Nfl mvp

[David Lyons]

In a previous post, Jeremy Scott wrote: ["Brady is nearing the end of his career and Roethlisberger has another decade? No. Big Ben may indeed play longer than Brady, but it could go the other way too. Because of the different systems in which they play, Big Ben gets beat up a whole lot more. Brady could be more susceptible to major injury if and when he gets hit, but Big Ben takes a regular beating because of the role he plays for Pittsburgh. He is sacked significantly more than Brady, and if memory serves me well, has had a number of concussions. I doubt that he will play significantly longer than Brady, if at all longer. Manning sure seems to be winding down, but I still yet hope he can play. As much as I am a Pats/Brady fan and despise the Colts/Manning, I'd still like to see Peyton tear down Favre's records (and to a lesser degree, Marino's).

The Steelers have been the best team in the NFL in the last 6.5 seasons.
Big Ben is a very good quarterback.
But he is not in the league of Brady, Manning, Brees, and soon-to-be: Rodgers.

As of right now, Rodgers is unbelievable. Whether he will be a Kurt Warner or a Manning/Brees/Brady is yet to be seen and cannot be determined right now. There is at least some voice that Brady is the MVP over Rodgers this year, but I rejected that kind of argument ("MVP to his team") for Manning in the past, and I reject it for my favorite player of all time (Brady) right now. Rodgers is the current MVP and it's very hard for me to see how he could lose it."]

To answer the last part first: Anybody who seriously promotes anyone other than Aaron Rodgers as the NFL MVP this year needs to have their head examined for showing signs of being hit by James Harrison. And I agree, I see no way anyone else can take it from him with only three games left in the regular season.

Big Ben is almost 5 years younger than Brady, shares a Hines Ward mentality about pain and still feels he has something to prove, while Brady tried to look like Justin Bieber and cries when someone touches his helmet with their fingertips. Longevity is hard to predict, but it feels to me that Brady only has one or two years left before he retires to the Hall of Fame along with Peyton Manning.

I agree with you that The Steelers have been the best team in the NFL over the last 6.5 years and also over the last 40 + years since the Super Bowl era started.

[David Morris]

In a previous post, Jeremy Scott wrote: ["Brady is nearing the end of his career and Roethlisberger has another decade? No. Big Ben may indeed play longer than Brady, but it could go the other way too. Because of the different systems in which they play, Big Ben gets beat up a whole lot more. Brady could be more susceptible to major injury if and when he gets hit, but Big Ben takes a regular beating because of the role he plays for Pittsburgh. He is sacked significantly more than Brady, and if memory serves me well, has had a number of concussions. I doubt that he will play significantly longer than Brady, if at all longer. Manning sure seems to be winding down, but I still yet hope he can play. As much as I am a Pats/Brady fan and despise the Colts/Manning, I'd still like to see Peyton tear down Favre's records (and to a lesser degree, Marino's).

The Steelers have been the best team in the NFL in the last 6.5 seasons.
Big Ben is a very good quarterback.
But he is not in the league of Brady, Manning, Brees, and soon-to-be: Rodgers.

As of right now, Rodgers is unbelievable. Whether he will be a Kurt Warner or a Manning/Brees/Brady is yet to be seen and cannot be determined right now. There is at least some voice that Brady is the MVP over Rodgers this year, but I rejected that kind of argument ("MVP to his team") for Manning in the past, and I reject it for my favorite player of all time (Brady) right now. Rodgers is the current MVP and it's very hard for me to see how he could lose it."]

To answer the last part first: Anybody who seriously promotes anyone other than Aaron Rodgers as the NFL MVP this year needs to have their head examined for showing signs of being hit by James Harrison. And I agree, I see no way anyone else can take it from him with only three games left in the regular season.

Big Ben is almost 5 years younger than Brady, shares a Hines Ward mentality about pain and still feels he has something to prove, while Brady tried to look like Justin Bieber and cries when someone touches his helmet with their fingertips. Longevity is hard to predict, but it feels to me that Brady only has one or two years left before he retires to the Hall of Fame along with Peyton Manning.

I agree with you that The Steelers have been the best team in the NFL over the last 6.5 years and also over the last 40 + years since the Super Bowl era started.

He more than likely hit you illegally in the first place, so I'd be willing to accept someone promoting Drew Brees as the MVP.

[Shea Zellweger]

He more than likely hit you illegally in the first place, so I'd be willing to accept someone promoting Drew Brees as the MVP.

