Vegas opens Luke Falk 30-1 to win Heisman Trophy

[Tony Finn]

Below and attached are William Hill’s opening future odds for the 2017 Heisman Memorial Trophy Award. Bettors can wager on the initial field of 38 players at the 108 William Hill Nevada Sports Books and on the Mobile Sports app.

This is the third year that Nevada Sports Books are able to accept futures wagering on the award. Last year’s winner, Lamar Jackson, had originally opened at 75/1 odds at William Hill Sports Books back on February 10, 2016. Jackson (currently 7/1 odds) opens for the 2017 season as co-favorites with Baker Mayfield of Oklahoma (7/1) and Sam Darnold of Southern California (7/1).

2017 Heisman Trophy Odds
via WagerTalk News in Vegas

SAM DARNOLD (SOUTHERN CAL) 7/1

LAMAR JACKSON (LOUISVILLE) 7/1

BAKER MAYFIELD (OKLAHOMA) 7/1

JT BARRETT (OHIO STATE) 10/1

JAKE BROWNING (WASHINGTON) 12/1

DEONDRE FRANCOIS (FLORIDA STATE) 12/1

SAQUON BARKLEY (PENN STATE) 15/1

JALEN HURTS (ALABAMA) 15/1

MASON RUDOLPH (OKLAHOMA STATE) 15/1

JOSH ROSEN (UCLA) 20/1

BO SCARBROUGH (ALABAMA) 20/1

DERRIUS GUICE (LSU) 20/1

TRACE MCSORLEY (PENN STATE) 20/1

KAMRYN PETTWAY (AUBURN) 30/1

NICK CHUBB (GEORGIA) 30/1

LUKE FALK (WASHINGTON STATE) 30/1

NICK FITZGERALD (MISSISSIPPI STATE) 40/1

SHANE BUECHELE (TEXAS) 40/1

QUINTON FLOWERS (SOUTH FLORIDA) 40/1

JARRETT STIDHAM (AUBURN) 40/1

ROYCE FREEMAN (OREGON) 50/1

MIKE WEBER (OHIO STATE) 50/1

JACOB EASON (GEORGIA) 60/1

JAMES WASHINGTON (OKLA STATE) 60/1

ED OLIVER (HOUSTON) 75/1

DERWIN JAMES (FLORIDA STATE) 75/1

MYLES GASKIN (WASHINGTON) 75/1

CHRISTIAN KIRK (TEXAS A&M) 75/1

BRANDON WIMBUSH (NOTRE DAME) 75/1

WILTON SPEIGHT (MICHIGAN) 75/1

KYLE ALLEN (HOUSTON) 75/1

CALVIN RIDLEY (ALABAMA) 100/1

ARDEN KEY (LSU) 100/1

JUSTIN HERBERT (OREGON) 100/1

SHEA PATTERSON (MISSISSIPPI) 100/1

KENNY HILL (TCU) 100/1

DEXTER LAWRENCE (CLEMSON) 100/1

BRETT RYPIEN (BOISE STATE) 100/1

*As of 2/6/2017

 

[Coug90]

Those are some good odds on Barkley. That dude is the total package at RB and barring injury, I would be. Shocked if he wasn't a finalist. That's the rub with RBs though, much more injury risk.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Below and attached are William Hill’s opening future odds for the 2017 Heisman Memorial Trophy Award. Bettors can wager on the initial field of 38 players at the 108 William Hill Nevada Sports Books and on the Mobile Sports app.

This is the third year that Nevada Sports Books are able to accept futures wagering on the award. Last year’s winner, Lamar Jackson, had originally opened at 75/1 odds at William Hill Sports Books back on February 10, 2016. Jackson (currently 7/1 odds) opens for the 2017 season as co-favorites with Baker Mayfield of Oklahoma (7/1) and Sam Darnold of Southern California (7/1).

2017 Heisman Trophy Odds
via WagerTalk News in Vegas

SAM DARNOLD (SOUTHERN CAL) 7/1

LAMAR JACKSON (LOUISVILLE) 7/1

BAKER MAYFIELD (OKLAHOMA) 7/1

JT BARRETT (OHIO STATE) 10/1

JAKE BROWNING (WASHINGTON) 12/1

DEONDRE FRANCOIS (FLORIDA STATE) 12/1

SAQUON BARKLEY (PENN STATE) 15/1

JALEN HURTS (ALABAMA) 15/1

MASON RUDOLPH (OKLAHOMA STATE) 15/1

JOSH ROSEN (UCLA) 20/1

BO SCARBROUGH (ALABAMA) 20/1

DERRIUS GUICE (LSU) 20/1

TRACE MCSORLEY (PENN STATE) 20/1

KAMRYN PETTWAY (AUBURN) 30/1

NICK CHUBB (GEORGIA) 30/1

LUKE FALK (WASHINGTON STATE) 30/1

NICK FITZGERALD (MISSISSIPPI STATE) 40/1

SHANE BUECHELE (TEXAS) 40/1

QUINTON FLOWERS (SOUTH FLORIDA) 40/1

JARRETT STIDHAM (AUBURN) 40/1

ROYCE FREEMAN (OREGON) 50/1

MIKE WEBER (OHIO STATE) 50/1

JACOB EASON (GEORGIA) 60/1

JAMES WASHINGTON (OKLA STATE) 60/1

ED OLIVER (HOUSTON) 75/1

DERWIN JAMES (FLORIDA STATE) 75/1

MYLES GASKIN (WASHINGTON) 75/1

CHRISTIAN KIRK (TEXAS A&M) 75/1

BRANDON WIMBUSH (NOTRE DAME) 75/1

WILTON SPEIGHT (MICHIGAN) 75/1

KYLE ALLEN (HOUSTON) 75/1

CALVIN RIDLEY (ALABAMA) 100/1

ARDEN KEY (LSU) 100/1

JUSTIN HERBERT (OREGON) 100/1

SHEA PATTERSON (MISSISSIPPI) 100/1

KENNY HILL (TCU) 100/1

DEXTER LAWRENCE (CLEMSON) 100/1

BRETT RYPIEN (BOISE STATE) 100/1

*As of 2/6/2017

I'd say Falk has a zero percent chance. I'm serious. None.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

I'd say Falk has a zero percent chance. I'm serious. None.

