NFL MVP Predictions

[BJJ34]

There's a reason Mahomes got 500 million and corners only max out around 100 million.

[IronDog]

If you are a good DL you get double-teamed.

Ummmmmm, Vita Vea is on line 2.

[IronDog]

I agree with @Nobody. As much as many might not like it the MVP goes to the most valuable player and based on the way the game is played now that would either be a QB, CB or DL. The latter two are important because of how much they impact the QB. The latter both suffer from the fact that superior play usually results in a lack of state. If you are a good DL you get double-teamed. If you are a good DB they do not throw at you. Despite affecting the game you are stat invisible.

That's not even the point Nobody made. When is the last time a CB or DL won MVP? By his logic the name needs to be changed to "Top QB Award" and not most valuable player. Apparently everyone is too stupid to vote on the parameters of what "most valuable" means

Did I mention subjective voting?

[AJPG]

Let Erin have it, a lose to the Bucs in the NFCCG again.

[Cheb]

I think a case can be made for any of the top four of Brady, Rodgers, Kupp, and Taylor. I'd be fine with any of them.

[Snake]

There's a reason Mahomes got 500 million and corners only max out around 100 million.

I don’t think anyone would disagree that quarterbacks are the most important players. But raw contract volume maybe isn’t the best way to measure perceived contributions. Some (most?) positions age like milk in the NFL. Quarterback is the exception and they will get longer larger contracts as a result.

[Kress]

Oh I'm not talking about you or me, although shameless prove how dumb you are. I'm talking about the hypothetical MVP voters Nobody here is talking about. By his logic those people are too dumb to take into account what "MVP" really means.

Even by that logic, you default to the fact that QB is inherently the Most Valuable Position on the field. 65-70 touches per game.

[King Bootz]

Oh I'm not talking about you or me, although shameless prove how dumb you are. I'm talking about the hypothetical MVP voters Nobody here is talking about. By his logic those people are too dumb to take into account what "MVP" really means.

Even by that logic, you default to the fact that QB is inherently the Most Valuable Position on the field. 65-70 touches per game.

Then why is the award not named the "most valuable position"?

[Kress]

Even by that logic, you default to the fact that QB is inherently the Most Valuable Position on the field. 65-70 touches per game.

Then why is the award not named the "most valuable position"?

Nobody here named it. We're just talking reality and proven history.

[King Bootz]

The system of voting for these awards and the HOF needs to be overhauled. Salty writers who know very little about the game shouldn't be making these decisions based off of their personal feelings.

[uscbucsfan]

The system of voting for these awards and the HOF needs to be overhauled. Salty writers who know very little about the game shouldn't be making these decisions based off of their personal feelings.

The NFL does a pretty good job about stripping voting rights from people. I read that he's even commented that he may lose his MVP vote due to these comments.

I don't think his point is completely outlandish. He says that Rodgers has been one of the best on the field, but his off field actions in sitting out/holding the team at ransom cost them 1 game and his vaccine status cost them drama and other games (not saying I agree with this point). He said in a close race with Kupp and Taylor (then said, even Tom Brady) these things eliminate Rodgers for him.

You don't think those are valid argument points? The headline is sensationalized, but his actual comments and then him expanding on them he makes logical points even if you or I disagree with them.

[Kress]

The system of voting for these awards and the HOF needs to be overhauled. Salty writers who know very little about the game shouldn't be making these decisions based off of their personal feelings.

The NFL does a pretty good job about stripping voting rights from people. I read that he's even commented that he may lose his MVP vote due to these comments.

I don't think his point is completely outlandish. He says that Rodgers has been one of the best on the field, but his off field actions in sitting out/holding the team at ransom cost them 1 game and his vaccine status cost them drama and other games (not saying I agree with this point). He said in a close race with Kupp and Taylor (then said, even Tom Brady) these things eliminate Rodgers for him.

You don't think that's a valid point?

It's a valid point, the problem is in how the tweet phrased it: "off-field issues." What you described are issues affecting things on the field, which is valid.

[uscbucsfan]

The NFL does a pretty good job about stripping voting rights from people. I read that he's even commented that he may lose his MVP vote due to these comments.

