Worst Moments in Big Ten Football History #8: Chuck Long Doesn't Win the 1985 Heisman

FanHouse is counting down the ten best, ten worst, and ten weirdest moments in the history of Big Ten football.

Look, any other year it would have been a laugher. Chuck Long would have won the Heisman and won it so resoundingly that people would still be talking about his decisive victory. He led the Iowa Hawkeyes to the outright conference title and in so doing became the first Big Ten quarterback with more than 10,000 career passing yards. His numbers from 1985 are just sick--260 of 388 for 3,297 yards and 27 touchdowns.

For crying out loud, so far as anybody can tell, Chuck Long is the only player in NCAA history who played in five bowl games. So where is his Heisman?

It's in the living room of one Vincent Edward "Bo" Jackson.

Now, let's be perfectly clear about one thing: Bo Jackson was indeed a very fine football player, probably one of the best I've ever seen. So all you folks in east-central Alabama can put away your shotguns and stop composing that indignant message board post you started the minute you saw this headline. By no means am I suggesting that your beloved running back didn't deserve the trophy. I'm just suggesting that there was somebody out there who deserved it more.

My case is pretty simple. No college football player meant more to his team during the 1985 season than Chuck Long meant to the Iowa Hawkeyes. My argument is simple: Look at what happened the next year. The Hawkeyes, now in the hands of Mark Vlasic, stepped back from a 10-1 regular season to 8-3. And how did Auburn do without their vitally important running back? They stepped up to 9-2 and had a solid victory over Southern Cal in the Citrus Bowl.

See, you're not supposed to mention stuff like this. You're not supposed to bring up anything which points out that Bo Jackson, while unquestionably one of the greatest and most exciting athletes of his era, just might not have been the most valuable player in college football in 1985. It makes people bring up the time he faked out Brian Bosworth so bad Boz's children were probably born wondering who just ran past them. Then they mention that Bo was running so hard he ran right down the tunnel of the stadium.

"That happened in the NFL," you have to say.

So they mention--they always mention--how Bo Jackson was completely unstoppable in the original Tecmo Bowl.

"That was a video game," you have to say.

Then they mention that Bo was also a great baseball player, good enough to play and play well in the major leagues.

"The Heisman is a football award," you have to say.

That makes them mention that Chuck Long was a complete bust in the NFL.

"And how does that make him any different than the typical Heisman winner?" you have to say. (It's best not to bring up that Chuck Long actually scored three more touchdowns in the NFL than Bo Jackson did.)

If you go through both teams' 1985 seasons, game by game, you come to the ineluctable conclusion that, while Bo Jackson may have been much more fun to watch, Chuck Long put the Hawkeyes on his back and carried them. When they needed a clutch drive, he delivered. When they needed to sell a trick play, he delivered. He was, quite simply, the most valuable player in college football in 1985.

That's when their eyes light up. "Aha! The Heisman does not go to the most valuable player in college football--it goes to the most outstanding player in college football! That was Bo! In your face, Hawk Boy!"

So there you have it. In the final analysis, it comes down to grammar. I am not convinced by grammar. That trophy should have been Chuck Long's, and you'll never convince me otherwise.

Tags: wmibth

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

6-09-2008 @ 4:15PM

Acid Reign said...

We were fortunate that Bo won that thing. As I recall, it was one of the closest votes in history, so a LOT of voters agreed with you!

Honestly, I think some of it was a sympathy vote. Jack Crowe and Pat Dye installed one of the dumbest-looking offenses I've ever seen, that year. They abandoned the wishbone, and tried to run a power-I, in an era where everyone else was throwing more and more. Bo was asked to run through 9-man fronts, and for the most part, did. There were a couple of teams, Tennessee and Florida, who were able to slow him down enough to win. Then, of course, we also played Alabama and Texas A&M, and couldn't stop those two. A lot of us Auburn fans felt cheated, that we had such a great back, and were trying to run him 40 times a game. Never a pass on first down, not even a 5-yard hitch. Always Bo. Jack Crowe lost his job over it.

