Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pro Football (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Final Poll - Rookie of the Year 2012-2013 (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=55167)

Caulibflower 01-08-2013 05:29 AM

Final Poll - Rookie of the Year 2012-2013
 
It came right down to the wire. We all watched it. They're all fantastic athletes for the position, and RGIII especially is electrifying with the ball in his hands. But I said since last year I was fully expecting that he was going to get hurt, and I called an ACL tear a few weeks ago. Grim, but true. I can find the post. I could just sense it was going to happen, and it's something I wrote about him in nearly every analysis I ever posted. I've never trusted his health, and it's really a shame. Perhaps he can change his game. I would truly hate to have his name end up in the careers-derailed-by-injuries thread. And the injuries do have to weigh into the success of his rookie year and the positives he was able to offer to his team.

Clearly, the Redskins were not the same without RGIII, but none of these teams would be the same without their starters. Andrew Luck's style is pure downfield aggression. His coaches allow him to let it fly, and he constantly tests the boundaries of what his arm can do and what the defense can cover. It led to some turnovers, but Andrew Luck was a relentless competitor all year, and the Colts offense was as explosive as it was with Peyton two years ago, albiet lacking the same level of refinement and consistency. Andrew Luck inherited a team with no identity and gave it one.

I think part of appreciating Russell Wilson's year is remembering that he is the only one of the three who actually won his starting job. I think that should count for something, and when you see that by the end of the year his stats are really only a half-step below RGIII's, you understand how amazing the second half of his season was. Early in the year all the pundits said that allowing a true quarterback competition in Seattle was a bad idea because it would mean that whoever won wouldn't have the benefit of a full offseason to learn the playbook. This means that while RGIII and Andrew Luck were learning their team's offenses and familiarizing themselves with their starting roles, Russell Wilson was not getting the same attention. The conservative approach early in the season was possible because the Seahawks are strong in other facets of the game, not because Russell Wilson was lacking in ability - he still had to get used to running the offense, because he didn't win the job until the third week of the preseason.

With all of that in mind, and seeing how dominant Russell Wilson was at the end of the season, I think when you look at the full picture you can say he had the most impressive rookie season. By week 17, Dangeruss had established himself as one of the top QBs in the entire league, not to mention his draft class, and the fact that absolutely no one would have bet on that happening last April makes him my choice for rookie of the year.

There is some ridiculous stuff in this video.


BigBanger 01-08-2013 06:18 AM

I have no idea how Andrew Luck is even in the race. He was very good for a rookie and the team greatly improved, but the Colts have the right pieces in the front office and coaching staff to make the type of change we saw from last year compared to this year. They went from one of the worst coached teams to one of the better coached teams. Luck does have, by far, the worst supporting cast, worst offensive line and worst defense compared to both Griffin and Wilson, but it's not an excuse. He made a lot of turnovers and played poorly at times. He was very inconsistent during games and throughout the season he struggled mightily against good defenses. A good season but it pails in comparison to the other two candidates. A very good rookie season, but the other two were played like second and third year players. Luck' struggles were noticeable, and rookie-like.

Wilson struggled early, but led one of the most explosive offenses in the NFL during the second half of the season. It was night and day. He's improved so much that I think the Seahawks have a legitimate chance of making the Super Bowl. He has a great team, great offensive line, great rushing attack and a great defense. He has mediocre receivers, but his team is clearly a contender. His early struggles are almost an afterthought, and it's amazing how well he's played down the stretch during this run to the playoffs. He's great under pressure and he's ready for the clutch moments. I can't argue with someone picking him. I think he's very deserving. Especially with the type of leadership he has shown. All three of these guys got it, but it seems likes he's earned the respect of his teammates as if he's a veteran. He exudes poise and confidence.

RGIII is just something special. His throwing and running ability is a rare combination. The lack of turnovers and the big play ability by both the air and the ground was perfectly blended. He had the weight of the team on his shoulders and he carried the offense more than these others guys. He was the most consistent of the three and his season was at a Pro Bowl level. He was great. A dynamic player that made everyone around him better. He's also running an offense that may revolutionize the game. I think he was a Top 5 QB in the NFL this year. Wilson played like one down the stretch, but at the start of the season I was questioning why Wilson was the starter.

Trogdor 01-08-2013 06:29 AM

Luck averaged almost twice as many throws per game as both Wilson and RGIII. He had to carry his team to each and every victory. The two other candidates had Beast Mode and the 2nd place finisher (IMHO) in the ROY in Alfred Morris.

