Matt Ryan wins OROY - Page 3

Shiver · 01-02-2009, 08:24 PM

That is exactly why Chris Johnson was not the best. He played on an awesome team, behind a great O-Line, with another RB softening the defense and a lead to milk. That is the best way to get prime time statistics. Besides, how many yards did Johnson get against the Chiefs and Lions lousy run defense? Steve Slaton had two 100-yard performances against your Titans' run defense.

Gay Ork Wang · 01-02-2009, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

That is exactly why Chris Johnson was not the best. He played on an awesome team, behind a great O-Line, with another RB softening the defense and a lead to milk. That is the best way to get prime time statistics. Besides, how many yards did Johnson get against the Chiefs and Lions lousy run defense? Steve Slaton had two 100-yard performances against your Titans' run defense.

pssst, good teams obviously have no effect on players at all!!!!

TitanHope · 01-02-2009, 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

That is exactly why Chris Johnson was not the best. He played on an awesome team, behind a great O-Line, with another RB softening the defense and a lead to milk. That is the best way to get prime time statistics.

Don't play this game. For every argument you can scrounge up to belittle CJ's accomplishments, I can bring up a counterpoint or apply something similar to Slaton, Forte, and even Matt Ryan.

For example, while you say LenDale White softening defenses helps CJ, LenDale also took carries away from CJ. A lot of carries. Chris Johnson had 251 carries, and LenDale had 200 carries. In comparison, Matt Forte had 316 attempts, and the guy behind him had 34 carries. Steve Slaton had 268 carries, and the guy behind him had 74. LenDale also took all of the goal line carries. While Slaton and Forte were featured RB's, CJ had to split time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

Besides, how many yards did Johnson get against the Chiefs and Lions lousy run defense? Steve Slaton had two 100-yard performances against your Titans' run defense.

That's a great point. Conveniently, all three RB's played that lousy Lions run defense. Lucky Mr. Forte even got to play them twice! Lets compare them:

Steve Slaton: 80 yds, 4.7 avg, 1 TD
Matt Forte:
a) 36 yds, 2.4 avg, 1 TD
b) 126 yds, 5.7 avg, 0 TD
Chris Johnson: 125 yds, 7.8 avg, 2 TD

Quite ingenius on your part really to claim Chris Johnson padded his stats against a bad team when every RB in question played that team this season - with one of them playing them twice. But Since CJ had the best day against them, it's totally fair to dismiss his performance. Thankfully Slaton only had an average day against this atrocious defense. Matt Forte's first game against them was terrible, but his second game was too close for comfort. He had one more yard than CJ, but thanks to Forte having to attempt more carries to hit his mark, CJ had the better average. CJ's 2 rushing TD's, which is the amount of rushing TD's that Slaton and Forte had combined, also helped him to have the best day...

...gimme a break.

Your points are a guise, and your faulty argument presents a double-standard.

OzTitan · 01-03-2009, 12:32 AM

Steve Slaton cracked 100 twice on the Titans thanks both times to one late run when the game was out of reach for the losing team. He was fairly low key otherwise in those games and would have been fairly interchangeable otherwise.

And whilst sharing carries can be nice on the body, LenDale White was the league's leading TD scorer on the ground for the vast majority of the season. Props to LenDale for that, but he did nothing special and nothing Johnson couldn't have done around the goalline. I honestly think Fisher just did it to keep White happy, which was a concern for sure given his "I don't care, I wasn't paying attention" statement after the NJY loss.

And I really wish people would quit making blanked generalizations about the Titans OL. It's an *elite* pass blocking OL this season, NOT a great run blocking OL. The internal OL, Amano particularly, were down right abused some times this season allowing both CJ and White to be stuffed up the middle with regularity. Don't be surprised if the Titans go C/OG in the 1st this draft because of it. They also had Kerry Collins and a weak receiving core, allowing D's to stack against the run constantly. Slaton had it easier with that passing offense and (imo) underrated OL. I think it's fairly clear he took advantage of the fact defenses were **** scared of Andre Johnson and Schuab coming back to give him the ball.

