Who wins the NFL MVP (2014)? (1 Viewer)

[Leroy Hoard]

Yeah, Romo's December was plenty awesome enough to earn him a spot in the discussion, but his season wasn't good enough to be a realistic contender over QB's with equally good records, equal or better statistical profiles, and no real question whether or not they are the most deserving candidate on their own team.

He was awesome, though. I think Rodgers and Watt are the only real candidates -- Rodgers being the slam dunk victor as the most deserving QB if the majority of voters vote on value, Watt being the darkhorse if enough voters rebel against that and vote based on simply how awesome the guy's season was.

So is there anything more Watt could have done, in your opinion, to deserve the MVP over Rodgers? Or do you thing a QB should always win over a DE?

Somebody made an interesting point in another thread. If they were traded for each other which team would improve more or less?

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Yeah, Romo's December was plenty awesome enough to earn him a spot in the discussion, but his season wasn't good enough to be a realistic contender over QB's with equally good records, equal or better statistical profiles, and no real question whether or not they are the most deserving candidate on their own team.

He was awesome, though. I think Rodgers and Watt are the only real candidates -- Rodgers being the slam dunk victor as the most deserving QB if the majority of voters vote on value, Watt being the darkhorse if enough voters rebel against that and vote based on simply how awesome the guy's season was.

So is there anything more Watt could have done, in your opinion, to deserve the MVP over Rodgers? Or do you thing a QB should always win over a DE?

Somebody made an interesting point in another thread. If they were traded for each other which team would improve more or less?

This makes the MVP a QB-only award. Which, ok, it does say 'valuable' right there in the name. No one's ever more valuable than the league's top QBs.

Watt would have a chance if it was for "best" player though.

 

[Ryan Swope's Pro Career]

Yeah, Romo's December was plenty awesome enough to earn him a spot in the discussion, but his season wasn't good enough to be a realistic contender over QB's with equally good records, equal or better statistical profiles, and no real question whether or not they are the most deserving candidate on their own team.

He was awesome, though. I think Rodgers and Watt are the only real candidates -- Rodgers being the slam dunk victor as the most deserving QB if the majority of voters vote on value, Watt being the darkhorse if enough voters rebel against that and vote based on simply how awesome the guy's season was.

So is there anything more Watt could have done, in your opinion, to deserve the MVP over Rodgers? Or do you thing a QB should always win over a DE?

Somebody made an interesting point in another thread. If they were traded for each other which team would improve more or less?

This makes the MVP a QB-only award. Which, ok, it does say 'valuable' right there in the name. No one's ever more valuable than the league's top QBs.

Watt would have a chance if it was for "best" player though.

This is my problem with the award. It's so impossibly gamed towards the QB position that no other position has a chance unless you do the impossible a la AP in 2012. That being said, that's my best argument for why the trade analogy is inaccurate. Even after that 2000 yard season, a straight up trade of Rodgers and AP would be ridiculous and nobody would ever deny that. The Vikings would be significantly better off, even forgetting this most recent AP cluster####.

If you were given the option of picking either the second best QB and JJ Watt or the second best defensive lineman and Rodgers, I think you get more value off the first simply due to how big of a step down from Watt the next best DE is. Rodgers had an awesome season, but it wasn't as statistically significant as Watt's in my eyes. Let's stop this QB monopoly on the award, if Rodgers broke every record in the book like Manning did last year I'd be a bit more impressed.

 

[ragnarok628]

If QB is the most valuable position in football, then it makes sense that MVP would be basically a QB-only award. To change that you'd have to change the whole dynamic in the NFL. But does it really make sense to make an issue out of this? What's the problem with an award than only a QB can win anyway? Seems like wishful thinking to think that any particular position should have a shot at MVP, that just doesn't reflect the reality that some positions are more valuable than others, to the extent that even a game changing force like Watt is still not as valuable to a team as top shelf QB talent. I'm not saying that has always been true or that it will always be true, but consensus seems to be that right now there's nothing more valuable than the QB position.

If you want to reinterpret 'Most Valuable Player' to mean something different, then you should change the name of the award. What was described above would probably be most accurately called 'Overall Player of the Year' or something. J.J. Watt would be a real contender for that, I think.

 

[TDorBust]

Riddle me this: If you are a NFL team name the one player in the whole league you would want to not lose from your team? Now name the second?

I would bet a good majority don't have Watt in their top 3 players and possibly not even the top 5. I understand people want to give Watt credit for a great season but that's why there is Defensive Player of the year, Defensive Lineman of the year and others.

