Breaking down the Rookie of the Year (1 Viewer)

[Leroy Hoard]

They need to cut the trophy into 3 pieces.

 

[TobiasFunke]

They need to cut the trophy into 3 pieces.

I don't think RGIII would appreciate them dismantling his trophy for no reason.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

They need to cut the trophy into 3 pieces.

I don't think RGIII would appreciate them dismantling his trophy for no reason.

What if Dr. James Andrews did the needed surgery?

 

[dgreen]

Griffin wins the Sporting News ROY:

Griffin is the Sporting News Rookie of the Year, headlining an extraordinary rookie class of 2012. Two other first-year quarterbacks also led their team to the playoffs—Andrew Luck of the Colts and Russell Wilson of the Seahawks. However, Griffin far outdistanced everyone else to win our award, with 363 votes ahead of Luck (213), Wilson (124) and Tampa Bay running back Doug Martin (57). The award was determined in a vote of more than 800 players, coaches and executives.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Griffin wins the Sporting News ROY:

Griffin is the Sporting News Rookie of the Year, headlining an extraordinary rookie class of 2012. Two other first-year quarterbacks also led their team to the playoffs—Andrew Luck of the Colts and Russell Wilson of the Seahawks. However, Griffin far outdistanced everyone else to win our award, with 363 votes ahead of Luck (213), Wilson (124) and Tampa Bay running back Doug Martin (57). The award was determined in a vote of more than 800 players, coaches and executives.

Not even close and shouldnt be. Even with the injuries, RGIII had one of the most memorable rookie seasons ever.

 

[pizzatyme]

Congrats to him and his fans. He is deserving for sure.

 

[chook]

Griffin wins the Sporting News ROY:

Griffin is the Sporting News Rookie of the Year, headlining an extraordinary rookie class of 2012. Two other first-year quarterbacks also led their team to the playoffs—Andrew Luck of the Colts and Russell Wilson of the Seahawks. However, Griffin far outdistanced everyone else to win our award, with 363 votes ahead of Luck (213), Wilson (124) and Tampa Bay running back Doug Martin (57). The award was determined in a vote of more than 800 players, coaches and executives.

Not even close and shouldnt be. Even with the injuries, RGIII had one of the most memorable rookie seasons ever.

BAM. Got him at $6 at the start of the year (I think that's +600 in your odds). Couldn't believe he wasn't at least half that quote.

 

[Faust]

NFL rookie of the year: RG3, Andrew Luck or Russell Wilson?

 

[Neofight]

Long and thorough (homer) breakdown. It's definitely worth the read, if only to heckle it.

Some tidbits:

Strength of Schedule

Here is one thing that you will never hear someone who is arguing for anyone besides Wilson mention: The strength of schedule they faced. Seriously, they just won't bring it up. And if you're going to ignore strength of schedule, what are we doing here? Ignoring this factor is like saying that the movie New Year's Eve was a smash hit because it beat Twilight: Breaking Dawn part I in the box office in it's opening weekend without noting that Twilight was in its fourth week and that the margin of victory was nominal.

Your ROY argument lacks Twilight references. Face.

SOS Ranks by Defensive DVOA of Opponents:

Wilson: 3rd

Griffin: 26th

Luck: 17th

...

Now, is the Colts turnaround that much more significant than the Redskins or Seahawks turnarounds?

Total DVOA Change from 2011 to 2012:

Seahawks from -1.5% to +38.3% = +39.8%

Redskins from -7% to +9.6% = +16.6%

Colts from -32.8% to -16% = +16.8%

As a team, Seattle improved significantly more than Washington and Indianapolis. We already know that the Seahawks have the superior defense to the other teams, but what about offense?

Offense DVOA Change from 2011 to 2012:

Seahawks from -8.7% to 18.5% = +27.2%

Redskins from -7% to 15.3% = +22.3%

Colts from -17.2% to -2.9% = +14.3%

This closes the gap, but still Seattle had the most significant offensive improvement by DVOA of any of the three teams. This also raises the question of "What quarterbacks did they replace?" and that's not insignificant either.

