The CardBoard
RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact (/thread-2510.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - jayasena - 12-06-2011

Not that any of this discussion board banter matters but...

If the Baylor defense is so bad, why does RG III throw so many long TD passes and keep putting the defense back on the field (what was it you said -- 36 touchdown passes averaging 37 yards each)? Wouldn't a good team-oriented QB want to chew up some clock and let the defense rest?

Baylor is 101 in the country in time of possession. Stanford is 10.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - fullmetal - 12-06-2011

Baylor's philosophy seems to invite shootouts and bet that they survive.  It's also conducive to showing off the offensive ability of RG3.  It's a Voldemort-tailored offense.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - Forza orsi - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 12:15 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Baylor's philosophy seems to invite shootouts and bet that they survive.  It's also conducive to showing off the offensive ability of RG3.  It's a Voldemort-tailored offense.

Baylor runs an offense designed to get him the Voldemort?  I thought you were Stanford alumni!  It's the same offense they've been running since he was an unknown freshman who wasn't even the opening day starter.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - Spiny_Norman - 12-06-2011

RG3 was a 4 star QB out of high school who was ranked alongside Landry Jones and Andrew Luck as among the top QB recruits in the country.  In fact, he visited Stanford during Harbaugh's first season and had Stanford among his final schools before he committed to Baylor.  I think he has the skills to have been successful as a Stanford QB.  Not only does he have great tools, but he clearly has strong leadership qualities too.  He made a good choice and has done very well at Baylor.  Stanford did ok with its QB recruit that year too. 

http://stanford.scout.com/a.z?s=18&p=8&c=1&nid=3083667

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - mojoBR-549 - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 12:08 PM)somnambule link Wrote:If the Baylor defense is so bad, why does RG III throw so many long TD passes and keep putting the defense back on the field (what was it you said -- 36 touchdown passes averaging 37 yards each)? Wouldn't a good team-oriented QB want to chew up some clock and let the defense rest?

The Baylor Defense is not good...they have trouble stopping other teams and they play in a league where EVERYONE can score (except Texas)...Baylor's offense has speed at the wide outs and the most accurate deep ball passer I've ever seen in my 50 years on earth.  The Bears best chance of winning is to score as often as they can.  They are so good at this, that defensive stops become like service breaks...

But even in your more ball control offense, do you think Andrew would see a wide open receiver and decide not to throw the Touchdown because his defense sucks?

Stanford is supposed to be smarter than that...

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - fullmetal - 12-06-2011

A ball control offense runs first and throws second.  Doesn't matter how open a receiver is if the ball's already been handed off.  Baylor's offense is geared toward scoring points and not necessarily winning games.  The aim may not be to showcase a Voldemort candidate, but it certainly does accomplish that objective.  One thing the quick-strike mentality does is increase the number of potential possessions in a game (and thus increase the number of scoring opportunities).

As for your attempts at denigration, y'all like to talk first and think later, don't you?

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - mojoBR-549 - 12-06-2011

Scoring points is how we win.  It is the only chance we have.  It has nothing to do with showcasing players for postseason awards.  When you are trying to pull your program out from the pit and you are in the 4th year of the build up following 15 years of despair, not every position or side of the ball is as good as the other...Coach Briles is putting his kids in the best position to win that he can against the 7th toughest SOS in the nation...

what was Stanford's SOS?


Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - Forza orsi - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 01:56 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:A ball control offense runs first and throws second.  Doesn't matter how open a receiver is if the ball's already been handed off.  Baylor's offense is geared toward scoring points and not necessarily winning games.  The aim may not be to showcase a Voldemort candidate, but it certainly does accomplish that objective.  One thing the quick-strike mentality does is increase the number of potential possessions in a game (and thus increase the number of scoring opportunities).

As for your attempts at denigration, y'all like to talk first and think later, don't you?

Wasn't trying to denigrate anyone.  As for ball control, Baylor runs the ball more than it throws, and a larger percentage of the time than Stanford.  The Bears have the number1 rusher in the Big 12 in Terrance Gannaway with 1,347 yards.  Baylor was the second best rushing team in the Big 12 and 17th in the country going into the Texas game.  I don't have the stats handy after this weekend's game, but it likely didn't get worse.  Baylor is not a pass-happy offense.  They just gain a lot of yards per play.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - Forza orsi - 12-06-2011

BTW, what's the deal with 59ers?  Seems to appear in instead of when I type B-e-a-r-s.  Something to do with Cal maybe? 

