wake in 1999, Little Joe passed for 281 yards and 1 TD, completed 23 of 40 passes, and also rushed for 36 yards. He did have 2 interceptions, but that happens to all QBs sometimes. Troy Smith had 2 INTs against Penn State last year, but his defense only gave up 6 points so no one cared.

Joe's QB rating against Wake was a pedestrian 115, but Troy Smith's against Illinois last year was an appalling 87.
 
mm42, IMO it's not that Joe lost the Wake game, it's that he didn't save us from a sorry day. Losing to Wake just looked so bad that it really hurt him in the voting I think. The reason we lost wasn't Joe but we all expected so much from him when he couldn't pull another one out of the hat, it felt the same way.
 
ncjacket said:
mm42, IMO it's not that Joe lost the Wake game, it's that he didn't save us from a sorry day. Losing to Wake just looked so bad that it really hurt him in the voting I think. The reason we lost wasn't Joe but we all expected so much from him when he couldn't pull another one out of the hat, it felt the same way.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% that losing to Wake killed any chance of Joe winning the Heisman. Losing to UVa also hurt his chances badly.

My point is that IF we had a strong defense like Ohio State last year and won those games 38-10 and 23-7, with the EXACT SAME performance by Joe, he would likely have won the Heisman. In other words, Joe's performance was Heisman worthy and would have been seen as such by the voters if our defense had been better.
 
Colt Brennan is in a similar situation this year. In order for him to win the Heisman, Hawai'i HAS to win out. He could throw for over 5,000 yds but if they lose at all, he will have no chance to win it.

Troy Smith had the luxury of playing at a perennial power which gives a player more leniency towards losses/bad games.
 
mm42 said:
I agree 100% that losing to Wake killed any chance of Joe winning the Heisman. Losing to UVa also hurt his chances badly.

My point is that IF we had a strong defense like Ohio State last year and won those games 38-10 and 23-7, with the EXACT SAME performance by Joe, he would likely have won the Heisman. In other words, Joe's performance was Heisman worthy and would have been seen as such by the voters if our defense had been better.
Click to expand...


Agreed. But he could have won it in spite of our lousy defense if we had beaten Wake Forest. The lousy defense didn't play any worse in the WF game than they did in any other game.

So, yeah, if we could wish for even an average defense that year then we may have been undefeated. With the defense we had, Joe had NO margin for error for his performance or the offense's performance as a whole to fall off.

It's not fair. The Heisman is for a player, not for the team. But it is the reality of Heisman voting that your team can't lose games it is supposed to win. The Heisman candidate is somehow expected not to let that happen. And that team should have beaten WF; even with our lousy defense.
 
Okay, so I'm a Dawg. But before you bash, please let me give my opinion.

JOE HAMILTON WAS THE BEST PLAYER IN '99 AND IT WASN'T EVEN CLOSE! HE DESERVED THE HEISMAN!

Ron Dayne was overrated, and wilted against a fast defense (see UGA-Wiscy Outback Bowl, '97). What did Joe do against fast defenses? He went faster.

He was, in my opinion, one of the most exciting players of the 90's. The Heisman voters stiffed him, and '99 is an example of how flawed the award voting really is.

That is all. There will be no more GT compliments coming from me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top