Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

    Originally posted by Sandman21 View Post
    I don't think Luck should win Rookie of The Year.....

    Because I'm not sure if he's actually a rookie... he sure don't play like one!
    He has his rookie moments, but just think if this is how he plays as a rookie, we have a lot to look forward to next year
    Why so SERIOUS

    Comment


    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

      Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
      No I haven't watched *every* RG3 game start to finish this year. I've watched him plenty, though. I'm curious if you've read anything I've posted on this subject over the past 8 months, lol.... I've stated *why* I prefer Luck on numerous occasions, gone into great detail... and it mostly has nothing to do with their play *this* year. If anything, Luck and RG3 are doing exactly what I thought they would do this year, based on my opinion of their abilities and past performances in college.I'm open to RG3's skillset, too, lol... it's not like I don't recognize that RG3 can be good. But that doesn't change my mind that he's anywhere close to Luck, lol... I've never regarded him in the same category.

      I might remind folks that he was ranked as a draft prospect around 93 and a late- to mid- first rounder just before he won the Heisman. It wasn't until his combine results, which I *knew* would be the case, made everyone fall in love with him. Late, fast risers due to combine results almost always end up not doing what people expect. After his combine, he jumped about 4 rating points! The world also learned he was very affable and likable at the combine interviews, which also boosted people's perception of him. Hell, he's so cool, *I* want to hang out with the dude. But that doesn't equate to football skills on the field. You hafta beware of these types of scenarios, combine results rarely project anything meaningful, there's been some bad players who were combine rock stars. Luck was pegged at 99 for at least a season, and possibly even before that. I didn't follow his draft rating his sophomore year. Very... very few players ever hit that 99 rating.

      I also think in the long run, RG3 won't be close. I've said in the past that I think Luck, Tannehill, and Russell Wilson all project to be better long-term QB prospects than RG3. I also had a feeling that the guy who would explode outta the gates would be RG3. He's by far the most over-hyped of the entire group. Hell, the 'Skins have a guy behind RG3 that I tend to keep an eye on. Not saying Cousins is better, but he shows me something, wouldn't be surprised if he finds a spot in this league and proves to be a very capable starter.
      Also I think I commented the 2nd most on that previous Thread next to you, go back to read my stuff if you would like.
      Why so SERIOUS

      Comment


      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

        Nicest pass I have seen of RG3 young career. That was at least a 60 yard bomb.

        Only one bad mistake I have seen, that was his bad throw to end the first half. Was not an interception, but could have been ugly.

        Comment


        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

          RG3 throws 15 times in the game, Luck throws 50 times. The Redskins rely on their running game and not the passing. The Colts have faith in Luck because he's a good QB, soon to be great. Who's the better QB? LUCK
          Smothered Chicken!

          Comment


          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

            If you really think the Redskins did not rely on the passing game then thats all the proof i need that you didnt watch the game

            The redskins had a great balance, but they still relied heavily on RG3 passing (and ability to make plays when the picket collapsed). Which is what makes him a good QB, soon to be great......1 perfect QB rating game, many more to cone....

            of course, the very timely turnovers by the Iggles helped as well....a lot

            Comment


            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

              Why can't we just agree that they're both great? I like watching them both. Of course I'll root for Luck more but it's good to see Washington finally get a QB.
              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

              Comment


              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                Originally posted by Suaveness View Post
                Why can't we just agree that they're both great? I like watching them both. Of course I'll root for Luck more but it's good to see Washington finally get a QB.
                I have no problem with that. I have been saying that all along.

                Plus, two eagle 49. Zipper zipper niner zipper birdie alpha eagle

                Comment


                • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                  NFL.com: RG3 hopes he, Luck become best comparison of all time (Video)

                  "Going into college, I was compared to Terrelle Pryor a lot and now coming into the pros, it's going to be me and Andrew luck. And like I tell everybody, I don't ever root against quarterbacks and I want him to have a great career as well. If they are going to continue to compare us, hopefully we are the best comparison of all time."

                  The Offensive Rookie of the Year race will come down to the wire, but RG3 said he wouldn't vote for himself.