If you were given the option of picking either the second best QB and JJ Watt or the second best defensive lineman and Rodgers, I think you get more value off the first simply due to how big of a step down from Watt the next best DE is.

We are not talking about #1 vs #2 at a position we are talking about the most valuable of all players in the whole league. Rodgers means more to the Packers than anyone else on the team even if John Kuhn is way better than the #2 FB and the #2 QB is just slightly worse than Rodgers. Also lets take this a step further why not compare #1 DE + #16 QB vs #1 QB + #16 DE? Why not look at #1 LG vs #2 LG?

 

[Tau837]

If QB is the most valuable position in football, then it makes sense that MVP would be basically a QB-only award. To change that you'd have to change the whole dynamic in the NFL. But does it really make sense to make an issue out of this? What's the problem with an award than only a QB can win anyway? Seems like wishful thinking to think that any particular position should have a shot at MVP, that just doesn't reflect the reality that some positions are more valuable than others, to the extent that even a game changing force like Watt is still not as valuable to a team as top shelf QB talent. I'm not saying that has always been true or that it will always be true, but consensus seems to be that right now there's nothing more valuable than the QB position.

If you want to reinterpret 'Most Valuable Player' to mean something different, then you should change the name of the award. What was described above would probably be most accurately called 'Overall Player of the Year' or something. J.J. Watt would be a real contender for that, I think.

But there is no need to change it. The trio of MVP, OPOY, and DPOY provides sufficient differentiation that it is possible for MVP to always, or nearly always, go to QB and other positions to be recognized via OPOY and DPOY. I don't know why so many seem to feel this is a problem.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

M-V-Q! M-V-Q!

 

[Ryan Swope's Pro Career]

Riddle me this: If you are a NFL team name the one player in the whole league you would want to not lose from your team? Now name the second?

I would bet a good majority don't have Watt in their top 3 players and possibly not even the top 5. I understand people want to give Watt credit for a great season but that's why there is Defensive Player of the year, Defensive Lineman of the year and others.

If you were given the option of picking either the second best QB and JJ Watt or the second best defensive lineman and Rodgers, I think you get more value off the first simply due to how big of a step down from Watt the next best DE is.

We are not talking about #1 vs #2 at a position we are talking about the most valuable of all players in the whole league. Rodgers means more to the Packers than anyone else on the team even if John Kuhn is way better than the #2 FB and the #2 QB is just slightly worse than Rodgers. Also lets take this a step further why not compare #1 DE + #16 QB vs #1 QB + #16 DE? Why not look at #1 LG vs #2 LG?

By that logic of individual value to the team (say, if they were suddenly removed from the team due to injury or the like), you could make a serious case that any QB in the league is MVP, even over Rodgers. Most teams' starting QB is the most valuable player, so by your logic of "if you removed them from the team who would have the most drop off" the answer could very well be Matt Ryan, seeing as the Falcons would be utter trash with a backup caliber QB.And that's besides all the other points you didn't address as well.

 

[Freelove]

Yeah, Romo's December was plenty awesome enough to earn him a spot in the discussion, but his season wasn't good enough to be a realistic contender over QB's with equally good records, equal or better statistical profiles, and no real question whether or not they are the most deserving candidate on their own team.

He was awesome, though. I think Rodgers and Watt are the only real candidates -- Rodgers being the slam dunk victor as the most deserving QB if the majority of voters vote on value, Watt being the darkhorse if enough voters rebel against that and vote based on simply how awesome the guy's season was.

So is there anything more Watt could have done, in your opinion, to deserve the MVP over Rodgers? Or do you think a QB should always win over a DE?

The absolute minimum would be that his play had a large role in raising the play of the HOU defensive unit to league elite status.

You simply aren't as valuable as many other players if you not only don't help your team make the postseason, but also don't radically lift the performance of the team on your own side of the ball.

 

[dhockster]

Yeah, Romo's December was plenty awesome enough to earn him a spot in the discussion, but his season wasn't good enough to be a realistic contender over QB's with equally good records, equal or better statistical profiles, and no real question whether or not they are the most deserving candidate on their own team.

He was awesome, though. I think Rodgers and Watt are the only real candidates -- Rodgers being the slam dunk victor as the most deserving QB if the majority of voters vote on value, Watt being the darkhorse if enough voters rebel against that and vote based on simply how awesome the guy's season was.

So is there anything more Watt could have done, in your opinion, to deserve the MVP over Rodgers? Or do you think a QB should always win over a DE?

The absolute minimum would be that his play had a large role in raising the play of the HOU defensive unit to league elite status.

You simply aren't as valuable as many other players if you not only don't help your team make the postseason, but also don't radically lift the performance of the team on your own side of the ball.

