[Goose]

Second even if cleared, Shaw may sit him. The questions to me are  (1) if he plays is he significantly more susceptible to aggravating the injury (by that I mean does he have an increased risk of worsening the injury) and (2) does that risk drop appreciably if he sits another 8 days. 

If those are answered yes and yes, I’d certainly think about sitting him.  If otoh this is something that will be a bit painful at times but not a further risk, I leave it to Love.

I would expect Shaw would answer differently. If the first answer is yes, the next question is Do we need him to win? If the answer is no, you sit him. There is no point in taking a risk in this game if we don't need him because we will certainly need him in the next two. If we aren't sure we need him, we probably try to sit him and only play him if that isn't working.
If the answer to the first question is no, but Shaw thinks we don't need him, he will probably talk to Love about it. Shaw will take input from all concerned, but he will decide. He will not leave it up to the player. I expect that if Love is still hurting, he doesn't start, and probably won't play unless we are playing poorly and getting beat in the second half.

[Goose]

Second even if cleared, Shaw may sit him. The questions to me are  (1) if he plays is he significantly more susceptible to aggravating the injury (by that I mean does he have an increased risk of worsening the injury) and (2) does that risk drop appreciably if he sits another 8 days. 

If those are answered yes and yes, I’d certainly think about sitting him.  If otoh this is something that will be a bit painful at times but not a further risk, I leave it to Love.

I would expect Shaw would answer differently. If the first answer is yes, the next question is Do we need him to win? If the answer is no, you sit him. There is no point in taking a risk in this game if we don't need him because we will certainly need him in the next two. If we aren't sure we need him, we probably try to sit him and only play him if that isn't working.
If the answer to the first question is no, but Shaw thinks we don't need him, he will probably talk to Love about it. Shaw will take input from all concerned, but he will decide. He will not leave it up to the player. I expect that if Love is still hurting, he doesn't start, and probably won't play unless we are playing poorly and getting beat in the second half.

[CardinalSagehen]

At the last open scrimmage before the 2016 season, Love did not play due to an ankle injury.  Shaw told the media that he was holding Love out of the scrimmage for "precautionary" reasons, but we could clearly see that Love was still in a walking boot.  And sure enough, Love didn't play until 3-4 weeks later (our 2nd game of the season). 

I don't think this ankle sprain is as bad as that one, but this tells us (a) that Love has a history of ankle problems (not sure if it's the same one this time); and (b) that we shouldn't read too much into Shaw's reports such as "he could have played the 2nd half at Oregon" or even "he's a game-time decision".  Shaw will rightly want to keep the opponent guessing if there's any slight bit of gray area about his readiness.

As electrifying as the H-Man race might be, I would prefer for them to sit Love at OSU unless he's truly 100%.  The meat of our schedule is coming up.  In my opinion, it's not worth the risk of playing him against an inferior opponent that we ought to be able to beat easily without him. 

Team first.  Individual accolades are just an ancillary by-product of good team decisions and plays.   

[CardinalSagehen]

At the last open scrimmage before the 2016 season, Love did not play due to an ankle injury.  Shaw told the media that he was holding Love out of the scrimmage for "precautionary" reasons, but we could clearly see that Love was still in a walking boot.  And sure enough, Love didn't play until 3-4 weeks later (our 2nd game of the season). 

I don't think this ankle sprain is as bad as that one, but this tells us (a) that Love has a history of ankle problems (not sure if it's the same one this time); and (b) that we shouldn't read too much into Shaw's reports such as "he could have played the 2nd half at Oregon" or even "he's a game-time decision".  Shaw will rightly want to keep the opponent guessing if there's any slight bit of gray area about his readiness.

As electrifying as the H-Man race might be, I would prefer for them to sit Love at OSU unless he's truly 100%.  The meat of our schedule is coming up.  In my opinion, it's not worth the risk of playing him against an inferior opponent that we ought to be able to beat easily without him. 

Team first.  Individual accolades are just an ancillary by-product of good team decisions and plays.   

[OutsiderFan]

It may or may not be relevant, but if Love has NFL aspirations, he has to show durability - especially at his size - and the ability to play hurt.  This dynamic will likely play no role in whether or not Love plays Thursday, but it's something to consider in the grander scheme of Bryce Love's football career.