Curtis Painter, Kerry Collins, and Dan Orlovsky might have been the worst QB situation in the AFC. Rex Grossman and John Beck might have been the worst in the NFC. That's just a myriad of "Oh my god, those guys started?" situations. The gap from those players to Luck and Griffin is as big as the gap of years I have between being in a relationship.

Wilson replaced Tarvaris Jackson and two starts by Charlie Whitehurst. Jackson was okay, but Whitehurst belongs with those other five names, he was terrible. Jackson completed 60.2% of his passes for 14 TD, 13 INT and 6.9 Y/A and Wilson far out-paced those numbers and his overall production, accounting for 15 additional total touchdowns over an "Okay" quarterback. I always backed Jackson as a guy that was doing okay, and now Seattle has someone much better than okay, which shows.

...

SPLITS

Let's flesh out the numbers a little bit more. We're already here, right? Stick around for awhile. Your family can't file a missing persons report for at least 21 more hours.

HOME/ROAD

Wilson H: 106-of-164, 64.6%, 1,504, 17 TD, 2 INT, 9.17 Y/A, 47 rush for 223 yards, 1 TD, 8-0

Wilson R: 146-of-229, 63.8%, 1,614, 9 TD, 8 INT, 7.05 Y/A, 47 rush for 266 yards, 3 TD, 3-5

Griffin H: 122-of-190, 64.2%, 1,414, 8 TD, 1 INT, 7.44 Y/A, 68 rush for 525 yards, 4 TD, 5-3

Griffin R: 136-of-203, 67.0%, 1,786, 12 TD, 4 INT, 8.80 Y/A, 52 rush for 290 yards, 3 TD, 4-3 (Missed CLE)

Luck H: 169-of-308, 54.9%, 2,145, 12 TD, 5 INT, 6.96 Y/A, 34 rush for 140 yards, 3 TD, 7-1

Luck R: 170-of-319, 53.3%, 2,229, 11 TD, 13 INT, 6.99 Y/A, 28 rush for 115 yards, 2 TD, 4-4

The biggest disparity between home and road would be Wilson, who was just about the best quarterback in the NFL when he played in Seattle. His overall numbers on the road are good for a rookie, but don't 'wow' you. He had the biggest disparity between playing at home and playing on the road. There's more to it than that though, and we'll get there.

Griffin had more interceptions on the road, but also threw more touchdowns and had a much higher Y/A. The interesting thing is that at the same site where RG3 is currently being remembered for his knee turning into a failing game of Jenga is also the place where he just crushed it in the running game.

Luck threw more interceptions on the road this season than either Wilson or Griffin threw for the entire season. Actually, it's almost as many picks as those two threw combined. He was better at home, especially in the win column, but many of the numbers are very close and Luck was mostly consistent.

...

SAY SOMETHING ABOUT GAME LOGS!

I could go on and on about stretches of success, but I feel like that would favor Wilson so much that I couldn't do so without coming off as bias. I am only bias in the fact that I watch Wilson more than I watch any other player, I already told you that I don't care who wins the award. But I feel like it's worth noting that both Griffin and Wilson got better and that Luck just never had a huge run at any point where you felt like "Now this horse is in the lead."

Instead let's do some counting. It's better to be consistently good than to throw up some huge numbers against your weaker opponents, right? Doug Martin wasn't the Rookie of the Year because he had 12,000 yards in a two-game stretch.

Number of games with a QB Rating over 100:

Wilson: 9

Griffin: 8

Luck: 2

Number of games with a Y/A over 7.00:

Wilson: 11

Griffin: 10

Luck: 5

10 Y/A?

Wilson: 3

Griffin: 2

Luck: 0

60% Completions:

Wilson: 11

Griffin: 11

Luck: 4

2+ total touchdowns:

Wilson: 10

Griffin: 8

Luck: 10

Since When?