30:1 is pretty optimistic but it puts him a tie for the Top 14, which is a reasonable place for him to be. For Falk to win it, WSU would have to have 1 loss (at most), beat USC in the Pac-12 championship game and would need the Top four guys to slump in the way that McCaffery did last year. If Louisville has 3 losses, Jackson will have little chance to win. If Falk has better stats and a head to head win against Darnold, it helps his chances. Same with Browning.

If our receivers do their jobs and the offense overall performs as well as it could, Falk is definitely well enough regarded to be a finalist.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

30:1 is pretty optimistic but it puts him a tie for the Top 14, which is a reasonable place for him to be. For Falk to win it, WSU would have to have 1 loss (at most), beat USC in the Pac-12 championship game and would need the Top four guys to slump in the way that McCaffery did last year. If Louisville has 3 losses, Jackson will have little chance to win. If Falk has better stats and a head to head win against Darnold, it helps his chances. Same with Browning.

If our receivers do their jobs and the offense overall performs as well as it could, Falk is definitely well enough regarded to be a finalist.

There is zero chance Falk wins the Heisman. This is not a knock on him.

I wish I could get a million people to give me $1 for these odds. It would be an easy $1 million for me. Unfortunately, I don't have the required $30M for the payout if I'm wrong.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

There is zero chance Falk wins the Heisman. This is not a knock on him.

I wish I could get a million people to give me $1 for these odds. It would be an easy $1 million for me. Unfortunately, I don't have the required $30M for the payout if I'm wrong.

Oh now. They have to pick a number and realistically, our offense is good enough that Falk would be #15 or so in a list of Heisman candidates. Prior to the start of 2015, nobody thought that WSU had a realistic chance of winning the Pac-12 North. Most people would have said that we had close to a 0% chance. After gacking against PSU, there wasn't a single person predicting that we'd win the conference. As it turned out, we didn't win it, but we were only three yards right from winning it. You never know for sure. 30:1 odds are better than I'd give him, but again, they are saying that he is around the 15th best team leader in the country and that seems about right to me.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Oh now. They have to pick a number and realistically, our offense is good enough that Falk would be #15 or so in a list of Heisman candidates. Prior to the start of 2015, nobody thought that WSU had a realistic chance of winning the Pac-12 North. Most people would have said that we had close to a 0% chance. After gacking against PSU, there wasn't a single person predicting that we'd win the conference. As it turned out, we didn't win it, but we were only three yards right from winning it. You never know for sure. 30:1 odds are better than I'd give him, but again, they are saying that he is around the 15th best team leader in the country and that seems about right to me.

Whatever the number that has been assigned to him, he has no chance at all.

Hell would freeze over before Falk would win the Heisman. Again, it's not a knock on him. It's just that WSU won't have a Heisman winner ever.

 

[Coug90]

Whatever the number that has been assigned to him, he has no chance at all.

Hell would freeze over before Falk would win the Heisman. Again, it's not a knock on him. It's just that WSU won't have a Heisman winner ever.

I'm pretty sure Louisville fans probably would have said the same thing about their football program before Lamar Jackson showed up. I'd say it's unlikely but not impossible. It would take an exceptional season or talent like Jackson, and probably a PAC 12 championship at minimum for the team. the fact that the offense is Air Raid doesn't help, because for whatever reason the yards and points put up in this offense when it's running well are discounted by the so called college FB experts that vote.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Whatever the number that has been assigned to him, he has no chance at all.

Hell would freeze over before Falk would win the Heisman. Again, it's not a knock on him. It's just that WSU won't have a Heisman winner ever.

I get your point, but in August 1997, if you would have said that WSU was going to win the Pac-10 and go to the Rose Bowl, most fans would say that since it had been 67 years, we were never going to get there again. If you would have said that WSU was going to the Rose Bowl twice in a six year period, people would say that it would never happen.

If Falk throws for 6,000 yards, 55 touchdowns and fewer than 10 picks and WSU is 13-0 with a win over USC in the Pac-12 championship, he will be in the discussion for the Heisman and might be the favorite at that point. Realistically, that isn't going to happen of course.

 

[YakiCoug]

I get your point, but in August 1997, if you would have said that WSU was going to win the Pac-10 and go to the Rose Bowl, most fans would say that since it had been 67 years, we were never going to get there again. If you would have said that WSU was going to the Rose Bowl twice in a six year period, people would say that it would never happen.

If Falk throws for 6,000 yards, 55 touchdowns and fewer than 10 picks and WSU is 13-0 with a win over USC in the Pac-12 championship, he will be in the discussion for the Heisman and might be the favorite at that point. Realistically, that isn't going to happen of course.

Doubter!

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

I get your point, but in August 1997, if you would have said that WSU was going to win the Pac-10 and go to the Rose Bowl, most fans would say that since it had been 67 years, we were never going to get there again. If you would have said that WSU was going to the Rose Bowl twice in a six year period, people would say that it would never happen.

