Won the 1963 Heisman. The stats for the entire top 10 is bonkers bad. He had 7 TDs and 7 INTs. The runner up was 10-7, but completed under 50% of his passes. RB Sherman Lewis was 3rd, with 6.2 ypc...on 90 carries.
I've given up on the Staubach thing. It's not just the Heisman thing, but I'm in several random college football fan groups on FB and every month or so, someone posts Roger the Dodger with "best QB ever" and I can't even bother to say anything.
Fans back then only needed one big national performance to advance a player to "legend." For a QB specifically, all he had to do was be pretty good and have a few amazing scrambles. That's honestly all it took. Staubach (scrambling), Manning (big game vs Bama), Cannon (punt return), Spurrier (game-winning FG), etc.
Aside from their obsession with the flash of greatness all that's needed to be so great, voters back then suffered from rewarding actual great play from the year before. If you look at Staubach, he regressed every year. His SR season was hot garbage. -1 yard rushing for the season. 4 TD passes with 10 INTs. 'Best QB ever' my dick.
Hornung was a farse. One year, they reward volume, the next they reward high per-carry stats. It was all over the place.
Someone should do a study on those 60s and 70s scrambling QBs seemingly always having a good rushing season their JR seasons and falling off a cliff as SRs. It's almost universal.
Greg Pruitt might be confused by Heisman voters. Average 9 ypc (yes NINE) on 196 carries in '71 with 18 TDs and finish 3rd.....and regress across the board (attempts, yards, yards per carry, TDs) and finished 2nd. Of course. Because voters had a 1-year delay on their brains for whatever reason.
Why doesn't Archie Griffin have 3 Heismans? What's the difference between his SO and SR seasons??? Oh yeah, the delay effect. Why does he even have two?? Chuck Muncie probably still wonders.
Bleh. Whatever. None of it matters.