Wilson Over His Last 11 Games: 21 TD, 4 INT, 3 Rushing TD

Griffin Over His Last 10 Games: 16 TD, 4 INT, 3 Rushing TD

Luck Over His Last 11 Games: 16 TD, 11 INT, 4 Rushing TD

...

SO WHO HAD THE BEST ROOKIE SEASON?

As I alluded to in the headline, I believe that Wilson comes out on top. I really had to force myself to say that because I know that as soon as you start touting the player for your team to be the 'best' at something, it brings out the flies. I'd be much calmer if I simply said, "Griffin is the ROY, see I'm not a homer!" but I couldn't bring myself to do that after I had examined all the facts. What are the facts?

Fact - Wilson faced the toughest schedule of all three quarterbacks and it's not even close.

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

Fact - Wilson took over basically the same team that Tarvaris Jackson had, but led them to the biggest increase in DVOA and Offensive DVOA. This gives us the best idea of what Wilson was truly worth to his team.

Fact - In the second half of the season, Wilson had an argument for being one of the top five quarterbacks in the league, if not the best. His QBR over the last 11 games was tops in the NFL. He was also the best home quarterback in the NFL. As he got better and as the offense developed around him, Wilson avenged all 3 NFC West losses and played good or great throughout. He also improved his road numbers dramatically.

Fact - Even if there was such a thing as clutch, Luck did not display any more of it than Wilson did and in fact, Wilson had significantly more touchdowns during the season that gave his team the lead or tie. They also came against some of the league's best teams, including the Patriots when down 13 points in the fourth, and the Bears (the number one defense in the NFL) in Chicago.

Fact - When examining the season game-by-game, Wilson consistently had the most good performances and the fewest bad performances.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

It's weird when people say something's a fact but it isn't.Their passing stats are nearly identical. But Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.6 more yards per rushing attempt and almost twice as many TDs. That's not "barely behind." It's a completely different level.

 

[Neofight]

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

It's weird when people say something's a fact but it isn't.Their passing stats are nearly identical. But Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.6 more yards per rushing attempt and almost twice as many TDs. That's not "barely behind." It's a completely different level.

OK. Is that a fact?ETA: Would it be a fact that RGIII might not have been injured on a running play had he gone down more readily instead of seeking those extra yards (against those inferior D's)?

 

[TobiasFunke]

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

It's weird when people say something's a fact but it isn't.Their passing stats are nearly identical. But Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.6 more yards per rushing attempt and almost twice as many TDs. That's not "barely behind." It's a completely different level.

OK. Is that a fact?ETA: Would it be a fact that RGIII might not have been injured on a running play had he gone down more readily instead of seeking those extra yards (against those inferior D's)?

Is what a fact? That Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.8 more yards per attempt, and three more TDs than Wilson in during the 2012 NFL regular season? Yes. Those are all facts. Is it a fact that that's a pretty substantial difference? I guess it's kind of subjective, but I think it would be really hard to argue that Wilson was "barely behind" RGIII in rushing statistics. And since their passing stats are basically the same, it's equally hard to argue that their total statistics are all that close.I don't know if that nonsense about Griffin's injury is a fact or not, but I also don't see what the heck it has to do with anything. You seem to be all over the place.

 

[Neofight]

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

It's weird when people say something's a fact but it isn't.Their passing stats are nearly identical. But Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.6 more yards per rushing attempt and almost twice as many TDs. That's not "barely behind." It's a completely different level.

OK. Is that a fact?ETA: Would it be a fact that RGIII might not have been injured on a running play had he gone down more readily instead of seeking those extra yards (against those inferior D's)?

