Is Ingram a default Heisman pick?

5 Comments released their weekly straw poll, and the 13 Heisman voters participating still have Alabama running back Mark Ingram well ahead of everybody else. As of this week, Ingram slots ahead of Tim Tebow, Case Keenum, Colt McCoy, Notre Dame quarterback Jimmy Clausen is fifth, Kellen Moore sixth, then Golden Tate comes in at seven.

ESPN’s Experts Poll has similar results: Ingram and Tebow at one and two, Clausen up to three, and Golden down at eight. Gene Mendez at has Ingram atop his rankings, with Nebraska DT Ndamukong Suh an unlikely second, Golden up at third, C.J. Spiller of Clemson at four, Keenum at five, and Clausen at six.

I’ve gone on record as saying these polls are kind of silly to begin with, but the Heisman Pundit poll is a very good predictor of what’s going to happen come the end of the season. And after seeing fairly similar results at the top of these polls, it’s pretty clear that many people will have Mark Ingram on their final ballot. But after crunching some numbers, it’s pretty clear to me that nobody has a clue who should win this trophy right now. The fact that Ingram, a solid back playing for an undefeated team, is the consensus leader for the Heisman Trophy is resounding proof of that fact.

I’ve got nothing against Ingram, who is a very good football player having a very nice year, but he just isn’t a Heisman caliber running back. If you go back to 1994 when Rashaan Salaam won the award, Ingram doesn’t come close to having the stats to match any of the past winners, and would struggle making an argument to even get invited to New York in most other years.

Salaam had a 2,000 yard season (back when bowl games and conference championships didn’t count). Eddie George put up 1900 yards and 24 TDs. Ricky Williams and Ron Dayne put up monster senior seasons while leaving college as the NCAA leader in rushing yards. Reggie Bush will probably end up with more rushing yards than Ingram on a fraction of the carries, and his receiving and return yards made him a far more electric offensive threat than Ingram.

With Ingram the leader in the clubhouse with the season coming down to the final stretch, is he the front-runner for any other reason than default? If we’ve decided that Case Keenum is too much of a system quarterback and the other signal-callers haven’t done enough to move them to the top of the list, and a defensive tackle will never win the award, let’s compare the two prominent skill position players left, Ingram and Golden Tate. Even if you handicap Tate for playing on a team that isn’t as good as undefeated Alabama, how can you give the nod to Ingram if your argument is predicated on their production on the field?

Through eight games, Ingram has run for 1,004 yards on 153 carries for 8 TDs. He’s also caught 19 passes for 186 yards and another 3 TDs. Very nice numbers no doubt. Yet looking at Tate’s numbers, he’s practically matched Ingram’s statistics, and he’s doing it from the wide receiver position. Tate has 56 catches for 927 yards and 9 TDs. He’s also added 155 yards on 19 carries and two TDs. Ingram’s 1,190 yards from scrimmage are only 108 more than Tate’s 1,082, and he’s touched the ball 97 more times from scrimmage than Tate. To put that in basic terms, Tate is averaging 14.4 yards per touch from scrimmage while Ingram is averaging 6.9 yards. That’s quite a staggering difference. Even if you want to look at easy measurables — like 100 yard games — Ingram has four, Tate has five. 

Before you go and tout how much tougher yards are to come by in the SEC, take a look at Ingram’s game log. Ingram burst onto the scene with 150 yards on 26 carries against the ACC’s Virginia Tech (who is looking weaker and weaker as the days go by), then played teams like Florida International, North Texas, and Arkansas (FIU and Arkansas held him to under 60 yards each game). It was only against conference bottom-feeders Kentucky, Ole Miss, and .500 South Carolina where Ingram started putting up numbers in the SEC, and only South Carolina has a reputation for being solid defensively.

Meanwhile, Tate’s stats have come against the best teams on his surprisingly difficult schedule. In the Irish’s 35-0 dismantling of Nevada to open the season, Tate had a relatively pedestrian 59 receiving yards, and was held to only 57 yards on five catches against Purdue (though he did rush for 55 yards on 9 carries against the Boilermakers). In the season’s biggest games (Michigan, Michigan St., Washington, USC, and Boston College), Tate has put up his biggest numbers.

The point of all of this isn’t to say that Mark Ingram is a bad running back or unworthy of the praise he’s garnered carrying the Alabama offense. My point is, if people are putting a non-quarterback on top of their Heisman list, how can they pick Ingram over Golden Tate?

The Heisman race is far from over, and both of Notre Dame’s candidates, Golden Tate and Jimmy Clausen, will have the opportunity to play in front of prime-time national audiences to state their case. But as the race stands today, I find it hard to make a convincing argument for Mark Ingram over Golden Tate.


Navy, Notre Dame will display mutual respect with uniforms

Keenan Reynolds, Isaac Rochell

The storied and important history of Notre Dame and Navy’s long-running rivalry will be on display this weekend, with the undefeated Midshipmen coming to South Bend this weekend.