I think Brees and Brady will remain in the conversation until the end, but barring some drastic change in the next 3 weeks, Rodgers has them beat. However, I'm wondering if someone on the 49ers might not get tapped for the impressive turnaround. Same thing with the Bengals.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

I think it'll be Tebow - who will give credit to his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (not kidding)

[Shea Zellweger]

I think it'll be Tebow - who will give credit to his Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (not kidding)

...
...
...

In the name of all that is football-holy, I hope this does not happen. Unless Tebow has secretly been serving as the defensive coordinator for the last 8 games, in which case he more than likely deserves coach of the year...

[Scott Sherwood]

Remind me, does voting take place before the Super Bowl or after?

As of week 14, no one has a more irrefutable picture of what the team looks like without him and then with him than one Tim Tebow. All the other discussions have to include hypotheticals about what the team "would" look like without their mvp candidate. We know for certain what the Broncos looked like before Tebow and now with Tebow.

I don't think he is the best player in the NFL, but if Denver keeps winning, he has to be in the running for most valuable.

That being said, I am a Bears fan. What he and the Broncos did to my team beginning 57 minutes and 52 seconds into a stellar Bears performance should be illegal. It's like being two laps down with one lap to go and coming back to win. It is inhumane. I feel so violated. Comic books and action-thrillers have more realistic endings. I was watching with Tebow fans and was already into full gloat mode. Humiliating.

And yet I love the guy. I think I have stockholm syndrome.

[Wilson Deaton]

To answer the last part first: Anybody who seriously promotes anyone other than Aaron Rodgers as the NFL MVP this year needs to have their head examined ...

Seriously, it is rather silly for people to act like Rodgers isn't the MVP this year.

Wilson

[Shea Zellweger]

Remind me, does voting take place before the Super Bowl or after?

As of week 14, no one has a more irrefutable picture of what the team looks like without him and then with him than one Tim Tebow. All the other discussions have to include hypotheticals about what the team "would" look like without their mvp candidate. We know for certain what the Broncos looked like before Tebow and now with Tebow.

I don't think he is the best player in the NFL, but if Denver keeps winning, he has to be in the running for most valuable.

I repeat:

...
...
...

In the name of all that is football-holy, I hope this does not happen. Unless Tebow has secretly been serving as the defensive coordinator for the last 8 games, in which case he more than likely deserves coach of the year...

You cannot give Tebow credit for the fact that since he took over, the Bronco's defense has been the best in the league.

That being said, I am a Bears fan. What he and the Broncos did to my team beginning 57 minutes and 52 seconds into a stellar Bears performance should be illegal. It's like being two laps down with one lap to go and coming back to win. It is inhumane. I feel so violated. Comic books and action-thrillers have more realistic endings. I was watching with Tebow fans and was already into full gloat mode. Humiliating.

And yet I love the guy. I think I have stockholm syndrome.

The Bears put up 10 points in 60 minutes. Not exactly a "steller performance." They also made at least 3 HUGE mistakes in the final minutes to hand the game over to the Broncos. Tebow did not make Barber run out of bounds, nor did he make the Bears forget how to tackle, nor did he force Barber to fumble when the Bears were already in FG range. He also did not cause Matt Prater to match his career long in FG to tie the game as time expired. He may have been the inspiration or the motivation behind all of these things, and he may not have, but it would be an immense departure from the MVP tradition if the trophy were to go to a person whose apparent intangibles (motivation, inspiration, determination) were considered more important than his actual performance. Maybe Tebow really deserves it- maybe he is the force driving this team in all 3 phases- but I would be positively shocked if he actually got it.

[Bob Hunter]

Shea,

He's the popular choice, but maybe not the most deserving in terms of actual game performance. Tebow is refreshing because right now the NFL needs a good story. Too many bad stories....more than I can count. Tebow brings a good vibe and actual wins to the game.

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Shea,

He's the popular choice, but maybe not the most deserving in terms of actual game performance. Tebow is refreshing because right now the NFL needs a good story. Too many bad stories....more than I can count. Tebow brings a good vibe and actual wins to the game.

That's my thinking - but I know we all tend to focus on our team or at least teams we get to see play. I said what I did about Tebow because, when all is said and done, he's the player who is making the biggest difference in his team - not only on the field, but also for the morale of his team, causing them to keep believing they can win a game even when it seems impossible. In fact, I have the idea that even the coaching staff is better because of him.