I don't think his point is completely outlandish. He says that Rodgers has been one of the best on the field, but his off field actions in sitting out/holding the team at ransom cost them 1 game and his vaccine status cost them drama and other games (not saying I agree with this point). He said in a close race with Kupp and Taylor (then said, even Tom Brady) these things eliminate Rodgers for him.

You don't think that's a valid point?

It's a valid point, the problem is in how the tweet phrased it: "off-field issues." What you described are issues affecting things on the field, which is valid.

As I said in my edit. The tweet and the other stories are sensationalized for clicks, but actually reading what he said and listening to further discussions...it's less emotional and more logical argument.

[King Bootz]

It's a valid point, the problem is in how the tweet phrased it: "off-field issues." What you described are issues affecting things on the field, which is valid.

As I said in my edit. The tweet and the other stories are sensationalized for clicks, but actually reading what he said and listening to further discussions...it's less emotional and more logical argument.

The argument is articulated very well. But it's still very biased and diminishes the process.

[uscbucsfan]

As I said in my edit. The tweet and the other stories are sensationalized for clicks, but actually reading what he said and listening to further discussions...it's less emotional and more logical argument.

The argument is articulated very well. But it's still very biased and diminishes the process.

No more bias than a Bucs writer voting for Brady or Saints writer voting against Brady. He's basically saying Rodgers lost the Packers 3 games and created a narrative about him leaving. In a really close race, for him, between Taylor, Kupp, and Rodgers...that is a tie breaker of sorts.

I think his 1 game of no prep and 2 games missed being all loses highlights how important he is, but I don't think that line of thought or opposing opinion diminishes the process at all.

[King Bootz]

The argument is articulated very well. But it's still very biased and diminishes the process.

No more bias than a Bucs writer voting for Brady or Saints writer voting against Brady. He's basically saying Rodgers lost the Packers 3 games and created a narrative about him leaving. In a really close race, for him, between Taylor, Kupp, and Rodgers...that is a tie breaker of sorts.

I think his 1 game of no prep and 2 games missed being all loses highlights how important he is, but I don't think that line of thought or opposing opinion diminishes the process at all.

Rodgers only missed 1 game this year. What are you even talking about?

And that 1 game he missed highlighted how important he is. The writer disqualified him before the season even began from what I’ve read. There’s a very clear bias here. And furthermore, the writer is trying to make a case that other writers feel the same. He can’t stand behind his own argument alone.

[uscbucsfan]

No more bias than a Bucs writer voting for Brady or Saints writer voting against Brady. He's basically saying Rodgers lost the Packers 3 games and created a narrative about him leaving. In a really close race, for him, between Taylor, Kupp, and Rodgers...that is a tie breaker of sorts.

I think his 1 game of no prep and 2 games missed being all loses highlights how important he is, but I don't think that line of thought or opposing opinion diminishes the process at all.

Rodgers only missed 1 game this year. What are you even talking about?

And that 1 game he missed highlighted how important he is. The writer disqualified him before the season even began from what I’ve read. There’s a very clear bias here. And furthermore, the writer is trying to make a case that other writers feel the same. He can’t stand behind his own argument alone.

I thought he missed two, but I don't see anything about him saying he shouldn't be an MVP before the season. This was a very recent take. He did say before the season he wasn't being a team player and that would be a detriment to GB, but that was a pretty popular take that really took off after week 1 where Rodgers was terrible and acted like he didn't care.

Again, I think there's a valid point. I don't agree with it and agree that if anything it shows how valuable he is...also why the MVP is almost exclusively a QB award. If you take Rodgers off the Packers with their current roster...that's probably the biggest change in W/L of any other player in the league...Brady would likely be next. Taking a bellcow (which are rare) RB or any type of WR off the roster certainly hurts (Taylor much more so than Kupp), but history shows it's not nearly as impactful.

[King Bootz]

Rodgers only missed 1 game this year. What are you even talking about?

And that 1 game he missed highlighted how important he is. The writer disqualified him before the season even began from what I’ve read. There’s a very clear bias here. And furthermore, the writer is trying to make a case that other writers feel the same. He can’t stand behind his own argument alone.

I thought he missed two, but I don't see anything about him saying he shouldn't be an MVP before the season. This was a very recent take. He did say before the season he wasn't being a team player and that would be a detriment to GB, but that was a pretty popular take that really took off after week 1 where Rodgers was terrible and acted like he didn't care.

