The Walter Camp Foundation has released a list of 15 "players to watch" for its NCAA College Football Player of the Year Award. If you comb through the list, you can count that two of the fifteen are defensive players. This seems normal, regrettably. But looking more closely, nine of the thirteen offensive players are quarterbacks, which strikes me as abnormal. Has this ever happened before?
As an avid college football fan, I recognize that Andy Dalton, Andrew Luck, Cam Newton, Ryan Mallet, Kellen Moore, and the other listed QBs are exceptionally talented players. But the preponderance of quarterbacks (and the people who sack them: see the two defensive players listed) suggests to me that the TV cameras, which focus on the QB after each and every snap in the modern game, are dictating the show.
Do you agree that this list is biased? The idea that 9 of the 15 best players in the game are from 1 of 22 (or more) positions suggests to me that the ability to judge relative athletic talent is extremely difficult, especially at this level. The response to this difficulty in the "award market" seems to focus on players in visible positions at the expense of players whose "unseen" contributions are less obvious. I thought it was the purpose of informed bodies like the Walter Camp Foundation to offset this tendency. My bad!