NFL MVP

[Songbird]

Does anyone score a touchdown without crossing the goal line?

 

[QYFW]

I hate to say it, but Rodgers should win it. I think Carr will, though.

 

[bigpern23]

I can't really fathom how Brady gets much MVP consideration when he missed 25 percent of the season and his team went 3-1 with a MASH unit of QBs under center during that stretch. He's great, one of the best ever. But he missed a quarter of the season and the team didn't miss a beat without him.

 

[cjericho]

I can't really fathom how Brady gets much MVP consideration when he missed 25 percent of the season and his team went 3-1 with a MASH unit of QBs under center during that stretch. He's great, one of the best ever. But he missed a quarter of the season and the team didn't miss a beat without him.

At worst, don't think anyone thought there was any way they wouldn't win at least two of those first four games without him. In Week 4, they were shut out by the Bills, who have an average defense. Think four games may be a pretty small sample. Pretty sure if Brady was out for the season, they wouldn't have a .750 winning percentage.

 

[bigpern23]

At worst, don't think anyone thought there was any way they wouldn't win at least two of those first four games without him. In Week 4, they were shut out by the Bills, who have an average defense. Think four games may be a pretty small sample. Pretty sure if Brady was out for the season, they wouldn't have a .750 winning percentage.

Have you looked at their schedule? It's the weakest in the NFL. I actually think it's a pretty safe bet they could have finished 12-4 without him. And I really can't find more than five losses on that schedule, even with Garroppolo or Brisset under center.

 

[Rhody31]

Have you looked at their schedule? It's the weakest in the NFL. I actually think it's a pretty safe bet they could have finished 12-4 without him. And I really can't find more than five losses on that schedule, even with Garroppolo or Brisset under center.

And the difference between 12-4 and 14-2 might end up being the difference between making the Super Bowl and not.

I get the argument. But that means Bell is out of consideration (and let's be honest; he's not really there anyway) for the same reason. But if you're going to play the "Brady missed 4 and they went 3-1 without him" game, then you need to play the replacement game with everyone.

But Dak shouldn't get it over Brady. Right now Dak is a better Alex Smith. Personally, I think he's going to end up an all-timer, but he's got fewer TDs than Brady in four more games (and before you bring up Elliot and his TDs, LeGarrette Blount is second in the NFL, IIRC). Dak's behind such legends as Trevor Siemien, Sam Bradford and Andy Dalton in yards per game. His completion percentage and TD/INT ratio are terrific, but that makes him a game manager.

Brady's not MVP either. The problem with Brady is the same reason why the Patriots get criticized so much up here - his numbers need to be 2007 good or he's not having a great season. He's definitely done enough to earn the award but if there wasn't one no-brainer candidate, I'd say it was his. But there is one.

Ezekiel Elliot is the MVP of this league and I don't think it's close. He makes everything go in Dallas. That line helps, but there isn't a candidate who doesn't have help somewhere. Come playoff time, how would you plan for Dallas as a DC? I'm doing everything I can to stop the run and daring Dak to beat me.

I watch Dak and see a lot of Tom Brady 2001. He's still learning NFL football and when he figures it all out, good god. But Elliot? He's playing it. If I'm a fan of an NFC team I'm not happy because those two together are gonna win a lot.

EDIT: The Patriots' easy schedule is overblown. Right now they have the same strength of victory as Dallas. The only teams with schedule beef are the KC/DEN.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Brady's been MVP level in the 10 games he has played. Is 75 percent of the season enough? Since the other leading candidate is Rodgers, who was the subject of much "what's the matter with him?" talk when the Packers were slumping, it's an interesting debate.
Rhody, you make a fine case for Elliott. But the voters are so QB-centric now, I think the poor child will have to settle for Rookie of the Year and first-team All-Pro.

 

[QYFW]

Whom does Putin want to win?

 

[Songbird]

Is 75 percent of the season enough?

I don't know. I mean, Trout played in only 159 of the 162 games this season.

 

[bigpern23]

And the difference between 12-4 and 14-2 might end up being the difference between making the Super Bowl and not.

I get the argument. But that means Bell is out of consideration (and let's be honest; he's not really there anyway) for the same reason. But if you're going to play the "Brady missed 4 and they went 3-1 without him" game, then you need to play the replacement game with everyone.