If Falk throws for 6,000 yards, 55 touchdowns and fewer than 10 picks and WSU is 13-0 with a win over USC in the Pac-12 championship, he will be in the discussion for the Heisman and might be the favorite at that point. Realistically, that isn't going to happen of course.

I'll take $1M from you with a promise to pay you $30M if Falk wins the Heisman.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

I'll take $1M from you with a promise to pay you $30M if Falk wins the Heisman.

Like I said above, 30:1 isn't the right number, but in the context of the other guys in the same range....it's probably about right. Given the way that UCLA played last year, what's the basis for Rosen being at 20/1 odds other than being a number that will attract people? USC is likely to wipe the field with them, and they lost 8 games last year. That's $20 million that you are unlikely to have to worry about. Mississippi State is the equivalent to WSU without as much high level success, yet they have a player right behind Falk. The numbers are just numbers. Outside the Top 10, none of the odds are particularly good for any of those players, including Rosen who's in the Top 10.

 

[425cougfan]

Whatever the number that has been assigned to him, he has no chance at all.

Hell would freeze over before Falk would win the Heisman. Again, it's not a knock on him. It's just that WSU won't have a Heisman winner ever.

Rarely say this so directly, but this is a stupid take given the enormity of the unknowns and potential situations you're trying to encompass with that opinion. The right player in the right situation absolutely could win the Heisman at WSU. In 20 years WSU might be running a pro-style system and luck into some RB who's a grade risk, makes it in somehow, and then leads the nation in rushing and TDs in the context of an improbable Rose Bowl run. We have no idea at this point. I agree with you, though, that the true odds of Luke Falk winning the Heisman this coming season are next to nil, though, and certainly some multiple of 30-1. That's based on all relevant factors (the odds of this particular WSU team having an incredibly good season, other guys falling off, Falk performing at a legitimate Heisman level and overcoming the "system" arguments, etc.). I think there's a reasonable chance he gets invited to NY (not a good one, but something like 45-to-1 odds) but virtually a zero chance of him actually winning.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Like I said above, 30:1 isn't the right number, but in the context of the other guys in the same range....it's probably about right. Given the way that UCLA played last year, what's the basis for Rosen being at 20/1 odds other than being a number that will attract people? USC is likely to wipe the field with them, and they lost 8 games last year. That's $20 million that you are unlikely to have to worry about. Mississippi State is the equivalent to WSU without as much high level success, yet they have a player right behind Falk. The numbers are just numbers. Outside the Top 10, none of the odds are particularly good for any of those players, including Rosen who's in the Top 10.

That's sort of my point. Rosen has no chance either. When was the last time someone from the Pac12 not from USC or Furd won the award?

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Rarely say this so directly, but this is a stupid take given the enormity of the unknowns and potential situations you're trying to encompass with that opinion. The right player in the right situation absolutely could win the Heisman at WSU. In 20 years WSU might be running a pro-style system and luck into some RB who's a grade risk, makes it in somehow, and then leads the nation in rushing and TDs in the context of an improbable Rose Bowl run. We have no idea at this point. I agree with you, though, that the true odds of Luke Falk winning the Heisman this coming season are next to nil, though, and certainly some multiple of 30-1. That's based on all relevant factors (the odds of this particular WSU team having an incredibly good season, other guys falling off, Falk performing at a legitimate Heisman level and overcoming the "system" arguments, etc.). I think there's a reasonable chance he gets invited to NY (not a good one, but something like 45-to-1 odds) but virtually a zero chance of him actually winning.

I grant you that "never" is a bit of hyperbole. However, it's not that much of a stretch to say it. It's become a glamour award, and let's face it, Wazzu is not a glamour program and that's fine by me.

 

[Coug90]

I grant you that "never" is a bit of hyperbole. However, it's not that much of a stretch to say it. It's become a glamour award, and let's face it, Wazzu is not a glamour program and that's fine by me.

Furd was not a glamour program before Harbagh. We used to regularly go there and beat them.

Anythings possible. Will Alabama, Michigan, SC, Florida State, Texas, etc. have a much better chance of having a Heisman winner? Of course...but there's always a chance that a once in a generation talent lights it up at a school like WSU. It happened last year with Jackson at Louisville.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Furd was not a glamour program before Harbagh. We used to regularly go there and beat them.

Anythings possible. Will Alabama, Michigan, SC, Florida State, Texas, etc. have a much better chance of having a Heisman winner? Of course...but there's always a chance that a once in a generation talent lights it up at a school like WSU. It happened last year with Jackson at Louisville.

I think Plunkett won a Heisman at Furd back in the 1970s. Anything is possible I guess, but the college football landscape has changed so much in the past 20 years it's hard to imagine a school in a very remote area having a Heisman winner.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

Howdid, the belief that 0% chance of winning is realistic is exactly what guarantees the folks in Vegas a steady living. The odds are the odds. The odds may be wrong; usually they modify as time passes, and that is as sure an indication as you will get that they are wrong, especially the early odds. But the favorite does not always win, and the longshot does not always lose. Your idea of 1,000,000 folks each offering a dollar makes that clear. High potential of benefit at low risk to the bettor. Instead, how about if you bet your house; or your life; against a huge reward. If there were really 0% chance, it would be a sure bet. But it would be a bet that only a sucker would take.

I don't question your belief that Falk has minimal chance. I even agree. But never say always and never say never. 0% chance is absurd.

