T1B

2005 Butkus award winner.



This kid is a LB, make no mistake. I didn't expect to be adding to the list of great PSU LBs anytime soon...but Paul belongs right up there, IMO.

Apologies to Hawk, because Paul will be back next year, and he ain't going to regress any...this should have been Hawk's year for this award.

^^^^^

FUCK HIM AND FUCK THE BUTKUS VOTERS... :D



actually cool for PP...I figured it would come down to Hawk and PP...I thought Hawk did enough to get the Butkus...I like Shoalize I believe...want to know how you can win the Lombardi (best LB/Lineman) but not win the Bednarik or Butkus...to me if you win one you sweep them?

Still the Big 10 has got to be the conference of LB's for the very near future...I mean PP and Connor are back at PSU, Burgess will be even better as a Jr next year at Michigan...Lauernitis at tOSU looks like the next one in a long line of great ones...

not that I am going to start a war here but can anyone remember any conference with such line backer depth recently?

PP/Connor at PSU
Hawk/Schelgal/Carpenter at tOSU
those TWO FUCKING IOWA dudes
Burgess at Michigan

yes perhaps the Big 12 last year and what two years ago when Johnson was a Soph and Lehman and the OU guys were seniors...

anyway congrats to PP...On a Homer note I wish Hawk would have won it...and in all actuallity I think carpenter until he got hurt was playing better than both of them toward the end of the season...

Good going PP...congrats PSU!

I am pretty sure there are different voters for each of those awards. Probably different criteria as well.

PP is a very good LB, but its bullshit that Hawk didnt win the award. Fucking awards make me sick sometimes. Hawk is a future Top 5 pick and was all over the field making big plays and he gets fucked out of the Butkus.

I'd have given it to Hawk too. There's just something about tattooed, angry white men that I like to see on the football field.

Ahem...



the_ouskull

PSUFAN wrote:Apologies to Hawk, because Paul will be back next year, and he ain't going to regress any...this should have been Hawk's year for this award.

I don't get this at all. Not a bit, psu. I would be disappointed if voters for any award took into account whether or not a player still had a year of eligibility remaining. Not sure how this should be considered part of the criteria used to recognize a player for an ward that is given for play in the current year.

Cicero wrote:PP is a very good LB, but its bullshit that Hawk didnt win the award. Fucking awards make me sick sometimes. Hawk is future Top 5 pick and was all over the field making big plays and he gets fucked out of the Heisman.

While he's a first rounder, I don't think he's top five. No, not because I don't think he's good enough to be top five, but more because top five picks are, generally speaking, used on skill players regardless of need.

Anyways, who's to say Poz isn't also a top five pick next year? To add, since you're into comparing the quailites of both, it's not like Poz played in a 10' x 10' ft imaginary box on the field, idiot.

Edit to add: After thinking about it for a moment, I think I'm going to eat the comment about top five picks being reserved for skill players.

Ken wrote:

PSUFAN wrote:Apologies to Hawk, because Paul will be back next year, and he ain't going to regress any...this should have been Hawk's year for this award.

I don't get this at all. Not a bit, psu. I would be disappointed if voters for any award took into account whether or not a player still had a year of eligibility remaining. Not sure how this should be considered part of the criteria used to recognize a player for an ward that is given for play in the current year.

I agree completely.

Sin,
Ron Dayne

One of the reasons that I think the eligibility argument stands is that Paul will only get better next year. Hawk and Poz both had tremendous seasons.

I see your point, though.