Thurman#1

I can't answer for him, but I think the main thing they use for MVP is how well a guy plays compared to other candidates that same year. Just the stats: Mahomes 66.3% completions, 4740 yards, 38 TDs to 6 INTs and 108.2 passer rating Rodgers 70.3% completions, 4059 yards, 44 DTs to 5 INTs and 119.4 passer rating. Again, Allen's playing at an elite level right now, but this year has produced a lot of insane offensive statistics. It's not fair to compare this year's stats with other years without accounting for that.

I think you're seriously misusing the word "every" in your headline. This isn't "every QB MVP stat for the lst 10 years." Not even close. It's some stats, the stats that make up passer rating and a few running stats thrown in. As for comparisons, they aren't really fair. QB stats and offensive stats generally are way up this year what with nobody in the stands and defenses not having the offseason to prepare. Still, a hell of a year for Josh. Rodgers' stats are clearly better, though, and probably Mahomes too. But again, an absolutely terrific year for Josh. Oh, and what does this question mean? "Compare and tell me what years Josh is better this year compared to that year?" Hunh?

Sucked. Past tense. Chances are he still does, but guys change, develop, regress ...

We absolutely stick with him. Why wouldn't you, unless three or four guys beat him out, and that won't happen next year. Beyond that, do we address the position if the draft leaves us a good option? Yeah, sure, maybe. If the BPA is TE, OK. I doubt it'll be top three rounds, though. Too many other more pressing needs.

You say the excuses will run rampant. That's one guess. It could certainly happen that way. Let's worry about such insignificant things when they happen. Or perhaps never. I'm not even sure what your point is. Your third paragraph is more or less unintelligible. I guess what I'd mainly say is, "Um, what?"

Yup, agreed. I still worry a bit about being run on, but the way we're scoring nobody can run much past about halfway through the 2nd quarter. They've pulled it together brilliantly and it reflects extremely well on Frazier.

No reason to care. And if Allen started and only threw a handful of passes, was taken out and we lost, Allen wouldn't be credited with the loss. Losses are team stats, always. That's why the real name of that stat is NOT "QB wins," or anything like it. The real name of that stat is, "TEAM record in games started by this QB (regular season)," my capital and bolds. Tua is a baby compared to RJ, much less Flutie. Johnson had three years on the bench in Jax, including only 35 passes thrown, before he even got here. Tua is a child. He doesn't fit either guy in that comparison. Maybe he will in a year or two.

Gee, what a surprise, you haven't found a link yet, hunh? And then you disappear? What a shock. Thing is, if there isn't a link, how come you posted with such confidence that Mayock loved JaMarcus and then doubled down, saying Mayock's (correct) summary of his position was revisionist history? Still waiting. If you find some links saying that he loved JaMarcus (not his arm or his pro day, but the whole package) I'll be here.

Now, this makes some sense, but honestly, I don't think winning MVP is going to cost all that much more than being in the top five of the MVP discussion two or three years in a row. But I hear you.

Right, if he can't play, he can't play. Thing is, he can. And does. The Pro Bowl only authenticates the obvious. Yes, he wasn't very good earlier this season when he was injured and the whole defense wasn't working together. But he's obviously a great deal better now, as he was last year. People want to see a skull-crusher at MLB, but that's not his game, nor is it what McDermott's main requirement of whoever plays that position in his defense. And yeah, people say that Edmunds is young a lot. They also say look both ways before you cross and others, wear a mask for instance. A lot of times when people say stuff a lot, it's because it makes total and complete sense.

Didn't make much sense before, and even less now. They're both fine players, we need 'em both. It might be economically impossible to keep Milano. I'm sure they will try like hell to bring him back, but they might not manage. When they have to bring Edmunds back there'll be much more money available. Shouldn't be as hard.

I corrected you myself, then when I saw my post was on page four I immediately deleted it without even checking ... figured somebody must have said something by now. Your original post is on page 1, the spot where all the people new to the thread are deposited. Might want to put in an "EDIT: I see I was wrong about that. Oops." or something like that in the post. Or not. Whatever.

Andy Reid, among others, does fine with it. It happens. I'd rather see Daboll here, obviously, and I'm not convinced yet that he'll be a great head coach. No way to know, really, he'll certainly have a lot to prove, but it could work.

Yeah, if you don't have your computer plugged in, I can see there might be problems. But for computers with sense it computes just fine. If you're saying you don't understand my point, OK. I'll try to explain further. What would someone with sense say if you said that the team having the DPOY had won the Super Bowl only ten times over the years? He'd say, yeah, that sounds about right, for two things with no direct connection, in a 32 team league, you'd say it was well within what chance would say would happen. You'd guess that generally both the Super Bowl winner and the team with the DPOY year are likely to be pretty good. 20%? Fairly common. Not particularly worthy of notice. Having the DPOY, the OPOY, or the MVP on your team would have zero effect on your odds of winning or losing the SB, beyond meaning your team is probably pretty good.

Yes. For cross-matching two stats, each of which allows only one team out of 32, it's common. You're correlating two stats, one of which is an individual achievement and one a team achievement. A match is essentially a lot of luck. Nearly always, an MVP candidate will be on a playoff team. But winning a bunch of games in the playoffs needs luck and a lot more components than the play of one guy.

