Who is the current OROTY?

[xjxdarren]

Griffin- and Wilson- supporters who didn't catch the Colts game yesterday mostly likely still have have no clue about two, actually three significant stats surrounding Luck's year: he is ranked #1 in the entire league both in terms of being hurried and hit in dropbacks; he's also atop of the list with respective to drawing fine-able hits. What he's been able to pull off so far is nothing short of miraculous.

[killxswitch]

Only some statistics matter, and those statistics only matter when it helps my argument. In all other situations stats are for losers.

[scottyboy]

Originally Posted by killxswitch

Only some statistics matter, and those statistics only matter when it helps my argument. In all other situations stats are for losers.

YEAH BUT YOU CLEARLY HAVENT SEEN THE GUY I'M ARGUING FOR PLAY. IDIOT.

and killswitch and I just completed 10+ pages of internet arguing in 2 posts. We are efficient.

[FUNBUNCHER]

Should have been a poll.

Most of what I've read has been a rationalization for why Luck's numbers aren't better than they are.

Someone make the simple (convincing) case for why Luck should be OROTY.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

Should have been a poll.

Most of what I've read has been a rationalization for why Luck's numbers aren't better than they are.

because they're arguing with people who are solely posting stats. i'm not sure why this is surprising.

Someone make the simple (convincing) case for why Luck should be OROTY.

why bother? it'll just be ignored, like the other 15 posts that've already done that.

[Jvig43]

I know I said I was done but just found this hilarious.

Cudders makes several well thought out posts about Luck and RG3

*asks for someone to make a convincing post about Luck.

[crossroads]

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

Should have been a poll.

Most of what I've read has been a rationalization for why Luck's numbers aren't better than they are.

Someone make the simple (convincing) case for why Luck should be OROTY.

His team is 9-4 after a 2-12 season last year. He is 7th in the league in passing yards, and first among rookies by a fairly large margin, and is second among rookie QBs in total touchdowns. He is leading an offense that is ranked 6th in the league despite having a running game that is ranked 22nd. And he currently has his team in the lead for the 5th seed in the AFC while having an absolutely porous defense and taking on more responsibilities than your typical rookie QB.

[y.f.s.]

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

Should have been a poll.

Most of what I've read has been a rationalization for why Luck's numbers aren't better than they are.

Someone make the simple (convincing) case for why Luck should be OROTY.

Because he is the entire foundation of a playoff team that was a hapless 1-15 last year. I don't know if I can understate how hard they make it for him. There hasn't been an "easing in" process for him. It's not like Indy is running a controlled, measured pass game that takes an occasional shot play. They're asking him to carry them and overcome the other deficiencies on the roster much in the same way that Pittsburgh asked of the veteran version of Roethlisberger (not the rookie/young version).

RG3 and Russell Wilson are amazing. I love them. You will not find bigger fans of those two (and Tannehill - really, this whole rookie QB class) than me. I think it should be noted, though, that every single one of those guys has had a staff that met them halfway. All 3 of those guys are largely doing the same things schematically that they were asked to do last season. Luck isn't....and he's still being ridiculously successful. His metrics in Throwing Distance/Yards Per Pass in the Air blow everybody else away.

[FUNBUNCHER]

IMO people have nibbled around the edges of the debate, but there haven't been strong cases made about why one player should be OROTY.
There have been attempts to put into context why one rookie's production is less/more impressive than the other, or how player X is still productive in less than ideal circumstances.

Crossroads took a stab at it and hit what the high points are for Luck.
But you still can't make a case for him without using some stats. All NFL offensive awards are heavily stat based.

So....Luck is a winner, 9-4 and quarterbacking a team nearly a lock for the playoffs.
He's thrown for the most yards of any other rookie.


EDIT:

y.f.s., I thought Luck and Tannehill had the least transition to make from their college systems to the pros??
Wasn't that a big part of the reason Luck was considered the most 'pro ready QB' in decades??

[AntoinCD]

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

IMO people have nibbled around the edges of the debate, but there haven't been strong cases made about why one player should be OROTY.
There have been attempts to put into context why one rookie's production is less/more impressive than the other, or how player X is still productive in less than ideal circumstances.

Crossroads took a stab at it and hit what the high points are for Luck.
But you still can't make a case for him without using some stats. All NFL offensive awards are heavily stat based.

