[D. C. Bear]

Here's the difference, put succinctly. RGIII is an exceptional athlete, and the major cog in Briles' offensive system, which is 6th in overall scoring. Luck is an exceptional athlete, and the engineer of our 5th rated scoring offense. RGIII executes, Luck creates.

Clearly the most outstanding player should have exceptional athletic ability and execution, but it's Luck's role as the primary decision maker in our offense that sets him apart. Doesn't appear that voters know how to account for that.

I'd also venture to say that if Stanford had Baylor's defense, Luck's offensive numbers would have been much more impressive. So many of our games were over early in the 3rd quarter, there was no reason for Luck to air it out. So it's silly to cite that as something impressive RGIII has overcome. I also wish people would have seen that what, 5, 6? of Luck's interceptions came off of drops from his WRs before they criticize him for having 9 INTs.

In any case, it looks as though RGIII has it wrapped up- he's got 11/5 odds I think I last saw. And I don't think he's an undeserving winner, certainly more so than a lot of other winners. But I think Luck was the most uniquely outstanding college football player of the past decade (Jason White? Matt Leinart? Mark Ingram? Troy Smith? So many of them don't even come close) at least, seems a shame he won't win it.

dabigv,
You mention that Baylor's offense is ranked 6th while Stanford's is 5th. That is true, but Stanford had a safety this season, and those numbers would have been reversed without it. In other words, Baylor and Stanford's offenses were virtually identical in terms of scoring. I remember two touchdowns by Baylor defenders, not sure if there were any more, but even that wouldn't make an appreciable difference statistically.

I'd venture to say that if Stanford had Baylor's defense, Stanford would be closer to 9-3 than 11-1. I don't think you realize just how bad Baylor's defense was in many games this year (although there was some improvement over time in terms of getting  a few stops and turnovers). The defense explains why Baylor's record was only 9-3. Add a couple of touchdowns to the opponent's average for Stanford, and you're looking at a similar record--8-4 or 9-3.

You talk about Luck not needing to air it out later in games. Was this just your perception from watching the games, or did you look at some numbers? The stats indicate that Luck did not "shut it down" in the second half of games. He had more second-half yardage than first-half yardage on fewer completions. I think this is an argument in his favor--he got better as the game went on--but it certainly tends to contradict the idea that Luck didn't "air it out" in the second half of games.

Baylor's defensive deficiencies are what that led to a three-loss record, and that's something RGIII will have had to overcome if he ends up winning the Voldemort. They don't have much to do with his offensive numbers, just with his team's record. Florida with Tim Tebow is a recent example of a three-loss team with a Voldemort winner, but most of the time a Voldemort winner is on a team with fewer than three losses.

halaleezy, be nice. They can read. They're just reading with their hearts and aren't real happy about the presumed results.

garvin, the ability to call audibles does not particularly differentiate Luck from RGIII. I know he wears dreads and can run faster than Luck, but Griffin is doing just as much out there with his mind as Luck is with his.

Finally, I think your guys will light up OSU like a Christmas tree. Just avoid turnovers and enjoy the BCS win.

[D. C. Bear]

Here's the difference, put succinctly. RGIII is an exceptional athlete, and the major cog in Briles' offensive system, which is 6th in overall scoring. Luck is an exceptional athlete, and the engineer of our 5th rated scoring offense. RGIII executes, Luck creates.

Clearly the most outstanding player should have exceptional athletic ability and execution, but it's Luck's role as the primary decision maker in our offense that sets him apart. Doesn't appear that voters know how to account for that.

I'd also venture to say that if Stanford had Baylor's defense, Luck's offensive numbers would have been much more impressive. So many of our games were over early in the 3rd quarter, there was no reason for Luck to air it out. So it's silly to cite that as something impressive RGIII has overcome. I also wish people would have seen that what, 5, 6? of Luck's interceptions came off of drops from his WRs before they criticize him for having 9 INTs.

In any case, it looks as though RGIII has it wrapped up- he's got 11/5 odds I think I last saw. And I don't think he's an undeserving winner, certainly more so than a lot of other winners. But I think Luck was the most uniquely outstanding college football player of the past decade (Jason White? Matt Leinart? Mark Ingram? Troy Smith? So many of them don't even come close) at least, seems a shame he won't win it.

dabigv,
You mention that Baylor's offense is ranked 6th while Stanford's is 5th. That is true, but Stanford had a safety this season, and those numbers would have been reversed without it. In other words, Baylor and Stanford's offenses were virtually identical in terms of scoring. I remember two touchdowns by Baylor defenders, not sure if there were any more, but even that wouldn't make an appreciable difference statistically.

I'd venture to say that if Stanford had Baylor's defense, Stanford would be closer to 9-3 than 11-1. I don't think you realize just how bad Baylor's defense was in many games this year (although there was some improvement over time in terms of getting  a few stops and turnovers). The defense explains why Baylor's record was only 9-3. Add a couple of touchdowns to the opponent's average for Stanford, and you're looking at a similar record--8-4 or 9-3.

You talk about Luck not needing to air it out later in games. Was this just your perception from watching the games, or did you look at some numbers? The stats indicate that Luck did not "shut it down" in the second half of games. He had more second-half yardage than first-half yardage on fewer completions. I think this is an argument in his favor--he got better as the game went on--but it certainly tends to contradict the idea that Luck didn't "air it out" in the second half of games.

Baylor's defensive deficiencies are what that led to a three-loss record, and that's something RGIII will have had to overcome if he ends up winning the Voldemort. They don't have much to do with his offensive numbers, just with his team's record. Florida with Tim Tebow is a recent example of a three-loss team with a Voldemort winner, but most of the time a Voldemort winner is on a team with fewer than three losses.

halaleezy, be nice. They can read. They're just reading with their hearts and aren't real happy about the presumed results.

garvin, the ability to call audibles does not particularly differentiate Luck from RGIII. I know he wears dreads and can run faster than Luck, but Griffin is doing just as much out there with his mind as Luck is with his.

Finally, I think your guys will light up OSU like a Christmas tree. Just avoid turnovers and enjoy the BCS win.