                  "My vote would go to Alfred Morris, because I wouldn't vote for myself," he said. "I think that's extremely conceited and I'm not that person, so I'd vote for Alfred Morris. He's my running back, he's had a very quiet, but very great season for a running back and I'm proud to have him on this team."


                  http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...n-of-all-time\

                  There you have it. Even RG3 is pulling for Luck (just not when we play the Colts, of if we ever meet in the playoffs)

                  Comment


                  • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                    Who Is the Offensive Rookie of the Year?
                    By Bill Barnwell on November 28, 2012 11:43 AM ET

                    The arrival of Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III into the National Football League could not have gone much more swimmingly. In fact, while expectations were high for the top two picks in the 2012 draft, it's arguable that they've both exceeded whatever lofty expectations they rode in on over the summer. Luck is leading a team that went 2-14 last season on an improbable playoff run in the AFC South, while RG3 has become the league's most exciting player and might even be the best player in the NFC East this year. Fans of the Colts and Redskins — and good football — have to be ecstatic at what their respective organizations are set up to do over the next 15 years.

                    Which one is the Offensive Rookie of the Year? Since they're about to spend the next 15 years being compared with each other to figure out which player from the Class of 2012 is the more dominant quarterback, there's no reason for that to start any later than now.

                    I think the best way to figure that out is to make a case for each player from the perspective of his campaign, see whose case makes more sense and is easier to argue, and put that player in the lead with five games to go. Since I've spent the week hearing from just about every Giants fan I know that they're terrified to play RG3 this Monday night, let's start with him.
                    The Case for RG3

                    1. The Numbers To an extent that I don't think people realize, Robert Griffin's numbers as a quarterback — of any vintage — are ridiculous. Compared to Luck statistically, Griffin looks like an entirely different player.

                    Player Cmp % Yds/Att TD-to-INT Ratio
                    RG3 67.5% 8.2 4:1
                    Luck 56.8% 7.1 1:1


                    Those are truly staggering differences. Luck looks like your typical above-average rookie quarterback, a talented player prone to mental mistakes and forcing throws at the wrong times. His rookie year is not much different from that of the franchise quarterback he succeeded in Indianapolis; in 1998, Peyton Manning led the league in interceptions (28) in his up-and-down rookie campaign.

                    Griffin's performance is basically unprecedented for a rookie quarterback. Pro-football-reference.com uses index statistics that compare a player's performance to the league averages for a quarterback during the season(s) in questions to see how they performed in the context of their day; by those measures, Griffin has the second-best era-adjusted completion percentage for a rookie quarterback with 200 attempts or more, narrowly trailing Ben Roethlisberger. He's fourth in yards per attempt, with only Roethlisberger, Marc Bulger, and Mark Rypien ahead of him (and the latter two were playing after a year or more of sitting on the bench).

                    The only rookie quarterback since the merger to throw interceptions less frequently or have a better quarterback rating than Griffin, again adjusted for era, is Dan Marino. So, basically, RG3 is right up there with Marino and Roethlisberger as the most statistically impressive rookie quarterback in NFL history — and that doesn't even take into account his impact as a rusher.

                    Not bad, right?

                    2. He's Had No Receivers Despite Washington's best efforts to spend money this offseason and procure RG3 some weapons to throw to, their receiving corps has fallen apart this year. After shelling out big bucks for Pierre Garcon and seeing him catch that long touchdown pass from RG3 against the Saints in Week 1, Garcon's been injured virtually all season. Josh Morgan has been more notable for costing Washington their game against the Rams than for anything else, and Fred Davis tore his Achilles and is done for the year.

                    Washington's leading receivers are 33-year-old backup Santana Moss, 2011 third-rounder Leonard Hankerson, Morgan, and 2011 sixth-rounder Aldrick Robinson. Backup tight end Logan Paulsen has taken over for Davis. If Griffin were really struggling this year, we'd be looking at his receiving corps and saying that he didn't have anything to work with, just like we did with Blaine Gabbert in Jacksonville. Instead, he's been brilliant with these very same players.

                    3. He's Captured the Cultural Zeitgeist We would be naive to ignore that RG3 has become a phenomenon in a way that few young quarterbacks have, especially during their rookie seasons. Washington has a way of turning their star athletes (or their Nick Youngs) into larger-than-life figures, but Griffin would be a superstar in any market. Without a truly dominant team or a player running away with the MVP this year, Griffin's arguably become the biggest story in football. That shouldn't be enough for him to win the award on its own, but it absolutely means something in terms of his case.
                    The Case for Andrew Luck

                    1. He's the Big Winner Luck's statistics don't compare to Griffin's, but he's been part of a revolutionized organization that looks to be headed to the playoffs. After going 2-14 a year ago, the Colts are now 7-4 and almost surely on their way to a stunning wild-card berth. The Colts made other changes in their lineup and brought in a new coaching staff this offseason, but it's clear that the biggest difference between last year's team and this year's model is the gap between Curtis Painter and Andrew Luck. While Griffin's Redskins have as many wins now (five) as they did all of last season, they have just a one-in-five shot of making the playoffs.