[OutsiderFan]

It may or may not be relevant, but if Love has NFL aspirations, he has to show durability - especially at his size - and the ability to play hurt.  This dynamic will likely play no role in whether or not Love plays Thursday, but it's something to consider in the grander scheme of Bryce Love's football career.

[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17765.msg207658#msg207658 date=1508848725]
[quote author=SamuelMcF link=topic=17765.msg207600#msg207600 date=1508802510]
Love seemed ok coming out of the tent at the Oregon game. My guess is we'll slow-play him. If he's not needed (which he shouldn't be), then I'd play Scarlett and Speights and save him for the end-of-season gauntlet. Of course, this might totally sink his chances of winning the Award That Shall Not Be Named. But maybe he'll be runner-up, as is tradition!!!

Not an expert in what causes someone to win or not win the H.eisman, but I have to believe that if Love kicks butt against the Washington schools and also ND, whether he plays or doesn't play against a one-win team won't affect his chances much.
[/quote]

It definitely will. Love's only chances are:

1) Break Sanders's record, or at least 2500 yards.
2) Help us to win the Pac-12 while Barkley stumbles and PSU doesn't play in the B1G CG.

Sitting against ORST makes #1 basically impossible. Also, Publius will be happy because all Stanford fans need to be rooting for OSU to smother PSU this weekend.
[/quote]

This is correct.  If we're concerned about managing his health and not giving him too many carries, then the best possible outcome is what happened last game, getting him his yards and adding to the TD total but sitting him for most of it.  But he's toast if he sits.  Because if Barkley is even within shouting distance of Bryce's total yardage by the end of the regular season, it'll be Barkley. 

FYI, my brain still thinks "Matt" when I see Barkley, and my lip involuntarily curls in disdain.  I have nothing against Saquon, and he sure seems like he'll be a heck of a back in the NFL.  Like most of you, my frustration is aimed at the hypocrisy of the voters and their inconsistency from year to year in what they care about when voting.

[ColoradoTree]

[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17765.msg207658#msg207658 date=1508848725]
[quote author=SamuelMcF link=topic=17765.msg207600#msg207600 date=1508802510]
Love seemed ok coming out of the tent at the Oregon game. My guess is we'll slow-play him. If he's not needed (which he shouldn't be), then I'd play Scarlett and Speights and save him for the end-of-season gauntlet. Of course, this might totally sink his chances of winning the Award That Shall Not Be Named. But maybe he'll be runner-up, as is tradition!!!

Not an expert in what causes someone to win or not win the H.eisman, but I have to believe that if Love kicks butt against the Washington schools and also ND, whether he plays or doesn't play against a one-win team won't affect his chances much.
[/quote]

It definitely will. Love's only chances are:

1) Break Sanders's record, or at least 2500 yards.
2) Help us to win the Pac-12 while Barkley stumbles and PSU doesn't play in the B1G CG.

Sitting against ORST makes #1 basically impossible. Also, Publius will be happy because all Stanford fans need to be rooting for OSU to smother PSU this weekend.
[/quote]

This is correct.  If we're concerned about managing his health and not giving him too many carries, then the best possible outcome is what happened last game, getting him his yards and adding to the TD total but sitting him for most of it.  But he's toast if he sits.  Because if Barkley is even within shouting distance of Bryce's total yardage by the end of the regular season, it'll be Barkley. 

FYI, my brain still thinks "Matt" when I see Barkley, and my lip involuntarily curls in disdain.  I have nothing against Saquon, and he sure seems like he'll be a heck of a back in the NFL.  Like most of you, my frustration is aimed at the hypocrisy of the voters and their inconsistency from year to year in what they care about when voting.

[ADPATERSON]

As with Oregon, Love will play in first half. He has had a couple extra days of rest. Shaw is playing mind games.
Love is a highly tuned Testarossa -- you don't REST him completely in the garage for the WA schools. That fosters rust. 
Take him out for a few spins against the worst defense in the Pac12, book 200 yards. Keep Love in condition.
Let Speights, Scarlett, Maddox get reps in 2H.

If you look at Beaver injury list, their secondary is in tatters.  Put out a mix of pass and run, open lanes for Love et. al.

I agree stopping Big Ryan Nall is job #1.  Their passing attack is mediocre, so stack the box and snuff Nall.

[ADPATERSON]

As with Oregon, Love will play in first half. He has had a couple extra days of rest. Shaw is playing mind games.
Love is a highly tuned Testarossa -- you don't REST him completely in the garage for the WA schools. That fosters rust. 
Take him out for a few spins against the worst defense in the Pac12, book 200 yards. Keep Love in condition.
Let Speights, Scarlett, Maddox get reps in 2H.

