Reggie Bush was the best college football player in the country in 2005. I remember watching Bush as he rushed for over 1,700 yards and 16 touchdowns. Bush finished the 2005 season with 2,890 all-purpose yards and 19 TDs. So it was no surprise that Reggie Bush was awarded the 2005 Heisman Trophy. He had 705 more first-place votes than the runner-up, Texas quarterback, Vince Young. Bush received 2,541 total votes. Young received 1,608. There's no question the Heisman belonged to Reggie Bush.
Well, it belonged to him until September 14, 2010. After an NCAA investigation he was retroactively declared ineligible for the 2005 season and USC was severely punished. I'm not getting into the NCAA investigation - that's another post for another day, but the aftermath of the investigation created a controversy that, until this week, was left unresolved. Bush announced yesterday that he was "giving up" his award. And by "giving up" I mean he was forced to hand it over. Word leaked a few days ago that Bush would be stripped of his Heisman, so he did the only thing he could do to save a little bit of dignity - give it up so they couldn't take it.
So now with Bush "forfeiting" the Heisman, what will the Heisman Trophy Trust do with the award?
Well, there are basically three options:
A. The Heisman Trophy Trust can give the 2005 Heisman Trophy to runner-up Vince Young. That makes sense, right? Young was next in line wasn't he? But what about USC quarterback Matt Leinart, who received 18 first-place votes and a total of 797. If Reggie Bush had been ruled ineligible before the season began, Leinart would've been directly effected. There's no doubt opposing teams would've defended the Trojans differently. Would Leinart's numbers have been worse since he lost his starting running back and best play-maker? Or maybe Leinart would've thrown the ball more, adding up more yards and touchdowns. Without Bush, maybe Leinart wins the 2005 Heisman. So I'm sorry Vince, you're not getting the trophy.
B. They could re-vote. I'm not spending much time on this one, because I don't consider it an option. Re-voting for a five-year-old award is ridiculous. You would be asking voters to ignore the successes (or failures) the 2005 Heisman hopefuls have experienced since the original voting took place. For example, Deangelo Williams and Elvis Dumervil have had success in the NFL, while Brady Quinn and Matt Leinart have been huge busts. It would be impossible to ignore such information. So, on to plan C.
C. Leave the award vacant. No one knows how a Reggie Bush-less season would've played out. Even if Leinart finished with similar numbers, there's no way to know how the votes Bush received would've been distributed among the other finalists. So the 2005 Heisman Trophy should be awarded to no one. To me, this is the obvious choice. I don't think any individual or group can make an accurate and unbiased decision on what happens to the trophy. Therefore you must leave it alone.
Today the people with the opinions that matter made their decision. In a statement released this afternoon, the Heisman Trophy Trust said,
"As a result of Reggie Bush's decision to forfeit his title as Heisman winner of 2005, the Trustees have determined that there will be no Heisman Trophy winner for the year 2005."
The Trust went on to say,
"It was a difficult decision to return the Heisman Trophy and he (Bush) exhibited great character in acknowledging his mistakes and accepting the consequences."
So there you go. Reggie Bush gives back his trophy and the trustees decide no player won the Heisman in 2005. There will be an empty line next to the year in the official Heisman records. USC has removed all Reggie Bush pictures and memorabilia from campus. His name has been erased from the NCAA record books.
Now that we're finished with all of this nonsense, no one will ever know that Reggie Bush won the 2005 Heisman...right? WRONG. The memories remain. They can't take that away. And hey, if I forget, I'll just go to You Tube and look up Reggie Bush highlights. We all know, and we'll always know, who won the 2005 Heisman Trophy. To be clear, I'm not condoning his actions, which were clearly against NCAA rules. And I'm no way insinuating that Reggie Bush should be allowed to keep the Heisman. What I am saying is that it doesn't matter if he has the actual trophy in his possession. It doesn't matter if there is no official winner of the 2005 Heisman. I know who won it. Decades from now I'll still know who won it, and I'll tell my kids who won it. In 2005 I knew Reggie Bush was the best player in college football that season. Five years later my mind hasn't changed.
No comments:
Post a Comment