[Scott Sherwood]

Shea, any time a Bears fan speaks of a "stellar performance," it is a given that he is talking about the defense and special teams. We have heard about a third phase and some claim to have seen it, but I for one don't think it exists.

Re: the broncos defense, I have not studied the stats, but I would guess they are spending about 10 minutes less per game (regulation) on the field now than they were BT. This would help explain why the same bunch of players suddenly look so much better.

[Shea Zellweger]

Shea,

He's the popular choice, but maybe not the most deserving in terms of actual game performance. Tebow is refreshing because right now the NFL needs a good story. Too many bad stories....more than I can count. Tebow brings a good vibe and actual wins to the game.

This is true. The question is, does that make him MVP?

BTW, if you guys watched the GB game yesterday (it was effectively over before the Tebow show started :P), we got some insight into the Pack without Rodgers vs. with him. With Rodgers in the game, the Packers outscored the raders 43-7. Rodgers had less than 300 yards, a rating below 100 for the first time this year, and by all accounts put up his worst performance of the year.
When he left, they got outscored 9-3. Their 3 points came from a drive that started on the OAK 41, and Rodgers' replacement was 0-2 with a sack and a safety. The defense's performance decreased, as did the run game and special teams.
I'm inclined to think that this is because by the time Flynn got into the game, the Packers had the game in the bag, and were effectively on autopilot. But this is the problem when we start arguing for MVP based on how the rest of the team performs. Maybe Tebow is responsible for the turnaround on defense, and maybe he isn't. Maybe he's the inspiration behind his team's improved play, and maybe he isn't. Maybe Kyle Orton, or anyone replacing Kyle Orton, would've got the same results Tebow has after Denver's bye, maybe they would've failed... maybe they would've done better. There's no way to know, just like there's no real way to know how the Patriots or Packers would be doing without Brady or Rodgers. The MVP has always been based on individual accomplishments which led directly to team success. That's why players on losing teams don't get it, and it's also why players with poor individual stats on winning teams don't. The voters this year are not all that different than they were in 2007, 2009, or 2010- regardless of whether anyone else deserves it, and Tebow might, they will give it to Rodgers, because they've shown that's how they vote. A QB who starts the season 13-0 and is on pace to break all the records will win it every time.

[Bob Hunter]

I think we have a pretty good idea what the Broncos would be without Tebow. They would be like the Colts without Manning. Or the Pats without Brady. Or the Pack without Rodgers. I know I'm pushing it here and Tebow is no where near the top tier of QBs. But he has a certain something that lifts his team. Kyle Orton had 3 years (or was it 2.5 yrs?). The record speaks for itself. Tebow actually has a less talented roster than Orton. He has guys from the practice squad, holy cow and doods we never heard of.

Most impressive was how he morphed into a pocket passer and adjusted the Bears Defense after they stuffed the run game for 3 Quarters. Tebow had 13 passing first downs. Most of them in the close. Very unexpected for a guy they critics said couldn't pass to save his life. The unlikliness of all this continues. I do not expect them to win against the Pats...btw.

[Benjamin Burch]

I repeat:



You cannot give Tebow credit for the fact that since he took over, the Bronco's defense has been the best in the league.



The Bears put up 10 points in 60 minutes. Not exactly a "steller performance." They also made at least 3 HUGE mistakes in the final minutes to hand the game over to the Broncos. Tebow did not make Barber run out of bounds, nor did he make the Bears forget how to tackle, nor did he force Barber to fumble when the Bears were already in FG range. He also did not cause Matt Prater to match his career long in FG to tie the game as time expired. He may have been the inspiration or the motivation behind all of these things, and he may not have, but it would be an immense departure from the MVP tradition if the trophy were to go to a person whose apparent intangibles (motivation, inspiration, determination) were considered more important than his actual performance. Maybe Tebow really deserves it- maybe he is the force driving this team in all 3 phases- but I would be positively shocked if he actually got it.

Score another one for sanity.

[Benjamin Burch]

Shea, any time a Bears fan speaks of a "stellar performance," it is a given that he is talking about the defense and special teams. We have heard about a third phase and some claim to have seen it, but I for one don't think it exists.

Re: the broncos defense, I have not studied the stats, but I would guess they are spending about 10 minutes less per game (regulation) on the field now than they were BT. This would help explain why the same bunch of players suddenly look so much better.