BBIB · 01-03-2009, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shiver

That is exactly why Chris Johnson was not the best. He played on an awesome team, behind a great O-Line, with another RB softening the defense and a lead to milk. That is the best way to get prime time statistics. Besides, how many yards did Johnson get against the Chiefs and Lions lousy run defense? Steve Slaton had two 100-yard performances against your Titans' run defense.

And Matt Ryan wasn't in a situation conducive to success?

He had a Pro Bowl RB who led the league in carries, set a franchise record in rushing TDs on a team that was near the bottom of the league in passing attempts. And when they did throw it, he could throw it to a Pro BOwl WR who set a franchise record in receiving yards.

And as far as lousy defenses, let's look at Ryan's numbers:

Against top 10 pass defenses this year (OAK, PHI, TBx2): 4 TD 6 INT, 68/122 56%

Against 11-20 pass defenses this year (CARx2, GB, MIN, STL): 4 TD 3 INT 77/139 55%

Against 21-32 pass defenses this year (CHI, DEN, DET, KC, N.Ox2, SD): 8 TD 2 INT 120/173 70%

Ryan had overall more interceptions than touchdowns vs teams that had defenses in the top 20 in pass defense.

Ryan has been great but his production did not warrant ROTY. Again another joke of a margin of victory.

Donno · 01-03-2009, 03:17 PM

Thats great that he got it. The Falcons should be competitive for years to come.

TitleTown088 · 01-03-2009, 04:32 PM

I can see why Ryan won it, but I've never boughten into his hype all season long. Nothing overly impressive.

MetSox17 · 01-03-2009, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

I can see why Ryan won it, but I've never boughten into his hype all season long. Nothing overly impressive.

Bought?

He's a good quarterback. The fact that he has played above average, despite being a rookie, is what won him the award, really. Just like MVP's will mostly be QB's and RB's, same goes for other awards.

TitleTown088 · 01-03-2009, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17

Bought?

He's a good quarterback. The fact that he has played above average, despite being a rookie, is what won him the award, really. Just like MVP's will mostly be QB's and RB's, same goes for other awards.

You corrected a grammar mistake. Kewl.

A good QB? Meh, if you saw these stats without knowing a player was a rookie would you call him a "good" QB? 16 TD and 11 int 3400 yards.

That is esentially an average non-rookie NFL QB.

*but its not all stats! Hes a leader*

MetSox17 · 01-03-2009, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

You corrected a grammar mistake. Kewl.

A good QB? Meh, if you saw these stats without knowing a player was a rookie would you call him a "good" QB? 16 TD and 11 int 3400 yards.

That is esentially an average non-rookie NFL QB.

*but its not all stats! Hes a leader*

I can't remember the last time a rookie quarterback came in and did that, all the while leading his team into the playoffs after having an absolutely horrible season the year prior.

When was the last time a rookie RB came in and played well? Just about every year..

TitleTown088 · 01-03-2009, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17

I can't remember the last time a rookie quarterback came in and did that, all the while leading his team into the playoffs after having an absolutely horrible season the year prior.

When was the last time a rookie RB came in and played well? Just about every year..

I'm not arguing that Ryan shouldn't have won it if you had cared to read. I was implying he should not yet be considered a " good QB". He's solid, nothing more thus far.

As for Ryan " leading his team into the playoffs". I suppose, after all he is the quarterback. I'd give more of the credit to the burner however.

illmatic74 · 01-04-2009, 12:04 AM

Matt Ryan should have been the clear cut winner. He is the best rookie QB in my lifetime. Most succesful rookie QBS like Mirer, Young and Rothelisberger like are only given a few plays in the playbook and only asked to read half the field. Matt Ryan wasn't hidden or held back at all and led his team to the playoffs. Matt Ryan was only sacked 17 times which is skill rookie QBS usually don't have since QBs are more responsible for sacks then people realize. As a rookie Matt Ryan was a top 10 QB. What more did he need to do?

Ness · 01-04-2009, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

You corrected a grammar mistake. Kewl.

A good QB? Meh, if you saw these stats without knowing a player was a rookie would you call him a "good" QB? 16 TD and 11 int 3400 yards.

That is esentially an average non-rookie NFL QB.