 

[Coug90]

I think Plunkett won a Heisman at Furd back in the 1970s. Anything is possible I guess, but the college football landscape has changed so much in the past 20 years it's hard to imagine a school in a very remote area having a Heisman winner.

I actually think it's easier to imagine now. We all bitch about east coast bias, etc, but if Falk throws six touchdowns, it's all over twitter, bleacher report, espn.com, etc. vehicles that didn't exist 20 years ago (or in ESPNs case not everyone had access to).

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

I actually think it's easier to imagine now. We all bitch about east coast bias, etc, but if Falk throws six touchdowns, it's all over twitter, bleacher report, espn.com, etc. vehicles that didn't exist 20 years ago (or in ESPNs case not everyone had access to).

Valid point.

But the media attention is still all over the East Coast/SEC regions....where most people live.

Let's remember too...we all should know we will lose to Montana State to start the season which will not help his cause.

 

[SCglory]

Oh now. They have to pick a number and realistically, our offense is good enough that Falk would be #15 or so in a list of Heisman candidates. Prior to the start of 2015, nobody thought that WSU had a realistic chance of winning the Pac-12 North. Most people would have said that we had close to a 0% chance. After gacking against PSU, there wasn't a single person predicting that we'd win the conference. As it turned out, we didn't win it, but we were only three yards right from winning it. You never know for sure. 30:1 odds are better than I'd give him, but again, they are saying that he is around the 15th best team leader in the country and that seems about right to me.

You can't just throw out one improbable that almost came through to back up your case about another one!!! lol.....History is FULL of improbable inventions, events, etc. that have absolutely nothing to do with other improbable events. If your only point is some kind of impassioned, inspirational speech about "never give up," etc., etc., OK, I get your point. But winning the Heisman takes a VERY special set of circumstances besides a fantastic season and record. And WSU has virtually NONE of those circumstances. Each Oregon school has one Heisman, one. And neither of the Washington schools has one.

The award is perhaps 50% talent, 25% marketing and PR and 25% media exposure. Wazzu has almost zilch in the last two categories. We may argue about the exact percentages, but you get my point, right? For someone in a small market to win (Eugene, Corvallis) you need HUGE marketing. Ducks have that with their sugar daddy. Cougs have none of that and their market is the tiniest in the entire conference. It is stretching the bounds of credulity to even conceive of a scenario in which Falk wins this. But is it "possible?" Well, since the word means literally a theoretical possibility, then "Yes, it is." But 30 to 1?? Not a chance. Try 10,000 to 1....if he's lucky.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

You can't just throw out one improbable that almost came through to back up your case about another one!!! lol.....History is FULL of improbable inventions, events, etc. that have absolutely nothing to do with other improbable events. If your only point is some kind of impassioned, inspirational speech about "never give up," etc., etc., OK, I get your point. But winning the Heisman takes a VERY special set of circumstances besides a fantastic season and record. And WSU has virtually NONE of those circumstances. Each Oregon school has one Heisman, one. And neither of the Washington schools has one.

The award is perhaps 50% talent, 25% marketing and PR and 25% media exposure. Wazzu has almost zilch in the last two categories. We may argue about the exact percentages, but you get my point, right? For someone in a small market to win (Eugene, Corvallis) you need HUGE marketing. Ducks have that with their sugar daddy. Cougs have none of that and their market is the tiniest in the entire conference. It is stretching the bounds of credulity to even conceive of a scenario in which Falk wins this. But is it "possible?" Well, since the word means literally a theoretical possibility, then "Yes, it is." But 30 to 1?? Not a chance. Try 10,000 to 1....if he's lucky.

As I said, we all agree that 30:1 is just a number to get people to put down a bet. If you are in Vegas and a Coug fan, why not throw down a $20 bill on Falk? Vegas doesn't waste time on someone who won't generate interest at all and they go into "the field" at whatever odds they feel will sucker someone in. I will agree that Falk's chances are not good at 30:1. If I was to pick a number, I'd put it at 250 to 1.

Indulge a fantasy if you will:

For him to win the Heisman, he needs big yards against Boise State, preferably in a close game (although as a fan, I'd rather it be a blowout). Then, on Friday night, Falk would need to lead WSU to a win over your beloved Trojans when a lot of the media will be paying attention. If both teams are undefeated, it will get a good time slot and lots of attention. Decent stats are fine in the game against USC. Just win. WSU needs Oregon to find a way to beat Nebraska and head into the game against us at 5-0 and ranked in the Top 25. A game like that gets a featured spot. Falk throws for 600 yards and 4 TD's against a still mediocre Oregon defense to lead us to a 49-41 win over the Ducks. At 6-0 and in the Top 3 in the country in passing with WSU rated in the Top 15, nobody is ignorant of Falk.

Even though I think Colorado will be down in 2017, they will not face any teams that won their bowl games and only two that qualified for bowl games before they face WSU. It is likely that CU will be 6-1 and ranked in the Top 20. Another nationally televised win over the Buffaloes puts WSU at 8-0 and with as many as 4 wins against Top 25 opponents (BSU, USC, UO, and CU). There may not be another team with a resume as good as ours at that point. You can bet that Falk is in the Top 5 in the Heisman discussion at that point. After a breather against Arizona, 9-0 WSU gets yet another Top 25 opponent in Stanford. At 6-2, the Cardinal would be ranked around #20. WSU wins again and furthers the Falk hype. The 10-0 Cougs (ranked #6) face off against the 7-2 Utes (#23) in yet another Top 25 game. WSU ekes out a tough win and Falk leads WSU to a game winning drive in the last three minutes of the game to set up a Top 5 showdown with UW that is ranked #2 courtesy of the easiest schedule in college football. Gameday is in Seattle, it's #2 UW vs #4 WSU in one of the biggest hyped games of the year. The game ends in a fashion that is virtually identical to our win over UW in 2007. Huskies leading 35-28 early in the fourth quarter. Falk throws two touchdowns in the fourth quarter including a heroic 35 yard TD to Priester as he is getting pounded into the turf near midfield.