This is true, and yet untrue at the same time. People often talk about the time of possession game, but in the case of Tebow it actually isn't helpful. The defense receives the same amount of rest on passing series that take 2:00 off the clock as they do on running series that take 5:00 off the clock. They're still spending 5:00 sitting on the sideline resting, because the offense is stil only allotted :40 between plays, and a running play in and of itself only requires an extra 3 seconds to a passing play, if even. The only difference is that the game clock stops on an incomplete pass but not on a 0-yard run. Thus, it looks like the defense got more rest, but they didn't.

The better indicator is third down conversion rate, and total 1st downs, as well as plays run. In all of these categories, Tim Tebow's Broncos are doing far worse than Kyle Orton's Broncos. From there, the turnovers equal out the equation. They probably haven't seen much better field position on average, though they may have faced more outliers (very short fields) with Orton (I'm not sure), leading to some easy points.

However, if the defense is getting rest via 1st downs, and 3rd down conversions, then it is the defense's jobs to get stops and keep the time possession game in their favor.

[Bob Hunter]

This is true, and yet untrue at the same time. People often talk about the time of possession game, but in the case of Tebow it actually isn't helpful. The defense receives the same amount of rest on passing series that take 2:00 off the clock as they do on running series that take 5:00 off the clock. They're still spending 5:00 sitting on the sideline resting, because the offense is stil only allotted :40 between plays, and a running play in and of itself only requires an extra 3 seconds to a passing play, if even. The only difference is that the game clock stops on an incomplete pass but not on a 0-yard run. Thus, it looks like the defense got more rest, but they didn't.

The better indicator is third down conversion rate, and total 1st downs, as well as plays run. In all of these categories, Tim Tebow's Broncos are doing far worse than Kyle Orton's Broncos. From there, the turnovers equal out the equation. They probably haven't seen much better field position on average, though they may have faced more outliers (very short fields) with Orton (I'm not sure), leading to some easy points.

However, if the defense is getting rest via 1st downs, and 3rd down conversions, then it is the defense's jobs to get stops and keep the time possession game in their favor.

The red zone is what counts. He may not score like Rogers, but he does enough to win and that's what matters in this league.

[Scott Sherwood]

NFL record setting kicker's thoughts on playing with Tebow. It is still a pretty small sample size, but I'm not sure one player's intangibles have ever made such a tangible difference for such a long stretch.

“This has been probably the most fun I’ve ever had playing football,” Prater said. “Where in the past you kind of feel like you’re just going to your job, now it’s back to high school football—where you’re playing with all your friends and you’ve got all their backs and all that stuff.”

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/stor...#ixzz1gNiWEjHI

[David Lyons]

With Rodgers in the game, the Packers outscored the raders 43-7. Rodgers had less than 300 yards, a rating below 100 for the first time this year, and by all accounts put up his worst performance of the year. ... A QB who starts the season 13-0 and is on pace to break all the records will win it every time.

The heading for this thread is "NFL MVP", yet somehow it has evolved into a discussion of Tim Tebow. I love what Tim Tebow is doing and agree that he is a difference maker extraordinaire for the Broncos, but the MVP is about having great performances (usually on a winning team) over the length of the season. I do not remember anyone ever having a better year than Aaron Rodgers this year. Tom Brady was close when the Patriots set numerous offensive records a few years ago. And Aaron Rodgers statistics have also led to winning ... EVERY TIME! Even his worst statistical game was better than most qb's best games. Tim Tebow's best yardage passing in a game this year was 236. Aaron Rodgers worst passing yardage in a game was 247. Besides being my own opinion, I also predict that the MVP voters will be almost, if not completely, unanimous in voting for Rodgers. Tebow will be in the top 5 because of his amazing impact on his team. (I love the kicker's quote)

[David Morris]

The heading for this thread is "NFL MVP", yet somehow it has evolved into a discussion of Tim Tebow. I love what Tim Tebow is doing and agree that he is a difference maker extraordinaire for the Broncos, but the MVP is about having great performances (usually on a winning team) over the length of the season. I do not remember anyone ever having a better year than Aaron Rodgers this year. Tom Brady was close when the Patriots set numerous offensive records a few years ago. And Aaron Rodgers statistics have also led to winning ... EVERY TIME! Even his worst statistical game was better than most qb's best games. Tim Tebow's best yardage passing in a game this year was 236. Aaron Rodgers worst passing yardage in a game was 247. Besides being my own opinion, I also predict that the MVP voters will be almost, if not completely, unanimous in voting for Rodgers. Tebow will be in the top 5 because of his amazing impact on his team. (I love the kicker's quote)

Unfortunately, that won't be the case. Your top 5 for MVP will be:

1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Drew Brees
3. Tom Brady

No doubt this is your Top 3. After this, #4 & #5 will be comprised of two of these players: Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Ray Rice, Matt Forte. I think Matt Schaub was an easy #4 until his season was cut short due to injury.

