Rodgers - MVP

TW

Moderator
Moderator
Member
Messages
6,865
Reaction score
5,683
Okay! Don't shoot the messenger. It's talk going around in some areas. When I first heard it, I laughed. Then I thought about it for a minute, and started laughing again.

Unless Rodgers throws for 400+ yards per game for the rest of the year, vaults the team into at least the NFC Championship game, doesn't throw another INT that matters, and adds enough TD passes (he has 32 to lead the league) to put him in the 45+ category, and his QB rating goes up from 101.1 to 114.0, I don't see it happening. Interestingly enough, these same people are talking about La'Veon Bell being another guy who could sneak up and grab it.

I'm not trying to make light of his chances. I just think it's going to be an uphill battle. Too many losses early in the season will leave a bad taste in people's mouths. Yet, if they did run the table, and he was top QB for the rest of the year????

That would be one helluva turnaround season for Rodgers, the Packers, and all of us. Were we wrong, or did Rodgers up his game by rediscovering what got him to the top?

Either way, this is a subject worth discussion.
 
People love a Cinderella story. If, or when, the vikings lose to the Colts and the Lions run out of their luck for the year AND ARod gets through the Bear game uninjured? Yes, he will sneak into the conversation. The Seahawks game showed him on the money, very few errant passes. Our OL is maybe the healthiest position group on the team and Jordy is looking like he is hitting his stride. Our defense is bad enough so we might have to throw even more. His biggest obstacle the next two weeks might be the weather! Honestly, if we win the next two and He is able to lead his team to a division crown in Detroit? Especially after the midseason meltdown? Then he deserves to be in the discussion. IMO.
 
The MVP Award is about the body of work over a season. Not 4-5 games.

If he's part of the conversation it's media driven not performance driven
 
Devils advocate: this is entirely contingent upon the Packers winning out and making the playoffs of course. Rodgers played poorly in a number of games and mediocre in others. The recent turnaround is arguably due almost entirely to him upping his level of play. Isn't that in itself proof of his inherent value to his teams fortunes? The Pats were 3-1 without Brady, they're well coached and have a fine roster. If - and big if - AR takes this flawed roster and worn out coaching staff and leads them to the playoffs, what's a better mark of his value to the team and within the league?

Please spare me the green and gold glasses remarks. Not saying this is what I believe, but for the sake of conversation...
 
Devils advocate: this is entirely contingent upon the Packers winning out and making the playoffs of course. Rodgers played poorly in a number of games and mediocre in others. The recent turnaround is arguably due almost entirely to him upping his level of play. Isn't that in itself proof of his inherent value to his teams fortunes? The Pats were 3-1 without Brady, they're well coached and have a fine roster. If - and big if - AR takes this flawed roster and worn out coaching staff and leads them to the playoffs, what's a better mark of his value to the team and within the league?

Please spare me the green and gold glasses remarks. Not saying this is what I believe, but for the sake of conversation...
By this logic Nelson should also be part of the conversation the way his game has stepped up. I'm not going to give Rodgers a mulligan and forget that he played at very low level for 5-6 weeks. It's about a season and not a stretch of games.
 
I seriously doubt AR is a viable MVP candidate this year. I'd give it to Matt Ryan. I'm just glad AR is playing well again.
 
Some very interesting points brought up by everyone, for and against him even being considered.

But, let's add one little thing to the mix. What is the MVP award? Is it the best player in the league, or the most valuable player that does the most to make his team successful? Even the sportswriters tend to disagree. But one thing is certain, most of them pin the title on a QB, because - in their minds - the QB contributes the most to all teams. It gives them the edge in the voting. Within that frame work, they're split. Some believe it's a break down of game after game that counts. Some look at the stats, and the team record, and choose accordingly. Some throw the record out the window, and judge it solely on the contributions made to the team, win, lose, or draw. That, though, is very subjective, and pretty much a matter of how you personally view it, not based on true facts that can be supported by stats.

Where do we go from here?
 
I don't know the timing of the voting on the award but I can't see him getting it just for getting the Packers to the playoffs. He'd have to lead the team on a deep run, and if the votes are cast before that happens I don't see it.

Do I think he could be in the conversation, sure. I think there are always players at his level that the media resorts to when they need to start filling column lines and webpages. I don't think this is a story coming from Packer nation, but rather is coming from the media. I've heard the talk here on local radio. If he can play at the level he's played for the past few weeks, and maintain it to a Super Bowl, then he absolutely needs to be part of the discussion, but not before.
 
Back
Top