the mvp race

[CR91]

seems like a three man race between rodgers brady and luck. some of mentioned watt, but mvp to me means your team is one of the best and texans are not even in the playoff picture. ok there 6-6 and a game behind the 7-5 teams, but can anyone really see the texans getting a playoff spot over the chiefs chargers ravens or steeler? exactly my point. anyway back to topic, lets make a case for the top 3.

 

 

 

 

[jvan1973]

Its going to Rodgers. No way luck has a chance with the way Rodgers is playing

[Malakai432]

Its going to Rodgers. No way luck has a chance with the way Rodgers is playing

I'd have to go with this unless Rodgers & the Pack magically start playing like crap.

[runthepost]

Manning replaces luck... luck has no chance for mvp

[Everyone]

I'd say it goes to Rodgers, my list is 1.Rodgers 2. Luck 3. Watt 4. Brady 5. Manning.

[GoPats]

Barring any crazy developments in the home stretch, Rodgers is your 2014 MVP. He pretty much sealed it last weekend with his surgical performance against the Pats.

 

If we're picking a top three, I'd toss in Brady and Watt as the other two. But I don't think it'll be all that close. 

[Shane Bond]

Aaron Rodgers, Watt, Gronk in that order.

[BullsColtsFan1]

Rogers is going to get it.  I think NFL.com had Rogers, Luck then Watt.  Id go with Rogers, Watt then Luck. 

[Moose Of Woe]

Aaron Rodgers, Watt, Gronk in that order.

This.

 

Having a garbage team is not a knock on being a great player. In fact, it's even more impressive when players perform their role exceptionally well while carrying a bunch of dead weight.

 

Rodgahs

Watt

Gronk

 

Fourth place isn't anywhere close. That applies to Peyton and Brady. The three names above are playing those positions as well as anyone ever has if not better. I can't say the same for Peyton or Brady. (Or Luck, for that matter.)

[Superman]

This.

Having a garbage team is not a knock on being a great player. In fact, it's even more impressive when players perform their role exceptionally well while carrying a bunch of dead weight.

Rodgahs

Watt

Gronk

Fourth place isn't anywhere close. That applies to Peyton and Brady. The three names above are playing those positions as well as anyone ever has if not better. I can't say the same for Peyton or Brady. (Or Luck, for that matter.)

Thing is, if your team isn't winning many games, are you really carrying them?

There's no question that Watt is the best defensive player in the league, and without him, the Texans would be worse. But it doesn't get much worse than 2-14, and they're below .500 this year. This is the reason why defenders and RBs and WRs don't MVP, because they don't carry teams. Even great players at those positions. When they do, like AP in 2012, then they get MVP.

The player's value to the team should be clearly demonstrated in the win/loss column. They don't have to be the best team, but they shouldn't be below .500. If the player really is the most valuable in the league, he'd help his team win more games. Not every game, not even necessarily a playoff berth, but not bottom ten, either.

[Moose Of Woe]

Thing is, if your team isn't winning many games, are you really carrying them?

There's no question that Watt is the best defensive player in the league, and without him, the Texans would be worse. But it doesn't get much worse than 2-14, and they're below .500 this year. This is the reason why defenders and RBs and WRs don't MVP, because they don't carry teams. Even great players at those positions. When they do, like AP in 2012, then they get MVP.

The player's value to the team should be clearly demonstrated in the win/loss column. They don't have to be the best team, but they shouldn't be below .500. If the player really is the most valuable in the league, he'd help his team win more games. Not every game, not even necessarily a playoff berth, but not bottom ten, either.

It depends on how you look at it. Some positions are more impactful than others. QB, by default, is the single most important/impactful position. A great QB will help earn more wins than, say, a great DE.

 

That being said, I see MVP as the best player(s) in football. Those are the three guys I mentioned. They all play their position to a T. If I were to pick a single player to add to a team this season it would be Rodgers, Watt, or Gronk.

[amfootball]

I think it will be Rodgers unless GB collapses. Brady has an outside chance. After them, I don't see anyone else.

 

I think Watt is having a very special year and I would pick him but doubt the Texans make the playoffs so the point is moot.