                    2. Luck Has Won With Less While Griffin's receiving corps is a group of nobodies, Luck has virtually nothing to work with short of Reggie Wayne. Outside of Wayne, Luck's targets have been rookie third-rounders T.Y. Hilton and Dwayne Allen, along with Rams castoff Donnie Avery and injured second-rounder Coby Fleener. His running game has been virtually nonexistent; while Griffin has enjoyed the services of breakout star Alfred Morris on the ground, Luck has been saddled with the combination of Vick Ballard and Donald Brown. In fact, while Griffin has done far more cumulative work as a runner, Luck has been incredibly efficient in his scrambles. He has five rushing touchdowns, which is more than the rest of his team combined.

                    Furthermore, while their schedule masks the pain, Indianapolis's defense is truly bad. They're 22nd in points allowed, and the only teams they've been able to hold under 20 points are the Jaguars, Bills, Titans, and Browns. In terms of advanced metrics, the Indianapolis defense is last in the league in defensive DVOA, and they're not good at anything, since they're 31st against the pass and 32nd against the run. You can argue that there's certainly talent there, since Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney are on the roster, but virtually every impact name on Indianapolis's defense has missed their fair share of time this season, and Luck has been forced to lead the team to victories without them.

                    3. He's the Leader Had he struggled, it would have been extremely easy to give Luck a writeoff for this 2012 season. Turning around a 2-14 team is hard enough, but once Colts head coach Chuck Pagano was forced to leave the team to undergo leukemia treatment, it would have been totally understandable if a young, talent-poor team treaded water or regressed in his absence. Instead, the team has rallied around their coach, and Luck has become the team's de facto leader in the process.

                    There's absolutely no reason to criticize Griffin for taking on several endorsement campaigns before and during his rookie season, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Luck left endorsement money on the table so he could shave his head in support of his coach. He's not just the face of the franchise; he's its unquestioned leader in a time of serious adversity, too.
                    And the Winner Is …

                    I certainly don't think that this is a finished race for Rookie of the Year, and I think there are extenuating circumstances that make the case less cut-and-dried on either side, but if the question is simply "Which of these two players has performed better this year?" I think the evidence pretty clearly points to Robert Griffin III. I'm not a slave to statistics when it comes to measuring an individual player's performance — the individual stats in football just aren't good enough to trust them that implicitly, whether they're old-school stats or advanced ones — but the difference between the two players in that table above is pretty stark. If there were plenty of soft factors pointing toward Luck that Griffin didn't have any reply to, I think it would be fair to call it a toss-up, but Griffin has spent the year throwing to backups and has the lowly Redskins in sight of .500, even if they fall short of the playoffs. I suspect that people who are more wowed with quarterback wins as a stat will see Luck earning a likely playoff appearance and punch him in as Rookie of the Year without giving the idea much further thought, but given each player's contributions to their team, a wild-card berth just isn't enough for me to ignore the chasm in performance between the two players. Barring a notable collapse from Griffin and a five-game stretch of brilliance from Luck, I think RG3 is going to be the deserving Offensive Rookie of the Year.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                      I am thinking Griffin will get it, he has a lot of people in his corner, and a lot of this is a popularity contest, I could see it either going to him or being a tie between him and Luck, Co-MVP's

                      Who will get it on defense? Janoris Jenkins, Kuechly, Irvin, Barron, Chandler Jones, Lavonte David?
                      Why so SERIOUS

                      Comment


                      • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                        Originally posted by Ace E.Anderson View Post
                        Who Is the Offensive Rookie of the Year?
                        By Bill Barnwell on November 28, 2012 11:43 AM ET

                        The arrival of Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III into the National Football League could not have gone much more swimmingly. In fact, while expectations were high for the top two picks in the 2012 draft, it's arguable that they've both exceeded whatever lofty expectations they rode in on over the summer. Luck is leading a team that went 2-14 last season on an improbable playoff run in the AFC South, while RG3 has become the league's most exciting player and might even be the best player in the NFC East this year. Fans of the Colts and Redskins and good football have to be ecstatic at what their respective organizations are set up to do over the next 15 years.

