So my boy Justin James Watt just posted the single greatest season ever by a defensive player.
20.5 sacks, 10 batted passes, 5 touchdowns scored (including a pick-6), 4 fumbles recovered, 44 quarterback hits (no other defender had more than 21 quarterback hits), a blocked point-after attempt, etc.
If you have the honor of watching Watt on a weekly basis, then you realize this guy will go down as the greatest defensive player ever if he maintains his current production for 5 more years.
And yet, despite having an unparalleled, irreproachably dominant season, JJ Watt could not get enough votes to win the NFL MVP award; Aaron Rodgers, the Green Bay Packers quarterback, won.
The argument against a defensive player winning is that the award should go to the most valuable player in the NFL. A quarterback who is playing at a very-high level is inherently more individually valuable to his team than any other player at any other position.
Thus, a historically dominant season by a defensive end is still not as valuable as a very-good (but not historic) season by a quarterback.
So I have two questions to posit:
If JJ Watt couldn’t win it this year, will a defensive player ever win the MVP in the modern NFL?
Should the award be renamed to Most Outstanding Player, thereby not discriminating against virtually every position other than quarterback?
This. All it’s going to take is a defensive lineman with a ton of spectacular sacks and TFL, or a DB with a bunch of spectacular interceptions and pass breakups, in a year that there’s no one runaway offensive superstar. It would help if he had Deion Sanders- or Lawrence Taylor-esque personal swagger.
Hard, but not impossible.
“[NFL DB name] has nine INTs on the year, and only one touchdown against him,” will be the rallying cry on ESPN.
That’s a good point. If your team doesn’t make the playoffs, then either A) your position doesn’t really affect whether or not your team wins, regardless of how well you play it or B) your position does affect the outcome of games and your team not making the playoffs indicates you aren’t in the top caliber. Either way, it’s hard to see how you’re entitled to be called the most valuable player in the league.
Also, Watt played pretty well the year before, and his team was 2-14.
I think the rules, as they are, just make the quarterback position too important. I can’t see a defensive player winning the award without pitching in somewhere else (such as as a returner). Part of the reason Watt got some push was because of his offensive touchdowns, though people also realized it was a bit of a gimmick.
And this is really what it boiled down to in this particular year. Watt’s team wasn’t very good. If they had made the playoffs, I think he would have won MVP.
One other oddity: The NFC’s Most Valuable Player award went to Aaron Rodgers, which is fine. He was a worthy candidate.
But… the NFC Offensive Player of the Year award went to Dallas Cowboys running back DeMarco Murray (who was ALSO a worthy candiate for MVP)!
Now, if Rodgers was the MVP, why was he not also the Offensive Player of the Year? And if Murray was a better offensive player than Rodgers , why was he not MVP? It’s not as if either guy was doing anythig on defense or special teams.
I guess the only explanation can be that “player of the year” does not equal “most valuable.” Murray had a better statistical year, but Rodgers meant more to the success of his team. “MVP” seems to mean something different to everyone.
Same reason the Heisman now always goes to a QB. It’s the position that touches the ball on every offensive play (ignoring wildcat plays) and really does drive wins and losses more than any other position.
There is some legitimate argument whether Rodgers was even the best QB. He certainly was great, but Manning and Brady were very good as well.
2014 will probably go down as Watt’s best season, but maybe not. At least he got the defensive POY award.