Mahomes has thrown the second-most passes in the league this year, 77 more than Allen, 588 to 511. That's 13% more. More, you're comparing this year and last year, which really isn't fair. Things have been very different this year, in many aspects. Mahomes played 14 games last year. This year when he'd played 14, he'd already thrown 60 more passes than he did last year. You've got to compare Mahomes' stats this year with everyone else's stats this year. 2019 was very different. Comparing across years can tell you some things but it shouldn't be used as your only data points.

Oh, it's revisionist history? Gotcha. Well then you'll have no problem whatsoever finding the link to where Mayock said he loved JaMarcus Russell. Not that he loved his arm or his pro day. That he loved JaMarcus. I'll be waiting with interest, because in the little fifteen minutes of research I did I found nobody saying Mayock had been wrong about JaMarcus and a bunch saying he'd been exactly right. Mayock had him as the #1 QB in his class ... because his class sucked. The best in that class look to have been JaMarcus, Brady Quinn, Kevin Kolb, Drew Stanton, Troy Smith or Tyler Thigpen. Or of course, Trent Edwards. Jordan Palmer at least became a good QB coach. Only thing I found with the quick look was a Football Outsiders article that collected contemporary takes on JaMarcus from just before he was drafted. The article is gone, but the comments aren't, and a number of folks pointed out that Mayock had been right on with work ethic problems. But you're so totally sure that you were right when you said that Mayock loved JaMarcus that when someone points out that you're wrong ... you double down and call it revisionist history. With such a strong comeback, you must have a ton of evidence. Even though you didn't produce the slightest iota of any in either post. I'll be waiting for the link. And again, more nonsense. Yes, they all miss terribly. Same as the greatest poker players in the world don't win every hand. GMs miss terribly because what they do is extremely difficult. And yet some GMs clearly do it better than others. How many GMs passed on Brady, Wilson, Brees and Rodgers? And how many didn't on Andrew Luck and Peyton Manning? You said Ozzie was better than the others. You're right about that, though there are about five to seven others who are also better. But Ozzie was among those who passed on Brady, Wilson, Brees and Rodgers. Yes, they all make mistakes, including the good ones. No, there will never be a perfect drafter or anywhere close, it's far far too complex and uncertain. And yet the Steelers draft better year after year, despite nearly always drafting from the last ten spots. There are a bunch of GMs who do it better. A few who do it worse and most in the middle, pretty average. The bell curve, in other words. Which is what should be expected.

We don't have the money next year for an expensive backup.

That's flat out nonsense. There are plenty of GMs who are obviously better than others, and on a long-term basis. And the whole "lottery" thing is butt-stupid on the face of it. If it were a lottery we'd see as many 7th round starters as we do 1st rounders, and we don't. Is there some luck involved, particularly in terms of who's there when you draft? Sure. But that doesn't mean it's not a system that it's perfectly possible to do better on if you do it well. It is. Even the best will make mistakes. But they'll make fewer of them than average and they'll do other things to improve their chances, such as making intelligent trades for picks and doing more and smarter homework on the guys they pick than many do. Nonsense also on your idea that "Mayock loved JaMarcus Russell." He didn't. He liked his arm and his pro day. From a 2010 Florio Interview: “Let me give you an example of the other side of it,” Mayock said this morning on The Dan Patrick Show. “The best Pro Day I ever saw as a quarterback was JaMarcus Russell. . . . I’ve never seen a quarterback throw the football like that in my life, but I still couldn’t take him in the first round — the guy doesn’t care about football. He doesn’t have the passion for the game, doesn’t have the work ethic, I don’t want him. But by the way, it was a pretty impressive Pro Day.” https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/30/mayock-jamarcus-russells-pro-day-a-cautionary-tale/

He's knowledgeable, smart and hard-working. He's made a lot of good calls through the years. But he's 60. That's about enough right there, but there's more. He's always been happier as an outsider rather than a builder. He's never addressed team-building, never run a group of scouts, never had to deal with too much bureaucracy, never had to deal with a head coach. Never showed much interest in anything but the draft and broadcasting. Wildly unlikely.

Jalen Hurts. Richard Todd, Ken Stabler, Joe Namath. And Bart Starr. Which amounts to four Super Bowl championship starters and two very promising young guns. But that's the wrong question. Name an Alabama QB between Tua and those early guys who built up enough expectations to be drafted as high. There aren't many. What school you come from has far less to do in terms of predicting QB success than do the skills you showed there. For Tua specifically, it's too early to tell. Far too early. Allen looked pretty bad his first year too. Plenty of QBs who later turned out to be very very good looked bad as rooks.

Certainly possible, but I doubt it. Last year having nothing to play for in week, 17, Allen threw 5 passes before being replaced by Barkley.

They need each other. Neither will be quite as good without the other. It's harder to find an Allen than a Daboll, but Herbert or Watson are extremely good-looking young QBs. Daboll was considered smart and a good OC since he got here. He had a head coaching interview last year, so the argument he wasn't talked about positively till now is pure nonsense. He's damn smart. Doesn't guarantee he'll be a good HC, but he's without question an excellent OC. It's not a sure thing Daboll goes but that's the way to bet. If he does, who they get to replace him will be important.

4. They have a different view of life, the world and Kumerow than you do