PDA

View Full Version : Percy Harvin OROTY a Mike Wallace snub?


WH
01-07-2010, 05:35 AM
Stats
Percy Harvin
http://www.nfl.com/players/percyharvin/profile?id=HAR829482
Mike Wallace
http://www.nfl.com/players/mikewallace/situationalstats?id=WAL468678

Article
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-offensiverookie&prov=ap&type=lgns

What was simply stunning to me was the 41 out of 50 votes Harvin received to Mike Wallace's 1. It is as if Wallace was almost completely overlooked.

Not factoring in Special Teams yardage, Harvin and Wallace shared nearly the same yards and equal touchdowns, but Wallace did it with just over half of Harvin's receptions.

I figured the game winning touchdown against the Packers would have been a giant boost for him.

Congratulations to Percy all the same. We've witnessed the yin and yang of Rookies these passed two years, so your accomplishment is definately not undeserved.

lionslicer
01-07-2010, 05:47 AM
Percy Harvin does have more receptions and more key 1st down receptions at that if you ever watched some of the vikings games. Wallace was really only a downfield threat averaging 19 yards per reception. He was never a go to guy on 3rd down. Harvin has 24 receptions on 3rd down, while Wallace only had 14.

And Harvin also did kick returns putting his team in good field position and had 2 touchdowns. He had more of impact than Wallace.

MasterOfPuppets
01-07-2010, 05:53 AM
plus he had to KO's for tds ....:noidea:...

honestly with the history of florida receiver failures in the nfl i was a little skeptical of harvin ...

WH
01-07-2010, 05:58 AM
MoP, i'm assuming you mean KickOff's and not KnockOuts?

RoethlisBURGHer
01-07-2010, 11:23 AM
While I hoped that Wallace would win it, I have no qualms with Harvin being the OROY.

He had better stats, plus he was a kick returner and a bigger part of the offense than Wallace was.

Curtain_of_Steel
01-07-2010, 12:11 PM
Snub? Hardly how do you dispute Harvins stats this year?

Harvin had over 2000 all purpose yards to Wallaces 825.

Number speak loudly, Harvin deserved it.

Wallace had a great year for the Steelers, and a couple key drops gone the other way he wouldve been over 900 plus. But still a great year for the rookie.

sharkweek
01-07-2010, 12:20 PM
Percy Harvin does have more receptions and more key 1st down receptions at that if you ever watched some of the vikings games. Wallace was really only a downfield threat averaging 19 yards per reception. He was never a go to guy on 3rd down. Harvin has 24 receptions on 3rd down, while Wallace only had 14.

And Harvin also did kick returns putting his team in good field position and had 2 touchdowns. He had more of impact than Wallace.

meh, 3rd downs has nothing to do with it, Wallace has had some of the most clutch 3rd / 4th / game winning catches this season

What won it for Harvin was his all purpose yards...his kick return numbers are very impressive on their own, combine it with solid WR numbers and that's all she wrote.

Nadroj 20
01-07-2010, 12:25 PM
As much as i love Wallace, Harvin deserved this award...no doubt Mike Wallace is a dynamic player and will be great for us in the future, but as for this year Harvin was better......by no means does that make me think harvin is a better player then wallace though, he just had a better rookie year.

WH
01-07-2010, 12:32 PM
I'm almost certain that if Wallace were placed as the Kickoff returner his numbers would have been close to if not more than Harvin's. Look at what Logan did back there.

Curtain of Steel, not to sound rude, but did you read my original post? I explained that the total lack of votes, despite Wallace's having nearly the same amount of yards and exact same number of TD's in nearly half the receptions, were snubbish. I also stated that Percy getting the award was not undeserved.

Should the committe or group that votes on the Offensive rookie of the year be factoring in special teams yards?

Angus Burgher
01-07-2010, 12:35 PM
Yeah, while I wish Wallace would have gotten a few more votes, I understand that Harvin had the bigger impact. Still, I was pulling for the 60-Minute Man.

Also, I think that the votes for Michael Oher stem more from the media hype over the movie and his tough childhood. Not that he isn't a good player, but I don't think he edged out guys like Wallace.

Hammer Of The GODS
01-07-2010, 12:46 PM
What it boils down to is that Wallace is behind 2 SB MVPs while Harvins only real compitition is Peterson. Really not a fair comparison because there is a TON of room for Harvin because the WR talent just isn't there. Plus you have to factor in the Defenses stacking up against AP and that alone gives HArvin room to have good numbers. No slight against Harvin he looks like he's going to be a good player, but Mike would have had better numbers in the same scenario as Harvin. JMO.

Glad to have Mike though seeing as how Sweed was a disaster.


.

Mags87
01-07-2010, 02:17 PM
and not to mention, Harvins numbers come with him being out for a few games and having limited play time in another.

MaidenIndiana
01-07-2010, 03:19 PM
I've no qualms with Harvin winning the award. But could somebody explain to me how the hell Wallace only got 1VOTE? That's rediculous. Oh well, I guess Wallace will just have to go out there and win another SB MVP for a Steelers reciever:tt02:

scsteeler
01-07-2010, 03:25 PM
Percy Harvin does have more receptions and more key 1st down receptions at that if you ever watched some of the vikings games. Wallace was really only a downfield threat averaging 19 yards per reception. He was never a go to guy on 3rd down. Harvin has 24 receptions on 3rd down, while Wallace only had 14.