                        Which one is the Offensive Rookie of the Year? Since they're about to spend the next 15 years being compared with each other to figure out which player from the Class of 2012 is the more dominant quarterback, there's no reason for that to start any later than now.

                        I think the best way to figure that out is to make a case for each player from the perspective of his campaign, see whose case makes more sense and is easier to argue, and put that player in the lead with five games to go. Since I've spent the week hearing from just about every Giants fan I know that they're terrified to play RG3 this Monday night, let's start with him.
                        The Case for RG3

                        1. The Numbers To an extent that I don't think people realize, Robert Griffin's numbers as a quarterback of any vintage are ridiculous. Compared to Luck statistically, Griffin looks like an entirely different player.

                        Player Cmp % Yds/Att TD-to-INT Ratio
                        RG3 67.5% 8.2 4:1
                        Luck 56.8% 7.1 1:1


                        Those are truly staggering differences. Luck looks like your typical above-average rookie quarterback, a talented player prone to mental mistakes and forcing throws at the wrong times. His rookie year is not much different from that of the franchise quarterback he succeeded in Indianapolis; in 1998, Peyton Manning led the league in interceptions (28) in his up-and-down rookie campaign.

                        Griffin's performance is basically unprecedented for a rookie quarterback. Pro-football-reference.com uses index statistics that compare a player's performance to the league averages for a quarterback during the season(s) in questions to see how they performed in the context of their day; by those measures, Griffin has the second-best era-adjusted completion percentage for a rookie quarterback with 200 attempts or more, narrowly trailing Ben Roethlisberger. He's fourth in yards per attempt, with only Roethlisberger, Marc Bulger, and Mark Rypien ahead of him (and the latter two were playing after a year or more of sitting on the bench).

                        The only rookie quarterback since the merger to throw interceptions less frequently or have a better quarterback rating than Griffin, again adjusted for era, is Dan Marino. So, basically, RG3 is right up there with Marino and Roethlisberger as the most statistically impressive rookie quarterback in NFL history and that doesn't even take into account his impact as a rusher.

                        Not bad, right?

                        2. He's Had No Receivers Despite Washington's best efforts to spend money this offseason and procure RG3 some weapons to throw to, their receiving corps has fallen apart this year. After shelling out big bucks for Pierre Garcon and seeing him catch that long touchdown pass from RG3 against the Saints in Week 1, Garcon's been injured virtually all season. Josh Morgan has been more notable for costing Washington their game against the Rams than for anything else, and Fred Davis tore his Achilles and is done for the year.

                        Washington's leading receivers are 33-year-old backup Santana Moss, 2011 third-rounder Leonard Hankerson, Morgan, and 2011 sixth-rounder Aldrick Robinson. Backup tight end Logan Paulsen has taken over for Davis. If Griffin were really struggling this year, we'd be looking at his receiving corps and saying that he didn't have anything to work with, just like we did with Blaine Gabbert in Jacksonville. Instead, he's been brilliant with these very same players.

                        3. He's Captured the Cultural Zeitgeist We would be naive to ignore that RG3 has become a phenomenon in a way that few young quarterbacks have, especially during their rookie seasons. Washington has a way of turning their star athletes (or their Nick Youngs) into larger-than-life figures, but Griffin would be a superstar in any market. Without a truly dominant team or a player running away with the MVP this year, Griffin's arguably become the biggest story in football. That shouldn't be enough for him to win the award on its own, but it absolutely means something in terms of his case.
                        The Case for Andrew Luck

                        1. He's the Big Winner Luck's statistics don't compare to Griffin's, but he's been part of a revolutionized organization that looks to be headed to the playoffs. After going 2-14 a year ago, the Colts are now 7-4 and almost surely on their way to a stunning wild-card berth. The Colts made other changes in their lineup and brought in a new coaching staff this offseason, but it's clear that the biggest difference between last year's team and this year's model is the gap between Curtis Painter and Andrew Luck. While Griffin's Redskins have as many wins now (five) as they did all of last season, they have just a one-in-five shot of making the playoffs.

                        2. Luck Has Won With Less While Griffin's receiving corps is a group of nobodies, Luck has virtually nothing to work with short of Reggie Wayne. Outside of Wayne, Luck's targets have been rookie third-rounders T.Y. Hilton and Dwayne Allen, along with Rams castoff Donnie Avery and injured second-rounder Coby Fleener. His running game has been virtually nonexistent; while Griffin has enjoyed the services of breakout star Alfred Morris on the ground, Luck has been saddled with the combination of Vick Ballard and Donald Brown. In fact, while Griffin has done far more cumulative work as a runner, Luck has been incredibly efficient in his scrambles. He has five rushing touchdowns, which is more than the rest of his team combined.

