Yeah, it's not like he did anything spectacular this year. I mean, just a handful of game-winning plays, set the all-time rookie QB rushing record, league-wide praise for the unique impact he had on the team, and stuff like that. It's insane to think he might be worthy of ROY.
Why should Grossman be offensive player of the year? He wasn't the main reason for the Bears success, not like LT for the Chargers and not like VY for the Titans. That's his point. No rookie did more or was more important to their team then VY. He threw for 12 TDs (decent) and was probably one rush away from having more yards than Bush did, and only ran for one less TD. But most importantly, he had his team in playoff contention, which is pretty remarkable for a team that almost every NFL analyst and commentator threw under the bus at the start of the season. Tell me Possum, who do you think is more deserving for Rookie of the Year? Ric- Good post with a lot of stats. And while we obviously cannot throw out the stats, it's not the only thing voters look at. Jone-Drew obviously had the best year statistically speaking, but do you not think that VY was the most important or most valuable member for their respective teams? Would the Jags have had their 7 win season with or w/o Jones-Drew? Maybe, maybe not, like you said...they also had a 1200+ yard RB on their team. Would the Patriots or Colts had similar seasons with our w/o Addai and Maroney? Possibly. I think the one rookie/team that you could honestly say "no they wouldn't" would be VY and the Titans (possbily Colston and the Saints). W/o VY, the Titans could have been the worst team in the NFL. Also...you could factor in kick returns if you like. But I'm sure Maroney loves how it tacks on an extra 60 yards on this game averages since he averaged only 58 yards w/o it.
Ok...everybody knows I am a UT hater.... Even I think Maurice Jones-Drew over VY is something someone who would rather read a stat sheet than watch a football game would come up with. Drew was valuable to the Jags, cause I don't think Fred would have stayed healthy all year without him. Vince made the Titans a playoff contender from a laughing stock. PS. Don't get your hopes up T-sip's I still think VY isn't gonna be a dominant pro...only that he was clearly the rookie of the year this year.
Wait...whose judgment is clouded??? VY already WON the award. No one is trying to convince you he should win it. He already did. This whole discussion has passed the point of ridiculous.
thanks; i appreciate it. imo, ROY is an individual award; there are only so many "facts" you can use to determine a winner, and those "facts" are the stats of the individuals. you shouldn't use win totals; that's not a true measure, unless it is quantifiable, but as cited, there were titan wins he had nothing to do with, and wins where he received almost unbelievable support - 60 yard field goals; team chokes... as for his related importance, that's a bit unfair: of all the players cited, he was the lone QB, so sure, you're right - but using that logic, shouldn't matt leinart (who posted better numbers than vy and led AZ to 4 of its 5 wins) have won it? btw, i did not know/realize the chargers' LT was a rookie. 1 sack allowed, no penalties, i believe, and a record-setting year from the team's RB while protecting a first-year starter's blindside well enough to get said QB to the pro bowl...? yeah, marcus mcneil should have been ROY; followed by MJD, then vy. first and foremost, it's an individual award; not a team award. quantifying wins is difficult to do. but, as previously stated, they won three games in spite of vy; and the guy who REALLY turned that team around was pacman jones, who went deion sanders during the final 11 games of the season. that's why i think using win totals to judge individual accomplishments obscures the process. i didn't, for the record, list maroney ahead of vy; but KRs are every bit as relevant as passing stats. i mean, are we still giving vy 25 yards and a TD when he throws a 5-yard out the WR turns into a 25-yard score? field position is a crucial part of today's game; to have a guy average nearly 30 yards a kick return is significant. major, for the record, in the truest sense of the word, he had ONE game-winning play - the OT run against HOU. it was the only time he scored the game's winning points. also, i truly doubt he was the only rookie to receive league-wide praise for his effort/impact. SamFisher, your act is old as is your ridiculously thin-skinned responses to any and all legitimate criticisms of vy. if i don't think vy deserves ROY, i must then hate him? if i praise the undeniable contributions of the titans' defense and/or running game, that must mean i'm comparing it the '78 steelers/'83 redskins? is that how you combat your inability to actually engage the discussion with rational responses, by just blowing everything completely out of proportion? at least gucci888 and major both posses the capacity (and respect) to actually offer sensible rebuttals; yours are just caked in your own inadequacies, fueled by your inability to pull your fingers out of your ears, open your eyes, and offer anything beyond yelling "VINCE YOUNG!!!' at the top of your lungs until everyone just eventually gives up and moves on. vy was an understandable choice; he wasn't even a bad choice, but the grounds for claiming he was undeserving are not, by any stretch, unfounded.
