[washingtonismoney]

Those are some interesting non-traditional statistics, Washington, but I have never heard of those deciding a Voldemort race. 

Bottom line:  RG3 is a "system QB" who led his team to the Insight.com bowl.  He didn't have the best stats at his position.  He runs Mike Leach's offense (their coach came from T-Tech).  His stats don't approach someone like a Graham Harrell (Harrell put up 5,700 yards in that offense--not a Voldemort candidate).  600 yards rushing is nice, but not historic.  It's a little less than what a guy like Jeremiah Masoli or Marques Tuiasosopo ran for.  If you pick him over Luck, it's pretty much like taking Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers.  Not going to happen.

Not interested in making comparisons between Griffin and Luck, but was limited to Griffin-Weeden comparisons. And whether or not they've decided Voldemort races is immaterial; I care about which statistics best describe someone's play. As it happens, Griffin's are much better than Weeden's, without question.

He doesn't really run an Airraid offense like Leach. Some similar elements, but not at all the same. At any rate, the tempo isn't anywhere near the same between Baylor 2011 and Leach's offense; the volume of plays Texas Tech ran will deceive you into thinking they're more productive than they actually are. Graham Harrell never averaged above 8.2 yards per attempt, for example, which is really good but not the same level of absurdity that Griffin's is. (this is also the Oregon issue. Fundamentally, over the past three years, Stanford and Oregon have, on aggregate, basically been exactly as productive at turning drives into points. Oregon just uses more of them.) And while Griffin led his team to the Insight.com Bowl, he also didn't play both ways. The unit Griffin led--the offense--was the most productive in the Big 12. Unless you believe Griffin lacked mystical powers to improve the play of his defense that Luck used for Thomas, Murphy, etc., this is a strange argument to use. Griffin led an incredibly productive offense with an absurd set of statistics.

In fact, I can't find a college quarterback with a high level of attempts that betters Griffin's 10 yards/attempt. Tebow and Bradford get close, but not close enough. Not Leinart. Not Colt McCoy. Not Rodgers. Can't find one. So, I think it's more than a bit condescending to call this an Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers decision. Griffin's a darn good player; Luck's a darn good player too. There's no need to insult one to build up the player.

[washingtonismoney]

Those are some interesting non-traditional statistics, Washington, but I have never heard of those deciding a Voldemort race. 

Bottom line:  RG3 is a "system QB" who led his team to the Insight.com bowl.  He didn't have the best stats at his position.  He runs Mike Leach's offense (their coach came from T-Tech).  His stats don't approach someone like a Graham Harrell (Harrell put up 5,700 yards in that offense--not a Voldemort candidate).  600 yards rushing is nice, but not historic.  It's a little less than what a guy like Jeremiah Masoli or Marques Tuiasosopo ran for.  If you pick him over Luck, it's pretty much like taking Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers.  Not going to happen.

Not interested in making comparisons between Griffin and Luck, but was limited to Griffin-Weeden comparisons. And whether or not they've decided Voldemort races is immaterial; I care about which statistics best describe someone's play. As it happens, Griffin's are much better than Weeden's, without question.

He doesn't really run an Airraid offense like Leach. Some similar elements, but not at all the same. At any rate, the tempo isn't anywhere near the same between Baylor 2011 and Leach's offense; the volume of plays Texas Tech ran will deceive you into thinking they're more productive than they actually are. Graham Harrell never averaged above 8.2 yards per attempt, for example, which is really good but not the same level of absurdity that Griffin's is. (this is also the Oregon issue. Fundamentally, over the past three years, Stanford and Oregon have, on aggregate, basically been exactly as productive at turning drives into points. Oregon just uses more of them.) And while Griffin led his team to the Insight.com Bowl, he also didn't play both ways. The unit Griffin led--the offense--was the most productive in the Big 12. Unless you believe Griffin lacked mystical powers to improve the play of his defense that Luck used for Thomas, Murphy, etc., this is a strange argument to use. Griffin led an incredibly productive offense with an absurd set of statistics.

In fact, I can't find a college quarterback with a high level of attempts that betters Griffin's 10 yards/attempt. Tebow and Bradford get close, but not close enough. Not Leinart. Not Colt McCoy. Not Rodgers. Can't find one. So, I think it's more than a bit condescending to call this an Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers decision. Griffin's a darn good player; Luck's a darn good player too. There's no need to insult one to build up the player.