Is what a fact? That Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.8 more yards per attempt, and three more TDs than Wilson in during the 2012 NFL regular season? Yes. Those are all facts. Is it a fact that that's a pretty substantial difference? I guess it's kind of subjective, but I think it would be really hard to argue that Wilson was "barely behind" RGIII in rushing statistics. And since their passing stats are basically the same, it's equally hard to argue that their total statistics are all that close.I don't know if that nonsense about Griffin's injury is a fact or not, but I also don't see what the heck it has to do with anything. You seem to be all over the place.

How am I all over the place? I was merely asking If you felt that Griffin's use by the Redskins and his tendency to stretch plays were contributing factors to not only his numbers rushing, but also his injury. I personally think that Griffin should have been more judicious and the coaching staff exercised more caution. It may have meant less yardage rushing, but could have led to him finishing the season healthy.By the overall numbers Wilson and Griffin are very comparable. Then you look at the other factors (advanced metrics, SOS, consistency) that are brought up and it gets even more interesting. What do you think about the rest of the article?

You need to get out of that Moss v. Rice debacle, it is making you touchy.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

It's weird when people say something's a fact but it isn't.Their passing stats are nearly identical. But Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.6 more yards per rushing attempt and almost twice as many TDs. That's not "barely behind." It's a completely different level.

OK. Is that a fact?ETA: Would it be a fact that RGIII might not have been injured on a running play had he gone down more readily instead of seeking those extra yards (against those inferior D's)?

Is what a fact? That Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.8 more yards per attempt, and three more TDs than Wilson in during the 2012 NFL regular season? Yes. Those are all facts. Is it a fact that that's a pretty substantial difference? I guess it's kind of subjective, but I think it would be really hard to argue that Wilson was "barely behind" RGIII in rushing statistics. And since their passing stats are basically the same, it's equally hard to argue that their total statistics are all that close.I don't know if that nonsense about Griffin's injury is a fact or not, but I also don't see what the heck it has to do with anything. You seem to be all over the place.

How am I all over the place? I was merely asking If you felt that Griffin's use by the Redskins and his tendency to stretch plays were contributing factors to not only his numbers rushing, but also his injury. I personally think that Griffin should have been more judicious and the coaching staff exercised more caution. It may have meant less yardage rushing, but could have led to him finishing the season healthy.By the overall numbers Wilson and Griffin are very comparable. Then you look at the other factors (advanced metrics, SOS, consistency) that are brought up and it gets even more interesting. What do you think about the rest of the article?

You need to get out of that Moss v. Rice debacle, it is making you touchy.

Yeah maybe so.Sure I think it contributed to him getting hurt- the more you get hit, the more risk there is of getting hurt. I don't know about the cost/benefit though. Personal opinion is that Griffin did try to avoid contact unless the situation changed the calculation a bit. On both plays where he got hurt in the regular season there was a lot more on the line than your average play. Against the Falcons he was trying to reach the end zone late in a close game. Against the Ravens that was the final drive of the game with the team down 7. In both cases a little extra risk if OK because the reward is much bigger. Was it too much risk? Maybe against the Falcons, but the Skins' season was on the line against the Ravens.

I don't see what that has to do with his ROY candidacy though. He did in 2012 what he did in 2012. That's what I meant by "all over the place." It's a different question than who should win ROY.

As I said, I disagree that "their overall numbers are very comparable." I think their passing numbers are comparable, but Griffin was the better rusher by a country mile. So overall, not comparable.

As far as the article, it's a good read but it kind of seems like cherry-picking. It highlights SOS and DVOA improvement of the team, but it ignores pretty huge factors, most prominently the role other personnel changes or improvement of returning players might play in a year to year bump. And I'm not sure what the point is of the home/road breakdown. They both played at home and on the road, shouldn't matter in the aggregate.

If they were really close, I'd say give it to Wilson because of the stuff in the article about SOS and maybe even DVOA improvement. But they're not. Their passing is equal, but RGIII came relatively close to doubling up Wilson on the ground. And not just because of extra chances. His yards per attempt were way higher.

