Ryan wins rookie of the year - 40/50 votes, Flacco gets zero votes

[James R(aven)]

I am sure playoff W's are more important to Joe than this award.

Well said Deuce, The only thing Joe cares about is his team winning games not awards. Whilst some love for Joe would have been nice the voting system for ROY is just not set up for second choices.

Awards schmawards we're in the playoffs!!

[Rxdoxx]

Yes, it is a little disrespect. But I chalk it up also to past media hype.
The hype of a high first rounder, and the name recognition coming out of college were hurdles that Joe had to overcome in voters minds, and equalling Ryan wasn't enough.
But I'm hoping the playoffs just scream back to the voters "you should have thought a little more".

More surprising to me was the no votes for WR.
Marques Colston was runner-up a couple of years ago, and
Eddie Royal put up 21 more catches (91) and more total yards (109 rushing added giving 1089 - 51 more than Colston) and not one vote.
(DeSean Jackson had a super rookie year also).
That to me verifies it was more the feel-good turn around in Atlanta with the additional media attention with the Vick mess still fresh in their interested minds.
I'm not saying Ryan didn't deserve it, just that there was a very polarized perception, and not much extra thought given to the Royals and Flaccos.

[purplepoe]

Everyone does realize that each voter gets one vote right?

They don't give out votes for 2nd and 3rd place.

Once you realize that, it's a whole lot easier to see why Flacco didn't get any votes.

If a voter thought another position besides QB had the best year, then they voted for that player (Forte/Johnson/Clady).

If they thought it was a QB, then it was Ryan. I'm sorry, but if you believe Flacco had a better year than Ryan then you aren't being objective.

PP

[HoustonRaven]

I thought Johnson deserved it more then Ryan anyway.

Flacco, while have an amazing season, got beat out by peeps who's seasons were unheard of. Bad timing. He might have won any other year.

[psuasskicker]

Where did I say he didn't do more? He did, but barely. You could certainly make an argument that it should have been closer than 44 votes to zero. You are the one who said "it wasn't close."

It was. If anything the sacks show that Flacco was playing behind an inferior line. I've never seen anyone throw out a high sack number as proving a QB is bad, more often than not it is used to say his o-line is bad. Don't get me wrong, some QB's actions do pad that sack total, but Flacco isn't one of them. Kyle Boller was one of them, he couldn't move in the pocket. Flacco can and has avoided a lot of sacks.

It also important to mention how Flacco got limited reps with the first team offense, whereas Ryan was anointed starter from day one. This could have easily contributed to Joe's somewhat rough beginning.

Ryan played four games against top defenses this year (TB twice, Philly, Vikings) while Flacco played seven games against top ten defenses this year (Stealers twice, Philly, Dallas, Skins, Titans, Giants). Flacco played four games against bottom twelve defenses (Cleveland twice, Texans, Raiders) and Ryan played nine (Saints twice, KC, Detroit, Rams, Raiders, Bears, Packers, Broncos). Furthermore, Ryan played four out of five of the bottom five defenses, Flacco played zero. Strength of opponents are things that should be taken into consideration, but usually aren't when you are dealing with the media. It's highlight throws, stats, hype, things like that.

Again, did Ryan deserve it? You could definitely make the case, and most would probably agree. Did Flacco deserve some votes? Yes. Did Flacco deserve to be in the conversation? Yes. If you read the articles Flacco is an after thought.

p.s. we got "purple shades" and "what are you smoking" in one thread, both signature lines. I'm impressed

Strength of schedule I'll give you, Flacco had it tougher.

Not that much tougher that it off-sets.

Nothing else in this post makes sense. Why should someone vote for Flacco when Ryan CLEARLY had the better year? Just because you say so? Just because he had a great rookie year? Awards don't work like that...votes go to guys who were the best, not to the guy who was great but wasn't the best.

Where are Ryans stats that much better?

Pops, learn to read if you want an answer to that question.

Everyone does realize that each voter gets one vote right?

They don't give out votes for 2nd and 3rd place.

Once you realize that, it's a whole lot easier to see why Flacco didn't get any votes.

If a voter thought another position besides QB had the best year, then they voted for that player (Forte/Johnson/Clady).

If they thought it was a QB, then it was Ryan. I'm sorry, but if you believe Flacco had a better year than Ryan then you aren't being objective.

PP

This.

- C -

[hurting]

WHAT??? Did I just actually read that statement? I act like Ryan came into a team like the Lions and turned them around in one season???

WTF are you smoking, and where do I get some?

What is it exactly about the Falcons going into this season that put them in a class above the Lions? Is it because they actually won more than zero games last year? Cause while the Lions were historically bad this year, they aren't "worst team in history" bad, and since you conveniently seem to have forgotten, allow me to refresh your memory...
http://www.atlantafalcons.com/MediaL...q=Season+Recap

They fell into the class of "horrible." The Vegas o/u on wins this season was 4.5. Ours was 6. We both had the same record, they actually earned the higher seed and were a last second FG away from winning the division this past Sunday, while we ... weren't.

That's a stupid statement and I'm not spending more time on it.

Regarding the stats being "very close," wanting them to be really close doesn't make it so.