When you have an extremely effective running game and an offense predicated on running first you are expected to not force throws and run play action effectively. It's not a knock on Wilson or RGIII but neither was asked to carry their teams to victory.

Both Wilson and RGIII had horrible records when throwing the ball more than 30 times. Luck had a winning record.

These arguments have been hashed out repeatedly though. This thread is going to descend into the exact same pit as the last few. Should just close the thread and allow the poll to continue.

General Zod 01-08-2013 06:58 AM

Sorry its still Luck for me. Just simply because he was asked to do more with less and he got his team to the playoffs.

AntoinCD 01-08-2013 07:16 AM

Luck has had a lot of turnovers, however I still can't get past the fact that he looks, by far, the most impressive player to me.

RG3 ran that offense perfectly but when he had a bad leg we seen that he couldn't be a drop back passer. At certain points in a game the situation arises for every QB to take the snap, scan the field and make the correct throw. I didn't see that from RG3 on anything near a consistent basis.

Wilson is almost like a cross between the two. He didn't run it as well as RG3 and didn't throw it as well as Luck but found a real good medium the second half of the year.

The question I have with both Wilson and RG3 is, if they are down 6 points with 2 minutes to go can they go down the field in a 2 minute drill when the offense knows you are passing? Perhaps they can but I know that if given the choice I would have Luck in that situation.

As for the argument about coaching I don't buy it. New coaches do not automatically mean success. In fact stability at the coaching position is more likely to achieve success. When you look at these teams, non had a worse offensive line than Indy, yet Luck was asked to consistently take deep drops. That isn't good coaching. What RG3 had was good coaching. They put him in the best position to succeed. What Wilson had towards the end of the year was good coaching. Bruce Arians is an absolute idiot. How he is getting HC interviews is beyond me. Andrew Luck was asked to do way more than he did in college from week 1. I can't say that about either RG3 or Wilson.

jrdrylie 01-08-2013 08:04 AM

Luck was asked to do much more. They threw him out there and treated him like a veteran while RGIII and Russell Wilson had offenses that were simpler and more in tune with what they did in college. Luck also had the worst running game. Luck probbaly has the worst line. Luck had the worst defense (Washington's wasn't just as bad). Add in the whole coach-with-cancer business and what Luck did was just so much more impressive.

And the stats aren't bad either. He has 614 more total yards than RGIII and 1022 more yards than Wilson. He has 1 more total TD than RGIII and 2 less than Wilson. Luck helped add 9 wins, Griffin added 5, and Wilson added 4.

Don Vito 01-08-2013 08:07 AM

There is a reasonable case for any of them. You can't really go wrong if you ask me, but I think it is going to be RGIII.

J-Mike88 01-08-2013 08:26 AM

  1. Griffin
  2. Wilson
  3. Luck
  4. Morris
  5. Martin

We saw how important Griffin was vs Seattle. When he could move, they moved.
Without him being him, the Redskins offense sucked.

Wilson may have a better team around him, he does, but that doesn't change the fact that it was he as QB who took that team to another level. They were nowhere near this good last year.

Luck did put that offense on his back. Arm. And they won the most games.
But their offense wasn't the best and he surely didn't do the best.
You can't ignore the completion percentage because all the misses lead to punts often.
You can't ignore the interceptions either. Yards are nice, but when you throw it so much more, you'd exepct a lot more of everything, yards, Ints, and TDs. He did have a lot more of them, except TDs.

AntoinCD 01-08-2013 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-Mike88 (Post 3237655)
  1. Griffin
  2. Wilson
  3. Luck
  4. Morris
  5. Martin

We saw how important Griffin was vs Seattle. When he could move, they moved.
Without him being him, the Redskins offense sucked.

Wilson may have a better team around him, he does, but that doesn't change the fact that it was he as QB who took that team to another level. They were nowhere near this good last year.

Luck did put that offense on his back. Arm. And they won the most games.
But their offense wasn't the best and he surely didn't do the best.
You can't ignore the completion percentage because all the misses lead to punts often.
You can't ignore the interceptions either. Yards are nice, but when you throw it so much more, you'd exepct a lot more of everything, yards, Ints, and TDs. He did have a lot more of them, except TDs.

You also can't ignore the fact that in 3rd and long situations Luck was better than virtually any QB in the league, let alone rookies. Against Miami he converted on 3rd and 7 or longer 5 times in the first half. RG3 did it 3 times in the first 8 games. What about them punts for the Redskins?

jrdrylie 01-08-2013 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-Mike88 (Post 3237655)
[list=1]
You can't ignore the completion percentage because all the misses lead to punts often.

