Well, I'm saying that he's only played one big game this season, yesterday, and has only played against two defenses that weren't bottom dwelling catfish.
In the two games that he has played as such, he's 47 of 71, for 455 yards, 1 TD, 3 INTs. In the NFL that's a rating of 71.0. It's one thing to not put up a Heisman performance, it's another to do that.
Here's the thing, you've mentioned how good he was last season, but that he has no talent around him. But only four USC players were drafted, all four on different units, 2 O and 2 D. His best RB last season isn't on an NFL team and the guy that's replaced him at USC appears to be notably better, and if I had to guess, headed to the draft after his senior season next year if not after his junior season this year. So why is this team so drastically different than last season's? I see no reason why it should be. If several players that weren't drafted left as seniors, that's not typically a big problem for schools given the massive backfills they have for non-stellar players.
So why is USC worse this season? It's not from a significant loss of talent. The only OL they lost was drafted in the 7th round. Addison's the only player. Good QBs don't fold in college due to the loss of a single WR, no matter how good.
He's got three more big games to step up in. Cal won't be a big game, but Washington, @ Oregon, and UCLA should all be big games. It seems like a longshot that they make the PAC-10 CG though.
OK, but having said that, he had a key fumble that like cost his team a TD, had several dicey throws, and got lots of help from his special teams and even D late in the game in not losing by 20. I watched the entire 2nd half and part of the first. I saw it. He wasn't playing well. Not poorly, but far from a great game on his own merits, having nothing to do with the rest of the team. It didn't even approach rising to Heisman levels.
Maybe he either overachieved last season or just got lucky last year, who knows. But lighting up Colorado, San Jose State, and Nevada, three teams with defenses ranked 127th, 109th, and 120th, to the tune of 18 TDs and 1 INT, while putting up 8 TDs and 3 INTs in five other games, an average of 1.6 TDs/game, two of which were also against crap Ds, 2 TDs and 3 INTs in the three games that weren't against crap Ds otherwise, and for not even 1 TD/game, hardly screams out Heisman much less that he should be the first overall draft pick. Not as I evaluate anyway.
Let's see how he finishes.
Come on though, he got lots of help from his special teams and D. Of those 32 points, 6 were that Pick-6. fAlready down to 26. SC's first TD was Lloyd's 45-yard TD run. Down to 19. Williams was 2 for 2 for 6 yards on that drive. His only contribution was a 13-yard run. He's not going to be great in the NFL because of his running. So we can take those 7 off too. Now we're down to 19, which is far from impressive. He had one and only one notable play on their second scoring drive, but Washington also deserves equal credit for that. Washington also deserves credit, alongside Williams, for getting wide open on the only other notable pass play by Williams for 40 yards.
Two FGs otherwise, and that 61-yard PR set-up Williams' 13-yard TD run. I see two big pass plays in that game, that's it, as the primary reason for 13 points. That's it. I see a defense that put up 6, a PR that set up another 6, and Lloyd who ran for a 45-yard TD as the primary reason for 19 of their 32 points.
IDK why not. Their team hasn't changed that much. But Washington and Lloyd did a pretty good job yesterday. No?
The D put up 6 directly, and the STs provided a 61-yard PR to set-up Williams' 13-yard run.
Meanwhile, on a play that could have won the game, Williams gets sacked on 3rd-and-8 to force a FG instead of going up by 1 or possibly 3 late in the 4th. That wasn't a Heisman play.
But why isn't he doing better this season? They lost almost no one, by collegiate standards, in the draft. It appears to be nearly the same team. I'm having difficulty reconciling that.
No one is. Burrow was about as sure a thing as I've ever seen. I would put Lawrence in there too. Also, keep in mind, that it's quite possible that he was overrated from last season. Again, he's got four games left, at least, and three of 'em are big games. Let's see how he finishes.
But as of now, if I'm a GM looking for a QB, I'm incredibly hesitant to use a top-5 pick, possibly top-10, on Williams, based upon his play this season. I would consider last season more of a fluke, pending his play in November.
Heisman's don't mean much to me in this regard. In fact, it's funny we're talking about this, but the other criteria that would make me avoid a QB drafted highly, is in fact winning a Heisman. There's a lot of irony there. The track record of Heisman winning QBs in the NFL is not inspiring. LOL You have to go back to Carson Palmer over 20 years ago, ironically from USC, to find a Heisman winning QB that even sniffed greatness in the NFL prior to Burrow, and discounting Bryce Young for now, whom I'm not betting on to join Burrow in bucking that.
Here's a list of the modern Heisman-winning QBs since Palmer:
Murray, Mayfield, Jackson, Mariota, Winston, Manziel, RG III, Newton, Bradford, Tebow, Troy Smith, Leinart, and Jason White. The list through the 90s is even worse. Murray, Jackson, and maybe Mayfield are solid starters, but hardly great. Over half aren't even in the league anymore I don't think. Several just sucked outright.
Either way, the only way that I give Williams a percentage of ownership is if it's aligned with his contract from a percentage perspective, and 80% of it goes into an escrow to be paid back if he doesn't ante-up. LOL