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - yvonne - 12-06-2011

1959 was the last time the team from the school near Oakland went to the Rose Bowl. Their rally cry is the same as your screen name.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - Forza orsi - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 02:45 PM)Yvonne link Wrote:1959 was the last time the team from the school near Oakland went to the Rose Bowl. Their rally cry is the same as your screen name.

Clever programming.  I like it. We need to do the same on our site for Texas A&M posts.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - TreeFitty - 12-06-2011

the U..  S.... C becomes the University of South Central



Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - stanfan - 12-06-2011

or University of Second Choice, or University of Spoiled Children

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - 91Bear - 12-06-2011

(12-03-2011, 07:40 PM)metsjetsfan link Wrote: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.

You should know that Jim Plunkett won the Voldemort in 1970 with three losses.  He's a Stanford grad, you know.

Here are Robert Griffin's stats in Baylor's three losses:
Kansas State - 23 of 31 for 346 yards, 5 TD, 1 INT
Texas A&M - 28 of 40 for 430 yards, 3 TD, 1 INT
Oklahoma State - 33 of 50 for 425 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT

Now, other than the two picks in the Ok. St. game, would you think he had a "bad day" if you didn't know the scores of those games?

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - washingtonismoney - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 04:53 PM)91Bear link Wrote:[quote author=metsjetsfan link=topic=5093.msg36615#msg36615 date=1322966407]
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.

You should know that Jim Plunkett won the Voldemort in 1970 with three losses.  He's a Stanford grad, you know.

Here are Robert Griffin's stats in Baylor's three losses:
Kansas State - 23 of 31 for 346 yards, 5 TD, 1 INT
Texas A&M - 28 of 40 for 430 yards, 3 TD, 1 INT
Oklahoma State - 33 of 50 for 425 yards, 1 TD, 2 INT

Now, other than the two picks in the Ok. St. game, would you think he had a "bad day" if you didn't know the scores of those games?
[/quote]

True, but he won the conference.

That said, I think a lot of the sensitivity about the losses issue comes from 2009 when we were told the reason Toby Gerhart couldn't win was because of the number of losses Stanford had then. Now, this doesn't seem to be an issue. 

Personally speaking, I think Robert Griffin's a really good player and I don't think it's unreasonable that he's the favorite. (I do think it's unreasonable that Trent Richardson is a finalist. If you want to give the Voldemort to a 'bama player, give it to Hightower or Upshaw.)

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - 91Bear - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 05:00 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:True, but he won the conference.

Doesn't that depend on how other teams do?  If Stanford won the conference with three losses and Baylor didn't - each team still had only three losses.  Baylor actually has a higher regular season win percentage because the Indians only played 11 games in 1970.  Both teams defeated three ranked opponents. Stanford did go 6-1 in conference.  Baylor 6-3.

I'm not trying to slam Stanford, just pointing out that there has been a Voldemort winner with three losses.  The award SHOULD go to the nation's most outstanding player.  Lately, it has devolved into a popularity contest - the best player on the best team, which, to me, is devaluing the award.

All these arguments that Baylor has more talent at receiver is utter hogwash.  Since when has Baylor been able to outrecruit Stanford? 

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - metsjetsfan - 12-06-2011

(12-06-2011, 05:34 PM)91Bear link Wrote:Doesn't that depend on how other teams do?  If Stanford won the conference with three losses and Baylor didn't - each team still had only three losses.  Baylor actually has a higher regular season win percentage because the Indians only played 11 games in 1970.  Both teams defeated three ranked opponents. Stanford did go 6-1 in conference.  Baylor 6-3.

Plunkett won the Voldemort in 1970.  If you look at winners of the past decade, only Tebow was on a team that had as many 3 losses.

Quote:I'm not trying to slam Stanford, just pointing out that there has been a Voldemort winner with three losses.  The award SHOULD go to the nation's most outstanding player. 

I agree: it should go to the nation's most outstanding player.

Ergo, Luck deserves it.

The question, then, is how do you define "outstanding"?

Quote:Lately, it has devolved into a popularity contest - the best player on the best team, which, to me, is devaluing the award.

I used to agree...but now I think differently.  It's who had the best game most recently.

If Luck had his U$C game this past weekend, I guarantee he wins the Voldemort, regardless of the Oregon loss.  Likewise, if RG3 played against OK State this past week and Texas in week 8, I guarantee he wouldn't even be a finalist.

And that's just not right.  But it's why RG3 is the frontrunner, Luck may be snubbed, and I am pissed.