*but its not all stats! Hes a leader*

You need to see the guy play consistently to make a true assessment. Sure his statistics in terms of touchdown to interceptions aren't that great. But think about it. When you have a dynamite running game why do you need to elate your statistics in the first place? And that isn't to say that Matt Ryan is just a game manager either. He made plays when the team needed him to and the run game wasn't working very well. Not only that but he didn't get sacked that much and showed remarkable poise.

Seeing how the humiliating the franchise has been in recent events concerning the multiple losing seasons and Michael Vick fiasco, that only adds to his prestige. In this day and age rookie runningbacks having good seasons aren't that unusual. Rookie quarterbacks playing very well though for an entire season? That's another story. In most cases it usually doesn't happen.

MetSox17 · 01-04-2009, 03:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

I'm not arguing that Ryan shouldn't have won it if you had cared to read. I was implying he should not yet be considered a " good QB". He's solid, nothing more thus far.

As for Ryan " leading his team into the playoffs". I suppose, after all he is the quarterback. I'd give more of the credit to the burner however.

Well if you cared to read, i said that the fact that he played pretty well, despite him being the rookie is what won him the award. I don't care if he didn't have a Drew Brees or Philip Rivers type year.

If you feel he is just "solid" right now, that is fine. Him being a "solid" and stable quarterback at his age and place in his NFL career is nothing short of amazing. I agree that Michael Turner deserves a big share of the playoff pie, but Matt Ryan played very well despite a crap offensive line/TE and a #2 WR. The defense is pretty horrible as well, yet they played wild card weekend.

Bengalsrocket · 01-04-2009, 03:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MetSox17

I can't remember the last time a rookie quarterback came in and did that, all the while leading his team into the playoffs after having an absolutely horrible season the year prior.

When was the last time a rookie RB came in and played well? Just about every year..

Well, Big Ben had 17 TD, 11 INT and 2,600 yards in 2004 as a rookie (and made the play offs). The big difference being the yards (obviously) and the words "Leading his team" as we all know there is an argument made for if he actually did that.

Also, Joe Flacco had 14 TD, 12 INT and 2,900 yards this year, which is a little bit closer in the yards category but not as many TDs (again, you can question if he lead his team to the play offs or not).

And finally, Dan Marino had 20 TDs, 6 INT but only a mere 2, 200 yards in 1983. Though he did actually help his team get to the play offs that year.

So, while none of them did quite what Matt Ryan did, most of them came pretty close. And some you might say did other things better than matt Ryan did :)

Also, I'm not posting to try and prove you or anyone wrong, it's more of just an interesting facts post (or at least, I find it interesting to see how well QB's stack up against each other based on their rookie years).

MetSox17 · 01-04-2009, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bengalsrocket

Well, Big Ben had 17 TD, 11 INT and 2,600 yards in 2004 as a rookie (and made the play offs). The big difference being the yards (obviously) and the words "Leading his team" as we all know there is an argument made for if he actually did that.

Also, Joe Flacco had 14 TD, 12 INT and 2,900 yards this year, which is a little bit closer in the yards category but not as many TDs (again, you can question if he lead his team to the play offs or not).

And finally, Dan Marino had 20 TDs, 6 INT but only a mere 2, 200 yards in 1983. Though he did actually help his team get to the play offs that year.

So, while none of them did quite what Matt Ryan did, most of them came pretty close. And some you might say did other things better than matt Ryan did :)

Also, I'm not posting to try and prove you or anyone wrong, it's more of just an interesting facts post (or at least, I find it interesting to see how well QB's stack up against each other based on their rookie years).

Roethlisberger's rookie team >>>>>>>>>> 09 Atlanta Falcons.

Dan Marino is.. well, Dan Marino. Flacco had a very good rookie year as well, but he had less yards, smaller YPA, less touchdowns, more interceptions and got sacked a lot more. That's quite a disparity.

d34ng3l021 · 01-04-2009, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bengalsrocket

Well, Big Ben had 17 TD, 11 INT and 2,600 yards in 2004 as a rookie (and made the play offs). The big difference being the yards (obviously) and the words "Leading his team" as we all know there is an argument made for if he actually did that.