Tim Tebow will not crack the Top 5.

[David Lyons]

Unfortunately, that won't be the case. Your top 5 for MVP will be:

1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Drew Brees
3. Tom Brady

No doubt this is your Top 3. After this, #4 & #5 will be comprised of two of these players: Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Ray Rice, Matt Forte. I think Matt Schaub was an easy #4 until his season was cut short due to injury.

Tim Tebow will not crack the Top 5.

You may be right about #'s 4 and 5. However, as someone who had Matt Schaub as the starting quarterback on my fantasy team, I would say that Arian Foster and Ben Tate rated higher than Schaub this year, and both rate below the coaching staff, specifically the defensive staff. Considering who does the voting, Tebow does have an uphill climb to make near the end, but that is what he specializes in. :-)

[Jeremy D. Scott]

So the fact that the backup QB came in and did what Rodgers does every week means that he isn't the "MVP", right?

I wouldn't have expected it, but Brees may have slipped in there...

[David Lyons]

I wouldn't have expected it, but Brees may have slipped in there...

It is definitely a lot closer race for MVP than I thought it would be. It would not be out of the question for Rodgers, Brees or Brady to win it or finish third. I would vote for them in that order, but now Brees has gone and set a number of new passing records... hmmm...

On a related note, I think it is wrong to name the Pro Bowl players before the regular season is over. What's the rush? And... how come the AFC's best defense only got one player as a starter on that team?

[Benjamin Burch]

It is definitely a lot closer race for MVP than I thought it would be. It would not be out of the question for Rodgers, Brees or Brady to win it or finish third. I would vote for them in that order, but now Brees has gone and set a number of new passing records... hmmm...

This gets blown out of proportion, I feel.

Brees broke 2 records
Brady broke 1 record (though Brees beat him in that)
Rodgers broke 1 record - which was the most impressive of all the records broken.

I think it is Rodgers and it won't be close. The Associated Press is the same group that does both "All-Pro" teams and the MVP award.

Rodgers got all but 2 votes for the All Pro 1st team.
Brees got only 2 votes
Brady got 0 votes

This will be a runaway. Rodgers is winning the MVP quite easily, thought Brees will probably win OPOY.

On a related note, I think it is wrong to name the Pro Bowl players before the regular season is over. What's the rush? And... how come the AFC's best defense only got one player as a starter on that team?

Why wait?

They got 4 last I checked...

Haloti Ngata
Ray Lewis
Terrell Suggs
Ed Reed

[Shea Zellweger]

This gets blown out of proportion, I feel.

Brees broke 2 records
Brady broke 1 record (though Brees beat him in that)
Rodgers broke 1 record - which was the most impressive of all the records broken.

I think it is Rodgers and it won't be close. The Associated Press is the same group that does both "All-Pro" teams and the MVP award.

Rodgers was also on track to break several other records. Of the three, he's the only one who sat week 17 out, and took some other time off in earlier weeks. Based on his backup's numbers, it seems likely that had he played every snap, he'd have the TD record, and probably the yardage record as well.

[Benjamin Burch]

Rodgers was also on track to break several other records. Of the three, he's the only one who sat week 17 out, and took some other time off in earlier weeks. Based on his backup's numbers, it seems likely that had he played every snap, he'd have the TD record, and probably the yardage record as well.

No, Brees would have more yards still, though he'd have probably broken Marino's mark.

However, who says he plays as well as his backup? Or that things play out the same? If particularity matters, then Rodgers starting the game means everything is different.

[David Lyons]

Brees broke 2 records

[David Lyons had written: "how come the AFC's best defense only got one player as a starter on that team?" (Pro Bowl)

They got 4 last I checked...

Haloti Ngata
Ray Lewis
Terrell Suggs
Ed Reed

Nice try on those crazy birds, though they do play on probably the second best defensive team.

I don't remember all that I read, but I am pretty sure that Brees broke more than two passing records, it was something like four or five.

