Troy Smith’s Heisman trophy had to be shipped home after failing an airline security inspection.

Smith was not allowed to take the trophy on the plane. He could have passed it through the X-ray scanner, but that’s how Eddie George’s trophy got damaged in 1995. Apparently, he asked for a hand inspection, and the trophy was denied clearance.

Wonder if anyone checked to see if the TSA screener was a Michigan fan…

OSU reigned, Lloyd Carr complained, Brady Quinn gained, but Troy Smith maintained.

Here’s a summary of OSU award winners (let me know if I neglected any):

Davy O’brien (Best QB):
Troy Smith

Walter Camp (Player of the Year):
Troy Smith

Bronko Nagurski (Top Defensive Player):
James Laurinaitis

Danny Wuerffel (Outstanding Athletic, Academic, and Community Service):
Joel Penton

All-America Team (Outstanding Athletic Acheivement):
Troy Smith, Quinn Pitcock, James Laurinaitis

Academic All-American Team (Outstanding Academic Achievement):
Anthony Gonzalez, Stan White, Jr. (1st team); James Laurinaitis (2nd team)

Scout.com National Player of the Year:
Troy Smith

Scout.com All-America Team (Outstanding Athletic Acheivement):
Troy Smith, Quinn Pitcock, James Laurinaitis (1st team); Doug Datish (2nd team)

Heisman Memorial Trophy (Best Player in College Football):
Troy Smith (yes, we’re already including this one)

“But… but… Quinn won the Maxwell! So the media thinks he’s the best player!” Not exactly. The Maxwell tends to be more of an MVP trophy. Some people confuse ‘most valuable’ with ‘best,’ but that’s not always the case. Sometimes, they’re the same person, and other times not (like this year).

I think there’s an argument that Quinn, while not the best player in college football, might be more valuable to Notre Dame than Smith is to OSU. Of course, Smith is still the better QB and athlete, but if you remove Quinn from ND they probably become a sub-.500 team. Do the same to OSU, and they probably lose a bunch more games, but they probably don’t tank like the Irish would.

Besides, Quinn had a good season and broke all those records at ND… so they had to give him something. A good player like Quinn, from an institution like Notre Dame, getting shut out would be bad for PR purposes. And the media is still overly obsessed with Weis.

So I consider the 2006 Maxwell as sort of a token “Most Valuable, but Really Bad Timing Award,” as in “Sorry, Brady, you’re a good player, but you just happened to be playing football when Troy Smith was. Bad timing for you, so here you go.”

Otherwise, he ends up being remembered as being the guy that got to ride in the limousine with Troy Smith after the 2006 Heisman ceremony.

I don’t care what team you root for, when you watch this video you’ll understand why Troy Smith is the best player in college football.

Yes, you’ll see great performances from his receivers. But no other QB (including Quinn) could thread the needle like Smith does, and from any hash, from the pocket or on the move, with guys hanging off of him, for three yards or 60. No matter what his body or foot position, he simply puts it where only his receiver can bring it down.

My favorites are #17 and #29.

HT: DCFW and Timbuck2

…barring a miracle (for UM).

The coaches poll gave the nod to Florida at the #2 spot.

It’s not likely that the Harris poll will be able to give UM the votes it needs to overtake Florida.

Another classy (and smart) move for Tressel; he abstained from this week’s coaches’ poll.

We are excited to play in the BCS title game against a tremendous opponent,” he said in a statement. “After consultation with my director of athletics, Gene Smith, and based upon our unique position in the BCS standings, I believe it is only fair that we not participate in the final poll.”

More at the Fanhouse.

UPDATE:
The LA Times quotes a BCS source as saying it is official: The Gators will advance.

Buckeye nation must wait until 10 p.m. EST tonight to find out who OSU’s opponent will be in the BCS national title game.

Fans seem to be evenly split on the issue, as is evident in the ESPN poll:

Mark Schlabach’s ESPN article makes a pretty persuasive case for the BCS taking Florida. He goes all Dave Letterman on us, listing ten reasons why Florida’s body of work is more impressive than Michigan. One of his points:

“5. The 12 teams Florida defeated finished the season with 11 combined wins against opponents which were ranked in the AP Top 25 poll at the time the game was played. The opponents Michigan defeated claim just three wins against ranked teams (Notre Dame beat Penn State. Indiana beat Iowa. Vanderbilt beat Georgia. The Nittany Lions, Hawkeyes and Bulldogs, it should be noted, haven’t been ranked in seven weeks).”

