PDA

View Full Version : Do you agree with Rook of the year?



Enforcerfin33
02-11-2007, 02:48 AM
Personally I know, Vince had a great impact on the Titans. And he did some great things with them, but honestly, how can you not go with Devin Hester here? So many teams had to completely change gameplans or special teams play simply because he was that big of a threat. You could almost make a stringer arguement for Bush too, he was..what third in the league in Back receptions? Young was not the Rook of the yr, IMO.

King Felix
02-11-2007, 03:09 AM
no, vince young is a winner but he isnt a good quaterback.....thats like giving the mvp to michael vick, he wins games but isnt a good quaterback.....

i think maurice jones-drew, or marques colston should've got it.....

1. the reason i think jones-drew should have got it was he was an absolulety beast and being the number 1 back at jax he would put up really really really good numbers

2. the reason i think colston should've gotten it is cuz he was the main vocal point of the offense before he got hurt, he made the offense go and was the defination of steal.

i dont think hester should have gotten it because he really only played on special teams which would be a few plays a game.....i know know he did play a little cornerback and wide reciever this year but not enough and didnt produce enough

HysterikiLL
02-11-2007, 03:17 AM
Vince deserved it primarily because he energized his team to the point that they managed 9 wins with a flat talent line.I'm not interested in the QB debate, he wins games. Hester was in an awkward situation. How can you not give it to him, but again, how can you give it to him? There really was no place for him winning the award because he didn't really fit in a category. But his impact was resounding, and really these awards don't mean a whole lot.

Enforcerfin33
02-11-2007, 12:50 PM
Vince deserved it primarily because he energized his team to the point that they managed 9 wins with a flat talent line.I'm not interested in the QB debate, he wins games. Hester was in an awkward situation. How can you not give it to him, but again, how can you give it to him? There really was no place for him winning the award because he didn't really fit in a category. But his impact was resounding, and really these awards don't mean a whole lot.
Its still a nice trophy on your wall, though.

HysterikiLL
02-11-2007, 04:14 PM
Its still a nice trophy on your wall, though.

For sure, but the thing about the ROY award is the candidacy pool is really sliced in half. Often, the ROY goes to whichever Rookies had the most playing time, because that's where the stats are at, rather than who was the best rookie. Take last year for instance -- had Ricky not returned, Ronnie's stats would have blown out Cadillac and it would've been hard for anyone to vote for Caddy over Ronnie. It's an award of opportunities, and not a gigantic pool of rookies is available in the NFL, compared to the size of rotated playing time.

Dolfan81
02-11-2007, 04:35 PM
no, i rlly think colston should have gotten it

playmaker1
02-11-2007, 06:07 PM
Yes, I think he deserved it. Based on the facts that he touched the ball so often. Not only did he tur things around for his team both on and off the field. He had an impact on almost ever down.

Drew was only a back up. A great one at that who I got to watch in college a few times. Killed me.
Colston looked good, but same thing. Only a few touches a game, and kinda fell off toward the end of the season. But did have a very impressive season.
Hester, amazing. Record and all. But I don't think it could go to a return guy. He turned the game around a few times for the bears, but that is it. He should be MVP on thaht team for sure though.

When it comes down to it, the Rookie of the year should be someone who put up the numbers, and had the biggest impact on his team. Young did that. The titans should have only on maybe 2 or 3 games with that team, and all the young guys on it. He single handedly turned a a few games around, and got his team to rally behind him. It says alot when a guy can be a rookie and a leader on his team. No other rookies did that. That s why I'm ok with it.

playmaker1
02-11-2007, 06:09 PM
For sure, but the thing about the ROY award is the candidacy pool is really sliced in half. Often, the ROY goes to whichever Rookies had the most playing time, because that's where the stats are at, rather than who was the best rookie. Take last year for instance -- had Ricky not returned, Ronnie's stats would have blown out Cadillac and it would've been hard for anyone to vote for Caddy over Ronnie. It's an award of opportunities, and not a gigantic pool of rookies is available in the NFL, compared to the size of rotated playing time.

Very well put DJ.

Mr.Majestik
02-11-2007, 11:49 PM
Personally I know, Vince had a great impact on the Titans. And he did some great things with them, but honestly, how can you not go with Devin Hester here? So many teams had to completely change gameplans or special teams play simply because he was that big of a threat. You could almost make a stringer arguement for Bush too, he was..what third in the league in Back receptions? Young was not the Rook of the yr, IMO.

Young is a lousy quarterback who will in no way be an elite player anytime soon. But he won games as a rookie quarterback. He energized the Titans. Hester made plays on special teams, but he's not touching the ball nearly enough to justify ROY. Young had complete responsibility for his team every time they lined up offensively, that dwarfs whatever Hester might have accomplished as a returner. The Titans were 0-3 without Young as quarterback, they were 8-3 with Young as quarterback. The Bears were 11-5 last year without Devin Hester and a rookie quarterback selected in the fourth-round starting most of the year. How big of an impact did Hester have? He added an extra dimension to that team, but he's not the reason the Bears were successful.