On NBCSN, a half-hour documentary presentation will take a closer look, with “Onward Notre Dame: Mutual Respect” talking about everything from Notre Dame’s 43-year winning streak, to Navy’s revival, triggered by their victory in 2007. The episode will also talk about the rivalries ties to World War II, and how the Navy helped keep Notre Dame alive during wartime.

You can catch it on tonight at 6:30 p.m. ET on NBCSN or online in the same viewing window.

On the field, perhaps an even more unique gesture of respect is planned. With Under Armour the apparel partner for both Notre Dame and Navy, both teams will take the field wearing the same cleats, gloves and baselayers. Each team’s coaching staff will also be outfitted in the same sideline gear.

More from Monday’s press release:

For the first time in college football, two opponents take the field with the exact same Under Armour baselayer, gloves and cleats to pay homage to the storied history and brotherhood between their two schools. The baselayer features both Universities’ alma maters on the sleeves and glove palms with the words “respect, honor, tradition” as a reminder of their connection to each other. Both sidelines and coaches also will wear the same sideline gear as a sign of mutual admiration.​

Navy and Notre Dame will meet for the 89th time on Saturday, a rivalry that dates back to 1927. After the Midshipmen won three of four games starting in 2007, Notre Dame hopes to extend their current winning streak to five games on Saturday.

Here’s an early look at some of the gear:


The good, the bad and the ugly: Notre Dame vs. Clemson

Will Fuller, B.J. Goodson

For a variety of reasons, Notre Dame’s 24-22 loss stings a little bit more than usual. The self-inflicted mistakes. The horrible start in an electric environment. The dropped passes and the missed blocks. Not to mention the two failed two-point conversions.

On a night where Notre Dame needed to bring close to their best to leave Death Valley a victor, they brought nothing near it for the game’s first 45 minutes. And while they very nearly fought their way into overtime, it wasn’t enough to emerge victorious.

“If you told me we were going to turn the ball over four times, I would tell you that we were going to lose,” Kelly said to open his postgame comments. “You wouldn’t have to be a genius to figure that out. We turned the ball over four times and we lost.”

With that, the Irish drop to 4-1 on the season, and need to immediately turn their focus to Navy and their triple-option maestro Keenan Reynolds. So let’s put this one in a body bag and do our best to move on as we tackle the good, bad and ugly.



DeShone Kizer. The sophomore quarterback showed a lot of pose and resiliency on Saturday night, able to keep his cool when many of his teammates couldn’t seem to do the same. Kizer lead the Irish to a furious fourth quarter comeback that came up just short when he called his own number on a run-pass option play on Notre Dame’s second failed two-point conversion play.

“At the end of the day, we want to be a championship team, but champions don’t lose,” Kizer said after the game. “It sucks that we end the game the way we do after fighting back the way we fought back.”

Kelly had positive things to say about his sophomore quarterback, who threw for 321 yards, a large portion of those coming in the fourth quarter, when everybody in the stadium knew he’d be throwing the ball.

“I’m really proud of him. I’m proud of the way he competed,” Kelly said. “He played well enough for us to win, let’s put it that way.”


C.J. ProsiseNo, he couldn’t get on track in the running game—held to just three yards in the first half. But Prosise once again showed he was the team’s most reliable playmaker, getting loose out of the backfield and notching a 100-yard receiving game on just four catches.

Yes, his fumble to begin the second half didn’t help. But Prosise’s evolution as a football player—contributing big things even when the ground game was stuck in neutral—was a nice step forward. Keeping him involved in the short passing game could be a huge part of this offense moving forward.


Max Redfield. We’ve spent a lot of time demanding the former 5-star recruit start playing like one. And on Saturday night, I thought he did. Redfield led Notre Dame in tackles notching 14, including an astounding 11 solo stops. Kelly talked about Redfield’s performance on Sunday.

“This past weekend [was] probably played his best game since he’s been here at Notre Dame,” Kelly said. “There’s a standard for him now on film for how he can play this game and hopefully we can continue on this track.”

Most wondered if the safety play was going to be Notre Dame’s demise on Saturday evening, especially matched up against Clemson’s talented skill talent. Redfield took a major step forward on Saturday night, playing physical as a tackler, a nice step forward considering the cast on his hand.


Resiliency. No moral victories. But I was impressed by the resolve this football team showed, especially when they seemed so overwhelmed early in the football game.

If the Irish end up getting into a beauty pageant for a spot in the College Football Playoff, it’s worth noting that their one loss is a narrow defeat on the road, against what looks like one of the ACC’s top teams.

Of course, a close loss doesn’t matter if Notre Dame loses again. And Kelly shared that message with his captains postgame, acknowledging that there’s zero margin for error now.