That just isn't true. Indianapolis punted the ball only 5 times more than Washington (Washington went for it on 4th down 5 more times than Indianapolis). Indaianapolis actually had a third-down conversion rate 7% higher than Washington, all without a viable running game to pick up third-and-shorts.

XxXdragonXxX 01-08-2013 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trogdor
Both Wilson and RGIII had horrible records when throwing the ball more than 30 times. Luck had a winning record.

To be fair, Wilson only did this 3 times, he was 1-2 with a loss in his first NFL game to Arizona, a loss to Detroit that was purely on the defense, and a win over Chicago.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntoinCD (Post 3237613)

The question I have with both Wilson and RG3 is, if they are down 6 points with 2 minutes to go can they go down the field in a 2 minute drill when the offense knows you are passing? Perhaps they can but I know that if given the choice I would have Luck in that situation.

Wilson did this twice against Chicago. He didn't have many chances because unlike Luck, he was able to get a lead early in most games.


I just don't see it with Andrew Luck. Every time I watch him play, all he does is make poor decisions under pressure for 3 quarters and then lead a game winning drive in the 4th. Everyone gives him a pass because he has poor pass protection, but Russell Wilson's pass protection is no better than Luck's, the difference is Wilson doesn't make poor decisions under pressure.

Luck, in my opinion, has played more like a rookie than either Wilson or RG3. Just because Luck threw the ball 40 times a game doesn't mean he should be OROY. Wilson and RG3 could have thrown the ball 40 times a game and had terrible stats to.

The Alex 01-08-2013 10:17 AM

Ryan Lindley carried the Cardinals to the draft position they needed. He takes it for me.

49erNation85 01-08-2013 11:39 AM

Wow Luck still blows the votes away. Even tho his team was one and done in the play offs. Yes pretty special guy.But still play off wins matter more .

AntoinCD 01-08-2013 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85 (Post 3237855)
Wow Luck still blows the votes away. Even tho his team was one and done in the play offs. Yes pretty special guy.But still play off wins matter more .

Playoff performance is irrelevant for a regular season award. All votes were cast before the playoffs started by the people who decide the award.

RCAChainGang 01-08-2013 11:58 AM

It is Luck for me (Homer). But still look at the Colts line! With that line BA had him throwing deep downfield and almost getting him killed. We had a shell of a running game and Luck still managed to bring our team to wins that we quite honestly had no business winning. They are all great and I'm going to stay out of the discussion and just read because I know I am bias. :crapstorm: Haha love you Redskins and Seahawk fans!:)

J-Mike88 01-08-2013 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntoinCD (Post 3237864)
Playoff performance is irrelevant for a regular season award. All votes were cast before the playoffs started by the people who decide the award.

True. Votes, real votes, were already in.
What it did do was cast a light on what each of the 3 were all about.
Luck flamed out the worst... he got himself down, and couldn't come back this time.

Wilson didn't make such mistakes, which is characteristic of his entire season once they let him open it up more.

And RG3, before Ngata cracked his knee, was even better.

I wonder how many of the Luck voters actually watched at least 3 full games of each of the Colts, Redskins, and Seahawks this year. I bet less than 10% of them did.

HypocrisyIsGreat 01-08-2013 12:08 PM

RG3 and it ain't close.

AntoinCD 01-08-2013 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-Mike88 (Post 3237879)
True. Votes, real votes, were already in.
What it did do was cast a light on what each of the 3 were all about.
Luck flamed out the worst... he got himself down, and couldn't come back this time.

Wilson didn't make such mistakes, which is characteristic of his entire season once they let him open it up more.

And RG3, before Ngata cracked his knee, was even better.

I wonder how many of the Luck voters actually watched at least 3 full games of each of the Colts, Redskins, and Seahawks this year. I bet less than 10% of them did.

How did Luck get himself down exactly? Paul Kruger dominated the Colts RT and Luck was hit on so many occassions it got embarassing. Maybe we will ignore the drive at the end of the first half to set up a field goal. That was big boy stuff right there.

We have hashed this argument out so many times in the last 6 weeks yet it still doesn't make a difference. OMG Luck had a lost fumble and an INT. But yet it is failed to be mentioned that it was a pass on 4th and 1 when down big that had to be squeezed in and was deflected, or that the fumble came on a sack.

Luck couldn't come back this time for a myriad of reasons. First of all he wasn't protected. The Colts have a bottom 5 offensive line no matter which way you look at it. Secondly, Anquan Boldin just went off in the second half. Although I do suppose Luck really should have broken up that TD pass. Thirdly, if Vinatieri doesn't uncharacteristically miss that field goal it's a 5 point ball game. Instead he misses, Ravens get the ball and score a TD, game over.