 

[Neofight]

Fact - Despite facing an incredibly tougher schedule that Robert Griffin, Wilson's statistics were either better, just as good, or barely behind. The stats were well ahead of Luck.

It's weird when people say something's a fact but it isn't.Their passing stats are nearly identical. But Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.6 more yards per rushing attempt and almost twice as many TDs. That's not "barely behind." It's a completely different level.

OK. Is that a fact?ETA: Would it be a fact that RGIII might not have been injured on a running play had he gone down more readily instead of seeking those extra yards (against those inferior D's)?

Is what a fact? That Griffin ran for 325 more yards, 1.8 more yards per attempt, and three more TDs than Wilson in during the 2012 NFL regular season? Yes. Those are all facts. Is it a fact that that's a pretty substantial difference? I guess it's kind of subjective, but I think it would be really hard to argue that Wilson was "barely behind" RGIII in rushing statistics. And since their passing stats are basically the same, it's equally hard to argue that their total statistics are all that close.I don't know if that nonsense about Griffin's injury is a fact or not, but I also don't see what the heck it has to do with anything. You seem to be all over the place.

How am I all over the place? I was merely asking If you felt that Griffin's use by the Redskins and his tendency to stretch plays were contributing factors to not only his numbers rushing, but also his injury. I personally think that Griffin should have been more judicious and the coaching staff exercised more caution. It may have meant less yardage rushing, but could have led to him finishing the season healthy.By the overall numbers Wilson and Griffin are very comparable. Then you look at the other factors (advanced metrics, SOS, consistency) that are brought up and it gets even more interesting. What do you think about the rest of the article?

You need to get out of that Moss v. Rice debacle, it is making you touchy.

Yeah maybe so.Sure I think it contributed to him getting hurt- the more you get hit, the more risk there is of getting hurt. I don't know about the cost/benefit though. Personal opinion is that Griffin did try to avoid contact unless the situation changed the calculation a bit. On both plays where he got hurt in the regular season there was a lot more on the line than your average play. Against the Falcons he was trying to reach the end zone late in a close game. Against the Ravens that was the final drive of the game with the team down 7. In both cases a little extra risk if OK because the reward is much bigger. Was it too much risk? Maybe against the Falcons, but the Skins' season was on the line against the Ravens.

I don't see what that has to do with his ROY candidacy though. He did in 2012 what he did in 2012. That's what I meant by "all over the place." It's a different question than who should win ROY.

As I said, I disagree that "their overall numbers are very comparable." I think their passing numbers are comparable, but Griffin was the better rusher by a country mile. So overall, not comparable.

As far as the article, it's a good read but it kind of seems like cherry-picking. It highlights SOS and DVOA improvement of the team, but it ignores pretty huge factors, most prominently the role other personnel changes or improvement of returning players might play in a year to year bump. And I'm not sure what the point is of the home/road breakdown. They both played at home and on the road, shouldn't matter in the aggregate.

If they were really close, I'd say give it to Wilson because of the stuff in the article about SOS and maybe even DVOA improvement. But they're not. Their passing is equal, but RGIII came relatively close to doubling up Wilson on the ground. And not just because of extra chances. His yards per attempt were way higher.

It may be unfair, but I ding RGIII for missing a game and parts of another. I think he'll be smarter about avoiding contact in the future, but he was just a bit too careless this year. He took a lot of contact and fumbled the ball too many times (I realize they only lost 2, but I'm interested in process over results here). I do think RGIII is a special talent and hope he can regain his form sooner rather than later. I also thought he was the clear cut favorite to win the ROY award through the first half of the season, but Wilson down the stretch was not only better than RGII & Luck, he was better than just about any QB in the league. And that wasn't just at home.

The article does address personnel changes fairly in depth (going really deep into the Colt's changes) as well as clearly stating RGII had the least to work with in terms of WR's and other pass catchers. I thought the author did a decent job there.