And Harvin also did kick returns putting his team in good field position and had 2 touchdowns. He had more of impact than Wallace.


I think Wallace's down field receptions was more due to the play calling to use his speed of which he had no control of that.

lionslicer
01-07-2010, 03:27 PM
meh, 3rd downs has nothing to do with it, Wallace has had some of the most clutch 3rd / 4th / game winning catches this season

What won it for Harvin was his all purpose yards...his kick return numbers are very impressive on their own, combine it with solid WR numbers and that's all she wrote.

Harvin had a game winning touchdown catch where he was slammed by 2 players.... He made a huge difference on that team, it wasn't just all purpose yards.. If he had 2000 all purpose yards, but no touchdowns, Wallace would have won.

TheBus360
01-07-2010, 04:02 PM
harvin prolly desrved to win but wallace desrved more then 1 vote

Psyychoward86
01-07-2010, 05:12 PM
Wallace wasn't snubbed at all. He should have been 3rd in the running for OROTY. Percy Harvin had a widespread impact as a return man, a wide receiver, and wildcat personnel. Wallace was phenomenal, but he was just great as a receiver, he did nothing wrong it all. Hell, Wallace finished the season with the league's highest yards per catch. But Harvin simply did more to earn that award. I would even go so far as to put Michael Oher ahead of Harvin. He played damn good football, im not sure why they had him playing RT at the beginning of the season when he was more than good enough to start 16 games start to finish at LT. He's largely accountable for Flacco/Ray Rice's emergence

ricardisimo
01-07-2010, 07:57 PM
No, Orakpo was a snub.

Wallace got more or less what we should expect him to get: the local journalist's (I'm assuming Bouchette's) vote, or maybe some wacko from the middle of the country. It's not a percentages game, where his numbers relative to Harvin's should equate somehow to total votes. Harvin was just by far the more obvious choice.

Psyychoward86
01-07-2010, 10:44 PM
No, Orakpo was a snub.

Wallace got more or less what we should expect him to get: the local journalist's (I'm assuming Bouchette's) vote, or maybe some wacko from the middle of the country. It's not a percentages game, where his numbers relative to Harvin's should equate somehow to total votes. Harvin was just by far the more obvious choice.

no way, Cushing played a complete game from start to finish for the Texans. He was a tackling machine, great blitzer, phenomenal in pass coverage, and he's a probowler for a reason

WH
01-08-2010, 04:29 AM
Percy Harvin's special teams yards shouldn't be a factor in his Offensive Rookie of the year award.

lionslicer
01-08-2010, 04:44 AM
Percy Harvin's special teams yards shouldn't be a factor in his Offensive Rookie of the year award.

If you don't count his special teams plays, he still had a better statistical year that Wallace on offense and better situational stats. The only thing Wallace had better than Harvin was yards per catch.

mistamadason
01-08-2010, 12:18 PM
Mike wallace wan't considered in the NFL Pepsi fan vote for rookie of the year. Even though he won the weekly award three times! If this is truly a fan driven award how did he miss the cut. check out the winners on NFL.com/rookies.

mistamadason
01-08-2010, 12:28 PM
Also Wallace was playing 3rd receiver behind 2 pro bowlers and still almost had a 1000 yds Rec. 39 rec for 756 yds, burning cb's.

WH
01-08-2010, 01:03 PM
If you don't count his special teams plays, he still had a better statistical year that Wallace on offense and better situational stats. The only thing Wallace had better than Harvin was yards per catch.

On the other foot the only thing Percy Harvin had better than Wallace was catches.

SMR
01-08-2010, 01:07 PM
Dang, I love that speedy Wallace, but kudos to Harvin. :thumbsup:

markymarc
01-08-2010, 05:32 PM
Percy Harvin deserved this award and congrats to him. We still got the steal in the draft with Mike Wallace though :tt02:

ricardisimo
01-08-2010, 06:35 PM
no way, Cushing played a complete game from start to finish for the Texans. He was a tackling machine, great blitzer, phenomenal in pass coverage, and he's a probowler for a reason

He's good, don't get me wrong, and he's only going to get better. But tackles - his main stat - do not tell you the same thing that other figures do, like sacks, drops-for-loss, interceptions, etc. If a corner leads the team in solo tackles (like, say, for example... oh, I don't know... William Gay) then you've got big problems, because all that means is that he's getting picked on. It's great that they're making the tackles, but why are they the ones making them? In Cushing's case, were they avoiding Diles on the other side? Is he easier to run against? I'm not saying it's so, not having seen nearly enough Texans games this year to form an opinion, but...

Sacks are another matter, and for a rookie to outperform Haynesworth in that area and others is pretty amazing. Orakpo was snubbed because Washington sucks big donkey schlongs, basically. And because they refuse to change their name to something less offensive. And because Daniel Snyder is, well.. Daniel Snyder.