Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Who's the 2016 NFL MVP right now? (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Ghost Rider
- Start date
ShamrockPride
Footballguy
Saracasm? What exactly am I supposed to be looking at against Denver? There's not much to see.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
LOL, seriously? They beat Denver thanks to their defense and the running game.
Also, fun fact: Brady hasn't thrown a TD pass in 6 of NE's 14 games this year. Assuming he throws one in each of the last two games, has a QB ever won the MVP when throwing a TD pass in only 10 of his team's 16 games?
skinsrule05
Footballguy
Against Denver Brady had 188 yards and no TDs. And you think he is why they won?
i guess you think Manning should have been the Super Bowl MVP last year too?
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
LOL It's like you didn't even watch the games and just saw that they won so it must have been because of Brady. Obviously the MVP.
massraider
Footballguy
I like Ryan and Stafford over Brady.
Pats went what, 3-1, without him? Pats have proven they can win with a game manager and Blount pounding the ball. Falcons and Lions have not shown that at all.
What would Falcons/Lions record be in 4 games without their QB?
By the way, media types were talking up Brady as MVP after 4 games back, so you know they just wanted to insert him into the discussion. Manufactured MVP candidacy for TB.
Pats went what, 3-1, without him? Pats have proven they can win with a game manager and Blount pounding the ball. Falcons and Lions have not shown that at all.
What would Falcons/Lions record be in 4 games without their QB?
By the way, media types were talking up Brady as MVP after 4 games back, so you know they just wanted to insert him into the discussion. Manufactured MVP candidacy for TB.
Ha...all you jamoke Brady haters. You are fools. He went into Denver and got the win.
Fun fact, genius...he was suspended for 4 of those games. Don't let fun facts get in your way though.
Was at them...didn't flip through NFL GameDay Live like most, pal. He crushed BAL and went in to DEN and got the win despite a history of having trouble at Mile High. You can focus on FF stats and get excited about Brees and other worthless QBs when it comes to playoffs...but try to focus on real football, man. Step away from your computer and NFL.com stats.
I think you need to look at that result, given his history at that venue, and stop yanking it to FF stats. He's been dominant this year. Manning sucked last year. Are you really trying to sell the whole "NE's defense is the reason Brady is winning" BS? I really thought you had more to bring to the table, man. Guess not.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
No ####, Sherlock, and that is another reason why he shouldn't win. Has an MVP ever played in only 75% of his team's games in the NFL?
That's not what he said. He said that the Patriots won last week because of their defense, which is true. It helps to read, sir.
It not only helps to read, it helps to know your facts.
"Brady hasn't thrown a TD pass in 6 of NE's games this year."
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
That is a fact that is undisputed. Brady didn't throw a TD in their first four games because he was suspended, and then didn't throw one against Seattle or Denver. Dispute those facts.
You make no sense, man.
Roll out the ridiculous comment about him not throwing TDs in 6 of 14 games then try to carefully justify your "position" - I didn't throw a TD in NE's first 4 games either...neither did you. Brilliant assessment.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
From the discussions I have seen, some media types have argued that Brady will get votes BECAUSE of Deflategate while others have said voters could say missing four games would make him hard to vote for.
Weebs210
Footballguy
ShamrockPride
Footballguy
So you're trying to boost his poor results vs Denver this year because of his even poorer previous results vs Denver?
This is your argument? This is the best you can do?
Neil Beaufort Zod
Footballguy
Brady's not the MVP this year. Considering his suspension, I'm not sure most writers would hand it to him unless he was the clear and away, obvious, no-brainer pick. He isn't.
Brees has a great chance to get 5,000 yards AGAIN. Not the MVP, but that's really an amazing feat. Really impressed with him as the years pass.
To me, the MVP is Elliott. He has more than 1,500 rushing yards, leads the next-best rusher by 300 yards, has 14 scores and has lost just one fumble. And that's in 15 games.
Sure, he's a rookie so we want to slot him for ROY. OK. Give him both.
As far as teams wanting Brady or Elliott...one will be 22 when they take the field next year. The other will be 40. I know QBs are defying expectations in the modern era, but how much more could he possibly have left? Two effective years? He'll be 40. I just can't get around that number.
Brees has a great chance to get 5,000 yards AGAIN. Not the MVP, but that's really an amazing feat. Really impressed with him as the years pass.
To me, the MVP is Elliott. He has more than 1,500 rushing yards, leads the next-best rusher by 300 yards, has 14 scores and has lost just one fumble. And that's in 15 games.
Sure, he's a rookie so we want to slot him for ROY. OK. Give him both.
As far as teams wanting Brady or Elliott...one will be 22 when they take the field next year. The other will be 40. I know QBs are defying expectations in the modern era, but how much more could he possibly have left? Two effective years? He'll be 40. I just can't get around that number.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
See, to me, unless they have a historically great season, it's hard for me to give it to a RB, considering QBs, by and large, are so much more valuable. Elliot is having a great rookie season, but not a historically great season.
massraider
Footballguy
He has been the most valuable player on the #1 NFC seed. Any Dak talk is some stupid HOT TAKE bullcrap not worth talking about.