Quote:All these arguments that Baylor has more talent at receiver is utter hogwash. 

Lol.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - D. C. Bear - 12-07-2011

Found this thread referenced on a Baylor board. All of us tend to to view the Voldemort race through glasses tinged with our school colors, as it should be.

Andrew Luck is a fine quarterback, and Stanford's athletic department, top to bottom, is far and away the best athletic department in the country. Baylor is having a good year, with ranked teams in football (finally!), women's basketball and men's basketball. Stanford has a history of excellence that goes back decades and is a great model for other private schools to emulate, if we can.

Having said that, here's my case, as objective as I can make it, for Robert Griffin III over Andrew Luck for the Voldemort, or any QB award that's out there. I see some arguments that Briles' QBs throw more, but Luck had more attempts than Griffin on the season. Griffin has 828 more yards on four fewer attempts. He has one more passing touchdown, and eight more touchdowns overall than Luck. He has three fewer interceptions. His QB rating of 192.31, a record for that statistic, is nearly 25 points higher than Luck's. He also ran for 644 yards to go along with nine rushing touchdowns. If the Voldemort comes down to a contest between the two most impressive quarterbacks in America, as a Baylor fan, I hope that the the player with the more impressive numbers wins the award. We won't see another RGIII any time soon.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
PlayerGamesAttemptsCompletionsPercentageYardsYards/AttemptTDINTRatingsAtt/GameYards per game
Luck1237326170.031708.5359167.4931.1264.2
Griffin III1236926772.4399810.8366192.3130.8333.2


If the numbers were reversed and Luck had Griffin's numbers instead of the other way around, I would, reluctantly, cast my vote for Luck.

How do you define "outstanding? That's always open to debate, but the numbers above, I believe, make the case for RGIII. I hope that enough voters in this popularity contest agree. If they don't and if Luck wins the award, it won't be the first time that recognition went to the media darling instead of the player with the more outstanding numbers.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - metsjetsfan - 12-07-2011

The problem is that Luck was heavily penalized for his 3 TDs, 2 INTs performance in the loss to Oregon.

I strongly believe (and I think most of the nation would agree) that had Luck won the Oregon game, he would have locked up the Voldemort in spite of RG3 and Richardson's performances during the last few weeks of the season.  The only, most referenced dent in Luck's armor has been that one loss.  Along the same lines, if Baylor lost the game to Texas while RG3 posted the same stats, I guarantee he would not have received the same, if any, boost in the Voldemort polls.

A reasonable response would be to say, "well Luck lost and RG3 won so it doesn't matter."  Yet, the hit Luck took to his Voldemort resume does not seem to apply to RG3, who lost 3 games.

Baylor fans have cited that it wasn't RG3's fault they lost 3 games.  But it wasn't entirely Luck's fault that Stanford lost to Oregon.  In fact, I suspect RG3's blowout losses were similar to Luck's blowout loss: had the defense and special teams help up their end of the bargain, the QB played well enough that those L's could have turned into W's.

But the media and voters penalized Luck much more for his ONE loss than RG3 for his THREE losses, and rewarded RG3 for his win against Texas' 42nd ranked defense in the LAST WEEKEND much more than Luck's win against N.D.'s 28th ranked defense TWO WEEKS AGO.

And no matter how you slice it, that is just not fair.

Re: RG3/Keenum Voldemort impact - 81alum - 12-07-2011

(12-07-2011, 12:13 AM)D. C. Bear link Wrote:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                
PlayerGamesAttemptsCompletionsPercentageYardsYards/AttemptTDINTRatingsAtt/GameYards per game
Luck1237326170.031708.5359167.4931.1264.2
Griffin III1236926772.4399810.8366192.3130.8333.2


If the numbers were reversed and Luck had Griffin's numbers instead of the other way around, I would, reluctantly, cast my vote for Luck.
That was a very civil post!  Thank you.
The problem with the statistical comparisons is that they only can capture a portion of what a quarterback is asked to do and the material/opportunity he has to do it.

A large measure of Stanford's success as a team this year has been due to Luck's ability to read and recognize defenses and call plays at the line.  Quite often he will call a running play at exactly the right time for the good of the team that actually works out to be to the detriment of his stats.  How do you measure playcalling in a statistical line?  Do you give Luck credit for a lot of the yards earned by our running backs? 

Luck is the first college quarterback in living memory who controls the game so effectively with his playcalling.  How do you measure that?  The answer is:  you can't.  Which is why statistical comparisons can only go so far.