Again, I think there's a valid point. I don't agree with it and agree that if anything it shows how valuable he is...also why the MVP is almost exclusively a QB award. If you take Rodgers off the Packers with their current roster...that's probably the biggest change in W/L of any other player in the league...Brady would likely be next. Taking a bellcow (which are rare) RB or any type of WR off the roster certainly hurts (Taylor much more so than Kupp), but history shows it's not nearly as impactful.

His take would have validity had it actually hurt the Packers. It didn't. All they did was secure the best record in football.

I think he was articulate but I don't think the argument is valid at all. Had the Packers lost the #1 seed by 1 game, you point to that Chiefs game. As it stands they will likely be the only team with 14 wins.

It's pretty clear, even by your own admission, that the writer had a preconceived position here and didn't sway from it based on the result of the season.

[uscbucsfan]

His take would have validity had it actually hurt the Packers. It didn't. All they did was secure the best record in football.

I think he was articulate but I don't think the argument is valid at all. Had the Packers lost the #1 seed by 1 game, you point to that Chiefs game. As it stands they will likely be the only team with 14 wins.

It's pretty clear, even by your own admission, that the writer had a preconceived position here and didn't sway from it based on the result of the season.

That's why there are 50 voters. They all have their own bias and agendas, outlooks on the award, view of value, etc.. There's really no such thing as a neutral vote in anything. You don't like his standards...I don't either, but as you said he's able to articulate them and that's the point of having such a large pool of voters.

It's certainly better than a fan vote.

Again, he admitted he will likely lose his vote for publicly stating this, so it may not matter.

I just don't think this taints the vote in anyway...especially not more so than Rick Stroud being able to vote for Brady and similar situations.

[Buccabeer]

I hate to say it, but Aaron Rodgers should be the MVP if you're not giving it to a Defensive Player. He's playing out of his mind and the Packers are a shell of themselves without him. Obviously I love Brady, but I don't think he's been quite consistent enough for the same amount of games as Rodgers.

[uscbucsfan]

I hate to say it, but Aaron Rodgers should be the MVP if you're not giving it to a Defensive Player. He's playing out of his mind and the Packers are a shell of themselves without him. Obviously I love Brady, but I don't think he's been quite consistent enough for the same amount of games as Rodgers.

Looking at various media sites and Vegas odds, it seems that Rodgers is the runaway favorite right now...some are even calling him a lock at this point.

Brady has the second best odds, but it's not that close.

edit: I think rightfully so. Brady is really valuable, but he's had his fair share of bad games. Rodgers had 1 really bad game to start the season and has been the best QB since then.

[BJJ34]

Both Brady and Rodgers are equally valuable to their teams.

[Kress]

Using the benefit of hindsight as to how everyone played this year, pretend you can go back to week 1, empty all rosters, put all available players on a draft board, and give yourself the #1 pick to build your 2021 team. Who do you take?

If you don't say Aaron Rodgers, you're nuts. He's the most valuable player in the league. Hence, MVP.

[uscbucsfan]

Using the benefit of hindsight as to how everyone played this year, pretend you can go back to week 1, empty all rosters, put all available players on a draft board, and give yourself the #1 pick to build your 2021 team. Who do you take?

If you don't say Aaron Rodgers, you're nuts. He's the most valuable player in the league. Hence, MVP.

It's true. He's the best QB in the league where QB is the most important position by a mile. He's lead his team to the number 1 seed.

That's why odds makers are basically saying it's a lock at this point.

[BJJ34]

Using the benefit of hindsight as to how everyone played this year, pretend you can go back to week 1, empty all rosters, put all available players on a draft board, and give yourself the #1 pick to build your 2021 team. Who do you take?

If you don't say Aaron Rodgers, you're nuts. He's the most valuable player in the league. Hence, MVP.

His TD/INT ratio is insane, and he’s honestly aided by the missed game.

Imagine the Steelers without Tj Watt though?

[King Bootz]

His take would have validity had it actually hurt the Packers. It didn't. All they did was secure the best record in football.

I think he was articulate but I don't think the argument is valid at all. Had the Packers lost the #1 seed by 1 game, you point to that Chiefs game. As it stands they will likely be the only team with 14 wins.

It's pretty clear, even by your own admission, that the writer had a preconceived position here and didn't sway from it based on the result of the season.