                        Furthermore, while their schedule masks the pain, Indianapolis's defense is truly bad. They're 22nd in points allowed, and the only teams they've been able to hold under 20 points are the Jaguars, Bills, Titans, and Browns. In terms of advanced metrics, the Indianapolis defense is last in the league in defensive DVOA, and they're not good at anything, since they're 31st against the pass and 32nd against the run. You can argue that there's certainly talent there, since Robert Mathis and Dwight Freeney are on the roster, but virtually every impact name on Indianapolis's defense has missed their fair share of time this season, and Luck has been forced to lead the team to victories without them.

                        3. He's the Leader Had he struggled, it would have been extremely easy to give Luck a writeoff for this 2012 season. Turning around a 2-14 team is hard enough, but once Colts head coach Chuck Pagano was forced to leave the team to undergo leukemia treatment, it would have been totally understandable if a young, talent-poor team treaded water or regressed in his absence. Instead, the team has rallied around their coach, and Luck has become the team's de facto leader in the process.

                        There's absolutely no reason to criticize Griffin for taking on several endorsement campaigns before and during his rookie season, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Luck left endorsement money on the table so he could shave his head in support of his coach. He's not just the face of the franchise; he's its unquestioned leader in a time of serious adversity, too.
                        And the Winner Is

                        I certainly don't think that this is a finished race for Rookie of the Year, and I think there are extenuating circumstances that make the case less cut-and-dried on either side, but if the question is simply "Which of these two players has performed better this year?" I think the evidence pretty clearly points to Robert Griffin III. I'm not a slave to statistics when it comes to measuring an individual player's performance the individual stats in football just aren't good enough to trust them that implicitly, whether they're old-school stats or advanced ones but the difference between the two players in that table above is pretty stark. If there were plenty of soft factors pointing toward Luck that Griffin didn't have any reply to, I think it would be fair to call it a toss-up, but Griffin has spent the year throwing to backups and has the lowly Redskins in sight of .500, even if they fall short of the playoffs. I suspect that people who are more wowed with quarterback wins as a stat will see Luck earning a likely playoff appearance and punch him in as Rookie of the Year without giving the idea much further thought, but given each player's contributions to their team, a wild-card berth just isn't enough for me to ignore the chasm in performance between the two players. Barring a notable collapse from Griffin and a five-game stretch of brilliance from Luck, I think RG3 is going to be the deserving Offensive Rookie of the Year.


                        So this is what the NFL has become, fantasy football is dictating who is having the better year. This is a hack job if I have ever seen one. RGIII's stats are impressive, but I'm more concerned with wins. Luck taking a 2-14 team on his back and taking them to the playoffs should end the debate. Barnwell conveniently omitted RG3's suspect chin and toughness, which I believe is a huge factor for QB's
                        Being unable to close out a game in which you have a comfortable lead in the 4th Q = Pulling a Frank Vogel

                        Comment


                        • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                          Serious question: what does chin and toughness mean? Never heard that phrase used before.

                          I am glad I dont have a vote because this decision is going to be tough as hell. Unless one of them wins out, Luck has the advantage IMO because he has really produced and pulled out some great wins (and now the team is playing for Coach, PS saw a bunch of Chuckstrong shirts for sale the other day. Very cool) which is really an improvement from last year. But the Redskins have improved greatly on offense, and RG3 is a player who you literally cant blink when he is on the field.

                          I would not be surprised to see a tie, but either way both have had outstanding years.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                            Not a very thorough analysis of the 2 QBs.

                            Not a mention of difficulty level of the offense and the type of throws the QBs are asked to make or the fact that most of RG3s passes are short with most of his yardage being yards after carry.

                            Guess mentioning that would have made it harder for him to come to the conclusion that RG3 is better.

                            Granted RG3 is good but he's not being asked to make the type of throws Luck is making.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                              Unless RG3 screws up royally, he's going to win OROY.

                              But who cares? They're both good. The important point is when will they win titles? I'd love to see a Colts vs Redskins SB.
                              Don't ask Marvin Harrison what he did during the bye week. "Batman never told where the Bat Cave is," he explained.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Luck vs Griffin - let it begin.

                                Luck is overrated and the Colts will be lucky to win more than 3 games this year. Wayne is old, and the defense does not fit the personnel.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X