If you look at Beaver injury list, their secondary is in tatters.  Put out a mix of pass and run, open lanes for Love et. al.

I agree stopping Big Ryan Nall is job #1.  Their passing attack is mediocre, so stack the box and snuff Nall.

[hardball01]

Usually it is the guys trying to tackle Love that have the ankle problems.

[hardball01]

Usually it is the guys trying to tackle Love that have the ankle problems.

[Goose]

Shaw is playing mind games.
 
Take him out for a few spins against the worst defense in the Pac12, book 200 yards. Keep Love in condition.

I really hope that is what happens. However, I don't think we really know how injured Love may or may not be, and how cautious Shaw will be. Hopefully, not at all and none required.

[Goose]

Shaw is playing mind games.
 
Take him out for a few spins against the worst defense in the Pac12, book 200 yards. Keep Love in condition.

I really hope that is what happens. However, I don't think we really know how injured Love may or may not be, and how cautious Shaw will be. Hopefully, not at all and none required.

[mutoo1]

real question is:  did he practice today?

[mutoo1]

real question is:  did he practice today?

[qwerty49]

There was some kind of arm or shoulder injury. His arm was hanging funny at his side when he came out.

It’s pretty obvious to me that he sits out. If he was healthy, Shaw would have said so. “Game-time decision” means Bryce wants to play but staff is not convinced they want him to.

He sits out, Scarlett and Speights play instead, we pass more, we score less, and we still haven’t proven we can stop the run, especially with a potential NFL back like Nall. We probably still have enough to beat these guys, but get ready for a closer game than we might otherwise expect.

If we get up by two scores, Shaw will turtle as early in the second half as he can, but a road win is a win, and he knows that.

[qwerty49]

There was some kind of arm or shoulder injury. His arm was hanging funny at his side when he came out.

It’s pretty obvious to me that he sits out. If he was healthy, Shaw would have said so. “Game-time decision” means Bryce wants to play but staff is not convinced they want him to.

He sits out, Scarlett and Speights play instead, we pass more, we score less, and we still haven’t proven we can stop the run, especially with a potential NFL back like Nall. We probably still have enough to beat these guys, but get ready for a closer game than we might otherwise expect.

If we get up by two scores, Shaw will turtle as early in the second half as he can, but a road win is a win, and he knows that.

[phxfan]

What some maybe forgetting is that Love will still get some extra days rest going into the Washington State game.  So long as he doesn't aggravate the injury then he should be fine for WSU.  Then he has 3 or possibly 4 home games in a row which will provide him some extra rest to finish the season.  He should hold up well.

[phxfan]

What some maybe forgetting is that Love will still get some extra days rest going into the Washington State game.  So long as he doesn't aggravate the injury then he should be fine for WSU.  Then he has 3 or possibly 4 home games in a row which will provide him some extra rest to finish the season.  He should hold up well.

[BostonCard]

There was some kind of arm or shoulder injury. His arm was hanging funny at his side when he came out.

I thought it was his ankle.

BC

[BostonCard]

There was some kind of arm or shoulder injury. His arm was hanging funny at his side when he came out.

I thought it was his ankle.

BC

[teejers1]

Lex pretty much captures my thinking on whether or not Love plays.
Only add here:  if he doesn't play, on an ESPN Thursday night game, then it's hard to see him sniffing the H.eisman.

Now, we may all think it's a joke/rigged award, anyway, to who gives a flying fark.

But I'd bet good money Love cares.  And I suspect Shaw does, too.

Interesting barometer of the H-Care Coefficient:  rank the following in order of importance:

Team makes CFP (not happening, but WTH)

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

Team makes P12 Championship game, but loses

Team plays in Alamo Bowl

Team plays in Holiday Bowl

Team plays in Foster Farms Bowl

Team plays in Sun Bowl

Team plays in Vegas Bowl

Bryce Love wins Voldemort (and Stanford not in NY6 Bowl)


There are other permutations, of course, but you get the drift.  As much as I think the H-award has become a joke, I'd still probably rate Love winning the Voldemort right below Team getting NY6 Bowl, in terms of fan satisfaction.