[COLTS449]

I don't see any way Rogers doesn't win it. He's having a special season, and I think he'll lead Green Bay to the super bowl too.

[BOTT]

Barring any crazy developments in the home stretch, Rodgers is your 2014 MVP. He pretty much sealed it last weekend with his surgical performance against the Pats.

 

If we're picking a top three, I'd toss in Brady and Watt as the other two. But I don't think it'll be all that close.

Rodgers was actually off early in that game and settled for field goals too often. I agree that he will be MVP, but me think his performance in that game has been exaggerated.

[Superman]

It depends on how you look at it. Some positions are more impactful than others. QB, by default, is the single most important/impactful position. A great QB will help earn more wins than, say, a great DE.

That being said, I see MVP as the best player(s) in football. Those are the three guys I mentioned. They all play their position to a T. If I were to pick a single player to add to a team this season it would be Rodgers, Watt, or Gronk.

I think everyone, including the voters, has their own criteria. But to me, the word valuable is important. Value can be demonstrated, IMO. And if you aren't winning even half of your games... doesn't mean Watt isn't valuable, but can he be MOST valuable? Not to me. There's no way the Broncos, Pats, Packers, etc., are 5-7 if Manning, Brady and Rodgers are healthy all year. And then, Luck, no way the Colts would be 8-4 if he isn't on the field. To me, that makes them more valuable than Watt.

If the Texans defense was dominant, and the team was winning despite a weak offense, I'd feel differently. Think about the 2009-10, 2013 Jets... If the Texans had wins, then we could talk.

[oldunclemark]

Peyton cant win because he hasn't put up the numbers he put up last year....even 5000 yards and 50 TDs wont be enough

For Andrew Luck to win, Indy has to be the top seed in the AFC.. and that's unlikely..

JJ Watt is the most valuable defensive player (I think he is the MVP of the AFC) but unless Houston wins its final 4 games..he wont be considered because that's not a playoff team..

..Aaron Rodgers has 32 TDs and 3 interceptions....for the top scoring team in the NFL

His other numbers aren't great....but unless his performance tails off...he's the MVP

[Qwiz]

Thing is, if your team isn't winning many games, are you really carrying them?

There's no question that Watt is the best defensive player in the league, and without him, the Texans would be worse. But it doesn't get much worse than 2-14, and they're below .500 this year. This is the reason why defenders and RBs and WRs don't MVP, because they don't carry teams. Even great players at those positions. When they do, like AP in 2012, then they get MVP.

The player's value to the team should be clearly demonstrated in the win/loss column. They don't have to be the best team, but they shouldn't be below .500. If the player really is the most valuable in the league, he'd help his team win more games. Not every game, not even necessarily a playoff berth, but not bottom ten, either.

Texans aren't below .500 this year. I might be a homer thinking S.Watt deserves it but Rodgers is also playing like he has an agenda. I think he will be the one who wins it.

[Superman]

Texans aren't below .500 this year. I might be a homer thinking S.Watt deserves it but Rodgers is also playing like he has an agenda. I think he will be the one who wins it.

You're right. For whatever reason, my brain keeps telling me that they lost Sunday and are 5-7. I don't know why. Watt will get votes, even if you lose out. I just don't see him as the most valuable player in the league.

[Dustin]

I hate the current definition of MVP. 

[wesd2890]

Gronk?.. wow people have done lost there minds

[Shane Bond]

Gronk?.. wow people have done lost there minds

Take Gronk out and see how Pats offense plays.

[backshoulderfade]

Take Gronk out and see how Pats offense plays.

Take Brady, or Rodgers or Luck out of their respective teams and it would be a lot worse by my estimation.

[amfootball]

Take Gronk out and see how Pats offense plays.

You mean like last year when he only played 6 games and Pats went 8-2 without him?

[JerodMayo51]

You mean like last year when he only played 6 games and Pats went 8-2 without him?

Lol!

I did a fist pump when I read that cause I was thinking the same thing

[Shane Bond]

You mean like last year when he only played 6 games and Pats went 8-2 without him?

No I mean how Pats scored 16 points and 7 of them in garbage time in an AFCCG against a crappy defense.

[amfootball]

No I mean how Pats scored 16 points and 7 of them in garbage time in an AFCCG against a crappy defense.