Whichever QB wins it isn't going to have a historic season, it'll be one of the QBs for one of the playoff teams.
Elliott is also close to the rookie record for rushing yards, a record he won't break because he has already helped his team to a #1 seed with two games left.
While I get that a RB would have to be special in order to beat out a QB, I think Elliott's season qualifies.
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
Good for you. You may have a cookie now. I don't care who was at the game watching. I've been to a lot of football games in my life and nothing will give you more insight to how the game is being played out compared to watching it on TV. When I watch a game on TV I can rewind any play I want and analyze anything I want. I can literally seen every single play multiple times any time I want. When you're at the game and you get distracted you missed out. You don't get to hear any analysis. This is one of the reasons that I record the games I actually go to so I can rewatch them and see the things that I missed or had questions about.
This is not a popularity contest or something that's based on who's had the best career. This is based on this season alone and that's it. Brady is not the best player in the NFL this year and he hasn't even played a full season.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Ryan may deserve the MVP, but if ATL finishes 10-6 he most likely won't be MVP. And if somehow ATL misses the playoffs (unlikely but still possible), he would be out of the running.
The oddest thing about the way the NFL MVP works, is it's more of a team based award than an individual award. They almost always vote a winner from the best or second best team. So you need a good team around you to be MVP, which is essentially the opposite of valuable.
FUBAR
Footballguy
guess we won't be winning the MVP this year.
As facts go, while you can call it meaningless, it makes the point. The Patriots arguably aren't winning their division only, or perhaps even mostly, because of Brady. Although after Jimmy G got injured, perhaps they wouldn't without him
Boomer said it well on ESPN radio yesterday - Stafford has played very well, but it's hard to see him winning MVP when he can't make the pro bowl. Also, Aaron Rodgers is his MVP. I can't say I fully agree, but he makes a strong point - Rodgers is the reason Green Bay is still in contention, doing it with far less support than the other QBs.
FUBAR
Footballguy
How many teams, currently in contention, have no running back with over 400 yards running? Or that rb was a receiver? Of the potential playoff teams, only Atlanta has given up more points.
massraider
Footballguy
I could make a very strong argument that Brady has a much worse supporting cast than Rodgers.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Including the best defense in the league?
Also at least arguably the best coach.
I'm not completely on board with Rodgers but he's certainly part of the discussion if the pack get in the playoffs.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
massraider
Footballguy
Not defense or coach, but his 2016 weapons were Blount, a gimpy Bennett, Edelman, Mitchell, James White.
Meh. No Gronk, no Lewis for the most part.
Rodgers had no running game to help him, no doubt. But he has plenty of weapons.
Meh. No Gronk, no Lewis for the most part.
Rodgers had no running game to help him, no doubt. But he has plenty of weapons.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Well if you're going to remove 2 of the most important parts of the team...
I'll take heat for this, but since Gronk has been out, Tom really hasnt played like the mvp. He's been good, really good against the Ravens, but the other games against the broncos, jets, rams and 49ers? Good, but not MVP caliber.
massraider
Footballguy
I don't get the Brady argument at all, feels like a forced MVP candidacy. If someone wants to give him a vote because of freaking DeflateGate, their vote needs to be taken away.
Another vote for Carr. Their defense as a whole is in the bottom half of the league, worse than Green Bay's statistically. They've got a good running game but without Carr they would be going nowhere.
massraider
Footballguy
Eh, neither would Atlanta, and Ryan has better numbers.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I'm not necessarily pushing for Brady here, but . . .Well if you're going to remove 2 of the most important parts of the team...
I'll take heat for this, but since Gronk has been out, Tom really hasnt played like the mvp. He's been good, really good against the Ravens, but the other games against the broncos, jets, rams and 49ers? Good, but not MVP caliber.
SFO 280-4-0
NYJ 286-2-0
LAR 269-1-0
DEN 188-0-0
(All wins)
Just curious which line people think is more MVP caliber . . . 286-2-0 in a win (like Brady above) or 351-3-0 in a 10-point loss (like Rodgers) . . . or 423-4-0 in a loss (Brees).
The question being, is playing decent and winning worth more than playing great and losing?
Is Brady's performance in a win at Denver better than Carr's poor outing in a loss at KC (I saw yes)?
Rodgers has played mostly well and has pretty much been consistent. But GB has had losses by 14, 22, and 15 points.
Is that better overall than Brady, who lost one game coming up a yard short against SEA?
Voters (rightly or wrongly) have voted for players from teams that win a lot (as I posted early, in the past 25 years the QB's that won came from teams with an average .819 winning percentage). It appears voters care more about winning than whether someone overcame the lack of a running game or a poor defense.
Indeed, NE has the #1 defense in points allowed and top 10 in yards allowed.Well if you're going to remove 2 of the most important parts of the team...
Even if I don't agree with the metric the voters often use, Ryan doesn't have the better numbers in one of the most important areas for MVP consideration, wins.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
If Brady ends up 11-1 and Ryan ends up 11-5, who had a better season with Brady missing 4 games from a wins and losses perspective?