That's why there are 50 voters. They all have their own bias and agendas, outlooks on the award, view of value, etc.. There's really no such thing as a neutral vote in anything. You don't like his standards...I don't either, but as you said he's able to articulate them and that's the point of having such a large pool of voters.

It's certainly better than a fan vote.

Again, he admitted he will likely lose his vote for publicly stating this, so it may not matter.

I just don't think this taints the vote in anyway...especially not more so than Rick Stroud being able to vote for Brady and similar situations.

That's where we disagree. And it's my main issue. How can this position not taint the vote? He knows it taints the vote otherwise he wouldn't even comment about potentially losing his vote nor would feel the need to throw other voters under the bus.

[King Bootz]

Both Brady and Rodgers are equally valuable to their teams.

As are Kupp and Taylor. Especially Taylor.

[ATrain]

I would consider the MVP of the league the person that joins a sub .500 roster and gets them a Super Bowl win in one year who had to beat the supposed MVP in order to get a Super Bowl win in their own house.

We wouldn't have won the Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers instead of Brady last year.

[uscbucsfan]

That's where we disagree. And it's my main issue. How can this position not taint the vote? He knows it taints the vote otherwise he wouldn't even comment about potentially losing his vote nor would feel the need to throw other voters under the bus.

I think his reasoning is fair, therefore not tainted, but you bring up a good point about breaking the rules in publicly discussing it. He's attempting to sway others/generate more clicks for himself, which is why he would lose his vote...and ya, fairly makes it a bit bush league. I didn't think about it from that perspective.

[uscbucsfan]

We wouldn't have won the Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers instead of Brady last year.

Even Nobody, Brady's biggest fan, doesn't believe that.

[ATrain]

We wouldn't have won the Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers instead of Brady last year.

Even Nobody, Brady's biggest fan, doesn't believe that.

We needed more than just a high TD to Int ratio. Aaron Rodgers isn't close to the leader that Brady is. We absolutely would not have won the SB with Rodgers. 100% guaranteed. There's a reason Rodgers only has one ring despite having great rosters for much of his career.

[uscbucsfan]

Even Nobody, Brady's biggest fan, doesn't believe that.

We needed more than just a high TD to Int ratio. Aaron Rodgers isn't close to the leader that Brady is. We absolutely would not have won the SB with Rodgers. 100% guaranteed. There's a reason Rodgers only has one ring despite having great rosters for much of his career.

After McCarthy the narrative was that the Packers, without Rodgers, would be one of the least talented teams in the NFL...and still succeeded.

I'm not sure if this is one of your trolling narratives or what, but Rodgers has never been a problem in GB on the field. True, he's not the level of leader as Brady, but he's a better QB. With the talent on this roster, there's no reason to think he wouldn't have won.

Saying 100% guaranteed is just dumb...neither of us can do that.

edit: Also we are talking about MVP for this year, not last. There have been numerous posts where you said Brady stinks this year, is worst than Mac Jones, has lost it, etc. Again, attempting to reply honestly to you, but it's hard to see where you are going with this.

[King Bootz]

That's where we disagree. And it's my main issue. How can this position not taint the vote? He knows it taints the vote otherwise he wouldn't even comment about potentially losing his vote nor would feel the need to throw other voters under the bus.

I think his reasoning is fair, therefore not tainted, but you bring up a good point about breaking the rules in publicly discussing it. He's attempting to sway others/generate more clicks for himself, which is why he would lose his vote...and ya, fairly makes it a bit bush league. I didn't think about it from that perspective.

I don't expect him to get a groundswell of support from other writers here. I'd like to think that generally most of them try to be as objective as possible in all of the voting they do. I'm not expecting this to be another Terrell Owens situation or the baseball HOF disasters. But implicit bias like this is bad for the process IMO.

[King Bootz]

We wouldn't have won the Super Bowl with Aaron Rodgers instead of Brady last year.

Even Nobody, Brady's biggest fan, doesn't believe that.

ATrain doesn't even believe this.

[ATrain]

Even Nobody, Brady's biggest fan, doesn't believe that.

ATrain doesn't even believe this.

I absolutely do. We wouldn't have won with Rodgers instead of Brady. Our team needed things that Rodgers simply can't provide. He's not a leader of men, he's a good QB, that's it. That's why he has one ring.