So....Luck is a winner, 9-4 and quarterbacking a team nearly a lock for the playoffs.
He's thrown for the most yards of any other rookie.


EDIT:

y.f.s., I thought Luck and Tannehill had the least transition to make from their college systems to the pros??
Wasn't that a big part of the reason Luck was considered the most 'pro ready QB' in decades??

Luck, in particular, played in what can be described as a more "conventional" offense than RG3 at Stanford, however while RG3 is still running zone read option and pistol stuff, Luck's offense this year (while also considered "conventional" in NFL terms) is completely different to the Stanford offense he played in under Harbaugh and Shaw. The Colts offense is basically the Steelers offense from a few years back. They use a lot of motion, deep drops, trips formations, shotgun passing etc. Stanford's offense was completely based off of power run behind that unbelievable offensive line. Luck was able to utilize play action to go deep and if not take the underneath stuff. This year the Colts run a lot of vertical routes out of all formations. The ridiculous thing is Andrew Luck was asked to do less at Stanford throughout his college career than he is being asked to do as a rookie in the NFL. That is the most impressive thing to me.

[y.f.s.]

In terms of terminology or how the offense is organized? Yes. But in terms of the structure of the offense and how it's executed? He's probably got the biggest difference of any of the four QBs. Luck being "pro ready" had very little to do with the offense he played in, and every bit to do with how ridiculously good he was at moving around in a compressed pocket. I know I have old posts on here from in-between his freshman and sophomore seasons saying that he better at moving inside the pocket than any QB I had ever seen in college.

Again, the Stanford offense is/was "pro style" but what does that even mean? It was a ball-control offense, the pass game was catered between the numbers, and they took occasional, measured shot plays. Andrew Luck was amazing in college and he did some advanced stuff pre and post snap, but that doesn't change the fact that he wasn't the foundation of their offense. The run game was, and it will continue to be.

FWIW, Tannehill went 8th overall because he's basically a prodigy for how well he moved in the pocket and threw outside the numbers with such limited starts. And that's what he's had success doing in Miami.

[FUNBUNCHER]

Don't forget Tannehill is running the same offense he ran at A&M. His OC Mike Sherman was his HC in college. His biggest transition has been adjusting to NFL defensive coverages, not the offensive scheme run by Miami.
I think hiring Mike SHerman was a major part of the reason the Phins took Tannehill when they did.

By the way, IMO when a pro QB prospect described as 'pro ready', it's mainly a reference to their experience dropping back from center and simultaneously synch up routes while reading coverages in a backpedal.

It's a primary skillset needed for all NFL QBs, but not every college QB can handle the learning curve in the NFL. It's the big reason why previous spread QBs have bombed in the pros.

From a distance it seems like Indy is winning games in spite of Luck's mistakes, not because of his outstanding play. That's why it's hard for me to quantify or categorize his individual play as something exceptional.

There's a margin of error working in Luck's favor that I don't see for other rookie QBs.
When you really look at it, forget the rookie stuff, I don't think any modern NFL QB has had Luck's numbers playing for a team with average overall talent at best and a less than dominant defense and running game, and they were 9-4 after 13 games.

That's bizarre to me.

[jsagan77]

Originally Posted by crossroads

His team is 9-4 after a 2-12 season last year. He is 7th in the league in passing yards, and first among rookies by a fairly large margin, and is second among rookie QBs in total touchdowns. He is leading an offense that is ranked 6th in the league despite having a running game that is ranked 22nd. And he currently has his team in the lead for the 5th seed in the AFC while having an absolutely porous defense and taking on more responsibilities than your typical rookie QB.

I agree with all the Luck supporters now.. Look at all the statistical categories Luck leads the league in. It's truely remarkable and I was so wrong about him.

He's first in INT's (he throws all of these with such amazing anticipation it's uncanny)

First in pick 6's thrown (I can't believe how efficient he's been here)

First in total turnovers (Not many guys can do this and still be 9-4 with absolutely nothing else around him.)

First in worst comp % for rookies (yes even the Enigma Brandon Weeden)

Second to only Brandon Weeden in worst QBR for rookies (What did you guys expect? Perfection? You can't beat Weeden all the time when it comes to these sorts of things)

[AntoinCD]

Man I really feel for all you suckers who actually watch games. Why waste your valuable time when you can just google "Andrew Luck NFL stats" to see exactly how much he sucks.