IMO, it's still too soon to tell, as the season isn't over yet. Some guys can improve their stock. Some candidates could fall off. Some teams could make or miss the playoffs. Kinda like golf. The leader could go bogie - bogie with two holes left and someone else could go birdie - birdie and win.
Hawkeye21
Footballguy
The fact that the Pats can go 3-1 without Brady playing and then also beat some good teams when Brady didn't have a very good game statistically is what makes Brady a non-contender for MVP this year. To me it just proves that the Pats have a pretty good team overall and are not solely relying on Brady to carry the team.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I don't disagree with your conclusion, but historically that's not how voters tend to vote.
Steve Young took over for Joe Montana and won MVP with essentially the same team two years later and both teams went 14-2. Does that mean Young shouldn't have won because the talent on the team was the best in the league?
How about Prescott this year? Dallas could go from 4-12 to 14-2. Yet he barely gets a mention for MVP. Elliott is getting all the MVP talk. As I mentioned earlier, DeMarco Murray had essentially the same season Elliott is having now and Dallas went 12-4 two years ago, yet people weren't fawning over Murray for MVP. Does Zeke get extra consideration because he's a rookie?
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Either Brady or Elliot would be unprecedented.
No rookie has won the MVP. Now that's a little controversial because the AP award (the one the NFL considers official) lists him as the first winner in 1957. The PFWA disputes that because from 1958-62 it was called PotY. The PFWA award - continuously awarded since 1975 - went to Earl Campbell in his rookie year. So I'm not saying a roookie can't win it, they're eligible, but it would be extraordinary.
The most games missed by an MVP is three (Montana, 1989.) So again, there's no rule against a guy playing 75% of the season, but it would go against 50+ seasons of historical precedent.
No rookie has won the MVP. Now that's a little controversial because the AP award (the one the NFL considers official) lists him as the first winner in 1957. The PFWA disputes that because from 1958-62 it was called PotY. The PFWA award - continuously awarded since 1975 - went to Earl Campbell in his rookie year. So I'm not saying a roookie can't win it, they're eligible, but it would be extraordinary.
The most games missed by an MVP is three (Montana, 1989.) So again, there's no rule against a guy playing 75% of the season, but it would go against 50+ seasons of historical precedent.
massraider
Footballguy
That's because Dak isn't having an amazing year. Elliott is.
Sure it is. Steve Young taking over for Joe Montana isn't remotely a valid comparison.
You often here talk about how it's the player most valuable to their team, not just the best player on the best team. We have little proof of what the Falcons and Raiders would do without their starters, but we DO have evidence of how the Pats would be without Brady--still pretty good.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Not sure if you listed what I have been saying properly. I have been saying that MVP is typically best player on the best team, not necessarily the most valuable player to a team.
As well as Zeke has been playing, there are plenty of reasons why he might not win. He really isn't really having an all time best season overall. He may be doing very well for a rookie, but that's why they have rookie awards. Even this year, a case could be made the Johnson and Bell are having just as good or better seasons than Elliott and without the benefit of the wall that is the Cowboys O-Line. And as mentioned a couple of times now, Murray had a very similar season for a comparable Cowboys team two seasons ago.
Using your example of the-Pats-did-just-as-well-without-Brady, one could argue that the-Cowboys-did-just-as-well-without-Elliott two years ago (which is pretty much a true statement). Murray had 2261 yfs and 13 TD on a 12-4 team. Elliott so far has 1902 yfs and 14 TD (he would need 360 yards to pass Murray in yfs). The 6 RB's that were MVP over the last 20 something years averaged 2,228 yfs and 22.5 TD's.
I won't lose any sleep no matter who ends up as MVP. Elliot would be deserving if he won, but there are 2 other backs putting up similar numbers this year. In other years, there typically was a RB head and shoulders above everyone else. I don't happen to think that Brady is the MVP this year, but apparently there are plenty of people who do. If Carr finishes strong and the Raiders get a bye, I would probably pick him. But his last two weeks were probably his weakest performances of the year. Like I said, I'd rather see how things end up and then figure it out.
FUBAR
Footballguy
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Dallas had lots of guys banged up last year. Romo, Bryant, Dunbar, plus guys on defense, plus multiple suspensions, etc. Having people healthy and available like they were in 2014 had more of an impact than just adding Elliott. If people want to say that Elliott is the best player on one of the best teams, that's fine, but even that would be going somewhat off the script based on prior MVP voting.
massraider
Footballguy
They had all of that this year as well, no Romo, suspensions, etc. You are making the argument for Elliott. Game manager QB last year, and no Elliott? bad team. Game manager QB this year, and Elliott: Best team in NFC.
No one is having an all time best season overall, why is the rookie running back being held to a higher standard than Tom freaking Brady?
You want to make a case for David Johnson, sounds good to me. Alas, you already made it clear that MVP is best guy on best team, and Cards suck, so DJ is DQ'd.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Rodgers
Sabertooth
Footballguy
wikkidpissah
Footballguy
Haven't seen a qb who looks like he's playing the same position as Brady. not close -