Also, Joe Flacco had 14 TD, 12 INT and 2,900 yards this year, which is a little bit closer in the yards category but not as many TDs (again, you can question if he lead his team to the play offs or not).

And finally, Dan Marino had 20 TDs, 6 INT but only a mere 2, 200 yards in 1983. Though he did actually help his team get to the play offs that year.

So, while none of them did quite what Matt Ryan did, most of them came pretty close. And some you might say did other things better than matt Ryan did :)

Also, I'm not posting to try and prove you or anyone wrong, it's more of just an interesting facts post (or at least, I find it interesting to see how well QB's stack up against each other based on their rookie years).

Steelers '04 [ranks]
Yardage given up: 1
-Passing defense: 4
-Rushing defense: 1
Scoring defense: 1

Ravens '08 [ranks]
Yardage given up: 2
-Passing defense: 2
-Rushing defense: 3
Scoring defense: 2

Dolphins '83 [ranks]
Yardage given up: 7
-Passing defense: 8
-Rushing defense: 17
Scoring: 1

Falcons '08 [ranks]
Yardage Given up: 24
-Passing defense: 21
-Rushing defense: 25
Scoring: 11

Based on those statistics alone, you can make a point to say that Matt Ryan's impact on the team was greater than the QB's of the other teams, especially given where the franchise was the year before. Not only were the Falcons involved in so many off the field issues, they went 4-12 and were picking 3rd in the NFL draft, the highest position for any of those other QBs. Matt Ryan may have similar/better statistics than all of those QBs, but he has the greatest impact and has been valuable to the change of his franchise, more so than the other QBs.

Addict · 01-04-2009, 05:01 AM

well I can't say I'm surprised, but he deserves it so Hurrah.

Also: Chris Johnson is going to the pro bowl? Wow. Just wow.

Prowler · 01-04-2009, 05:42 AM

i wish he would of had one more drive in that game last night

OzTitan · 01-04-2009, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addict

Also: Chris Johnson is going to the pro bowl? Wow. Just wow.

Huh?

3rd in AFC yards (well, probably second really - didn't get to play week 17 like Slaton did. 2nd in YPG anyway). Best YPC amongst AFC backs with meaningful carries. 6th TD's whilst sharing with the AFC's leading TD scorer on the ground. All the while being MVP of the Titans offense.

Why wouldn't he?

Saints-Tigers · 01-04-2009, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TitleTown088

I can see why Ryan won it, but I've never boughten into his hype all season long. Nothing overly impressive.

Agreed. Especially the MVP and best young QB EVAR hype.

Addict · 01-04-2009, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OzTitan

Huh?

3rd in AFC yards (well, probably second really - didn't get to play week 17 like Slaton did. 2nd in YPG anyway). Best YPC amongst AFC backs with meaningful carries. 6th TD's whilst sharing with the AFC's leading TD scorer on the ground. All the while being MVP of the Titans offense.

Why wouldn't he?

because a back like Johnson would be worth jack without a back like white to do the grinding.

OzTitan · 01-04-2009, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addict

because a back like Johnson would be worth jack without a back like white to do the grinding.

rofl. Are you serious, or just trolling?

Chris Johnson is more physical than LenDale White. All White does is go down when he's first touched. It's a fairly rare sight to see him lead with his shoulder like Johnson seems to like doing. I'm guessing you didn't watch many Titans games this season.

White did nothing more than relief Johnson, probably much more than he needed to be, and come in to mop up carries when the game was won. He also basically took any carry with-in the 5 yard line, which the Titans had a fair few of, explaining his high TD total.

That has got to be the dumbest thing I've heard said about the Titans for some time, and you're competing with this guy:

http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/...749&n8pe6 c=2

Gay Ork Wang · 01-04-2009, 06:42 AM

zomg Titans zomg!

OzTitan · 01-04-2009, 06:59 AM

lol, watch it or I'll "zomg" yourself the next time Forte's name is mentioned too far away from the words "best eva" and you go on your own tirade ;)

Seriously though, CJ nothing without White? I've heard some good ones this season, but wow. I'm not even sure how that's meant to make any sense.