What’s interesting to me is that everyone is arguing over what’s fair for Florida or Michigan. I agree that a case can be made for both, but nobody is arguing over what’s fair for OSU! Shouldn’t the team that clinched the spot more clearly than any other get a say? Shouldn’t what’s fair for OSU be a determining factor in the decisions of the voters in the coaches’ and Harris polls?

Clearly, giving Michigan a mulligan would be unfair for OSU. The Buckeyes have already proved they were the better team. Why have to validate it again, just because some kool-aid drinking BCS voters think Florida doesn’t deserve a shot?

**UPDATED… see below.**

Michigan did not lose to OSU because of a shoddy field.

There. I just had to get that out there. Sheesh. There is waaay too much talk on UM blogs and message boards blaming the November 18th loss on mediocre grass. (No, I’m not giving you any links to such.) If Woody and Bo could hear the fans complaining, they’d be ashamed of how wuss-ified college football had become.

At any rate, am I the only one that notices the inherent contradicton in that argument? If you argue that UM is about as good as OSU, but you also argue that UM isn’t OSU’s equal on a slippery field, isn’t that the same as admitting that UM isn’t as good as OSU? Think about that for a moment. “They’re just as good. Oh, they can’t beat them on a non-perfect field, but they might be able to beat them on a perfect one. So, they’re just as good.” WTH kind of logic is that?

Let us slap some logic on ya:

(1) No, the field wasn’t as perfect as field turf. Yes, the occasional player slipped. But it wasn’t as bad as what a lot of UM fans make it out to be. And it wasn’t as bad as a rainy field, or a muddy field, or a snowy field, etc. If you want to see terrible field conditions, watch the OSU/Penn State game, played during a heavy downpour. Interesting how you didn’t hear Penn State players or fans blaming their loss on the field conditions. Maybe that’s because…

(2) Surprise! OSU played on the same field. Saying the field conditions only gave the advantage to OSU is pure cognitive dissonance. One Michigan blogger, who I really respect, actually said that a slippery field hurt Mike Hart more than it hurt Antonio Pittman, because Hart makes a “lot of cuts.” Foolish me, I never noticed that Pittman only runs in a straight line! Someone else wrote, “But the field caused Manningham to trip and not catch that bomb from Henne.” But the field kept Ginn from catching the first-quarter bomb from Smith. Advantage: nobody.

One of these things is the REAL reason Michigan lost

Some have argued that the turf benefited the OSU offense more than the UM defense. But even if that was the case, remember that both teams had 12 offensive possessions. They both had equal chances to “benefit” from the field conditions. (Note: in actuality, UM had one more offensive possession than OSU, as OSU’s twelvth possession was a “run the clock out” possession at the end of the game.)

No matter what your loyalty, the field did not give one team the advantage over another. For a given play, it may cause a ball carrier to slip, for another, it may cause a defender to slip.

(3) This is the first time in history that a group of fans have complained that a slippery field actually raised the score in a game. Uhhh… whatever.

(4) The turf wasn’t the reason that, at any given time, two out of four or five OSU WRs were completely alone and not covered in the flat. It didn’t have anything to do with the UM secondary being out of position on Pittman’s and Wells’ 50+ yard runs, or the many missed tackles on OSU ball carriers. Ginn was covered as best he could be on the second quarter play action TD pass, and the turf didn’t help Smith put the ball in that 12″ wide window where only Ginn could catch it.

(5) Turf aside, the only reason Michigan even had a chance in that game were the three gift-wrapped turnovers from OSU, and a bogus pass-interference call that kept a UM touchdown drive alive. It was those four events that led to 17 UM points, and that kept OSU from scoring at least two touchdowns more than it did.

Know what? That’s such a good point, I think I’ll rephrase it in a more dramatic way:

Turf had nothing to do with it. I really do understand the need to find something – anything – to mitigate a disappointing loss. Heaven knows what we OSU fans went through during the Cooper era. But understand, the turf had absolutely no effect on the outcome of the game.

UPDATE: Jeff at BBC is being mean again. (If you’ve read our other posts that link to Jeff’s work, you know that’s our way of complimenting him.) He’s put together a video that shows a couple of Buckeye ball carriers — the ones who don’t make cuts — juking UM defenders out of their shoes… without slipping.

With one of the greatest seasons coming to an end, the Ohio State Buckeyes, as a team, have accomplished an impressive 12-0 season. This is perhaps the best “award” a team could be given — a chance to play for the National Championship. While there can only be one “Team Award,” many individual Buckeyes have played exceptionally well, and our deserving of personal recognition.

Now that we prepare with the bowl game, let’s take a look at the awards that Buckeyes have qualified for. Hit the jump for the complete list.
[Read more…]