MVP debate: Who's most deserving? A.Rodgers - JJ Watt - T.Brady - P.Manning - D.Murray?

[pbmax]

They don't have a JJ Watt caliber player IMO...although I think your point is valid that they have enough talent to compare as a whole.

However, you missed the part about having an average QB/offense. The Rams do not have that whatsoever. That is why they are 6-10.

Yes, but both my point and your counterpoint show the shortcoming of CC's quasi metric about Watt. It is entirely dependent on the other side of the ball performing a certain way. Comparatively, the Packers were 5-3 at the bye week while the D was playing like death, and that included a game where he was limited by injury.

[Pugger]

The 2014 Rams would like a word with you. They have four first round picks on the D line and dominate the LOS. But they are 6-10.

Without a QB you just don't win. AZ got most of their wins with Palmer (7-0) and Stanton but once these 2 guys were lost they were basically screwed. I suspect had Palmer not got hurt AZ might be the NFCW champas and the #1 seed instead of Seattle. Because this is a QB driven league the best QB in the playoffs will win the MVP. I have stated this before but in 2009 Brees had better stats than Manning but the Saints didn't win their division so PM won it much to the consternation of NO fans.

[vince]

Because this is a QB driven league the best QB in the playoffs will win the MVP. I have stated this before but in 2009 Brees had better stats than Manning but the Saints didn't win their division so PM won it much to the consternation of NO fans.

50 members of the media will vote on the 2014 Associated Press NFL Most Valuable Player (MVP) award before the playoffs start on January 3.

.

Edit - Oops. I think I misinterpreted what you were saying there Pugger. Sorry about that.

[Pugger]

I'll disagree with this. You put 2 JJ Watts on the same DL with the stats he has (not including his offensive work) and you have an elite defense and that alone would get you 12 wins with an average QB and offense with the pressure and run stopping ability he has. You put 3 on the DL, forget about opponents having any offense.

But you still need a QB. Just ask AZ. They had a great D that got worn down because their offense was so anemic.

[mraynrand]

Rodgers is the MVP because he's the best QB, with the most influence on the outcome of the team, playing on the best team, that has a huge national following. Brady could follow, Romo - no because of the split between he and the RB, and Watt - no because he's on a sucky team and gets no exposure. You will never generate national $$$ to watch Watt play. Good luck with that. he's way down on the $$$ list.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Rand, by your logic wouldn't it follow that Lombardi should have been the MVP?

[mraynrand]

Rand, by your logic wouldn't it follow that Lombardi should have been the MVP?

sure, except that he's not a Player. So you have to pick the next best thing - the on field general.

[Maxie the Taxi]

sure, except that he's not a Player. So you have to pick the next best thing - the on field general.

I was thinking we had redefined MVP to mean Most Valuable Person. Sorry.

[mraynrand]

I was gonna mention Horning too, but all that is from secondary sources for me, since I was still an ovum at that time. But it fits - the Golden Boy - more glitz than gains; perception, glam, popularity over production. Valuable - to the league.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I was gonna mention Horning too, but all that is from secondary sources for me, since I was still an ovum at that time. But it fits - the Golden Boy - more glitz than gains; perception, glam, popularity over production. Valuable - to the league.

Until he was caught gambling.

I, of course, saw all the Glory Years Packer games (except for the ones blacked out...then it was listening to Ted Moore on the radio).

Thinking back, I have to say that Hornung was a key member of that team. THE key member? I dunno. Who knows? All I know is that he ran with the ball, he caught passes, he threw passes, did the placekicking and had an incredible nose for the end zone. And no matter what anyone says, he WAS clutch.

On the other hand, I'd be hard-pressed to name one player on those championship teams that WAS an MVP. Starr? Jim Taylor? Hornung? Nitschke? Adderley? Willie Wood? Dave Robinson? Losing any one of those guys for an extended period of time would have set the team back. If I was forced to put my finger on one guy, I'd probably choose Nitschke. He was the heart and soul of that team and offenses just had no answer for him. In fact, the Packers had no answer for him.

When Starr was hurt, there was Zeke Bratkowski. When Hornung went out, there were Elijah Pitts and Tom Moore. But if Nitschke went out, there was just no replacement for him. I don't think young guys understand just how good he was. Best LB in the history of the game, and that includes Lawrence Taylor.

[mraynrand]

Until he was caught gambling.

I'm not even sure that's a crime anymore. There's been a lot of changes in the law.

[denverYooper]

Well, Rodgers blew away the QB field in All Pro voting.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300...4-allpro-teams

Quarterback
Aaron Rodgers, Green Bay, 44; Tony Romo, Dallas, 3; Tom Brady, New England, 2; Andrew Luck, Indianapolis, 1.

Kuhn was also voted to the AP All-Pro Team.

Murray and Dez Bryant from the Cowboys made the team... Jordy was 3rd in the voting.

Sitton was a close 3rd at guard, behind Yanda and Frederick.

