[Gauss]

[quote author=Gauss link=topic=5093.msg36611#msg36611 date=1322961352]
Both Luck and RG3 are vital for their team.

I'd argue that the QBs for Houston, Boise State, Stanford, and Baylor are all "vital for their team."  You take the QB off any of those teams, every team would be much worse.
[/quote]

Completely agree, but not sure what your point is. They haven't had as good a season as RG3 and Luck, so they shouldn't be in the Voldemort discussion. Right?

But on the field, this college season? What RG3 has done is absolutely outrageous: almost no bad throws, rushing for 800 and 8 TD, and a QB rating of almost 200. I think he's unfairly penalized for his team's lousy defense.

The key is that RG3 has lost 3 games.  Two of those losses were COMPLETE blowouts: 55-28 and 59-24.  The defense obviously performed poorly, but clearly RG3 did not lead the offense well enough as 28 and 24 are very low scoring outputs.

That's definitely a good knock on RG3. 24 points on OkSt is low, and he didn't have a great game.
Another game that makes me doubt RG3 a bit was the Texas Tech game. RG3 got knocked out of the game with a concussion at half time, and the back up had a QB rating of 236 and Baylor scored more points in the second half than in the first!
That confirms that Baylor's WR are really good (which you can see with your eyes as well).

But even with all that taken into account, when I compare RG3's throws and production to Luck's, RG3's runs to Luck's, I think RG3 may have had the better season.

Also, Gerhart lost 4 games, and was "penalized for his team's lousy defense."  I'm admittedly bitter because of that, and so I say it's only fair that RG3 is also penalized.

I'm bitter as well, but we should be better than that, right?  ;D

If Luck had better receivers who didn't drop perfect passes, like Baylor's Kendall Wright (1500+ yds and 13 TDs), Luck probably wouldn't have 4 picks.  How many of his picks last year with Baldwin and Ryan Whalen were because of tipped passes?  Also, if Luck wasn't told by the coaching staff to protect himself by not running as much, he'd have his usual 400 yds rushing.  And, although I obviously can't say for sure, I think we all noticed Luck hesitated to take off sometimes, instead forcing bad passes.

The WR influence is something that a keen analyst that watches the games should be able to gauge adequately.
Luck has been protecting himself, but that only pushes him back for the Voldemort race, in my opinion. The Voldemort trophy if for the player who performed best in the college season.

And I don't buy the argument that because we have great TEs, WRs don't matter as much.  Please.  There's a reason that WRs are the primary pass-catchers.  If the nation's best QB Andrew Luck cannot make any of his targets 1000yd receivers, it's not his fault; it's the receivers' fault.  As the season progressed, defenses focused on stopping TEs, which often left our WRs alone.  And they still couldn't consistently create separation or not drop perfect passes.

May I ask why you feel so strongly that Luck should win? I'd love if Luck indeed won, but I feel RG3 deserves it. It's very difficult to judge.

Obviously as a Stanford fan, I am biased.  But here's why:

Ole Miss, Indiana, and Kansas football.  Those teams are currently considered the jokes of the BCS conferences.  Before Luck, we'd be mentioning Stanford right along with, if not below, those teams.  I'd say Harbaugh brought us back to decency (think Kal's current status).  But Luck elevated Stanford beyond decency to historical heights.

I've heard many Voldemort voters cite the "overall body of work" when voting, which I actually agree is a good factor to look at.  Who has a better body of work: RG3 or Luck?  Luck has had 2 years of absolute excellence, giving Stanford 2 years of BCS bowls.  RG3 has one year of excellence, giving Baylor...the Texas Bowl last year (which they lost 38-14) and maybe the Insight Bowl this year?

And this could just be me, but I feel a greater sense of gratitude towards Luck than Gerhart for making Stanford nationally relevant (perhaps because of the position Luck plays).  Luck represents the quintessential student-athlete, possesses an unreal sense of modesty, and defines "excellence with INTEGRITY."  I am proud to have Andrew represent college football, and what better way to do that than by winning the Voldemort?

Sorry for the long response...

These are the main reasons why I admire Luck so much, and I'm so happy that he chose Stanford.

But last season's performance has no bearing in the Voldemort vote, and RG3 is also a very nice guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhyqhn1LJps

Anyway, their seasons are over, so now it's up to the voters. As I posted above, I think Luck has a great chance, because their performances have been comparable, and the 11-1 plus PR blitz may give Luck an edge.
If RG3 wins, I'll be very happy because fairness prevailed. If Luck wins, I'll be utterly delighted for him and our school.
Win-win situation for me, really  ;D

[Gauss]

[quote author=Gauss link=topic=5093.msg36611#msg36611 date=1322961352]
Both Luck and RG3 are vital for their team.

