IBC

Well... who is it?

The Pats went 3-1 without Brady and beat nobody good all season (Roethlisberger was out of the Pitt game). Gotta be Matt Ryan

I didn't see 'Giants Defense' on here, so I'm not voting.

Nationals wrote:I didn't see 'Giants Defense' on here, so I'm not voting.

Cowboys O-line is who really deserves it.
It'll probably be Ryan, but Brady was better (if Mantana can get an MVP missing 3 games and having a HoFer in Steve Young go 3-0 as his backup, then the 3-1 argument doesn't hold much water). MVP is pretty meaningless, though I would love to see Goodell have to give Brady the MVP after that railroading he gave him.

Brady was certainly the MVP of my fantasy team so that's good enough for me

Without Zeke, Dak can't make throws, despite the o line. Real difference-maker (except when playing Big Blue)

No love for Carr? Have you seen that offense without him at the helm...looks awful. And that defense isn't winning that team any games on their own.

I dunno I think Connor Cook might be good enough to have them competitive in the playoffs

Angels wrote:No love for Carr? Have you seen that offense without him at the helm...looks awful. And that defense isn't winning that team any games on their own.

None. He simply wasn't that good of a QB. Of the 28 QBs with 200+ completions, he was 15th in completion %, 19th in yards/attempt, 8th in passer rating, 16th in ESPN's Total QBR (if you put any value in their BS stat). Oh, and the only playoff team that Carr beat all season was Houston.
Aside from Oakland finishing with 12 wins, what is the case for Derek Carr being an MVP candidate?

I voted Brady because I think it's dumb when one guy is such an obvious choice to earn multiple MVPs but everyone wants to give it to someone new just because they're not Shaq, or Lebron, or Tom Brady.

However, Carr was as valuable to the Raiders as any player to his team this season. They went 12-3 in the NFL's best division with him at the helm. He lead seven 4th quarter comebacks this year. They won tough road games @NO, @TB, @Tenn, @Bal. The guy is the unquestioned leader of the team in the locker room (along with Khalil Mack).

The shitty performance in Denver probably had a lot to do with the letdown from the Carr injury, but I'm not sure the shitty performance in the Wild Card game should be blamed on anything more than A) half the team had the flu B) Pro-Bowl LT was out and C) being down to their 3rd string QB, a rookie making his first NFL start.

Cook can make all the throws, so I think he can be a quality backup or (even better) worthy of a decent draft pick from some team looking for a starter in a season or two but they def need to find a decent veteran backup for next year.

BlueJays wrote:I voted Brady because I think it's dumb when one guy is such an obvious choice to earn multiple MVPs but everyone wants to give it to someone new just because they're not Shaq, or Lebron, or Tom Brady.

However, Carr was as valuable to the Raiders as any player to his team this season. They went 12-3 in the NFL's best division with him at the helm. He lead seven 4th quarter comebacks this year. They won tough road games @NO, @TB, @Tenn, @Bal. The guy is the unquestioned leader of the team in the locker room (along with Khalil Mack).

The shitty performance in Denver probably had a lot to do with the letdown from the Carr injury, but I'm not sure the shitty performance in the Wild Card game should be blamed on anything more than A) half the team had the flu B) Pro-Bowl LT was out and C) being down to their 3rd string QB, a rookie making his first NFL start.

Cook can make all the throws, so I think he can be a quality backup or (even better) worthy of a decent draft pick from some team looking for a starter in a season or two but they def need to find a decent veteran backup for next year.

Sorry, but the AFC West is flat out NOT the best division in the NFL. Every team in that division had huge flaws, Oakland had no defense, KC's offense was pitiful, Denver's offense was even worse and San Diego was a train wreck all around. The only thing that made the division look good was being matched up against the god-awful AFC South for four games. Even the train wreck Chargers managed to go 3-1 against the AFCS (in which games they were a net +36).
Best division in the NFL was the NFC East. The AFC was too much of a muddy mess to reasonably claim any one division was clearly best in the conference, never mind best in the NFL (the one clear factor being the AFC South was the worst).

