[82lsju]

AL did share that he's still sore about not winning the Voldemort.

To provide context to Luck's displeasure with the Voldemort vote, I was the person who asked the question:

Elway, Gerhart, Luck, McCaffrey, Love have all come in second in the Voldemort race.  Stanford will have athletes in the future that will have the same potential generational talent.  How can Stanford market more effectively to get the Voldemort back to Stanford.

Luck's answer generally alluded to the East Coast Bias and its negative impact on West Coast teams (doesn't explain USC or Oregon).  His sensitivity to the issue indicates to me that Stanford will be more on the ball next time one of our players is a finalist for the Trophy.

Historically, Stanford has been a little bit too cool for school when marketing their Hiesman candidates. It requires an all-out, full-court press, particularly when you're in a part of the country that most of the rest of the country doesn't think about or hear about on a regular basis.

without looking at past kickoff times my impression is that we had more late games (7pm PT or later) than either Oregon or USC which would be a big negative in terms of generating support of H.eisman voters.  If you read about someone with big stats you might vote for them in the top three but if you haven't seen them play would you vote for them to win?

[82lsju]

AL did share that he's still sore about not winning the Voldemort.

To provide context to Luck's displeasure with the Voldemort vote, I was the person who asked the question:

Elway, Gerhart, Luck, McCaffrey, Love have all come in second in the Voldemort race.  Stanford will have athletes in the future that will have the same potential generational talent.  How can Stanford market more effectively to get the Voldemort back to Stanford.

Luck's answer generally alluded to the East Coast Bias and its negative impact on West Coast teams (doesn't explain USC or Oregon).  His sensitivity to the issue indicates to me that Stanford will be more on the ball next time one of our players is a finalist for the Trophy.

Historically, Stanford has been a little bit too cool for school when marketing their Hiesman candidates. It requires an all-out, full-court press, particularly when you're in a part of the country that most of the rest of the country doesn't think about or hear about on a regular basis.

without looking at past kickoff times my impression is that we had more late games (7pm PT or later) than either Oregon or USC which would be a big negative in terms of generating support of H.eisman voters.  If you read about someone with big stats you might vote for them in the top three but if you haven't seen them play would you vote for them to win?