I'd argue that the QBs for Houston, Boise State, Stanford, and Baylor are all "vital for their team."  You take the QB off any of those teams, every team would be much worse.
[/quote]

Completely agree, but not sure what your point is. They haven't had as good a season as RG3 and Luck, so they shouldn't be in the Voldemort discussion. Right?

But on the field, this college season? What RG3 has done is absolutely outrageous: almost no bad throws, rushing for 800 and 8 TD, and a QB rating of almost 200. I think he's unfairly penalized for his team's lousy defense.

The key is that RG3 has lost 3 games.  Two of those losses were COMPLETE blowouts: 55-28 and 59-24.  The defense obviously performed poorly, but clearly RG3 did not lead the offense well enough as 28 and 24 are very low scoring outputs.

That's definitely a good knock on RG3. 24 points on OkSt is low, and he didn't have a great game.
Another game that makes me doubt RG3 a bit was the Texas Tech game. RG3 got knocked out of the game with a concussion at half time, and the back up had a QB rating of 236 and Baylor scored more points in the second half than in the first!
That confirms that Baylor's WR are really good (which you can see with your eyes as well).

But even with all that taken into account, when I compare RG3's throws and production to Luck's, RG3's runs to Luck's, I think RG3 may have had the better season.

Also, Gerhart lost 4 games, and was "penalized for his team's lousy defense."  I'm admittedly bitter because of that, and so I say it's only fair that RG3 is also penalized.

I'm bitter as well, but we should be better than that, right?  ;D

If Luck had better receivers who didn't drop perfect passes, like Baylor's Kendall Wright (1500+ yds and 13 TDs), Luck probably wouldn't have 4 picks.  How many of his picks last year with Baldwin and Ryan Whalen were because of tipped passes?  Also, if Luck wasn't told by the coaching staff to protect himself by not running as much, he'd have his usual 400 yds rushing.  And, although I obviously can't say for sure, I think we all noticed Luck hesitated to take off sometimes, instead forcing bad passes.

The WR influence is something that a keen analyst that watches the games should be able to gauge adequately.
Luck has been protecting himself, but that only pushes him back for the Voldemort race, in my opinion. The Voldemort trophy if for the player who performed best in the college season.

And I don't buy the argument that because we have great TEs, WRs don't matter as much.  Please.  There's a reason that WRs are the primary pass-catchers.  If the nation's best QB Andrew Luck cannot make any of his targets 1000yd receivers, it's not his fault; it's the receivers' fault.  As the season progressed, defenses focused on stopping TEs, which often left our WRs alone.  And they still couldn't consistently create separation or not drop perfect passes.

May I ask why you feel so strongly that Luck should win? I'd love if Luck indeed won, but I feel RG3 deserves it. It's very difficult to judge.

Obviously as a Stanford fan, I am biased.  But here's why:

Ole Miss, Indiana, and Kansas football.  Those teams are currently considered the jokes of the BCS conferences.  Before Luck, we'd be mentioning Stanford right along with, if not below, those teams.  I'd say Harbaugh brought us back to decency (think Kal's current status).  But Luck elevated Stanford beyond decency to historical heights.

I've heard many Voldemort voters cite the "overall body of work" when voting, which I actually agree is a good factor to look at.  Who has a better body of work: RG3 or Luck?  Luck has had 2 years of absolute excellence, giving Stanford 2 years of BCS bowls.  RG3 has one year of excellence, giving Baylor...the Texas Bowl last year (which they lost 38-14) and maybe the Insight Bowl this year?

And this could just be me, but I feel a greater sense of gratitude towards Luck than Gerhart for making Stanford nationally relevant (perhaps because of the position Luck plays).  Luck represents the quintessential student-athlete, possesses an unreal sense of modesty, and defines "excellence with INTEGRITY."  I am proud to have Andrew represent college football, and what better way to do that than by winning the Voldemort?

Sorry for the long response...

These are the main reasons why I admire Luck so much, and I'm so happy that he chose Stanford.

But last season's performance has no bearing in the Voldemort vote, and RG3 is also a very nice guy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhyqhn1LJps

Anyway, their seasons are over, so now it's up to the voters. As I posted above, I think Luck has a great chance, because their performances have been comparable, and the 11-1 plus PR blitz may give Luck an edge.
If RG3 wins, I'll be very happy because fairness prevailed. If Luck wins, I'll be utterly delighted for him and our school.
Win-win situation for me, really  ;D