[teejers1]

Lex pretty much captures my thinking on whether or not Love plays.
Only add here:  if he doesn't play, on an ESPN Thursday night game, then it's hard to see him sniffing the H.eisman.

Now, we may all think it's a joke/rigged award, anyway, to who gives a flying fark.

But I'd bet good money Love cares.  And I suspect Shaw does, too.

Interesting barometer of the H-Care Coefficient:  rank the following in order of importance:

Team makes CFP (not happening, but WTH)

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

Team makes P12 Championship game, but loses

Team plays in Alamo Bowl

Team plays in Holiday Bowl

Team plays in Foster Farms Bowl

Team plays in Sun Bowl

Team plays in Vegas Bowl

Bryce Love wins Voldemort (and Stanford not in NY6 Bowl)


There are other permutations, of course, but you get the drift.  As much as I think the H-award has become a joke, I'd still probably rate Love winning the Voldemort right below Team getting NY6 Bowl, in terms of fan satisfaction.

[CardinalSagehen]

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

I personally couldn't care less about the H.eisman.  I agree that Love and Shaw probably care, and that's understandable.  It's also likely that the award would give our program a little more cachet and visibility with recruits if we actually won one. 

But "winning the PAC-12 and making an NY6 Bowl" is all that matters to me as a fan at this point.  The second item above, "winning the PAC-12 and not getting an NY6 Bowl", is almost certainly null because we would disqualify other PAC-12 teams from the playoff on our way to winning the conference, and each Power 5 conference is guaranteed an NY6 bowl if it misses the playoff (AFAIK).  Winning the conference is the loftiest goal that our team still fully controls.  If the team achieves this, we get to enjoy meaningful games in December (CCG) and January (NY6) rather than feel compelled to watch us annihilate a crappy Big 10 team in the Chicken Bowl or the like.

Everyone already knows Bryce Love is great now, anyway.  He doesn't need an award previously bestowed upon Johnny Manziel to prove it. 

[CardinalSagehen]

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

I personally couldn't care less about the H.eisman.  I agree that Love and Shaw probably care, and that's understandable.  It's also likely that the award would give our program a little more cachet and visibility with recruits if we actually won one. 

But "winning the PAC-12 and making an NY6 Bowl" is all that matters to me as a fan at this point.  The second item above, "winning the PAC-12 and not getting an NY6 Bowl", is almost certainly null because we would disqualify other PAC-12 teams from the playoff on our way to winning the conference, and each Power 5 conference is guaranteed an NY6 bowl if it misses the playoff (AFAIK).  Winning the conference is the loftiest goal that our team still fully controls.  If the team achieves this, we get to enjoy meaningful games in December (CCG) and January (NY6) rather than feel compelled to watch us annihilate a crappy Big 10 team in the Chicken Bowl or the like.

Everyone already knows Bryce Love is great now, anyway.  He doesn't need an award previously bestowed upon Johnny Manziel to prove it. 

[BostonCard]

Lex pretty much captures my thinking on whether or not Love plays.
Only add here:  if he doesn't play, on an ESPN Thursday night game, then it's hard to see him sniffing the H.eisman.

Now, we may all think it's a joke/rigged award, anyway, to who gives a flying fark.

But I'd bet good money Love cares.  And I suspect Shaw does, too.

Interesting barometer of the H-Care Coefficient:  rank the following in order of importance:

Team makes CFP (not happening, but WTH)

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

Team makes P12 Championship game, but loses

Team plays in Alamo Bowl

Team plays in Holiday Bowl

Team plays in Foster Farms Bowl

Team plays in Sun Bowl

Team plays in Vegas Bowl

Bryce Love wins    (and Stanford not in NY6 Bowl)


There are other permutations, of course, but you get the drift.  As much as I think the H-award has become a joke, I'd still probably rate Love winning the    right below Team getting NY6 Bowl, in terms of fan satisfaction.

Note, winning the Pac-12 conference means that we will get a NY6 bowl (or playoffs, but, as you point out, that possibility is remote).  All Big 5 conference champions are guaranteed a berth in a NY6 bowl game.

BC

[BostonCard]

Lex pretty much captures my thinking on whether or not Love plays.
Only add here:  if he doesn't play, on an ESPN Thursday night game, then it's hard to see him sniffing the H.eisman.

Now, we may all think it's a joke/rigged award, anyway, to who gives a flying fark.

But I'd bet good money Love cares.  And I suspect Shaw does, too.