Link for those that want to watch the final TD

After navigating one of the most difficult schedules in the country, the 12-0 Cougs (now ranked #3) face off against the 11-1 USC Trojans (ranked #5) in the most anticipated championship game of the 2017 season. The Pac-12 championship game is the only one where the winner goes to the playoff. #6 Oklahoma is facing off against #11 KSU with faint hopes of passing USC or WSU but we know it isn't going to happen. #1 Alabama is facing #8 Florida in the SEC. #2 Clemson faces off against #13 UNC. Lamar Jackson is on the outside looking in as his 9-3 Louisville team misses their conference championship game and his senior campaign was wiped out early with losses to UNC and Clemson in the first month of the season. #4 Michigan plays #8 Wisconsin.

Darnold falls off the map if he loses to Falk twice, Jackson won't get it with a team that doesn't have double digit wins, Mayfield will have a great shot because he is at OU, but the allegations of "system QB" will haunt him as much as it does Falk and he will not have the numbers because OU is more balanced. Browning will be a contender but getting outclassed in the fourth quarter against Falk leaves him out. Barrett at OSU would need to lose to OU and Michigan for Falk to have a slim chance and a third loss might be necessary. Alabama is too boring for their running back to win. WSU outclasses USC to advance to the college football playoff and Falk wins the Heisman Trophy in a shocker. For WSU to get to 13-0, we would have to beat 8 teams that would be in the Top 25 of the respective games. That resume gets you a trophy.

Is the above scenario bordering on impossible? Sure. 250 to 1 odds? Maybe worse than that. The above would have sounded crazy in the 2nd week of September of 2015, but given the fact that the Pac-12 hasn't shown true top shelf quality the past couple years, it would be stupid to say that it can't happen. For us to get to 13-0, our offense will have to be stupendous because we all know our defense is average at best for next year. Never say never.

 

[SCglory]

As I said, we all agree that 30:1 is just a number to get people to put down a bet. If you are in Vegas and a Coug fan, why not throw down a $20 bill on Falk? Vegas doesn't waste time on someone who won't generate interest at all and they go into "the field" at whatever odds they feel will sucker someone in. I will agree that Falk's chances are not good at 30:1. If I was to pick a number, I'd put it at 250 to 1.

Indulge a fantasy if you will:

For him to win the Heisman, he needs big yards against Boise State, preferably in a close game (although as a fan, I'd rather it be a blowout). Then, on Friday night, Falk would need to lead WSU to a win over your beloved Trojans when a lot of the media will be paying attention. If both teams are undefeated, it will get a good time slot and lots of attention. Decent stats are fine in the game against USC. Just win. WSU needs Oregon to find a way to beat Nebraska and head into the game against us at 5-0 and ranked in the Top 25. A game like that gets a featured spot. Falk throws for 600 yards and 4 TD's against a still mediocre Oregon defense to lead us to a 49-41 win over the Ducks. At 6-0 and in the Top 3 in the country in passing with WSU rated in the Top 15, nobody is ignorant of Falk.

Even though I think Colorado will be down in 2017, they will not face any teams that won their bowl games and only two that qualified for bowl games before they face WSU. It is likely that CU will be 6-1 and ranked in the Top 20. Another nationally televised win over the Buffaloes puts WSU at 8-0 and with as many as 4 wins against Top 25 opponents (BSU, USC, UO, and CU). There may not be another team with a resume as good as ours at that point. You can bet that Falk is in the Top 5 in the Heisman discussion at that point. After a breather against Arizona, 9-0 WSU gets yet another Top 25 opponent in Stanford. At 6-2, the Cardinal would be ranked around #20. WSU wins again and furthers the Falk hype. The 10-0 Cougs (ranked #6) face off against the 7-2 Utes (#23) in yet another Top 25 game. WSU ekes out a tough win and Falk leads WSU to a game winning drive in the last three minutes of the game to set up a Top 5 showdown with UW that is ranked #2 courtesy of the easiest schedule in college football. Gameday is in Seattle, it's #2 UW vs #4 WSU in one of the biggest hyped games of the year. The game ends in a fashion that is virtually identical to our win over UW in 2007. Huskies leading 35-28 early in the fourth quarter. Falk throws two touchdowns in the fourth quarter including a heroic 35 yard TD to Priester as he is getting pounded into the turf near midfield.

Link for those that want to watch the final TD

After navigating one of the most difficult schedules in the country, the 12-0 Cougs (now ranked #3) face off against the 11-1 USC Trojans (ranked #5) in the most anticipated championship game of the 2017 season. The Pac-12 championship game is the only one where the winner goes to the playoff. #6 Oklahoma is facing off against #11 KSU with faint hopes of passing USC or WSU but we know it isn't going to happen. #1 Alabama is facing #8 Florida in the SEC. #2 Clemson faces off against #13 UNC. Lamar Jackson is on the outside looking in as his 9-3 Louisville team misses their conference championship game and his senior campaign was wiped out early with losses to UNC and Clemson in the first month of the season. #4 Michigan plays #8 Wisconsin.