Can you find any other rookie who's teammates universally talk about him as their unquestioned leader and say he's responsible for their team's turnaround? Or any other rookie who's talked about by his OC as being a revolutionary player? Or how about someone who's talked about by coaches, players, analysts, media and everyone else as the game-changing player on the Titans? You guys act like it's VY-fans that are overhyping him and his impact on the team. The entire league sees it - everyone from players to coaches to analysts. There's a reason he's been all over the news, won an athlete-of-the-year award, was on the face of magazines, etc. Believe it or not, all those companies aren't run by Longhorns. The only ones that don't see it are the ones that trying to rationalize it themselves. Leinart put up better numbers now? Leinart: 2550 yards, 50 yards rushing, 11 TDs throwing, 2 TDs rushing, 12 INTs - with a team that has Boldin and Fitzgerald Young: 2200 yards, 550 yards rushing, 12 TDs throwing, 7 TDs rushing, 13 INTs - with no-name receivers Young had more TDs, more yards, more impact across the board, and yet now even Leinart was better. Wow. Just wow. A perfect example of people trying to justify to themselves that he's not the ROY. Ask anyone in the league who actually plays the game how many game-winning plays he made, and I guarantee you the answer won't be anywhere close to one. But in order to try to tear his numbers down, you go to non-sense like this. You don't think he made any game-winning plays against the Giants or Buffalo? That's not to say anyone else didn't make game-winning plays as well, but "oh he had help" stuff is wearing thin. No sh**? Based on that standard, no one in the history of the league has ever been anything special because they all had help to win games. When put in a position to help his team win games at the end, he did it a lot. That's why he won ROY.
you'll all be shocked to know i agree with this post. the idea that there's just these freaky UT fans out there who are the only ones who think VY has done anything special could not be farther from the truth.
I'm not being doomsday but realistic. The Titans are further along with their rebuilding than are the Texans. They have more disposable assets at their command to further use in that rebuilding than do the Texans so it stands to reason that their improvement next season will exceed that of the Texans. I too believe that the Texans will improve just not enough to leapfrog the Titans in one year given the numerous problems that have to be fixed on this team. It's OK to be hopeful because of the new regime, but it's also wise to note that as good as they are, Kubiak & Smith aren't infallible as evidenced by their making Mario Williams the top pick in the draft. And before you go ballistic on me, I like Mario Williams but did not think he should have been the overall no. 1 pick. As for the future here, an awful lot will depend on how they implement their offensive and defensive systems. If they can approach the level of consistency of say a Denver or a New England then the future will indeed be a bright one. Successful franchises are known for having good systems in place and a consistent plan for following them. And Kubiak comes from a franchise (Denver) where stability and consistency were the norm which is what we all can expect to become the norm here as well. As for my "ragging" on the Texans' mistakes, that's the position in which THEY have placed themselves so we'd all best get used to this and learn to grow thicker skins. The unfortunate thing is that they (Texans) will be revisiting the 2006 draft twice a year for some time to come but as I've said, there's nothing that can be done about it but to learn to live with it. Unlike, the situation in Detroit, Arizona, Cleveland or Oakland, there are legitimate reasons for optimism here and I do not get the sense that this franchise will continue to be mired in the muck of the past 4 years. But, at the same time, I'm realistic enough to realize that while the Texans are bound to improve, it won't happen in a vaccum and that the other teams in their division will also be improving or looking to improve as well. That's just the nature of the beast.