Interesting barometer of the H-Care Coefficient:  rank the following in order of importance:

Team makes CFP (not happening, but WTH)

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

Team makes P12 Championship game, but loses

Team plays in Alamo Bowl

Team plays in Holiday Bowl

Team plays in Foster Farms Bowl

Team plays in Sun Bowl

Team plays in Vegas Bowl

Bryce Love wins    (and Stanford not in NY6 Bowl)


There are other permutations, of course, but you get the drift.  As much as I think the H-award has become a joke, I'd still probably rate Love winning the    right below Team getting NY6 Bowl, in terms of fan satisfaction.

Note, winning the Pac-12 conference means that we will get a NY6 bowl (or playoffs, but, as you point out, that possibility is remote).  All Big 5 conference champions are guaranteed a berth in a NY6 bowl game.

BC

[teejers1]

Thanks for edification.  I had visions of Stanford winning P12 and getting shut out of NY6 Bowl.  It's not hard to envision a 4-loss Stanford team winning the Pac, and I feared no NY6 host would want a 4-loss team.

[teejers1]

Thanks for edification.  I had visions of Stanford winning P12 and getting shut out of NY6 Bowl.  It's not hard to envision a 4-loss Stanford team winning the Pac, and I feared no NY6 host would want a 4-loss team.

[BostonCard]

Well, a lot of those aren't hard to rank because one is clearly better than the other.  For example, winning the Pac-12 conference is clearly better than going to the Alamo bowl.  The Alamo bowl is clearly a step up from the Holliday bowl (though I suspect some people might prefer the latter from a vacation perspective) and the Holliday bowl is a step up from the Foster Farms bowl.  I think the real question is how much of the team goal would we be willing to sacrifice for Love to get the H-award.  I don't know about others but...

I would rather go to the playoffs and have Love finish runner up than have Love win and go to a NY6 bowl.
I would rather win the conference and go to a NY6 bowl and have Love finish runner up than lose in the conference championship game and go to a lesser bowl and have Love win.
For selfish reasons, I would not trade a trip to the Holiday bowl for a Love H-award, but other people's mileage may vary.
Once we get down to the Foster Farms bowl, I don't care as much, and although a Sun/Vegas bowl means I likely wouldn't be able to go in person, I would trade that opportunity to have Love win the H-award.

BC

[BostonCard]

Well, a lot of those aren't hard to rank because one is clearly better than the other.  For example, winning the Pac-12 conference is clearly better than going to the Alamo bowl.  The Alamo bowl is clearly a step up from the Holliday bowl (though I suspect some people might prefer the latter from a vacation perspective) and the Holliday bowl is a step up from the Foster Farms bowl.  I think the real question is how much of the team goal would we be willing to sacrifice for Love to get the H-award.  I don't know about others but...

I would rather go to the playoffs and have Love finish runner up than have Love win and go to a NY6 bowl.
I would rather win the conference and go to a NY6 bowl and have Love finish runner up than lose in the conference championship game and go to a lesser bowl and have Love win.
For selfish reasons, I would not trade a trip to the Holiday bowl for a Love H-award, but other people's mileage may vary.
Once we get down to the Foster Farms bowl, I don't care as much, and although a Sun/Vegas bowl means I likely wouldn't be able to go in person, I would trade that opportunity to have Love win the H-award.

BC

[Hurlburt88]

I am firmly in the boat if preferring winning seasons and bowl games to individual awards.  the thought of returning to the 80’s or the wlat idiotface years is most distasteful

[Hurlburt88]

I am firmly in the boat if preferring winning seasons and bowl games to individual awards.  the thought of returning to the 80’s or the wlat idiotface years is most distasteful

[Bruce Wang]

How about looking at it through this lens?  What helps recruiting more?  Another Voldemort trophy at the facility or another Chicken Bowl trophy?

There is, of course, a high degree of simultaneity here.  Love making a Voldemort run probably means we go to a more prestigious bowl which means he's more likely to win that most valuable player on the best team trophy.

[Bruce Wang]

How about looking at it through this lens?  What helps recruiting more?  Another Voldemort trophy at the facility or another Chicken Bowl trophy?

There is, of course, a high degree of simultaneity here.  Love making a Voldemort run probably means we go to a more prestigious bowl which means he's more likely to win that most valuable player on the best team trophy.

[CTcard]

Lex pretty much captures my thinking on whether or not Love plays.
Only add here:  if he doesn't play, on an ESPN Thursday night game, then it's hard to see him sniffing the H.eisman.