Darnold falls off the map if he loses to Falk twice, Jackson won't get it with a team that doesn't have double digit wins, Mayfield will have a great shot because he is at OU, but the allegations of "system QB" will haunt him as much as it does Falk and he will not have the numbers because OU is more balanced. Browning will be a contender but getting outclassed in the fourth quarter against Falk leaves him out. Barrett at OSU would need to lose to OU and Michigan for Falk to have a slim chance and a third loss might be necessary. Alabama is too boring for their running back to win. WSU outclasses USC to advance to the college football playoff and Falk wins the Heisman Trophy in a shocker. For WSU to get to 13-0, we would have to beat 8 teams that would be in the Top 25 of the respective games. That resume gets you a trophy.

Is the above scenario bordering on impossible? Sure. 250 to 1 odds? Maybe worse than that. The above would have sounded crazy in the 2nd week of September of 2015, but given the fact that the Pac-12 hasn't shown true top shelf quality the past couple years, it would be stupid to say that it can't happen. For us to get to 13-0, our offense will have to be stupendous because we all know our defense is average at best for next year. Never say never.

I read as far as I could. Enough to know that 250:1 does not come close to it. Try this: the chances of that coming true are approximately the same as yakicoug moving to Virginia, becoming best friends with Falwell, jr., marrying a 55-year-old widow who had prayed for a man "just like" yaki-coug, then opening his own church....christened "The Palm Springs Church of Virginia." Sure, could happen....

 

[YakiCoug]

I read as far as I could. Enough to know that 250:1 does not come close to it. Try this: the chances of that coming true are approximately the same as yakicoug moving to Virginia, becoming best friends with Falwell, jr., marrying a 55-year-old widow who had prayed for a man "just like" yaki-coug, then opening his own church....christened "The Palm Springs Church of Virginia." Sure, could happen....

What were the odds of a WSU dropout becoming a college professor? (albeit this achievement is in religious studies and came on the heels of two decades in college classrooms, night schools or otherwise).

 

[cr8zyncalif]

If you are determined to follow this "odds of success" thought process....a true Coug story.

I lived in Waller in the late 70's. We did not have room mates; we had suite mates. One of mine my sophomore year was a freshman from Washtucna who got to college and partied too much. He was deficient the first semester and got one of those "if your grades don't go up right now you are gone" letters. There were 8-10 of us who ended up going through college together and he was one of them. He ended up being the only one of us who got a PhD. He has spent the years since at NASA, where it wouldn't be stretching the truth very far to call him a rocket scientist (actually the heat shielding on the rocket; he was a Materials Science major). I introduced him to my fiancé's little sister, and he has been my brother in law for over 3 decades.

What are the chances that a kid who is deficient his first semester will get a doctorate? Or be called a rocket scientist? The odds are low. The probability small. But one of the fascinating things about speculation is that somebody does, in fact, win the lottery. And that is just random chance; it doesn't factor in the intangibles...desire, work ethic, adaptability, the ability to perceive what others miss. Goal achievement for an individual seems to me to be more about the intersection of opportunity, desire and skill set than anything else.

Luke Falk has opportunity and desire. Will his skill set carry him the rest of the way? I would not bet my house. But would I put some cash on the bet? With odds? Of course. Because one of the lessons I've learned over the years is to not bet against someone who is determined and who will have a shot to see if he can earn what he desires. It happens a lot more often than most realize. And I would not bet against Falk. My biggest gripe with Luke was his performance at the end of last season. I'll watch him this year. If he performs as he did during the 8 win streak, then anything is possible...both for WSU and for Falk.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

If you are determined to follow this "odds of success" thought process....a true Coug story.

I lived in Waller in the late 70's. We did not have room mates; we had suite mates. One of mine my sophomore year was a freshman from Washtucna who got to college and partied too much. He was deficient the first semester and got one of those "if your grades don't go up right now you are gone" letters. There were 8-10 of us who ended up going through college together and he was one of them. He ended up being the only one of us who got a PhD. He has spent the years since at NASA, where it wouldn't be stretching the truth very far to call him a rocket scientist (actually the heat shielding on the rocket; he was a Materials Science major). I introduced him to my fiancé's little sister, and he has been my brother in law for over 3 decades.

What are the chances that a kid who is deficient his first semester will get a doctorate? Or be called a rocket scientist? The odds are low. The probability small. But one of the fascinating things about speculation is that somebody does, in fact, win the lottery. And that is just random chance; it doesn't factor in the intangibles...desire, work ethic, adaptability, the ability to perceive what others miss. Goal achievement for an individual seems to me to be more about the intersection of opportunity, desire and skill set than anything else.

Luke Falk has opportunity and desire. Will his skill set carry him the rest of the way? I would not bet my house. But would I put some cash on the bet? With odds? Of course. Because one of the lessons I've learned over the years is to not bet against someone who is determined and who will have a shot to see if he can earn what he desires. It happens a lot more often than most realize. And I would not bet against Falk. My biggest gripe with Luke was his performance at the end of last season. I'll watch him this year. If he performs as he did during the 8 win streak, then anything is possible...both for WSU and for Falk.

I hate to sound pessimistic...and I like Falk as he's a solid guy who is a very good college QB...but I think we've seen the best of him already. He's had many starts...and has worked his way up the learning curve because of that...but we aren't seeing an improved version of him next season. He is who he is as a QB.

If I had a million $ to make some easy money on this 30:1 odds thing, I would. He has no chance to win this award...and I'm fine with that, by the way.

 

[SCglory]

If you are determined to follow this "odds of success" thought process....a true Coug story.