By the bye, I live is something like the country and we still count a mile as 5280 feet. RGIII didn't outrun Wilson by even 1000, let alone a country mile. Was he a better runner? Yes. Did he look to run more than Wilson? Absolutely. I'd wager that Wilson had more rushing yardage behind the line of scrimmage than any QB in the league this year, because his primary interest is to make a play downfield to his receivers (unless he has called a designed run). He probably made up half of the yardage disparity to RGII on one play against the 49'ers alone, though it only went down as a 6 yard gain. RGIII makes his reads but he was much more prone to take off running downfield on a busted play. I'm guessing that will change going forward.

 

[TobiasFunke]

It may be unfair, but I ding RGIII for missing a game and parts of another. I think he'll be smarter about avoiding contact in the future, but he was just a bit too careless this year. He took a lot of contact and fumbled the ball too many times (I realize they only lost 2, but I'm interested in process over results here).

I don't understand that. The stats already ding him for missing a game and parts of another. He put the same numbers up in 14.75 games that Wilson did in 16. Dinging him for missed time on top of the stat comparison seems like double-dinging.I agree with you for the most part on the fumbles. I mean, seasonal awards are usually more about results than process, but I do think he should get a bit of a downgrade for the fumbles because he got lucky on the recovery rate.

But if we're gonna start getting into good luck and process over results, shouldn't we subtract one TD and 40ish yards and one team win from Wilson's totals, and give him one more INT and one loss instead? I mean was there anything luckier this year than the Monday night Hail Mary "completion" for a "TD" and a "win" over the Pack?

I do think RGIII is a special talent and hope he can regain his form sooner rather than later. I also thought he was the clear cut favorite to win the ROY award through the first half of the season, but Wilson down the stretch was not only better than RGII & Luck, he was better than just about any QB in the league. And that wasn't just at home.

If it was the Rookie of December award, I'd give it to Wilson for sure. But it's not.

The article does address personnel changes fairly in depth (going really deep into the Colt's changes) as well as clearly stating RGII had the least to work with in terms of WR's and other pass catchers. I thought the author did a decent job there.

By the bye, I live is something like the country and we still count a mile as 5280 feet. RGIII didn't outrun Wilson by even 1000, let alone a country mile. Was he a better runner? Yes. Did he look to run more than Wilson? Absolutely. I'd wager that Wilson had more rushing yardage behind the line of scrimmage than any QB in the league this year, because his primary interest is to make a play downfield to his receivers (unless he has called a designed run). He probably made up half of the yardage disparity to RGII on one play against the 49'ers alone, though it only went down as a 6 yard gain. RGIII makes his reads but he was much more prone to take off running downfield on a busted play. I'm guessing that will change going forward.

I don't follow this. If Wilson was great at scrambling behind the line to make plays downfield (and I have no doubt that he was), it would be reflected in his passing totals. If he was better than RGIII at this, than RGIII was the better passer in the pocket, because their total passing numbers are almost identical. Either way, it evens out.One thing I think we can both agree on- Luck comes in third, by a lot.

I loved the country mile bit. Pretty funny.

 

[Neofight]

I don't understand that. The stats already ding him for missing a game and parts of another. He put the same numbers up in 14.75 games that Wilson did in 16. Dinging him for missed time on top of the stat comparison seems like double-dinging.

I agree with you for the most part on the fumbles. I mean, seasonal awards are usually more about results than process, but I do think he should get a bit of a downgrade for the fumbles because he got lucky on the recovery rate.

But if we're gonna start getting into good luck and process over results, shouldn't we subtract one TD and 40ish yards and one team win from Wilson's totals, and give him one more INT and one loss instead? I mean was there anything luckier this year than the Monday night Hail Mary "completion" for a "TD" and a "win" over the Pack?