So one game against the best team in the AFC on the road is your only example? I have a 10 game sample.

[Shane Bond]

So one game against the best team in the AFC on the road is your only example? I have a 10 game sample.

Is it about winning the SB a priority or just winning regular season games in Pats land?.

 

Gronk is a game changer.

[amfootball]

Is it about winning the SB a priority or just winning regular season games in Pats land?.

 

Gronk is a game changer.

Changing the argument I see...again. You talked about Gronk being the most important player on the Pats and I showed that the Pats win and win a lot without him. Your point was summarily shot down. But nice try at deflection.

[Shane Bond]

Changing the argument I see...again. You talked about Gronk being the most important player on the Pats and I showed that the Pats win and win a lot without him. Your point was summarily shot down. But nice try at deflection.

I am not changing anything.

 

Gronk is the MVP in Pats locker room.

[amfootball]

I am not changing anything.

 

Gronk is the MVP in Pats locker room.

ok. They sure win a lot when their MVP is not on the field ...

[Shane Bond]

ok. They sure win a lot when their MVP is not on the field ...

You are just arguing for the sake of it like how you think Decker is better than Sanders ( got burned bad there ).

 

You can beat Raiders without Gronk with good teams you need Gronk. 

 

If Gronk is out tomorrow, i can guarantee Pats wont go far in playoffs.

[amfootball]

You are just arguing for the sake of it like how you think Decker is better than Sanders ( got burned bad there ).

 

You can beat Raiders without Gronk with good teams you need Gronk. 

 

If Gronk is out tomorrow, i can guarantee Pats wont go far in playoffs.

Circular arguments again I see. 

[Shane Bond]

Circular arguments again I see. 

Yeah who is deflecting now

[MJD42]

You are just arguing for the sake of it like how you think Decker is better than Sanders ( got burned bad there ).

 

You can beat Raiders without Gronk with good teams you need Gronk. 

 

If Gronk is out tomorrow, i can guarantee Pats wont go far in playoffs.

Are you really this ignorant? Pats won three SBs without Gronk, without Moss, without Welker.

[Shane Bond]

Are you really this ignorant? Pats won three SBs without Gronk, without Moss, without Welker.

Dude I see you are new here and you are really trying to bait on quite a few people.

Whether I am ignorant or not is none of your business.

To the topic, we are talking about current Pats team. Not a team from over 10 years ago. Use logic before saying something.

If you don't understand stay away.

[jvan1973]

Are you really this ignorant? Pats won three SBs without Gronk, without Moss, without Welker.

how is they relevant to the current team?

[MJD42]

Dude I see you are new here and you are really trying to bait on quite a few people.

Whether I am ignorant or not is none of your business.

To the topic, we are talking about current Pats team. Not a team from over 10 years ago. Use logic before saying something.

If you don't understand stay away.

More ignorance. Do you even watch the Patriots or just spew what ESPN writes? The current Pats team has Brady and Revis as its key players. I would even put Chandler Jones ahead of Gronk right now given Sunday's game vs GB. Championships are won by defense and that is what has been lacking the last few seasons and why the Patriots have not won despite having Moss, Welker and Gronk.

[Shane Bond]

More ignorance. Do you even watch the Patriots or just spew what ESPN writes? The current Pats team has Brady and Revis as its key players. I would even put Chandler Jones ahead of Gronk right now given Sunday's game vs GB. Championships are won by defense and that is what has been lacking the last few seasons and why the Patriots have not won despite having Moss, Welker and Gronk.

Ignorance is you for typing garbage.

Everybody knows an healthy Gronk goes a long way.

Chandler ahead of Gronk?. Yeah, I will stop here.

[MJD42]

Ignorance is you for typing garbage.

Everybody knows an healthy Gronk goes a long way.

Chandler ahead of Gronk?. Yeah, I will stop here.

No one is disagreeing with that but that is not what you said. You said he was MVP of the team. He is not. It all starts with #12 and then the defense.

[amfootball]

No one is disagreeing with that but that is not what you said. You said he was MVP of the team. He is not. It all starts with #12 and then the defense.

How the defense continues to defend the pass will be key in whether or not this team wins the ring. No different from when they were winning in the early '00s.