“I met with the captains after the game and told them what they need to do to continue to work towards their goals and what their vision is for this football team,” Kelly said. “You can’t lose another game. You know, you’re on the clock now. Every single weekend you’re playing elimination football.”


Fifty-three minutes of defense. We touched on the play of the defense in our Five Things, but it’d be unfair to not mention it here. Outside of the first two series, Notre Dame’s defense played very well.

Sheldon Day and Isaac Rochell were tough in the trenches. Jaylon Smith was active at linebacker. Cole Luke made up for some early missed tackles with a game-turning interception and when Clemson got conservative in the fourth quarter protecting a lead, the Irish defense held strong.

“We can’t go on the road and be tentative defensively to start a game. After that, we played the kind of defense we expect to play here,” Kelly said postgame. “We played well enough after that first quarter, if you don’t have four turnovers.”



The first seven minutes. Notre Dame lost this football game not because Brian Kelly made a few controversial decisions on two-point conversions, but rather because the Irish showed zero composure in the game’s opening minutes.

Nothing went right in the game’s first seven minutes. Not on offense, not on defense, nor on special teams. And the result was a 14-point hole that Notre Dame just couldn’t dig itself out from.

This didn’t seem like a football team capable of a horrendous start. But Notre Dame didn’t answer the bell, and allowed Clemson’s crowd—and aggressive defense—to dictate terms for the first 30 minutes.


The turnovers. Kelly’s comments said it best. Notre Dame wasn’t winning a game where they turned it over four times. Worst still, it seemed like Irish ball security was faulty in critical times, with youngsters and veterans alike making the mistakes.

“If I knew, we certainly would’ve coached it more. But you’re talking about veteran players and rookies,” Kelly said. “[C.J. Sanders] looks dynamic on the first return, then turns it over…  Arguably two of your most veteran and decorated players, C.J. [Prosise] and Chris Brown, they know how to hold onto a ball, and they turn it over. And then DeShone tries to force a ball in there… If you turn it over, we’re not going to win games.”


The Drops. Yes, it was slippery and miserable out there. But it was for both teams. Notre Dame’s heralded receiving corps dropped a half-dozen passes, a crippling set of miscues that left a lot of yards (and points) out there.

Kelly calculated that the Irish left roughly 125 yards on the field, a number that certainly would’ve added to DeShone Kizer’s yardage total and would’ve turned Saturday night into a different outcome.

Corey Robinson has been known for his velcro hands. On Saturday, two drops arguably cost the Irish a touchdown and a must-have two-point conversion. Will Fuller was held to two catches, letting a third down conversion go through his hands. Fuller’s drop highlighted the one deficiency in his game, something former NFL director of college scouting Greg Gabriel pointed out on Twitter last night.

It was Fuller and Chris Brown who started some of the trash-talk opportunities with their Twitter comments. They couldn’t back it up this week.


The Offensive Line. This was probably the most disappointing part of Saturday night. Notre Dame’s offensive front got absolutely mauled in the first half, getting zero push and giving up nine tackles behind the line of scrimmage. Clemson’s defensive ends had seven TFLs themselves. Yes, the Tigers loaded the box and played aggressively downhill. But there wasn’t a single soul inside or out of the Notre Dame program that didn’t expect that.

After being able to dictate terms through four games, the Irish turned into a one-dimensional, finesse front five. We spent all offseason saying that wouldn’t be the case with this group. While they were playing in mud and slop and in conditions that were deafening, the Irish just couldn’t establish the running game early, a necessity to winning.

With the game on the line and Kizer showing confidence in his offensive front, Notre Dame chose to run for the tie. They couldn’t get it done.



The pain of losing. It’s been since November since Notre Dame lost a football game. And in those 10-plus months, we forgot what it was like to watch a team fail to win.

If you’re looking for people to blame, you had a fun night. Most have turned to the man atop the program. They’ll say Kelly failed to prepare his team, or blew the game by chasing points. They’ll cite a seven-figure salary when complaining about unoriginality near the goal line or a failure to read a two-point conversion chart.

In hindsight, it’s certainly hard to argue with the detractors, especially when two Justin Yoon extra points would’ve pushed the game into overtime. (Then again, if Corey Robinson reels in a wide-open two point try, Yoon’s kicking for the win.)

Yet in torrents of rain and a game that seemingly went wrong at every early turn, Notre Dame nearly pulled it out. And that says a lot about the program Kelly has built, as much anything Kelly did wrong from his spot on the sidelines.

In a close football game, many of the 50-50 decisions that are made determine the difference between winning and losing. But focusing on the minutiae distracts you from the autopsy results.

Notre Dame lost because of the blunt force trauma that comes from four turnovers. And from a half-dozen dropped passes. Not to mention an offensive line that couldn’t win at the point of attack and a slow start by the defense.

So while everybody’s looking for someone to blame, that’s the pain of losing. And we might have all forgotten that over the last 10 months.