SproutDaddy
Footballguy
What in the hell do hypotheticals have to do with the voting? This thread is ridiculous.
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? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Ghost Rider
- Start date
ghostguy123
Footballguy
What is the point in voters if nothing else is looked at besides stats? Just have some computer program pick then.
I agree that hypotheticals should mostly be thrown out, but you can't just look at stats to know who the actual MVP is. Unfortunately, that is what happens for voting.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
If Brady and Ryan play like they did yesterday, a team could score 40 points and still lose.
Ryan: 27 for 38 (71%) for 392 yards, 4 TD, 0 INT, 139.4 passer rating
Brady 32 fof 42 (76%) for 384 yards, 3 TD, 0 INT, 127.5 passer rating
skinsrule05
Footballguy
Plus Ryan had a rushing TD and was leading the team in rushing yards until late in the 3rd quarter. I haven't gotten to see him play enough. He was ridiculous yesterday.
It should be a great SB.
thatguy
Footballguy
5. Year 2 in Shanahan's system. Ryan struggled mightily with Shanny's offense in year 1. This year things clicked and what followed was an historical season.
I'm by no means trying to minimize what Ryan did, but I think his increased comfort level with the system was the primary difference. The acquisition of Mack was a close second.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Hmmm. Shanahan's rankings as an OC with regard to points scored: 17, 10, 25, 26, 4, 23, 27, 21, 1. Maybe you are right, but very little in the past suggested that a Shanahan offense would have a Top 8 all-time scoring season.
I would add . . .
6) A cupcake schedule. Just like NE defensively, ATL offensively had 9 regular season games against Bottom 12 defenses in both PA and passing yardage allowed (with the majority of those in the Bottom 5). You play who you play, but since is the thread where we get to play musical chairs, I think Rodgers and Brady with the Falcon's schedule would have scored close to as many points (probably a little less since they play their home games on grass, outdoors, in less than perfect playing conditions). This should not be taken as a knock on the dirty birds, it's just a piece to help explain how they scored so many points.
Run It Up
Footballguy
Anarchy99
Footballguy
TB12 earned the highest grade ever from PFF since they started 10 years ago. And his score actually WENT UP from 99.3 out of 100 to 99.5 out of 100 if this year's playoff stats are included.
Run It Up
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Another interesting (to me at least) tidbit was Brady led the league in completion percentage for throws 11+ yards downfield. That percentage had been declining the past few years and contributed to Brady being labelled a dink and dunk specialist. This will at some point start a campaign to question how someone almost 40 years old is performing better than he was in his prime. Even I admit I wonder how this is possible . . . but I'm good not knowing.
ZWK
Footballguy
ATL did not have a cupcake schedule. By DVOA, they faced the 2nd toughest set of defenses. Looking at the teams that they faced, I'd count New Orleans (twice), San Francisco, and maybe Oakland as cupcake defenses / passing defenses. New England faced a similar number of weak defenses (SF, CLE, NYJx2).Anarchy99 said:
Passing yards allowed can be a misleading stat. For example, Carolina allowed the 4th most net passing yards (and ATL got them twice), but 1) they also faced the 5th most passing attempts and 2) if you leave out their ATL games, then they only allowed the 9th most net passing yards per game. CAR gave up 40.5 ppg against ATL and 22.9 ppg against not-ATL. The CAR D was 10th best in DVOA, 11th best in passing DVOA, 12th best in fewest yards per drive, and 16th best in points per drive, 16th best in DSRS, and 17th best in ANY/att. Definitely not a cupcake D.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
IMO, a lot of the advanced metric stats based per play or efficiency stats can sometimes be misleading. There's normally a reason why a team faces a lot more passing attempts (perhaps they are good against the run, perhaps there are match ups teams want to exploit, perhaps their offense scores a lot so they see a lot of passing attempts, etc.) If the primary objective is to score the most points and the secondary objective is rack up yards, being more efficient doesn't always equate to more points or more yards.
Let's use Brady and the Patriots as an example. There have been games by design when NE was going to run a pass heavy, no huddle offense to keep their opponents guessing and wear down the defense. Two years ago, Brady had 53 attempts against Denver and 333 passing yards (completing a somewhat meh 62% of his passes). That's only 6.3 Y/PA, but he had 4 TD passes (and an INT). Overall, he had (for this era) a so so passer rating of 97.4 that game. They didn't do well rushing, accumulating 66 on 25 rushing attempts (2.64 ypc). The efficiency experts would deplore that game, as a 2.64 ypc rushing attack and a 6.3 Y/PA are admittedly not very good. NE had to settle for 3 FG's as well. But the scoreboard showed that NE won 43-21. I'll take 43 points and 400 yards of offense any day of the week, no matter what the advanced metrics had to say.
By comparison, the last time PIT beat NE (2011), Brady had an efficient 24 for 35 passing line for 198 yards and 2 TD (no picks) and a 101.8 passer rating. The Pats had no turnovers on the day and barely had any penalties. They even won the turnover battle (1-0). That sounds like a recipe for a win, right? Not so fast. The Pats could only muster 12 rushing attempts for 43 yards, meaning they only had 47 offensive plays for the game. The Steelers, though mounted 98 rushing yards and 365 passing yards on their 73 offensive plays.
So while I agree there is value in looking at things on a per play, results per play basis, that still could not tell the entire story. Sure, 240 passing yards on 30 attempts is more efficient (8.0 Y/PA) than 350 yards on 50 attempts (7.0 Y/PA), that's still a difference of 110 yards. Put another way, if the team with 240 passing yards wanted to equalize the total yardage, they would need to grind out 110 rushing yards on 20 rushing attempts (5.5 ypc), which most of the time is not going to happen.