The NFL season is a short one. To miss a game in baseball means nothing (hell to play baseball means nothing in my opinion), to miss one in basketball only slightly more. But to miss a game as a starting QB in football means you could be affecting your team's playoff position, or whether or not you even get in. Luckily for Griffin and the team Cousins is a capable backup. I think availability counts and not just the metrics. Pretty simple; not fair, but straightforward.Oh, and that was a TD.

If it was the Rookie of December award, I'd give it to Wilson for sure. But it's not.

WilsonBY MONTH CMP ATT YDS CMP% AVG LNG TD INT SACK RAT ATT YDS AVG LNG TDSEPTEMBER 60 100 594 60.0 5.94 41 4 4 8 73.5 22 80 3.6 14 0OCTOBER 69 110 872 62.7 7.93 51 6 4 6 90.4 14 48 3.4 9 0NOVEMBER 49 70 585 70.0 8.36 38 7 0 7 128.6 21 99 4.7 20 0DECEMBER 74 113 1,067 65.5 9.44 67 9 2 12 115.2 37 262 7.1 25 4GriffinSEPTEMBER 86 124 1,070 69.4 8.63 88 4 1 9 103.2 41 234 5.7 19 4OCTOBER 63 99 708 63.6 7.15 37 4 2 7 90.0 29 242 8.3 76 2NOVEMBER 56 81 719 69.1 8.88 68 8 1 9 124.5 30 166 5.5 28 0DECEMBER 53 89 703 59.6 7.90 35 4 1 5 94.9 20 173 8.7 46 1

I don't follow this. If Wilson was great at scrambling behind the line to make plays downfield (and I have no doubt that he was), it would be reflected in his passing totals. If he was better than RGIII at this, than RGIII was the better passer in the pocket, because their total passing numbers are almost identical. Either way, it evens out.

One thing I think we can both agree on- Luck comes in third, by a lot.

I loved the country mile bit. Pretty funny.

That was a lot of tongue-in-cheek, but since we are delving in I think it would be pertinent to point out that Wilson's numbers in the pocket were better than his numbers out of the pocket. Either way, he did benefit from his scrambling, clearly. As far as it evening out, that is what the advanced metrics try to do (save QBR, which does not adjust for opponent... though ESPN's adjusted QBR is available and Wilson was the highest rated of the three). I'd also point out that the defensive DVOA numbers against the pass for the teams which Griffin faced were putrid. Huge advantage playing in the NFC East. I broke these out in earlier in this thread, or perhaps the Russell Wilson Bandwagon thread. Wilson played 9 games against the top 10 defenses in pass defense DVOA and one that ranked 12th.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Oh, and that was a TD.

I don't understand why you'd go through so much effort to make a thorough, intelligent argument and then completely discredit yourself in six words

 

[Neofight]

Oh, and that was a TD.

I don't understand why you'd go through so much effort to make a thorough, intelligent argument and then completely discredit yourself in six words

 

[dhockster]

Oh, and that was a TD.

I don't understand why you'd go through so much effort to make a thorough, intelligent argument and then completely discredit yourself in six words

Agreed. I think you were winning the argument already, Tobias, but that sealed it for you.

 

[Neofight]

Oh, and that was a TD.

I don't understand why you'd go through so much effort to make a thorough, intelligent argument and then completely discredit yourself in six words

Agreed. I think you were winning the argument already, Tobias, but that sealed it for you.

hehe

 

[Todd Andrews]

Oh, and that was a TD.

I don't understand why you'd go through so much effort to make a thorough, intelligent argument and then completely discredit yourself in six words

Based on that statement, no one should ever read anything you write here again.

 

[Warrior]

Never a doubt. RGIII rightfully takes home the award.

 

[Neofight]

Oh, and that was a TD.

I don't understand why you'd go through so much effort to make a thorough, intelligent argument and then completely discredit yourself in six words

My goodness, the number of people who compound lack of recognition of simple things like sarcasm with logical fallacy is legion on this board. For the love of Buddha, visit nikzor or something.