The Instigator
jlmdcl
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Majducator
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Andrew Luck Should Have Been the Rookie of the Year

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/7/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,433 times Debate No: 29991
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

jlmdcl

Pro

Andrew Luck was not voted Rookie of the Year. His good friend Robert Griffin III was overwhelmingly voted the Rookie of the Year. In this debate I will be arguing in favor of Luck simply because he put a weak team in the playoffs. The Colts were 2-14 in the previous season, and with the great edition of Luck the colts managed an 11-5 record and made the playoffs. The Redskins, whom RG3 plays for, has a much better overall team. All the Redskins needed was a good Quarterback, because they already had a great supporting cast. So I will have two contentions in today's debate.
1. RG3 had a better team.
RG3 this season had a decent defense, and a great run game in Alfred Morris who was actually top five in the league in rushing. Luck had neither. Another great example that helps my case is the fact that when RG3 would get hurt, then his backup QB Kirk Cousins would come in and play well, showing RG3 maybe wasn't even the main reason the Redskins did so well. So between stellar rookie running back Alfred Morris, and the decent Redskins defense, clearly RG3 had a better team. Luck had one consistent target in Reggie Wayne, but RG3 had Pierre Garcon, Josh Morgan, and Santana Moss. Clearly you can see RG3 had a better team, showing that Luck had to truly put the Colts on his back, and he excelled.
2. Luck had more yards and a better overall record.
Luck actually this season had one more win than RG3, and he broke the Rookie passing yards record. He also led the AFC in rushing touchdowns, yet he wasn't even close to winning the great Rookie of the Year award. Some may say that RG3 takes over games, yet the same thing can be said for Luck after 8 game winning drives this past season.
So in conclusion, RG3 deserved the Heisman trophy back in college in my opinion, but clearly Luck should have been awarded the Rookie of the Year award. He had a weak team, and more wins. Not to mention Luck was healthy for every game this season. So for someone to say RG3 deserved the award over Luck is simply jumping on the bandwagon.
Majducator

Con

Andrew Luck is an awesome quarterback but my pick, RG3 is a way better quarterback. I might be a Philadelphia Eagles fan but I love RG3's offense. First of all RG3's rushing and option ability is better because his rushing at Baylor and during the Washington Redskins season was way faster than Andrew Luck's rushing. Also, RG3 is in national commercials for Subway, while I still didn't see Andrew Luck in any commercials which means that the crowd likes RG3 better. RG3 threw 5 interceptions during the 2012-2013 season while Luck threw 18 interceptions. Yikes! RG3's QB Rating for 2012-2013 is 102.4 while Luck only threw for a rating of 76.5. I understand that Robert Griffin III got injured but he played excellent before his injury!

Sources:
nfl.com
Debate Round No. 1
jlmdcl

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate and for giving his last argument. I will begin by attacking my opponent's case and then move on to strengthen my own.
First, my opponent brings up the fact that RG3 is in national commercials, and how that shows that the crowd likes him better. When according to the NFL network Luck was actually asked to do commercials with RG3 before the season began but he declined because he said quote, " I wanted to make sure I had time to handle the stuff that mattered, whether it was moving into an apartment, finishing school or learning the playbook." End of quote. It clearly had nothing to do with popularity, or the fact that people like RG3 more. Just the fact that my opponent brings up commercials in this debate proves my point that many people are simply jumping on the RG3 bandwagon. Even some who aren't Redskins fans are still jumping on the bandwagon as my opponent shows! The problem here is that RG3 is playing in Washington D.C, so he's automatically an attention magnet!
Second, my opponent brings up interceptions. Simply put, interceptions only matter if they cost you games!!! Luck won more games than RG3, so 13 more interceptions clearly didn't make a difference and therefore shouldn't even be in the conversation!
Third, According to Rick Reilly at ESPN, QB rating means nothing. He said Quote, "Oh, you mean NFL passer rating, the most useless stat in football? The 41-year-old fossil that was invented, literally, on a slide rule? The one that doesn't even consider running or fumbles or time of game or score? Yeah, I know that stat. That stat is the whole problem.
RG3 kills in that stat because he's nibbled his way to a league-leading 70.4 percent completion rating. Given the way the Redskins have babied him, Katy Perry in heels could throw for 60 percent. More than 20 percent of RG3's passes this season haven't even traveled across the line of scrimmage. Only 6 percent of Luck's haven't." End of Quote.
I let Rick Reilly give my rebuttal on my opponents argument about QB rating because I felt he negated it better that I could. It's simply, if you say RG3 is the best Rookie because of QB rating, then you again prove my bandwagon point, because it's like Rick Reilly said, that stat is absolutely worthless!
Now to move on to strengthen my own case.
I will first do this by using 3 points Rick Reilly from ESPN makes.
1. Luck runs more successfully than Griffin. He's had 10 scrambles for first downs. Griffin has had nine.
2. Luck is asked to do more than Griffin and is doing it. His average pass completion travels 8.6 yards in the air, highest in the NFL. Griffin's is 5.8, one of the lowest.
3. Luck is more valuable to his team than Griffin. Sixty-nine percent of the Colts' passing yards are gained while the ball is in the air, the rest after the catch. Only 49 percent of the Skins' passing yards come through the air. In other words, Griffin still has his training wheels on. Luck has his license.
These are 3 very nice points that Mr. Reilly makes showing Luck is more valuable to his team, and also a better overall player. Many say RG3 is an amazing athlete that can run like no other, and I won't disagree with that. However, I would like to say that Luck is a smarter runner, which is clearly shown because Luck wasn't injured once this season, but RG3's was plagued with injury. Luck, not known for the run coming out of college actually had the most rushing touchdowns in the AFC, including one he made as the clock expired to beat Detroit. So you can't say Luck can't run, and when he does run he knows when it's smart to take a hit, and when you just need to slide. Which is something RG3 simply hasn't figured out. This shows Luck is a smarter quarterback than RG3.
So again, I leave you with this. You can side with my opponent and say well RG3 is more popular, and he has more TV attention, and RG3 has a better QB rating, so he truly should have been the Rookie of the Year. Or, you can say no, I'm not going to jump on the bandwagon, I'm gonna go with the guy who put his entire team on his back, broke the rookie passing record, and had more wins in the season.
Majducator

Con

Majducator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
jlmdcl

Pro

I would like to begin this last speech by thanking my opponent for the speech he did give. Even though he forfeited his second round I still thank him for accepting the challenge. So the main reason I believe I won this debate is because I gave good sound arguments, and successfully negated my opponent's case. My opponent proved I successfully negated his case because he didn't give a response. So I will leave you with this. Before you say one QB is better than the other, you should look deeper than just popularity, or QB rating. You have to look to other things such as strength of schedule, how good of a team do they play for, and how many wins they have. If you just jump on the bandwagon, then that shows you truly don't know very much about football. I can honestly say that I believe RG3 was voted Rookie of the Year because a lot of the voters simply jumped on the bandwagon, which shows a lack of respect for the game. Thank You
Majducator

Con

Majducator forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by UltimateSkeptic 4 years ago
UltimateSkeptic
I want to accept, but these kind of debates never get votes!
Posted by KroneckerDelta 4 years ago
KroneckerDelta
Reggie Wayne is better than Moss and Garcon combined (Josh Morgan?? please). Reggie Wayne is a hall of fame WR, Santana Moss might also be considered the same, but he's well past his prime. Garcon has a long way to go to prove he's hall of fame material (and nothing I've seen so far suggests he will develop into that).

But I'm not going to debate this since it's pretty subjective.
No votes have been placed for this debate.