The Raiders and Chiefs tied for the NFL lead in T/O differential. Denver won the Super Bowl with virtually the same D last year. Rivers, Carr, Smith are all quality QBs. The division also features the best collection of pass rushers anywhere in Mack, Miller, Houston (or Hali or Ford), Bosa.

Sorry, the Giants, Redskins and Eagles don't have major flaws? I still think Dallas's major flaw (starting a rookie QB in the postseason) will be exposed. They should've got Romo back in when they had the chance and kept Dak ready if he faltered. Two 12-4 teams in the AFC West. That was the better division.

BlueJays wrote:The Raiders and Chiefs tied for the NFL lead in T/O differential. Denver won the Super Bowl with virtually the same D last year. Rivers, Carr, Smith are all quality QBs. The division also features the best collection of pass rushers anywhere in Mack, Miller, Houston (or Hali or Ford), Bosa.

Sorry, the Giants, Redskins and Eagles don't have major flaws? I still think Dallas's major flaw (starting a rookie QB in the postseason) will be exposed. They should've got Romo back in when they had the chance and kept Dak ready if he faltered. Two 12-4 teams in the AFC West. That was the better division.

Oakland was 26th in yards allowed and 20th in the NFL in points allowed. Yeah, that's a BIG flaw. It's even more damning with their TO differential. Even with Carr there was a pretty good chance they were one and done.

Smith as a quality QB... now that's funny. I guess it depends on how you define Quality though. Maybe you think being a below average QB is 'Quality', but I don't. 20th in the NFL in passing yards, 27th in TDs, 17th in passer rating (200+ attempts), 18th in yards/attempt. Overall KC was 13th in points on offense, 20th in yards. Yeah, that's a pretty big flaw. Oh, and they have Andy "What's clock management?" Reid as their coach. Pittsburgh will roll over KC. One and done.

Denver did return much of the Defense, and it played well. Their offense, however, flat out sucked. In 2015 it was average, in 2016 they were 27th in the NFL in yards/game and 22d in points. Big freaking flaw.

And, again, San Diego is a compete trainwreck. So dysfunctional they couldn't get Bosa signed until September.

The AFC West got puffed up playing the AFC South for four games each. How much?
Well, the Raiders were 4-0 with an average point differential of +10 against the AFC South. Against everyone else, they were 8-4, with a NEGATIVE average point differential of -.67.
Denver was 3-1 with an average point differential of +10 against the AFC South. Against everyone else, they were 6-6, with a negative average point differential of -.25.
The Chiefs were 2-2 with an average point differential of +3 against the AFC South. Against everyone else, they were 10-2, with an average point differential of +5.5, so they actually didn't benefit all that much at all... that said they also lost games in Houston and against Jacksonville at home.
Then we have the poor Chargers... 3-1 with an average point differential of +9 against the AFC South. Against everyone else, they were 2-10, with a negative average point differential of -4.

1. Anyone who watched the Raiders play throughout the season could easily tell that their defense was an almost totally different unit by the end of the season. When you replace 3/4 of your DBs in the offseason, it often takes a few games for a D to come together. The 70 pts and 1000 yds combined that they allowed over games 1 and 2 of the season (@NO and home against ATL - two of the best offensive units in football) certainly skewed their season averages, which didn't reflect the actual quality of their defense by season's end.

2. Sorry, but saying there was a "good chance they were one and done with Carr" is ridiculous. First of all, with Carr they probably have a bye WC weekend. Even if they still lost to Denver week 17 and had to play Houston, they already beat them once this season with Carr. The entire team had the flu and they just lost their pro bowl LT.

3. The NFC South wasn't particularly good or bad this year. Atlanta was very good. Tampa was a playoff-caliber team. New Orleans wasn't good, but their offense made them a tough out. Carolina was terrible, but every division has at least one terrible team (or two in the case of the AFC East).