Actually, Ric I have come around to your way of thinking: I really don't care what the Titans do - only what the Texans now decide to do. Now, don't get me wrong, I fully expect VY to continue to get better and better as he grows into the position and I expect the Titans to wisely use all of those draft picks and free agent dollars. I expect the Colts will finally start to address their weaknesses as well which would make them even more dangerous. The only team in the division that I expect to self-combust is Jacksonville. I'm not banking on the other teams to be stupid. But I simply don't care what they do, are doing or plan to do - my sole focus is on the Texans and how Kubiak & Smith plan to convert the Texans of today into a legitimate contending team. One other thing: never forget that it's also possible for the Texans to regress next year so we must always be prepared no matter what.
Exactly. Folks around here need to stop hoping that the Titans organization will wake up one day and morph into the McNair, Casserly & Capers organization of the past 4 years or that the "Vince Young Experience" will come somehow come crashing back to earth because I just don't see that happening. But it's not important what the Titans, Colts or Jaguars do or don't do - it's only important what the Texans decide to do from here on out. For the Texans to succeed, they are going to have to work long and hard for any success they achieve and they will have to do so with almost no margin for error. Difficult? Yes but not impossible. It has been done before in places like New England and most recently New Orleans so there's no reason to not expect that it can't be done here as well.
so is your contention that no other team praises its own productive rookies, major? i mean, it certainly verifies vy had a fine season and his importance to his own team, but i'm sure the cardinals would say the same thing about leinart; the chargers mcneil; the jaguars MJD, etc., etc., etc., etc. that you only read and/or recall vy praise might, maybe, possibly have something to do with your interest in vy...., no? or do you routinely keep up with the jacksonville jaguars and what their players have to say? no, what i'm actually saying is that EVERYONE'S overhyping him. his numbers - the individual measure of his season - were mediocre. and he alone is getting far too much credit for team accomplishments. kind of like... troy smith, uh, major? i said his numbers were better, major - and used it to disprove the logic behind granting QBs too much "importance," especially when it comes to wins and losses. no one is arguing leinart should've won it; just that, if you're going to talk about intangibles like "impact" and leadership" and give QBs credit for wins, then leinart deserved a lot more recognition for the award and was every bit the "logical' choice vy supposedly was. but, whatever - leinart's #s were better because in the stats you cited, you (accidently, i'm sure) left out a key one: games played/started. young played in 15; started 13; leinart 12 and 11. so it's little wonder young's cumulative stats were better - he played in and started three more games. and even given that advantage, leinart still completed more passes, threw for more yards and commited fewer turnovers. young threw 1 more TD and they actually threw the same number (11) in the games they started. and even with the best rushing total ever for a rookie QB, young still generated fewer yards per game than leinart (231 to 199); leinart also had a higher QB rating and completed a larger % of his passes. the only stat of young's that was better was TDs per game. vy averaged 1.46 to leinart's 1.18. that comes to about 4 more over a 16-game season and that's with young posing as a legitimate double threat. oh, and he also trailed young in # of wins attributed to a QB that the QB actually had absolutely nothing to do with... by quite a wide margin, actually. sorry, you're right on that one... otherwise, yes, leinart's numbers were better. i would actually characterize it as a pristine example of people romaniticizing his impact on the team's W/L record. did he make big plays in the giants game? sure. the bills game? yes. did he make the game-winning plays in either? no, he did not. every sunday, 16 teams win; 16 teams lose. i'm sure A LOT of players for the 16 winning teams make "game-winning plays" but in terms of how you were trying to use it ("he's just a clutch leader who wins"), you were wrong. and are you even going to address the jacksonville game in which he didn't produce a single point and the team still won? or the two other games in which the defense/special teams matched the offense's point production? who gets credit for those wins? why, of course - vince young! THAT'S why he was rookie of the year, major. no one bothered to look beyond W/L records. it's a valid point; major, but not when its glorified. for instance - yes, he put his team in "position to win" against the colts... because his kicker hit an improbable 60-yard field. but leaving your kicker that great a distance only looks good if the kicker makes the kick. but, sure - he did, so let's give vince young an award for it. besides, aren't you the guy who argued AGAINST troy smith getting an individual award when his numbers were merely "average" and that the award was a result of, among other things, the play of others and him getting too much credit for a 12-0 season? you can't have it both ways.