But Dak shouldn't get it over Brady. Right now Dak is a better Alex Smith. Personally, I think he's going to end up an all-timer, but he's got fewer TDs than Brady in four more games (and before you bring up Elliot and his TDs, LeGarrette Blount is second in the NFL, IIRC). Dak's behind such legends as Trevor Siemien, Sam Bradford and Andy Dalton in yards per game. His completion percentage and TD/INT ratio are terrific, but that makes him a game manager.

Brady's not MVP either. The problem with Brady is the same reason why the Patriots get criticized so much up here - his numbers need to be 2007 good or he's not having a great season. He's definitely done enough to earn the award but if there wasn't one no-brainer candidate, I'd say it was his. But there is one.

Ezekiel Elliot is the MVP of this league and I don't think it's close. He makes everything go in Dallas. That line helps, but there isn't a candidate who doesn't have help somewhere. Come playoff time, how would you plan for Dallas as a DC? I'm doing everything I can to stop the run and daring Dak to beat me.

I watch Dak and see a lot of Tom Brady 2001. He's still learning NFL football and when he figures it all out, good god. But Elliot? He's playing it. If I'm a fan of an NFC team I'm not happy because those two together are gonna win a lot.

I'm fine with excluding Bell from the discussion. The Steelers didn't miss a beat with D'Angelo Williams as the bell cow, either. Never for a second thought Dak is an MVP candidate. You can make an argument for Elliot, I suppose, but it's really hard for RBs to win it these days.

Rodgers is throwing for only 258 y/g, well behind Brady's 306 or Matt Ryan's 309. Ryan's got a 32-7 TD/INT ratio (same as Rodgers) and a higher completion percentage than both of them at 68 percent. His 13.6 yards per completion is also higher than Brady or Rodgers.

Stafford is well behind in all those categories and Cousins has relatively terrible TD and INT numbers for this discussion.

Ryan has thrown at least one TD in every game, never more than one INT and he's only had two real stinkers (vs. SD and @PHI). He's also done it against a relatively strong schedule. If the season ended today, I'd probably vote for Ryan.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

I don't know. I mean, Trout played in only 159 of the 162 games this season.

In 1962, Mickey Mantle was AL MVP despite playing in only 123 games. He led the league in walks, OBP, Slugging percentage and course OPS. That would seem a more accurate comparison. Like Mantle, Brady is an all-time great playing at the level that made him one despite missing a significant part of the season.

 

[Songbird]

It was a joke.

And, the Patriots are a well-oiled machine who would win with Goff more times than not.

 

[CD Boogie]

It's a travesty that wide receivers are just excluded from the conversation. You take antonio brown or beckham or julio off their teams and they'd be huge losses. They belong in the argument

 

[Michael_ Gee]

It's a travesty that wide receivers are just excluded from the conversation. You take antonio brown or beckham or julio off their teams and they'd be huge losses. They belong in the argument

I agree. Without Beckham, the Giants would be scoring about as much as the 49ers.

 

[bigpern23]

I agree. Without Beckham, the Giants would be scoring about as much as the 49ers.

The Giants are scoring about as much as the 49ers.

 

[Michael_ Gee]

The Giants are scoring about as much as the 49ers.

Well taken point. So make my sentence "less than."

 

[Michael_ Gee]

It was a joke.

And, the Patriots are a well-oiled machine who would win with Goff more times than not.

1. Just looked up more 1962 stats. Only alternative to Mantle, whose team did win pennant, would be Killebrew. Twins finished second and he led league in homers and RBI. But he also had way lower BA and OBP than Mantle. I mean, how can it be a joke when Mickey Mantle won an MVP?
2. There's a big difference between "win more often than not" and "best regular season record and favorite to make and win Super Bowl." That difference is Brady.

 

[bigpern23]

To the point about WRs, Brown or Julio Jones are probably having the best seasons, but neither of them has been transcendent, or even as productive as Zeke Elliott. Beckham is right there with those guys - he's become the first player to record 80 catches and 1,000 yards in each of his first three seasons and one of only three players ever to catch 10 TDs and crack 1,000 yards in each of his first three seasons - but he's still got less than 1,200 receiving yards.

Jerry Rice in his MVP season scored 22 TDs in 12 games (!) in the strike-shortened season.

Right or wrong, the argument against WRs will always be that they are too reliant on the QB for their success.

 

[LongTimeListener]

Rice didn't win the MVP. Elway won that year.

 

[bigpern23]

Rice didn't win the MVP. Elway won that year.

You're right, my mistake. Rice was named Pro Football Writers Association NFL MVP that season. Read it too quickly.