Reggie Bush is another guy who wouldn't recognize his reputation if he bumped into it on the street. He's a one dimensional player. A running back who cannot run the ball. He caught an absurd number of passes, but Maurice Drew outplayed him in every facet of the game, he averaged nearly two yards more a carry rushing the ball, he averaged more catching the ball, he was a better return man, he scored more touchdowns, and he didn't have Drew Brees throwing him the ball. If you're going to be ROY at a position like running back, you must at least be a decent running back. Bush is Larry Centers, period.

WestCKoastiN
02-12-2007, 04:08 AM
I don't really care but i can see Young with it he did a good job with the Titans, i wouldn't mind if Bush or Hester to won.

Enforcerfin33
02-12-2007, 11:57 AM
Yes, I think he deserved it. Based on the facts that he touched the ball so often. Not only did he tur things around for his team both on and off the field. He had an impact on almost ever down.

Drew was only a back up. A great one at that who I got to watch in college a few times. Killed me.
Colston looked good, but same thing. Only a few touches a game, and kinda fell off toward the end of the season. But did have a very impressive season.
Hester, amazing. Record and all. But I don't think it could go to a return guy. He turned the game around a few times for the bears, but that is it. He should be MVP on thaht team for sure though.

When it comes down to it, the Rookie of the year should be someone who put up the numbers, and had the biggest impact on his team. Young did that. The titans should have only on maybe 2 or 3 games with that team, and all the young guys on it. He single handedly turned a a few games around, and got his team to rally behind him. It says alot when a guy can be a rookie and a leader on his team. No other rookies did that. That s why I'm ok with it.
Just for arguements sake, Desmond Howard won Sb MVP as a return specialist, why not ROY?

NoVaDolfan
02-12-2007, 12:03 PM
hester definitely had a big impact on a lot of games even with his few touches.

Mr.Majestik
02-12-2007, 04:11 PM
Just for arguements sake, Desmond Howard won Sb MVP as a return specialist, why not ROY?

The difference between a single game and a season. In any one particular game, a return man can substantially alter the outcome. How in the world could you possibly give ROY to a return guy over a quarterback that took over a winless team and in the process won 8 of 13 games with almost no supporting talent to speak of? A kick returner touches the ball 7-8 times in a game. A quarterback orchestrates everything that goes on during every offensive snap. There is no comparison.

SpencerFS
02-12-2007, 05:09 PM
id say Vince young deserves it because he took a horrible record team to almost getting the wild card i don't think he is a great quarterback but he is a great leader and makes plays with his feet if Kerry Collins were in there they would have been bad this season.

FINdestructible
02-12-2007, 05:10 PM
I was hoping for Marques Colston to win rookie of the year, but i think that the couple of weeks that he was out due to an injury might have cost him the vote. I think Hester needed more playing time other than special teams for him to win it. Vince young did lead his team to a winning record & he didn't have a very good team either, so yeah, i agree with it.

phinphan896
02-12-2007, 05:24 PM
no, vince young is a winner but he isnt a good quaterback.....thats like giving the mvp to michael vick, he wins games but isnt a good quaterback.....

i think maurice jones-drew, or marques colston should've got it.....

1. the reason i think jones-drew should have got it was he was an absolulety beast and being the number 1 back at jax he would put up really really really good numbers

2. the reason i think colston should've gotten it is cuz he was the main vocal point of the offense before he got hurt, he made the offense go and was the defination of steal.

i dont think hester should have gotten it because he really only played on special teams which would be a few plays a game.....i know know he did play a little cornerback and wide reciever this year but not enough and didnt produce enough
i agree. Colston was the second to last pick and look at the number he put up. If he would have stayed healthy those numbers would have been even better. Hes gonna be a complete stud for the Saints

Jaj
02-12-2007, 05:27 PM
How could anybody but Maurice Jones Drew deserve it? He ran for nearly a 1000 yards, at 5.7 YPC, scored 13 rushing touchdowns, caught 46 balls for 436 yards and another two TDs, and returned a TD.

16 total TDs and 1377 total yards without retrun yardage at a very high YPC.

In_Flames
02-12-2007, 05:51 PM
I think Hester needed more playing time other than special teams for him to win it. Vince young did lead his team to a winning record & he didn't have a very good team either, so yeah, i agree with it.

I agree with the decision as well, due to the same reasons stated above by FINdestructible. Jones Drew was up there on my list as well.

Dolfan984
02-12-2007, 06:15 PM
How could anybody but Maurice Jones Drew deserve it? He ran for nearly a 1000 yards, at 5.7 YPC, scored 13 rushing touchdowns, caught 46 balls for 436 yards and another two TDs, and returned a TD.

16 total TDs and 1377 total yards without retrun yardage at a very high YPC.

Yup. Drew was my pick for ROY.

Mike13
02-12-2007, 07:49 PM
I think Jones-Drew or Colston deserved it.

Young is good, he energized his team. But he had a slow start, Colston played well all year before he got hurt.