BlueJays wrote:3. The NFC South wasn't particularly good or bad this year.

Stop. Just... stop. That one statement right there goes to prove you either really have not got even the slightest clue about football, or you're spreading a load of BS so tremendous it might outdo anything I could do myself on my best (worst?) day. I could spend the time tearing apart the rest of your nonsense, but that one comment right there tells me it's not worthwhile because you're off your rocker.

Can't edit my post. I misread NFC South as AFC South... because I never said anything about the NFC South, I said the AFC South sucked and being matche dup against the AFC South inflated the win totals and appearance of the AFC West.
That said Tampa as a playoff caliber team? Dude... My off-your-rocker comment stands.

Guys the whole NFL sucked this year. Every team has big holes (which is why suddenly the Packers are back in it after being left for dead in November) and every division had a mix of pretty good teams and pretty bad ones, while the Browns, 49ers, and Bears were the only truly shitty teams (I once watched a Browns game and a 49ers game back to back. Wow. Yikes. Blech. Etc.). Were the Bucs really any worse than the Lions? And you can't pretend like the Lions weren't a playoff caliber team this year given that they were actually IN THE PLAYOFFS. I'll be rooting for Pats/Cowboys since those are the only two teams that would be playoff caliber in any era to my eye, but this was just a down year with a bunch of mediocrity (excuse me parity).

Padres wrote:Can't edit my post. I misread NFC South as AFC South... because I never said anything about the NFC South, I said the AFC South sucked and being matche dup against the AFC South inflated the win totals and appearance of the AFC West.
That said Tampa as a playoff caliber team? Dude... My off-your-rocker comment stands.

Name one playoff caliber team New England beat this year. Pitt with Landry Jones doesn't count

What does that have to do with anything?

Cardinals wrote: Name one playoff caliber team New England beat this year. Pitt with Landry Jones doesn't count

Houston and Miami twice

Giants wrote:

Cardinals wrote: Name one playoff caliber team New England beat this year. Pitt with Landry Jones doesn't count

Houston and Miami twice

Member that one time Seattle and Carolina made the playoffs at 7-9...yea that might as well have been the Texans this year given that division. And Miami blew that first chance against the Pats without Tom Brady at the helm.

Angels wrote:

Giants wrote:

Cardinals wrote: Name one playoff caliber team New England beat this year. Pitt with Landry Jones doesn't count

Houston and Miami twice

Member that one time Seattle and Carolina made the playoffs at 7-9...yea that might as well have been the Texans this year given that division. And Miami blew that first chance against the Pats without Tom Brady at the helm.

So clearly a capable team without Brady at the helm? Seems he's not necessary to the Patriots winning.

Padres wrote: That said Tampa as a playoff caliber team? Dude... My off-your-rocker comment stands.

Tampa was 9-7. They were left out of the playoffs due to a tiebreaker with the 9-7 Lions. If you're still in the hunt in the final 2 weeks of the season, you are "playoff caliber." If you are team #7 and only 6 get in, you are probably "playoff caliber."

Raider wins @TB, @Bal, @Tenn, vs Hou (Mexico City) and vs Indy are as many wins against teams in playoff contention at the end of the season as anyone had. There were no great teams this year. The AFC West had two 12-4 teams and only 1 bad team in SD (they were 5-6 before tons of injuries finally caught up and they lost 5 straight to end the year). It was the best division this season.

Angels wrote:

Giants wrote:

Cardinals wrote: Name one playoff caliber team New England beat this year. Pitt with Landry Jones doesn't count

Houston and Miami twice

Member that one time Seattle and Carolina made the playoffs at 7-9...yea that might as well have been the Texans this year given that division. And Miami blew that first chance against the Pats without Tom Brady at the helm.

Can't speak for the NFC South that year, but this year's AFC South was certainly better than the 7-9 Seahawks NFC West. What garbage that was. Either way, the question was playoff caliber, those teams are in the playoffs, therefore they are playoff caliber.