[woodbuck27]

Looking at Football Outsiders analysis of the season for DE's It's very clear that JJ Watt dominates at his position:

http://www.advancedfootballanalytics...sition-leaders

[vince]

Watt was far more "valuable" this year when he played against the worst/most inexperienced QB's and OL's in the league. 10 of his 20.5 sacks and 3 of his 4 forced fumbles against Ten and Jax.

He's the most disruptive defensive player in the league - but he's not the MVP.

Romo's closer to Rodgers this year but he's not really close either. Romo's been slightly more efficient than Rodgers but only once did he eclipse 300 yards passing this year - against Watt's Texans interestingly enough. Rodgers went over 300 7 times. His stats would have been even better had he not blown teams right off the field before halftime so often.

Romo - 34 TD's against 9 INT's
Rodgers - 38 TDs and 5 INTs

Add the signature wins on top of the blowouts and historical stretch in Nov. and there's no one in the ballpark.

[Pugger]

Watt was far more "valuable" this year when he played against the worst/most inexperienced QB's and OL's in the league. 10 of his 20.5 sacks and 3 of his 4 forced fumbles against Ten and Jax.

He's the most disruptive defensive player in the league - but he's not the MVP.

Romo's closer to Rodgers this year but he's not really close either. Romo's been slightly more efficient than Rodgers but only once did he eclipse 300 yards passing this year - against Watt's Texans interestingly enough. Rodgers went over 300 7 times. His stats would have been even better had he not blown teams right off the field before halftime so often.

Romo - 34 TD's against 9 INT's
Rodgers - 38 TDs and 5 INTs

Add the signature wins on top of the blowouts and historical stretch in Nov. and there's no one in the ballpark.

Can you imagine what Aaron's numbers would have been had he played every snap of every game this year?

[vince]

Aikman just said something about Romo that perfectly encapsulates the Romo-Rodgers comparison. He said Romo's going to do "what he's done all year," rely on his running game for success. Conversely, the Packers running game relies on Rodgers to shift defenses to their advantage for success.

[mraynrand]

Aikman just said something about Romo that perfectly encapsulates the Romo-Rodgers comparison. He said Romo's going to do "what he's done all year," rely on his running game for success. Conversely, the Packers running game relies on Rodgers to shift defenses to their advantage for success.

true. Still, I think people don't realize how poor the Cowboy receiving corpse (intentional) really is. Dallas relies on the running game because, with the exception of Bryant (sometimes, when he isn't melting down), their receivers struggle to get open unless there is the threat of the run. And Romo can't throw receivers open the way Rodgers can.

[ThunderDan]

true. Still, I think people don't realize how poor the Cowboy receiving corpse (intentional) really is. Dallas relies on the running game because, with the exception of Bryant (sometimes, when he isn't melting down), their receivers struggle to get open unless there is the threat of the run. And Romo can't throw receivers open the way Rodgers can.

But look at Rogers and the Pack. Just a few years ago without a serious running threat we had Jennings, Jordy, Cobb, Jones and Finley. Now with Lacy we can get away with Jordy and Cobb. ARod can do things that Romo can't but a running game can open up the pass.

[mraynrand]

But look at Rogers and the Pack. Just a few years ago without a serious running threat we had Jennings, Jordy, Cobb, Jones and Finley. Now with Lacy we can get away with Jordy and Cobb. ARod can do things that Romo can't but a running game can open up the pass.

Sure, the ability to run is a great thing, esp. if you get cold and high winds (see Packers, 2007). But I'd still take the Packers receivers over the Cowboys every time. Just compare R.Rodgers and Witten against Detroit and you can see that one ascending and the other descending have met in the middle. Jordy>>Bryant, Adams>(slightly) Williams (I'd concede Williams slightly better if you pushed me), and Cobb>>Beasley Reece.

Packers d-backs are far superior relative to the Dallas WRs than Dallas DBs to Packer WRs. Without the PKD™, Dallas will struggle to get pressure on Rodgers and he should gut them, assuming the wind isn't ridiculous and his calf holds up.

[ThunderDan]

Sure, the ability to run is a great thing, esp. if you get cold and high winds (see Packers, 2007). But I'd still take the Packers receivers over the Cowboys every time. Just compare R.Rodgers and Witten against Detroit and you can see that one ascending and the other descending have met in the middle. Jordy>>Bryant, Adams>(slightly) Williams (I'd concede Williams slightly better if you pushed me), and Cobb>>Beasley Reece.

Packers d-backs are far superior relative to the Dallas WRs than Dallas DBs to Packer WRs. Without the PKD™, Dallas will struggle to get pressure on Rodgers and he should gut them, assuming the wind isn't ridiculous and his calf holds up.

I would take the Packer WRs also. But if you have a solid running game and a WR like Bryant you can make the O work. When you have a solid running game with Jordy, Cobb and a developing Adams along with ARod you can flourish on O.