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

[Maxie the Taxi]

Or is the CHEAPEST QB that produces highly most valuable...because his salary allows the team to procure talent elsewhere.

I guess Russell Wilson wins that debate.

Or is the most expensive QB who produces most highly the most valuable...because you don't need the highest quality talent on the rest of your team? It still comes down to the question of how do you determine different levels of production?

[Patler]

Yet the offense WAS JUST AS GOOD...and WITH FAR LESS OVERALL TALENT. Again...goes back to why Favre earned the MVP.

Defense had an aging Reggie White and Leroy Butler who were elite. Beyond that just a bunch of good players who were well-coached and bought into the program, much like on the offensive side.

[pbmax]

The Packers 1996 defense was #1 in lowest total yards against and more importantly #1 in lowest points against. They had the lowest opponent QB rating, yielded the least yards passing and 4th least rushing. They were #2 in interceptions and returned 3 for touchdowns. Special Teams scored 4 touchdowns and yielded none. The '96 Packers defense and epcial teams were darned good.

All true. And everyone remembers the lack of targets during the injury epidemic and how it affected the offense. They didn't sign Rison because they were confident with the situation. But I was stunned to see they still led the League in Points Scored. Even with 7 TDs from other sources, that is an impressive Offensive performance. And we can't subtract other sources of scoring without looking at all teams like that.

But as I said, that season's team was led by the D. Pro Football Reference calculates a down and dirty average value (AV) for all players based on available stats for the season, and that was the year White was the best player for the Packers, not Favre. It was Brett in the other two MVP seasons.

[Patler]

I guess this is what I can't figure out...I don't understand how you can win because of and in spite of at the same time.

To me, it is either one or the other.

The 1967 Packers did not win in spite of Starr. It doesn't matter how many INTs he threw. They won BECAUSE of him.

The same is true of the Favre MVP years.

Football is more than sheer numbers. That is precisely what the MVP award is all about. Trying to measure it with numbers alone is dumb. It is about what you see on the field. The leadership. Making plays when it matters. The total package.

That is why I don't buy the JJ Watt argument. He's got the "stats"...but he's missing on the total package thing.

Well, if you don't get my play on phraseology, we have both wasted a lot of time the last two days arguing with each other. No point continuing.

[Patler]

Pro Football Reference calculates a down and dirty average value (AV) for all players based on available stats for the season, and that was the year White was the best player for the Packers, not Favre. It was Brett in the other two MVP seasons.

There's our answer! Let's let them pick the MVP! If they can distinguish between Favre and White in 1996, they can certainly decide between Rodgers, Romo, Brady, Watt, etc. this year.

[Maxie the Taxi]

There's our answer! Let's let them pick the MVP! If they can distinguish between Favre and White in 1996, they can certainly decide between Rodgers, Romo, Brady, Watt, etc. this year.

Computers are magnificent creatures!!!

[mraynrand]

You guys are really getting all balled up.

MVP = Most VALUABLE player. To the league. So think in terms of $$$. Which guy draws people in to watch and generate coin. Favre was that guy, whether he threw crushing, game and season-ending INTs (1995, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2007) or threw SB winning TD passes(1996). Favre coulda won more MVPs just for the drama$$$ factor.

Starr was a great field general for a great TEAM, that won because Lombardi was their coach. Lombardi coached mediocre guys into greatness. As evidence - the time he coached a high school basketball team to a state championship. Lombardi could get a team of girl scouts and coach them to the highest culinary award for cooking, because he could coach people. He did the same with Starr - drilled that guy into greatness. Starr was a miserable specimen of a QB, but with Lombardi driving him to greatness, like a lot of other sorry schlubs, they won and won again. MVP - who the hell cares - Starr was a winner, mostly because of his coach. Similarly, Favre did his best work when he was tightly controlled by great coaches - Holmgren and Stubby. MVP - sure, sometimes, and sure again when he was the media drama queen, because $$$$, and because he was crazy flashy.

I wasn't alive for the 60's so I don't have that feel for what people were looking for in an MVP, but my sense is that times were different, and since Lombardi was in the drivers seat - CLEARLY he was the driving personality of that team - so why not pick Starr - because, well, he's the frickin' QB. Of course he's the guy they'd pick, because that was a TEAM, and you pick the on field leader of the best team.

Both MVPs, but for different reasons.

[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.

[King Friday]

Defense had an aging Reggie White and Leroy Butler who were elite. Beyond that just a bunch of good players who were well-coached and bought into the program, much like on the offensive side.

Aging Reggie White was still probably one of the top 10 defensive players in the league...OK, Favre's equal. Leroy Butler was one of the 2 or 3 best safeties of his generation. No one on the Packer offense came CLOSE to Butler's stature. White had an elite counterpart. Having 2 elite players on one side of the ball is typically a tremendous advantage.

[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.

[King Friday]

Computers are magnificent creatures!!!

I'm surprised ESPN hasn't come up with some kind of MVP calculator yet.

[mraynrand]

Computers are magnificent creatures!!!

Fuck you, asshole.

[woodbuck27]

I'm surprised ESPN hasn't come up with some kind of MVP calculator yet.

http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/29-site-news/206-final-regular-season-stats-rankings-2014

Final Regular Season Stats & Rankings 2014

By: Brian Burke

" Sunday's numbers are now available, including advanced stat box scores, top players of the week, team stats, and season leader boards. All numbers reflect the final advanced stats and rankings for the 2014 regular season. The top MVP candidates for this season should be Bell, Watt, Rodgers. Find out why at the links below. "

GO Aaron Rodgers GO !