Ric- As you posted earlier...you cannot throw out stats, but you have seemed to oversimplyfied it down to ONLY stats should count. If that's the case, then a OL would never have a chance to win a ROY, even while allowing 1 sack or whatever is nice, how could that compete with rushing/receiving for over 1000 yards or throwing for 15+ TDs in the eyes of the voter? While it is technically an individual award, voters will factor in win totals and will factor in how valuable that player was for their team to go along with stats. We can argue whether to factor in other stuff other than stats, but at the end, to truly guage who was the best rookie, you have to factor in other things along with stats. ALL QBs (not just VY) are getting 25 yards and a TD or whatever. I really don't see your point on this, this is how it's been done since the beginning of football. The fact is that the QB and the WR is getting credit no matter if it is a 40 yard TD strike or a screen pass that turns into a 40 yard TD.
again, it's an individual award; you can certainly tie wins to performance, but in the case of vy, given his mediocre individual numbers, that's a rather difficult thing to do effectively and, imo, it's sometimes (often) done at the expense of any and every other impactful players. of the guys i listed as worthy ROY candidates, maroney, addai, mcneil, colston and bush were all on playoff teams - who's to say they weren't the difference in making and not making the playoffs? and yeah, ok, NE and indy probably make it regardless, but take mcneil or colston or even bush - neither the chargers nor saints were in the playoffs last year; who's to say mcneil, colston and/or bush aren't the difference this year? i know i could certainly cite at least one game where bush made THE game-winning play... if he doesn't; if the saints are just 9-7...... well, i read your post as trying to discount the importance of return yardage; if that wasn't your point, never mind. if it was, then i don't agree it's dismissive, any more than young's (or any QBs) yardage total being inflated by receivers doing the heavy lifting, stat-wise.
I guess it all depends on whether you want to only consider stats or not. Personally...I don't think you can just look at stats alone and objectively see who is deserving of ROY. Like I posted, if it's only about stats, that basically knocks out all OL even though their impact could be much greater than anyone else. You're absolutely right, McNeil/Colston/Bush could have been the difference this year, having guys like LT and Brees certainly make that argument even harder. But I think very few could argue that VY was the difference in the Titans turnaround. Especially after starting 0-5, VY and the Titans went 8-5 after he got the starting job. You can say it's an individual award all you want, but it's more than just about stats IMO and evidently...the voters agree. Just like you told desert scar you cannot throw away stats, you cannot only look at stats either.
gucci888, i understand, and appreciate, the limitations of stats. more than vy, the guy probably most hurt is marcus mcneil. and yes, i agree that, independent of context, 8-5 is impressive. but when its applied singularly to vy , its completely misleading. he wasn't 8-5; the team was. would they have been 8-5 with kerry collins...? there were games they won in spite of VY; there were games they won under extraordinary circumstances that VY had absolutely nothing to do with (and by that, i mean the circumstances); there were games where he played OK, but teammates clearly outplayed him... you and i could probably debate for days how these games should be categorized and neither of us would probably be wrong, but the point is, given similiar circumstances, do we know those victories were a direct component of VY and wouldn't have happened with collins under center? does the kicker still hit a 60-yarder? do the giants still implode? do the titans still win the OT coin toss in houston...? which is why its easier to revert back to what is known: statistics. and under that guise, there are, contrary to earlier posts, many worthy candidates and several more worthy than vy for THIS award.
