[BigHairedAristocrat]

Regarding the "real" ROY awards, logic would dictate that a player's weekly recognition should be taken into consideration in the annual award. Here's how the ROY candidates compare in terms of Rookie of the Week results:

RGIII: 6
Alfred Morris: 3
Andrew Luck: 3
Russell Wilson: 1

RGIII won the award 3 more times than Luck and 5 more times than Wilson... and he did it being injured half the season. Also, a few things of note:

1. Kirk Cousins won ROW the week he started in place of RGIII and you've got to think Griffin would have won it that week had he started.
2. Redskins rookies won Rookie of the Week in 11 out of the 16 weeks they played. I'll repeat that for emphasis - ELEVEN out of sixteen games. I highly doubt that's ever happened before.

3. Russell Wilson's only ROW award came in week 10 (when the Redskins on a BYE) when he threw only two TDs vs... the Jets... at home.... in a game where he only completed 12 passes and handed the ball off to Marshawn Lynch 27 times for 124 yards.

Russell Wilson really started playing exceptional football late in the season and took his game to another level in the playoffs. In the past few weeks, the media has focused so much on the drama surrounding RGIIIs injury, that its coloring their judgement on making an honest evaluation of the players performance during the regular season...And ROY award is based exclusively on regular season performance and, for the majority of the regular season, RGIII was a better player. If he werent, then why did he win ROW 6 times and Wilson only once?

I think you could make a strong case that Wilson will have a better career (due exclusively to RGIIIs health concerns), but if you are just looking BACK on the 2012 regular season, you've got to give the award to RGIII and its not even close.