First off, I don't really care that much for this award just like who goes to the pro bowl and partially because of the lack of defined criteria for it.
Each voter has their own basis and if you want to define most valuable in the literal sense, then the QB position has a huge advantage over every other position and then its just looking at stats for the most part. I hear the media say things like "if you took him off the team, they would win half of their games" when discussing a QB but the reality is you could say that about at least 10 QB's so that criteria doesn't separate them.
Then of course you have the voter bias at play such as when Manning received a vote the year he was out and the Colts were terrible. Of course, they would have won alot more with him but that vote should have promoted a review of the award and at least a name change to most outstanding performance since surely it was never intended to be awarded to a player who never played.
Plus in Manning's case, he's won it 5 0r 6 times now and has only one Super bowl. That in itself should distinguish him as the best regular season QB ever..... which ultimately implies a criticism and a career deficiency.
If it was truly awarded to most outstanding performer, every position would at least be reviewed and although stats are always going to be significant criteria, how a player performs relative to others at the same position group could separate that player.
For instance, from what I've read it sounds like Rodgers is the favorite and yet his stats are very similar to Brady's so he really hasn't distinguished himself and with only 2 games to go, they will likely finish with similar stats.
Murray has a huge lead in rushing but Bell's receiving numbers combined with his rushing would present an argument.
Tackles, Int's and sacks are pretty competitive although you could easily look at the play of Watt and argue that he has separated himself from others in the front 7 based on his all around play.
WR's are pretty close as well.
I really can't tell you about Olinemen.
So this leaves us with the TE spot and although I may be biased given I watch the Patriots every week, I still watch alot of other games so I can at least observe performances.
Gronk in my view has clearly separated himself from other TE's with his statistics but even more so with his blocking. This latter really doesn't show up on the stat sheet so it requires some viewing and comparison but look at the other top TE's statistically in the league and watch their blocking performance and its not even close.
Graham, Thomas, Gates, Bennett, Olsen are big receivers and don't play with their hand down nearly as much as Gronk. Plus ask a guy to block a LB or DL one play and then run a seam route the next and we are talking about a pretty special talent when you can do both as good if not better than any other player at your position.
Do I think they will ever review and change this criteria? No. But it would be nice if at least someone mainstream who has a vote thought outside the box and actually wrote about the basis for his vote.
Each voter has their own basis and if you want to define most valuable in the literal sense, then the QB position has a huge advantage over every other position and then its just looking at stats for the most part. I hear the media say things like "if you took him off the team, they would win half of their games" when discussing a QB but the reality is you could say that about at least 10 QB's so that criteria doesn't separate them.
Then of course you have the voter bias at play such as when Manning received a vote the year he was out and the Colts were terrible. Of course, they would have won alot more with him but that vote should have promoted a review of the award and at least a name change to most outstanding performance since surely it was never intended to be awarded to a player who never played.
Plus in Manning's case, he's won it 5 0r 6 times now and has only one Super bowl. That in itself should distinguish him as the best regular season QB ever..... which ultimately implies a criticism and a career deficiency.
If it was truly awarded to most outstanding performer, every position would at least be reviewed and although stats are always going to be significant criteria, how a player performs relative to others at the same position group could separate that player.
For instance, from what I've read it sounds like Rodgers is the favorite and yet his stats are very similar to Brady's so he really hasn't distinguished himself and with only 2 games to go, they will likely finish with similar stats.
Murray has a huge lead in rushing but Bell's receiving numbers combined with his rushing would present an argument.
Tackles, Int's and sacks are pretty competitive although you could easily look at the play of Watt and argue that he has separated himself from others in the front 7 based on his all around play.
WR's are pretty close as well.
I really can't tell you about Olinemen.
So this leaves us with the TE spot and although I may be biased given I watch the Patriots every week, I still watch alot of other games so I can at least observe performances.
Gronk in my view has clearly separated himself from other TE's with his statistics but even more so with his blocking. This latter really doesn't show up on the stat sheet so it requires some viewing and comparison but look at the other top TE's statistically in the league and watch their blocking performance and its not even close.
Graham, Thomas, Gates, Bennett, Olsen are big receivers and don't play with their hand down nearly as much as Gronk. Plus ask a guy to block a LB or DL one play and then run a seam route the next and we are talking about a pretty special talent when you can do both as good if not better than any other player at your position.
Do I think they will ever review and change this criteria? No. But it would be nice if at least someone mainstream who has a vote thought outside the box and actually wrote about the basis for his vote.