Now, we may all think it's a joke/rigged award, anyway, to who gives a flying fark.

But I'd bet good money Love cares.  And I suspect Shaw does, too.

Interesting barometer of the H-Care Coefficient:  rank the following in order of importance:

Team makes CFP (not happening, but WTH)

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

Team makes P12 Championship game, but loses

Team plays in Alamo Bowl

Team plays in Holiday Bowl

Team plays in Foster Farms Bowl

Team plays in Sun Bowl

Team plays in Vegas Bowl

Bryce Love wins    (and Stanford not in NY6 Bowl)


There are other permutations, of course, but you get the drift.  As much as I think the H-award has become a joke, I'd still probably rate Love winning the    right below Team getting NY6 Bowl, in terms of fan satisfaction.

Couple of interesting things connected to this.

First of all, you are really just rating two things: importance to you of the team doing well versus importance to you of an individual getting an award.

The first nine items are different levels of the team doing well (or not). In fact, if one were to try to rank them, at this point "Team plays in Vegas Bowl" would have a negative ranking, and thus not chosen above just above anything (well, anything neutral to good).

I would probably rethink the question as: as a fan preference, how many steps down the team achievement ladder would you accept for Love winning the Heiceman?

------------
Coaches all say the following:
- my guy deserves the Heiceman.
- my guy has done everything he can to show he deserves the Heiceman.
- we don't care about individual awards.
- we never make any game decisions based on individual awards.

Now those things aren't quite contradictory, but are edging close.

In his news conference the other day, he responded to a question that said (more or less) "what are you going to do to feature Love more now that Stanford has opened a Heiceman campaign for him?"
Shaw's words said, "We just go out and play football."
Shaw's tone said, "That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. We make strategy/play calls to win games, not to get people awards."

My guess is that reality for basically every coach is at least close to what Shaw's tone says. Coaches intend for their game decisions to be solely based on what they think gives them the best chance to win the game at hand. However, at certain times, particularly when a game seems in hand, other considerations arise.

[CTcard]

Lex pretty much captures my thinking on whether or not Love plays.
Only add here:  if he doesn't play, on an ESPN Thursday night game, then it's hard to see him sniffing the H.eisman.

Now, we may all think it's a joke/rigged award, anyway, to who gives a flying fark.

But I'd bet good money Love cares.  And I suspect Shaw does, too.

Interesting barometer of the H-Care Coefficient:  rank the following in order of importance:

Team makes CFP (not happening, but WTH)

Team wins Pac 12 and makes NY6 Bowl

Team wins Pac 12 but doesn't get NY6 Bowl

Team makes P12 Championship game, but loses

Team plays in Alamo Bowl

Team plays in Holiday Bowl

Team plays in Foster Farms Bowl

Team plays in Sun Bowl

Team plays in Vegas Bowl

Bryce Love wins    (and Stanford not in NY6 Bowl)


There are other permutations, of course, but you get the drift.  As much as I think the H-award has become a joke, I'd still probably rate Love winning the    right below Team getting NY6 Bowl, in terms of fan satisfaction.

Couple of interesting things connected to this.

First of all, you are really just rating two things: importance to you of the team doing well versus importance to you of an individual getting an award.

The first nine items are different levels of the team doing well (or not). In fact, if one were to try to rank them, at this point "Team plays in Vegas Bowl" would have a negative ranking, and thus not chosen above just above anything (well, anything neutral to good).

I would probably rethink the question as: as a fan preference, how many steps down the team achievement ladder would you accept for Love winning the Heiceman?

------------
Coaches all say the following:
- my guy deserves the Heiceman.
- my guy has done everything he can to show he deserves the Heiceman.
- we don't care about individual awards.
- we never make any game decisions based on individual awards.

Now those things aren't quite contradictory, but are edging close.

In his news conference the other day, he responded to a question that said (more or less) "what are you going to do to feature Love more now that Stanford has opened a Heiceman campaign for him?"
Shaw's words said, "We just go out and play football."
Shaw's tone said, "That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. We make strategy/play calls to win games, not to get people awards."

My guess is that reality for basically every coach is at least close to what Shaw's tone says. Coaches intend for their game decisions to be solely based on what they think gives them the best chance to win the game at hand. However, at certain times, particularly when a game seems in hand, other considerations arise.