OMG! OMG! Chicago Tribune Notre Dame beat jockey faced Heisman conundrum!!!!!!!

Newspaper wishes to avoid "becoming the NEWS!!!!!" So it makes a big deal out of Heisman vote, then publishes a column in which it explains how this does NOT mean the paper has become the news.

Journalistic navel-gazing at its finest.

http://www.shermanreport.com/dilemma-notre-dame-beat-writer-chicago-tribune-make-interesting-decision-heisman-vote/

 

I disagree. They decided to vary from the norm and published an explanatory piece.
I'm OK with all of it.

 

I think anybody who votes for a major award should write a column explaining the decision.

 

Another great example of why sports writers shouldn't vote these things. And Mr. Kellams doesn't really make any kind of argument as to why they should, given the specific circumstance.

More inclined to Norrin's view here, that the explanatory piece doesn't explain much.

Newspapers need to recuse themselves from the 'Johnny Football Trophy Brought To You By Nissan and 1800Flowers' nonsense.

 

It doesn't matter to me whether or not writers vote for awards. But if they do, they should just vote and be done with it. There's no need for this Kellams to babble on about what a dilemma this was.

This is way too Inside Baseball, and goes deeply into the realm of "who cares"?

 

This must be satire.

 

Why? If you're going to vote, you should be able top defend your vote.

Some years the vote might be a no-brainer. Some years it's not. When I had a AP vote, we ran how I voted every week. I didn't explain anything, but I would get a ton of emails screaming about putting one school over the other or applauding me for putting one school ahead of another. I never knew if people were going to agree or disagree with me, but I knew people paid attention to it.

 

Again, I disagree. Kellams was asked for an explanation and he gave one.

 

I'm not sure why this is your main concern. Of all the potential conflicts -- and I believe there are conflicts -- I don't get why a corporate sponsorship appears to offend you most.

 

If he was as unbiased as he should be, why should he naturally vote for te'o? And why do we need to know who he voted for when his vote was 1/5 of a vote. I applaud the beat writer here.

 

I don't mind that writers vote on the Heisman. They see more games than anyone. I like the fact that former Heisman winners get a vote - it adds to the brotherhood of the award.
But I've also always been of the mind that NFL scouts should get a vote - one per team. They are true talent evaluators and could possibly get the Heisman to where it says it wants to be - and that's awarding the trophy to college football's best player, not simply the quarterback with the best stats. Sometimes that might be the case, but I'd love for 32 NFL scouts to factor into the equation.

 

Who said it was my 'main concern?'

The vote in this case was the cause of the navelgazing.