I lived in Waller in the late 70's. We did not have room mates; we had suite mates. One of mine my sophomore year was a freshman from Washtucna who got to college and partied too much. He was deficient the first semester and got one of those "if your grades don't go up right now you are gone" letters. There were 8-10 of us who ended up going through college together and he was one of them. He ended up being the only one of us who got a PhD. He has spent the years since at NASA, where it wouldn't be stretching the truth very far to call him a rocket scientist (actually the heat shielding on the rocket; he was a Materials Science major). I introduced him to my fiancé's little sister, and he has been my brother in law for over 3 decades.

What are the chances that a kid who is deficient his first semester will get a doctorate? Or be called a rocket scientist? The odds are low. The probability small. But one of the fascinating things about speculation is that somebody does, in fact, win the lottery. And that is just random chance; it doesn't factor in the intangibles...desire, work ethic, adaptability, the ability to perceive what others miss. Goal achievement for an individual seems to me to be more about the intersection of opportunity, desire and skill set than anything else.

Luke Falk has opportunity and desire. Will his skill set carry him the rest of the way? I would not bet my house. But would I put some cash on the bet? With odds? Of course. Because one of the lessons I've learned over the years is to not bet against someone who is determined and who will have a shot to see if he can earn what he desires. It happens a lot more often than most realize. And I would not bet against Falk. My biggest gripe with Luke was his performance at the end of last season. I'll watch him this year. If he performs as he did during the 8 win streak, then anything is possible...both for WSU and for Falk.

You guys really, really need a course in critical thinking. One anomaly that is not connected to this issue has NO relevance to this issue. None. Zero. Just quoting rare exceptions as "proof" or support for Falk is ludicrous. Just because something happens rarely in Discipline A has nothing whatsoever to do with Discipline B. Falk is a good QB at an invisible school with no influence or standing amongst the elite writers who will decide this thing. No media. No market. Etc. Has nothing to do with Luke Falk the man, and, if this would be a perfect world, then I agree--he would have a BETTER chance to win it. But it's not. We live in this world. So so many highly, highly improbable factors would have to come true, all connected, that 30:1 would be much better than what is realistic. Let me put it another way: if Falk were playing at Okie State or Texas or Texas Tech or Georgia...that's another story.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

You guys really, really need a course in critical thinking. One anomaly that is not connected to this issue has NO relevance to this issue. None. Zero. Just quoting rare exceptions as "proof" or support for Falk is ludicrous. Just because something happens rarely in Discipline A has nothing whatsoever to do with Discipline B. Falk is a good QB at an invisible school with no influence or standing amongst the elite writers who will decide this thing. No media. No market. Etc. Has nothing to do with Luke Falk the man, and, if this would be a perfect world, then I agree--he would have a BETTER chance to win it. But it's not. We live in this world. So so many highly, highly improbable factors would have to come true, all connected, that 30:1 would be much better than what is realistic. Let me put it another way: if Falk were playing at Okie State or Texas or Texas Tech or Georgia...that's another story.

Did you just say Texas Tech? That makes less sense than saying that Falk has 30:1 odds. It's generally agreed upon that a team has to be playing at a high level for a player to have a shot at the Heisman. Texas Tech has had one double digit win season in the past 40 years. In that same timeframe, WSU has had four. We've won conference championships twice in the past 20 years. Their lone conference championship in the past 40 years was when the Southwest Conference was imploding and they won with an impressive 6-6 record. Texas Tech was lucky to get a guy like Leach to bring attention to them because their program makes our accomplishments look impressive.

Your inclusion of Texas Tech highlights the loser "woe is me" mentality that poisons our program. In desperate search of finding ways to make excuses for our programs position in the pecking order, our fans will throw out just about any type of comment. 30:1 odds are too high, but this talk of zero chance is stupid. The Pac-12 is just weak enough overall that WSU only needs to have 1 or 2 exceptional games for us to have the kind of season for Falk to win the Heisman. There are biases in place that would make it difficult, but the opportunity to overcome those biases is there.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Did you just say Texas Tech? That makes less sense than saying that Falk has 30:1 odds. It's generally agreed upon that a team has to be playing at a high level for a player to have a shot at the Heisman. Texas Tech has had one double digit win season in the past 40 years. In that same timeframe, WSU has had four. We've won conference championships twice in the past 20 years. Their lone conference championship in the past 40 years was when the Southwest Conference was imploding and they won with an impressive 6-6 record. Texas Tech was lucky to get a guy like Leach to bring attention to them because their program makes our accomplishments look impressive.

Your inclusion of Texas Tech highlights the loser "woe is me" mentality that poisons our program. In desperate search of finding ways to make excuses for our programs position in the pecking order, our fans will throw out just about any type of comment. 30:1 odds are too high, but this talk of zero chance is stupid. The Pac-12 is just weak enough overall that WSU only needs to have 1 or 2 exceptional games for us to have the kind of season for Falk to win the Heisman. There are biases in place that would make it difficult, but the opportunity to overcome those biases is there.

Flat...you put up $5,000 and I'll pay you $150,000 if Falk wins the Heisman. I'll never lose even one minute of sleep that I won't get the easiest $5,000 in my life. That's how confident I am that Falk won't win the Heisman.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Flat...you put up $5,000 and I'll pay you $150,000 if Falk wins the Heisman. I'll never lose even one minute of sleep that I won't get the easiest $5,000 in my life. That's how confident I am that Falk won't win the Heisman.