All that really matters is what can fit in a 60 minute window. If a team, per play wise, ranked fairly well but gave up 400 yards passing every week, guess what, they still game up 400 yards passing every week. So CAR might look like they were good on a per play basis, they weren't that great on a per game basis.
ZWK
Footballguy
Some of the stats that I gave on Carolina were per play, some were per possession, and some were per game. They were middle-of-the-pack or slightly above average for most ways of slicing it. PFF agrees, ranking their D 15th. Carolina was not giving up 400 passing yards every week - it only happened twice (once to ATL and once to NO). They gave up 30+ points of offense only 4 times (twice to ATL, once to NO, once to SEA). If you only watched their Atlanta games then you might think that they had a garbage defense, but that's not how they played against the Chargers, Redskins, Chiefs, etc.
When you're using stats to look at how tough a player's schedule was, I think you should generally use the same stat to judge his opponents as you use to judge the player. So if you're crediting Matt Ryan for leading his team to lots of points per game, you should look at how many points per game his opponents allowed to see how much his PPG might have benefited from a weak schedule or been hindered by a tough schedule. I haven't looked at breakdowns for every stat, but my guess is that for the stats that I posted here and here which Matt Ryan excelled at, his strength of schedule ranged from middle-of-the-pack to very tough.
When you're using stats to look at how tough a player's schedule was, I think you should generally use the same stat to judge his opponents as you use to judge the player. So if you're crediting Matt Ryan for leading his team to lots of points per game, you should look at how many points per game his opponents allowed to see how much his PPG might have benefited from a weak schedule or been hindered by a tough schedule. I haven't looked at breakdowns for every stat, but my guess is that for the stats that I posted here and here which Matt Ryan excelled at, his strength of schedule ranged from middle-of-the-pack to very tough.
bostonfred
Footballguy
What elliott did as a player was more deserving of mvp than prescott, but what prescott was able to do as a rookie was more impressive than elliott doing what he did as a rookie.
Hack Attack
Footballguy
RB, WR, RB previous three years but rename because you disagree that a QB won this year?
FUBAR
Footballguy
QB: 8 times in 50 years (granted, 7 since 2000)
RB: 33 times in 50 years (also 7 times since 2000)
At least Matty Ice will walk away with some hardware this year.
Brady will get the SB mvp - a much more meaningful trophy to win.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
Rodgers with 2 votes? 
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
The actual ballot was never in question. We all knew Ryan would win. That was never the debate, but your continued emphasis on he false debate says a lot.
KarmaPolice
Footballguy
It is interesting that the QB people were claiming was playing the best a QB has ever played the position got 4 less votes than D.Carr though.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
Has the mvp ever played the runner up in the superbowl? Iirc the mvp has only gotten to the superbowl 8 times counting this year so im guessing no.
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Since you asked . . .bostonfred said:
Since the merger in 1970, the AP league MVP made the SB 25 times. Eleven times their were no players on the other team that received any MVP votes.
This is the 7th time that the MVP winner and the runner up both played in the SB (although sometimes on the same team).
2016 Matt Ryan and Tom Brady
2009 Peyton Manning and Drew Brees
2001 Kurt Warner and Marshall Faulk
1999 Kurt Warner and Marshall Faulk
1991 Thurman Thomas and Jim Kelly
1981 Ken Anderson and Joe Montana
1972 Larry Brown and Earl Morrall
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
They got it right this year. Could you imagine if they would have given it to Brady after missing 25 percent of the season and then this..
No more Tom Brady as GOAT any more. He is a great QB but the greatest of anything doesn't lose the championship 3 times.
No more Tom Brady as GOAT any more. He is a great QB but the greatest of anything doesn't lose the championship 3 times.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So 4-0 is better than 4-3???? Idiots.
Err 5-2
Err 5-2
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Losing earlier in the playoffs is better?
Brady > Montana. It's not close any more.
Matt Ryan is a fraud.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Only smart people think losing earlier in the playoffs is better........................ 
ghostguy123
Footballguy
The MVP for the Patriots this game was Dan Quinn. Wow talk about looking like you WANTED to lose the game.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Slow down now. Even though I don't think Ryan shoulda won the MVP, there is absolutely no way I can pin this loss on him. Zero percent.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Montana had a career cut short by injuries.....that QBs today don't face because they are so protected from hits.Only smart people think losing earlier in the playoffs is better........................
Brady is still the GOAT now though.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Well, no. But he deserves some blame. He took two huge sacks, one of which led to a turnover. Even if his coach is a freaking moron, Ryan should have known better and protected the ball.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Yep.
The turnover was awful. He was't even blindsided; the guy came from his front side, yet Ryan had no idea he was coming.
The sack was 100 times worse. A QB who has been in the league that long has to know you cannot take that sack there, regardless of what the play call was.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So he made one mistake all game? FRAUD!!!!!
For one, they should not have attempted a pass the rest of the game at that point. And two, Brady made a ton of mistakes all game.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Between all the dumb and all the beer this thread is about to go off the rails. Gnight all.
HELL of a game. Sucks I bet the under though. Rough way to lose.
HELL of a game. Sucks I bet the under though. Rough way to lose.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
If they had played an equal number of healthy seasons, it would be worth discussing. Different eras. Brady is a great player. Congrats.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Last post.............................
You are arguing something that is absolutely NOT what I am arguing for or against. Just thought you would like to know that.
bed...................
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I think his point was that Montana didn't lose earlier, he just played shorter, especially in terms of the time he was healthy.
Brady hadn't played in 7 Super Bowls by the time he was 34. But by the time Montana was 34 he was an injured shell of himself because he'd spent a career with guys legally allowed to blast him in the knees/head at will.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Yeah but Brady can do that because he for some reason has the grace of the football gods to always give him a few extra chances after he screws up via some of the most boneheaded plays imaginable by the other team in crunch time.