RG3 for MVP - of all QBs with 200+ throws he's 5th in completion percentage, 1st in ypa, 2nd in TD:INT ratio and 1st in QBR

RG3 >>>>>>> Brady, Manning and Rodgers because statzzzzz

[crossroads]

Originally Posted by jsagan77

I agree with all the Luck supporters now.. Look at all the statistical categories Luck leads the league in. It's truely remarkable and I was so wrong about him.

He's first in INT's (he throws all of these with such amazing anticipation it's uncanny)

First in pick 6's thrown (I can't believe how efficient he's been here)

First in total turnovers (Not many guys can do this and still be 9-4 with absolutely nothing else around him.)

First in worst comp % for rookies (yes even the Enigma Brandon Weeden)

Second to only Brandon Weeden in worst QBR for rookies (What did you guys expect? Perfection? You can't beat Weeden all the time when it comes to these sorts of things)

Is there a reason why all of your posts in this thread are so antagonistic? i don't know why you had to respond in such a dickish way. Funbuncher asked for an argument for why Luck should be oroty, and since more than a few RG3 supporters have ignored or brushed off any arguments for Luck that aren't purely based in statistics I figured I may as well use stats to back-up Luck's candidacy. And even then, it's not nearly as strong of an argument for him as the ones people like Cudders have already presented several times in this thread.

[killxswitch]

If you need a convincing argument for Luck, just read Cudders' posts in this thread. Stop ignoring them.

[FUNBUNCHER]

Originally Posted by killxswitch

If you need a convincing argument for Luck, just read Cudders' posts in this thread. Stop ignoring them.

Cudders didn't really make a positive argument in favor of Luck, it was more a defense of how he's played this season and why Luck's statistics from an analytical point of view aren't really that bad.

That's why I was curious to hear someone make the specific case for Luck deserving to win OROTY without comparing him directly to anyone else.

I wanted to hear what the points of emphasis would be, why Luck has had the most deserving season of any offensive rookie player in the NFL and merited the award.

[jsagan77]

Originally Posted by crossroads

Is there a reason why all of your posts in this thread are so antagonistic? i don't know why you had to respond in such a dickish way. Funbuncher asked for an argument for why Luck should be oroty, and since more than a few RG3 supporters have ignored or brushed off any arguments for Luck that aren't purely based in statistics I figured I may as well use stats to back-up Luck's candidacy. And even then, it's not nearly as strong of an argument for him as the ones people like Cudders have already presented several times in this thread.

Cause I'm sick to death of the lack of respect for what RG3 has done and I'm sick of nut suckery of the Andrew Luck crowd. There's absolutley NO excuse that can be made for him that hasn't been made by his apologists, yet every time I open this gd thread I see more crap excuses piled on to why Luck deserves a pass for every mistake he makes. If RG3 or Wilson had these sort of crap stats it would a completely different story. Heck even if the Colts were losing it would be a completely different story. Just because a team is not losing despite the so so season by their highly touted rookie does not give him a pass. Has he looked good at times? Sure... Has he looked like grease monkey sh*t at times too? YES, but not one of these guys hanging off Lucks nut fuzz have said anything of the sort... It's like excuse after excuse and basically a non factor or issue because "omgzzz he the best qb prospect eeeevvvverrzzz omg he can't be having a worse season than RG3 or Wilson because his team is 9-4 and his offense is so complicated so I'll make up stuff to show these idiots how good he izzz---Luck for MVP and HOF!!!).

I've now been able to watch 10 of his games now and while I agree he's done some amazing stuff, he's also made so many more "rookie" mistakes than the other main guys (and I don't see the scheme being that much more complicated as everyone else seems to). His problem is that he makes a lot of illadvised throws or he holds the ball too long that result in a negative play and the he's forced into airing the ball to dig himself out of a hole (which to his credit has done masterfully at times (but has also been very lucky as well).

RG3 has been amazing this year and has not had one game where he's looked like a Rookie. People joke about him being up there with Brady, Rodgers, Manning, and the lot (even though he's not there yet) but there's something to be said about what he's done statisticlaly this year as a rookie. If you're not amazed, you're not watching... And I can tell most people aren't watching because I keep hearing about all the bubble screens the guy throws...(sigh).