Did you not read what I wrote above? I said that 30:1 odds aren't really that good and that all they were basically establishing is that in the line of people being considered for the Heisman.....he's #14. I also said that if I were to set his odds, it would be closer to 250:1. SC in particular said that even those odds were wrong and who knows what they really are. Again, the odds say that Falk won't make the Top 10 finalists for the Heisman and I think we all agree on that. How about I put up $1 and you give me $250 if he wins? I'm willing to put a buck on the line.

If you think about my 250:1 comment, one way to view it is that I'm saying that it could take up to 250 years before WSU will have a guy win the Heisman. From that perspective, it highlights how poor Falk's chances are. Even the scenario that I highlighted above (13-0 and a Pac-12 championship) would probably give Falk less than a 50/50 chance of winning the Heisman at that point. There would still be a couple other guys that would get a lot of consideration for the Trophy because of the brand that they represent. His chances are ridiculously slim. I'm saying that he has a 0.4% chance but any number is really just a number. Even zero is a number that can be argued. Let me know if you want the 250:1 bet.

 

[425cougfan]

Did you not read what I wrote above? I said that 30:1 odds aren't really that good and that all they were basically establishing is that in the line of people being considered for the Heisman.....he's #14. I also said that if I were to set his odds, it would be closer to 250:1. SC in particular said that even those odds were wrong and who knows what they really are. Again, the odds say that Falk won't make the Top 10 finalists for the Heisman and I think we all agree on that. How about I put up $1 and you give me $250 if he wins? I'm willing to put a buck on the line.

If you think about my 250:1 comment, one way to view it is that I'm saying that it could take up to 250 years before WSU will have a guy win the Heisman. From that perspective, it highlights how poor Falk's chances are. Even the scenario that I highlighted above (13-0 and a Pac-12 championship) would probably give Falk less than a 50/50 chance of winning the Heisman at that point. There would still be a couple other guys that would get a lot of consideration for the Trophy because of the brand that they represent. His chances are ridiculously slim. I'm saying that he has a 0.4% chance but any number is really just a number. Even zero is a number that can be argued. Let me know if you want the 250:1 bet.

Not trying to be more of a pain to you than others have been (I get what you're saying, and I agree, as I've expressed myself ... the odds aren't zero, but probably are something more like the 250-1 odds figure you gave ... I'd go with 350-1 myself), but I don't see how putting Falk's odds at 250-1 means that you're saying it could take 250 years before WSU will have a guy win the Heisman. How does that follow? I don't see how expressing odds for a particular player winning it this year has much to do with, or can be extrapolated to be a comment on, any kind of timeframe for any WSU player winning it.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

Not trying to be more of a pain to you than others have been (I get what you're saying, and I agree, as I've expressed myself ... the odds aren't zero, but probably are something more like the 250-1 odds figure you gave ... I'd go with 350-1 myself), but I don't see how putting Falk's odds at 250-1 means that you're saying it could take 250 years before WSU will have a guy win the Heisman. How does that follow? I don't see how expressing odds for a particular player winning it this year has much to do with, or can be extrapolated to be a comment on, any kind of timeframe for any WSU player winning it.

From a statistical point of view....you are correct. I was just simplifying to make a point. In my line of work, we call the 1% storm event the "100 year storm" because it has a 1% chance to happen in any given year, but we've had three "100 year storms" happen in our area in the past 20 years and it's possible that we won't have another one for 200 years. It's a bit lazy to call it the 100 year storm but it gives perspective to odds that are easier to understand. Sorry for offending your statistical sensibilities.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

Did you not read what I wrote above? I said that 30:1 odds aren't really that good and that all they were basically establishing is that in the line of people being considered for the Heisman.....he's #14. I also said that if I were to set his odds, it would be closer to 250:1. SC in particular said that even those odds were wrong and who knows what they really are. Again, the odds say that Falk won't make the Top 10 finalists for the Heisman and I think we all agree on that. How about I put up $1 and you give me $250 if he wins? I'm willing to put a buck on the line.

If you think about my 250:1 comment, one way to view it is that I'm saying that it could take up to 250 years before WSU will have a guy win the Heisman. From that perspective, it highlights how poor Falk's chances are. Even the scenario that I highlighted above (13-0 and a Pac-12 championship) would probably give Falk less than a 50/50 chance of winning the Heisman at that point. There would still be a couple other guys that would get a lot of consideration for the Trophy because of the brand that they represent. His chances are ridiculously slim. I'm saying that he has a 0.4% chance but any number is really just a number. Even zero is a number that can be argued. Let me know if you want the 250:1 bet.

I read it Flat.

How about you put down $1000? I'll give you $250K if Falk wins the Heisman. Only a dollar in my pocket means nothing. Deal or no deal?

 

[Flatlandcoug]

I read it Flat.

How about you put down $1000? I'll give you $250K if Falk wins the Heisman. Only a dollar in my pocket means nothing. Deal or no deal?

I would never put a $1000 (or $100) for any bet on sports. I have put down $20 in Vegas before but that's been on something I felt that I had a 50/50 shot on (Cougs +7 vs UCLA comes to mind). Anything with odds worse than that and I wouldn't gamble more than a couple bucks. I will be buying a $2 powerball ticket today even though my odds are astronomically bad.

 

[How_did_this_happen?]

I would never put a $1000 (or $100) for any bet on sports. I have put down $20 in Vegas before but that's been on something I felt that I had a 50/50 shot on (Cougs +7 vs UCLA comes to mind). Anything with odds worse than that and I wouldn't gamble more than a couple bucks. I will be buying a $2 powerball ticket today even though my odds are astronomically bad.

No guts...no glory.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

No guts...no glory.

I know. You had the opportunity to say that you had won a dollar from me and you are passing it up!