Auburn's 9-2 squad the next year was a new pro-I offense installed by Pat Sullivan. It began the best four-year run in Auburn history, as we transitioned to being a big-play passing team.

This discussion reminds me of the Woodson/Manning debate of 1997. Everyone here in the south argues that one, on NFL production, too.

6-10-2008 @ 1:55AM

cfb expert said...

mark what are you smoking? lay the pipe down dude. auburn 1986 national champions at 10-2. i guess the 1987 fiesta bowl where unbeaten 12-0 penn st defeated 11-1 miami 14-10 was before your time. 1986 ap champion penn st....1986 upi champion penn st....tuscaloosa gazette champion auburn i guess lol. jesus im starting to actually lose respect for you guy. all i ask is you do research before you write a story and make such false and assinine accusations. is that too much to ask from someone that enjoys reading blogs about each team and players to ask? the sad thing is when you write these false and inaccurate articles it leads those to lazy to research the facts on and into believing their team is the greatest then when debating football they get their asses handed to them by the historical documented facts that i personally research. your story had promise until you inaccurately claim auburn won the national title. only ap upi title auburn has is from their 1957 unbeaten season. now maybe you want to count local gazette titles or something but once again the only titles that matter are ap and upi. if you wish to count titles other than that then i guess 10-2 ou was the 1980 champion over uga since sagarin or some other homer awarded their so called title to ou which is a joke. ou doesnt claim it but then again when you are the winningest team in the modern era and it isnt even close you have many earned titles. its like the celtics, yankees, canadiens they dont have title envy and neither does ou. so i am asking as a fan who wants documented historical facts please write stories in which you can back those facts up so i dont think i wasted my time reading your articles.

6-10-2008 @ 2:28AM

correction i stated auburn only ap upi title was from 1957. auburn was awarded the 57 ap title and ohio st the 57 upi title. i had auburn listed on my list of "earned" titles since they went unbeaten. i didnt have ohio st on that sheet of paper so i missed the fact they were handed a share with auburn since ohio st had a loss which isnt earned in my opinion. no title with a loss is earned in my opinion period. cant claim you were the best team when it was proven one saturday afternoon you werent. when a team is unbeaten then you have to respect the fact they defeated every team they played each saturday for an entire season.

6-10-2008 @ 8:26AM

Mark Hasty said...

Story corrected; thank you for pointing out the error.

6-10-2008 @ 12:35PM

tallboy711 said...

So you're allowed to bring up what the teams did the following season to help prove your point but you give a list of things people aren't allowed to use in helping prove the case for Bo? Bit of a double standard huh?

6-10-2008 @ 12:37PM

If you can tell me what Jackson's accomplishments in the NFL or MLB have to do with a college football award, then yes, it's a double standard.

6-10-2008 @ 2:32PM

I was pointing out the fact that you say people can't bring these things up about Bo right after you mention something that has nothing to do with the year in question. Basically it seems you're saying that the award should not be given until the following year to see who was more valuable to their respective team? Who's to say that Auburn wouldn't have 0 - 10 that year without Bo?

6-15-2008 @ 9:28PM

I seriously doubt that Auburn would have gone 1-10 in 1985, without Bo. Bo got hurt in the second game of 1984, and Auburn posted 9 wins without him. In fact, in 1984, we were 0-2 with Bo starting. We had other capable backs, such as Brent Fullwood, Colis Campbell, Kyle Collins, and Tim Jessee, as well as future NFL fullback Tommy Agee. Fullwood was an All-American in 1986.

7-05-2008 @ 3:42PM

Probably way late and won't be seen, but... Watch Bo, and make your own judgment!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLGADNEeb50

7-23-2008 @ 11:35AM

Stuart said...

I agree Chuck should have won in '85. As I recall, he led the nation in just about every meaningful passing stat, while Bo was something like 3rd in the nation in rushing. It was a bit heartbreaking for us (Hawkeyes), and a lot of us still feel that Bo's pick by media front-men like Brent Mussburger (et al) had more to do with his close victory than his obvious abilities.