Fair enough. I just think if the surrounding talent is really deficient, there is only so much one player can do on defense. This is a team that finished 7th in points allowed and 1st in takeaways. Besides Watt, only 2 players had more than 1.5 sacks (Mercilus 5, Reed 3). They spent 1st and 3rd round picks on linebacker and nose tackle and got nothing from either player. Brian Cushing is an average player at best. Everyone in the secondary is average except for Kareem Jackson who is good. There are no other pro bowlers, let alone all-pro players on this defense. They were in their first year learning a new scheme. I just shudder to think what this defense would be if Watt were replaced by an average DE.

And if the offense is not good, that only makes the defenses job that much harder. Overall, the Texans offense was average at best with below average QB play.

 

[FlapJacks]

so by your logic of "if you removed them from the team who would have the most drop off" the answer could very well be Matt Ryan, seeing as the Falcons would be utter trash with a backup caliber QB.

so they'd win 4 games instaed of teh 6 or 7 they did win?

not really much drop-off in that

 

[NE_REVIVAL]

It likely goes just as the poll shows, Rodgers easily, Watt and Brady a distant 2nd & 3rd.

Can't see how or why you could give it to a D lineman on a 9-7 team and I also believe the Romo mvp love is over blown. I like Romo, always have, the positives far out weigh the negatives and the criticism has been a bit unfair. Having said that, he isn't a serious mvp candidate imho; he has FOUR All Pros playing around him. Give same to Rodgers, Brady, Manning, Luck and a few others and they would likely win just as much if not more and put up similar or better numbers.

 

[ghostguy123]

Not sure how Watt is even in the discussion.

If you take Watt off Houston and add one of the top tier QBs, they are pretty easily in the playoffs.

He's the best defensive player in the game, but that isn't what makes an MVP these days.

 

[Touchdown Syndrome]

Most teams' starting QB is the most valuable player, so by your logic of "if you removed them from the team who would have the most drop off" the answer could very well be Matt Ryan, seeing as the Falcons would be utter trash with a backup caliber QB.

Ftr, the answer would be Andrew Luck.

Colts are a 3 or 4 win team without him.

 

[ghostguy123]

This is a fun convo since everyone seems to have a different definition of what the MVP is.

It's hard to just say "if you took him off the team their record would be........". That just means he is the MVP of his team, not necessarily the league.

If you took Rivers of San Diego, they might win 1-2 games, but that doesnt make him the league MVP.

A guy has to obviously be playing great, leading his team, winning games, and be the best at his position (or at least top 2). Stats are part of it, wins are part of it, the team around him is part of it (although highly subjective), and what would happen to the team if that player got hurt is part of it (PART, and HIGHLY subjective).

And in the game today, I can not imagine this player being a defensive player, even a guy as great as Watt. I really cant imagine it being anything other than a QB right now. I suppose things can change, but if you try and tell me someone is more valuable to their team in in the league than Manning, Brady, Luck, or Rodgers (and I can even add a handful or more guys to this) then I will tell you that you are insane.

 

[fred_1_15301]

This is a fun convo since everyone seems to have a different definition of what the MVP is.

It's hard to just say "if you took him off the team their record would be........". That just means he is the MVP of his team, not necessarily the league.

If you took Rivers of San Diego, they might win 1-2 games, but that doesnt make him the league MVP.

A guy has to obviously be playing great, leading his team, winning games, and be the best at his position (or at least top 2). Stats are part of it, wins are part of it, the team around him is part of it (although highly subjective), and what would happen to the team if that player got hurt is part of it (PART, and HIGHLY subjective).

And in the game today, I can not imagine this player being a defensive player, even a guy as great as Watt. I really cant imagine it being anything other than a QB right now. I suppose things can change, but if you try and tell me someone is more valuable to their team in in the league than Manning, Brady, Luck, or Rodgers (and I can even add a handful or more guys to this) then I will tell you that you are insane.

Agree with this. Sure if you took Luck off of the Colts, they may be a 4 win team. Sure if you took Rodgers off of the Packers, there may not be as significant of a dropoff. Obviously all of that depends on the level of talent surrounding these 2 players and especially the experience/talent of the backup QBs on the respective teams. The real question is where would the Packers be with Luck at QB and where would the Colts be with Rodgers at QB. IMO both are great but I've seen this level of consistent, great QB play from Rodgers longer. At the end of the day, the statistics have to point to Rodgers because we don't have the luxury of knowing how Luck would perform in GB or vice versa.

 

[Jeremy]

Yeah, Luck has a few too many turnovers. And the award shouldn't come down to who has the better backup QB.