Luck didn't have his greatest game but he made numerous throws that both Wilson and RG3 dream they could make.

There's clearly nothing I can say to change your viewpoint and that's fine. But saying because Luck lost a playoff game, on the road, as a rookie somehow detracts from him as a player is completely nonsensical

Also, just to mention, Andrew Luck threw one less pass than Russell Wilson, RG3 and Kirk Cousins combined. But hey, let's ignore that too

Cardinal96 01-08-2013 01:40 PM

Andrew Luck. He is asked to do more than the other two rookies and he more than anyone was responsible for the Colts going from 2-14 to 11-5.

FUNBUNCHER 01-08-2013 02:16 PM

How many players from the 2010 Colts were on the Luck led 2012 Colts??
I feel like 2011 was a major aberration for Indy and if they'd had an average backup, people wouldn't be talking about them like they were one of the alltime worst teams in NFL history.

The Skins haven't been a 10+ win team for decades. Their 5 win 2011 season was their 'normal', not an unexpectedly down year.

People say Luck led his team to the biggest turnaround, but did he have to change the entire team culture in Indy??

When RG3 showed up, players were hopeful, but IMO there was a stench of mediocrity and losing that still surrounded the entire organization.

From management on down, Robert Griffin III made SKins fans and players change their mindset; instead of hoping not to lose games they expected instead to WIN.

That's hard to quantify for a OROTY award, but it's still nonetheless a very difficult transformation for a player to make happen for an entire organization.

In one way or another I think all these guys are deserving. Just a really weird year for rookie QBs.

cmarq83 01-08-2013 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER (Post 3238079)
How many players from the 2010 Colts were on the Luck led 2012 Colts??
I feel like 2011 was a major aberration for Indy and if they'd had an average backup, people wouldn't be talking about them like they were one of the alltime worst teams in NFL history.

I don't think there is much similarity between the 2010 Colts to the 2012 Colts to be honest, and even that team was beginning to break apart at the seams. Sure Robert Mathis, Reggie Wayne, and Antoine Bethea are still good, but really how much is left from those Colts teams that were consistent playoff contenders? This team has formed it's personality around Luck much in the same way that the Redskins did around RGIII. I don't think there was a significant cultural difference between the 2 teams when they took over.

Cardinal96 01-08-2013 02:32 PM

[quote=FUNBUNCHER;3238079]People say Luck led his team to the biggest turnaround, but did he have to change the entire team culture in Indy??/QUOTE]

In many ways, yes. The 2012 Colts team is filled with many players rookies and players in their first year with the Colts. If you look at the Colts roster, you better appreciate how amazing it is what they have done. They have below-average talent at the vast majority of positions on both sides of the ball. Their offensive line is terrible. Their defensive line is bad, the secondary is below average (Vontae Davis is a strong cornerback though) and the linebacking corps is average at best.

By necessity, Luck was asked to do more than RG3 and Wilson and this without the benefit of running backs getting ~ 100 yards a game.

jrdrylie 01-08-2013 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER (Post 3238079)
How many players from the 2010 Colts were on the Luck led 2012 Colts??
I feel like 2011 was a major aberration for Indy and if they'd had an average backup, people wouldn't be talking about them like they were one of the alltime worst teams in NFL history.

Not sure about 2010, but 20 players from last year's team are on the current 53 man roster. That does not include 8 guys from 2011 that are currently on the IR.

If you are trying to say that the 2011 Colts were an aberration because the 2012 and 2010 teams were good and had similar players, I think this actually hurts your point. The 2010 Colts had Manning, and they were good. The 2011 Colts had Curtis Painter and sucked. The 2012 Colts had Luck and were good. So to me, based on what you are implying, Luck has been extremely important to the team.

XxXdragonXxX 01-08-2013 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntoinCD (Post 3237893)

Luck didn't have his greatest game but he made numerous throws that both Wilson and RG3 dream they could make.

Bull. Wilson's throws to Rice and Tate on the sideline were as impresive as anything Luck threw.

I love how Luck fans act like he's the only one who can throw the ball. Statements like this are worse than Jsagans stats.

AntoinCD 01-08-2013 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxXdragonXxX (Post 3238131)
Bull. Wilson's throws to Rice and Tate on the sideline were as impresive as anything Luck threw.

I love how Luck fans act like he's the only one who can throw the ball. Statements like this are worse than Jsagans stats.

Yes because as a Pats fan I have a real desire to love a Colts player.

And Wilson's throw to Rice was a way better catch than it was throw


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.