[scottyboy]

how the **** does RG3 not have enough respect? Jesus christmas. What do you want? For us to crown him? The entire media is all over his nuts. Nobody's saying he sucks or is over-rated. Like seriously, what do you want ?

this thread is more Redskins fans being insecure about RG3 and just bashing on Luck for no reason and not accepting any logical arguments for why people are saying Luck could/should be ROTY

[LonghornsLegend]

Duh...Because if you don't think RG3 is the RoY then you don't watch football. That's all that has been repeated throughout this entire thread.

[crossroads]

Originally Posted by jsagan77

Cause I'm sick to death of the lack of respect for what RG3 has done and I'm sick of nut suckery of the Andrew Luck crowd. There's absolutley NO excuse that can be made for him that hasn't been made by his apologists, yet every time I open this gd thread I see more crap excuses piled on to why Luck deserves a pass for every mistake he makes. If RG3 or Wilson had these sort of crap stats it would a completely different story. Heck even if the Colts were losing it would be a completely different story. Just because a team is not losing despite the so so season by their highly touted rookie does not give him a pass. Has he looked good at times? Sure... Has he looked like grease monkey sh*t at times too? YES, but not one of these guys hanging off Lucks nut fuzz have said anything of the sort... It's like excuse after excuse and basically a non factor or issue because "omgzzz he the best qb prospect eeeevvvverrzzz omg he can't be having a worse season than RG3 or Wilson because his team is 9-4 and his offense is so complicated so I'll make up stuff to show these idiots how good he izzz---Luck for MVP and HOF!!!).

I've now been able to watch 10 of his games now and while I agree he's done some amazing stuff, he's also made so many more "rookie" mistakes than the other main guys (and I don't see the scheme being that much more complicated as everyone else seems to). His problem is that he makes a lot of illadvised throws or he holds the ball too long that result in a negative play and the he's forced into airing the ball to dig himself out of a hole (which to his credit has done masterfully at times (but has also been very lucky as well).

RG3 has been amazing this year and has not had one game where he's looked like a Rookie. People joke about him being up there with Brady, Rodgers, Manning, and the lot (even though he's not there yet) but there's something to be said about what he's done statisticlaly this year as a rookie. If you're not amazed, you're not watching... And I can tell most people aren't watching because I keep hearing about all the bubble screens the guy throws...(sigh).

I've read most of the posts in this thread and I can't remember anyone saying that RG3 hasn't been great (possibly i missed something though) so I don't know why you think he isn't getting enough respect. Is it because people have described his offense as simpler than Luck's? It seems to me there are more instances of you (and a couple others) having a lack of respect for what Luck is doing on the field.

For the most part people in here have simply been trying to provide context to the stats being laid out because context is important. If you just want to go off of stats, there are like 40 receivers who are better than Larry Fitzgerald.

[bigbluedefense]

Redskin fans. We missed ya. Glad to have you all back.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by scottyboy

how the **** does RG3 not have enough respect? Jesus christmas. What do you want? For us to crown him? The entire media is all over his nuts. Nobody's saying he sucks or is over-rated. Like seriously, what do you want ?

this thread is more Redskins fans being insecure about RG3 and just bashing on Luck for no reason and not accepting any logical arguments for why people are saying Luck could/should be ROTY

this. NO ONE has said rg3 is anything less than absolutely phenomenal. no one. not even once, not even close. it'd be great if some folks would actually read the posts and consider, for just a minute, that there might both be positive arguments for luck, and actual critiques of rg3. it's the same idiocy that'll happen around the draft, when anyone who doesn't fully buy into a guy is 'just a hater' or some other childish nonsense. the only reason this thread has gone remotely this long is because the pro-rg3 camp largely has no understanding whatsoever that anyone could possibly think luck deserves consideration and that they're dumbfounded that anyone doesn't buy that rg3 is the unanimous choice. i'm not even sure anyone has said that they'd be surprised if rg3 won, just that they might take luck instead.

but no, now we'll get sixteen more posts about how everyone just wants to suck luck's balls, or whatever other juvenile idiocy comes up. because why try to have a rational discussion when you can just angrily repost the same 4 stats and call everyone who disagrees with you an ignorant douchebag?

if anyone, in the future, is ever curious why certain fanbases suddenly get an inordinate amount of 'hate', they need look no further than this thread.

[bigbluedefense]

I remember when Number 10 made everyone hate us Giants fans.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

I remember when Number 10 made everyone hate us Giants fans.

i miss the 'better and more productive' meme.