It is that time of year again, for the “ongoing” MNC Wednesday miniseries entries scrutinizing Heisman Trophy votes, as the 2024 winner was announced a few days ago. We have not agreed with the voters since the 2018 season, and when we think of the hyperbole machines that exist these days, we may never agree with a vote again for the Hypesman. After all, it just is about who can pimp the player best now.

2024 Heisman Trophy winner: Travis Hunter, WR/CB, Colorado (original); Kurtis Rourke, QB, Indiana (revised)

So, Colorado Buffaloes two-way player Travis Hunter won the Heisman vote after catching 92 passes for only 1,152 yards on offense while registering four interceptions on defense. He scored 15 touchdowns overall (54th in the nation). We’re not a fan of this selection for a few reasons, but we will go through due process as usual to decide who we think should have really won this trophy. That’s why we’ve done this column forever.

Who are the other vetted candidates? Here is our short list:

  • Kurtis Rourke, QB, Indiana: 181.4 QB rating for CFP-bound, 1-loss team
  • Ashton Jeanty, RB, Boise State: 2,613 scrimmage yards (30 TDs) for CFP-bound, 1-loss team
  • Cameron Skattebo, RB, Arizona State: 2,074 scrimmage yards (22 TDs) for CFP-bound, 2-loss team

For context, the Buffaloes were a 3-loss team that didn’t even make it to their conference title game; Hunter posted just 1,157 scrimmage yards (sixth in receiving yards). He made just 32 tackles on the season playing cornerback, but he did lead the nation with 11 passes defended. So, that’s where his true defensive value is placed, in reality. His receiving skills do not stand out that much, other than mere volume/counting stats.

His yards-per-catch number (12.5) ranked just 212th in the country; he was basically a possession receiver. Even Skattebo had a higher YPC number (13.7) out of the backfield, albeit only on 37 receptions. Our point is that Hunter’s two-way abilities are extremely overrated, since he’s entirely replaceable on offense, and his 32 tackles and four INTs on defense are hardly enough to warrant the Heisman Trophy on their own.

But we digress; we have to examine the context for these four finalists—and we’re including Hunter out of obligation, as we think the nation’s passer-rating leader, rushing leader, and all-purpose star on CFP-bound teams had a lot more impact during the year, once you remove the hyperbole from the situation. To wit, the SOS marks for the four teams above: Arizona State (54); Boise State (90); Colorado (63); and Indiana (69).

None of the schools played good schedules, really: ASU won the Big XII; Boise State won the MWC; Colorado lost out on tiebreaks for the Big XII title game; and Indiana lost out on tiebreaks for the B1G title game. Jeanty’s numbers are insane, but they came against very weak competition. Hunter and Rourke played comparable schedules; Scattebo had the “toughest” go of it and still finished second in overall yards.

How about their offensive teammates? Check it out:

  • ASU: QB with 159.5 QB rating; one teammate over 515 total yards (WR with 1,102 yards and 10 TDs)
  • BSU: QB with 143.6 QB rating; one teammate over 523 total yards (WR with 837 yards and 4 TDs)
  • Colorado: QB with 168.8 QB rating; one teammate over 617 total yards (WR with 880 yards and 10 TDs)
  • Indiana: no teammates with more than 900 total yards (four between 594-895 yards, overall)

What we see here is that Hunter also had great QB support, and he was just a tad bit “better” than the next-best position player on his own team. Jeanty had the least to work with, even though he played the weakest schedule by far. Rourke also was the quintessential game manager here, distributing effectively to multiple skill-position players on his own team. And Skattebo did a lot of work against the best slate of the bunch.

Heck, why not add Buffaloes QB Shedeur Sanders to this list? He led the nation with a 74.2 completion percentage, also demonstrating his abilities were the driving force behind Hunter’s receiving. In reality, the presence of both of them on the offense would, in theory, cancel each other out in a contextual, sensical vote. Therefore, for the umpteenth time, we really have no idea what these voters were thinking at all.

One last nail in Hunter’s coffin, too, is the fact the Colorado defense ranked 38th in the country in points allowed—hardly elite against a weak SOS. Shouldn’t an alleged shutdown corner have a bigger impact on a team? We think so, especially since that is his primary value for winning this award, and he was replaceable on offense. The voters really didn’t think this one through very clearly, which is no surprise: Hypesman?!

So, for us, this comes down to Rourke or Skattebo, really, and we think Rourke did more with less than Skattebo, despite the SOS difference. Arizona State had a good QB and a Hunter-like WR, so Skattebo benefitted from that. Meanwhile, Rourke led a lesser-talented team to an 11-1 record, even if it was against weaker competition overall. It’s hard to overlook how much he meant to a CFP-bound team in the end.

Congratulations to Kurtis Rourke, the real Heisman Trophy winner for 2024. That means in 69 seasons of review, we have confirmed just 19 winners of the trophy’s vote. Think about that for awhile … and question why the public puts up with more corruption in the voting for the Hypesman Trophy every year: sheep!