Here are the stats. All of them. Not the ones you can just cherry-pick to make it look like they're really closer than they actually are...

Ryan - 265/434, 61.1%, 3,440 yards, 7.9 YPA, 16 TD, 11 INT, 87.7 rate, 17 sacks for 104 yards (6.1/sack), 55 rushes for 104 yards, 1 rush TD, 6 fum, 1 lost

Flacco - 257/428, 60.0%, 2,971 yards, 6.9 YPA, 14 TD, 12 INT, 80.3 rate, 32 sacks for 276 yards (8.6/sack), 52 rushes for 180 yards, 2 rush TD, 43 rec yards, 11 fum, 2 lost

The ONLY spot he's better is in his rushing. It's not close there, but let's not pretend that Flacco is Mike Vick out of the pocket. He had a couple nice runs, but he's not a rushing QB, and frankly it's nowhere near enough to off-set the rest of the stats.

Ryan's completion percentage is higher than Flacco's.
His YPA is 15% higher than Flacco's.
His TD to INT ratio is 25% higher than Flacco's.
His QB rating, while only 9% higher than Flacco's, isn't in the same league. Matt Ryan was the #11 rated QB this year, Flacco #22.
Flacco had 88% more sacks than Ryan, and lost 41% more yards per sack.
Flacco fumbled 83% more and doubled the number lost, over virtually no difference in the number of attempts/drop-backs.

And I'm gonna say it...going into this season, there is not one person on this planet outside the city of Atlanta that would have said "The Atlanta Falcons have more talent on offense than the Baltimore Ravens." Not one.
It's not like we're talking about Peyton Manning vs. Kyle Boller type of difference here...I'm not saying that. And I'm not saying Flacco didn't have a terrific year for a rookie...he did. His rookie QB performance is probably top five in the last 25 years.

But flat out he wasn't as good as Ryan was. The stats are NOT really close except for completion percentage...certainly not close enough to say that there's essentially no difference. And no one anywhere that I heard gave Atlanta any hope of doing anything positive this season prior to September.

Matt Ryan is a media darling because he had a freaking AWESOME season. It is moronic to argue this guy was a media darling prior to week 1. The guy was labeled by many coming out of college as overrated and a potential bust who threw way too many INTs at the college level to be successful in the pros. He had virtually the entire city of Atlanta working against him because of the Vick stigma and the "white QB replacing a black QB" race issue. This wasn't Peyton Manning coming out where everyone was falling all over themselves singing his praises.

So yeah, it's pretty easy to see why I might think you and some others here have purple shades when you say that Matt Ryan didn't do anything more than what Joe Flacco did...

- C -

I haven't posted muchlately, but this is something I felt compelled to chime in on. I agree with you almost 100%. If I had a vote I would have voted for Ryan myself. He has better stats across the board. and since each voter only gets one vite, it would be hard to justify a vote for Flaco over Ryan.

The only thing I think I would disagree on is the statement that i highlighted above. Remember we started this season with a totally rookie O-line and receivers that most teams would consider #2 or #3 in their offenses. Yes we had McGahee, but he was apparrently "injured" early this season.

[psuasskicker]

The only thing I think I would disagree on is the statement that i highlighted above. Remember we started this season with a totally rookie O-line and receivers that most teams would consider #2 or #3 in their offenses. Yes we had McGahee, but he was apparrently "injured" early this season.

I know what we went in with, but I also know what ATL went in with.

RB - McGahee's proven his value in the NFL. Turner was given a big contract on potential, never having more than 80 carries.

FB - Mughelli is okay, but LoNeal is one of the best FB ever and McClain is better. We made the choice on which of those two to keep, remember.

OL -
Gaither vs. Baker - Baker's a rookie. First rounder, but widely regarded as being a reach in the 1st. Gaither had a year of experience.
Grubbs vs. Blalock - Both second season guys, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone in Aug who'd have taken Blalock of these two.
J Brown vs. McClure - Brown is widely regarded as one of the best young interior linemen in the NFL. McClure...isn't.
Yanda/Chester vs. Dahl - Chester now, but it was Yanda. Dahl is a first time starter. Yanda had a good year for a rookie third rounder last year. Prolly a wash but if there's an edge it goes to Yanda.
Terry/Anderson vs. Clabo - Clabo's been inconsistently starting and wasn't even on a roster in '05. Terry's not great, but Willie Anderson is and like Yanda/Dahl, if there was an edge back in Aug, it went to us.

TE - Heap vs. Hartstock, um, that's not even close.

WR -
D Mason vs. Roddy White - Roddy had one really great year last year. Lots of potential, but no one knew if that was for real or not. Mason's a proven WR. Ask all 32 GMs if they could have Mason or White for one year only, back then probably no less than 80% take Mason.
Clayton vs. Jenkins - Neither is particularly attractive, but Clayton has actually outproduced Jenkins in every category except TDs, and Clayton's got 4 years to Jenkins' 5 years. Clayton's got the edge here as well.

Put yourself back in August, totally separate yourself from what happened this year. What position do you think ATL had an edge over us in?

I don't see one.

- C -

[xmradiodave]

Bah... I do not care. He did not win an award or a single vote? Who cares, as long as he keeps leading this team to wins? We are playing football in January, and that is a good place to be.