[Benjamin Burch]

Nice try on those crazy birds, though they do play on probably the second best defensive team.

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

The Ravens also were better against the pass in terms of QBRating against (1st) and ANY/A (2nd). They were better against the run in terms of Y/A, and only allowed 2 more points per game. They also got more turnovers.

The Steelers were the better team and, if healthy, the best team in the NFL - still.

But the Ravens were the best defense in the NFL this year, with the 49ers #2. You're just a homer, it's okay.

I don't remember all that I read, but I am pretty sure that Brees broke more than two passing records, it was something like four or five.

I'm sorry, I was thinking significant records.

[David Lyons]

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

The Ravens also were better against the pass in terms of QBRating against (1st) and ANY/A (2nd). They were better against the run in terms of Y/A, and only allowed 2 more points per game. They also got more turnovers.

The Steelers were the better team and, if healthy, the best team in the NFL - still.

But the Ravens were the best defense in the NFL this year, with the 49ers #2. You're just a homer, it's okay.



I'm sorry, I was thinking significant records.

I guess I could be called a "homer", he is my Dad's first cousin after all. However, to get to the facts about defense, Pittsburgh allowed the fewest yards per game, the fewest passing yards per game and the fewest points per game. The only other important measuring stick which they weren't first in was rushing yards per game. Since this is based on the entire regular season, and since Baltimore and Pittsburgh play the same schedule, we do not need "weighted" measurements to compare teams. Unfortunately, the only statistic that really mattered in the end was that Baltimore won both of their games against Pittsburgh. I agree with you, maybe with a homer's bias, that the Steelers are possibly the best team in the NFL when healthy.

As for Brees concerning significant records, he has only won one Super Bowl so far, so he ranks below Brady and Roethlisberger and is equal with Rodgers and the Manning brothers. Also, shouldn't there be an adjustment to account for someone who plays a lot of games in indoor stadiums?

[Benjamin Burch]

I guess I could be called a "homer", he is my Dad's first cousin after all. However, to get to the facts about defense, Pittsburgh allowed the fewest yards per game, the fewest passing yards per game and the fewest points per game. The only other important measuring stick which they weren't first in was rushing yards per game. Since this is based on the entire regular season, and since Baltimore and Pittsburgh play the same schedule, we do not need "weighted" measurements to compare teams. Unfortunately, the only statistic that really mattered in the end was that Baltimore won both of their games against Pittsburgh. I agree with you, maybe with a homer's bias, that the Steelers are possibly the best team in the NFL when healthy.

As for Brees concerning significant records, he has only won one Super Bowl so far, so he ranks below Brady and Roethlisberger and is equal with Rodgers and the Manning brothers. Also, shouldn't there be an adjustment to account for someone who plays a lot of games in indoor stadiums?

1) Baltimore and Pittsburgh do not (did not) play the same schedule. They each play the other twice, and Pittsburgh's defense is not the same as Baltimore's defense.

2) Baltimore and Pittsburgh do not (did not) play the same schedule. They finish in different seedings in their division, and 2 games each season are based upon your seeding in your division.

So, you're wrong on one point.

From there, you just used a bunch of volume stats which mean very little. I don't care about how many yards rushing they gave up a game. I care how many they gave up a carry. It is far more telling. Maybe people just didn't run on them, even though when they did so Pitt couldn't stop them.

We need these measurements precisely because some people are content to look at a bunch of meaningless numbers without context and then declare their team the best defense, even though their defense got smoked by the 49ers while the Ravens smashed them. Just a thought....

Baltimore had the best defense this year, and they had 4 pro-bowlers for that very reason.

[Jeremy D. Scott]

1) Baltimore and Pittsburgh do not (did not) play the same schedule. They each play the other twice, and Pittsburgh's defense is not the same as Baltimore's defense.

2) Baltimore and Pittsburgh do not (did not) play the same schedule. They finish in different seedings in their division, and 2 games each season are based upon your seeding in your division.

So, you're wrong on one point.

From there, you just used a bunch of volume stats which mean very little. I don't care about how many yards rushing they gave up a game. I care how many they gave up a carry. It is far more telling. Maybe people just didn't run on them, even though when they did so Pitt couldn't stop them.

We need these measurements precisely because some people are content to look at a bunch of meaningless numbers without context and then declare their team the best defense, even though their defense got smoked by the 49ers while the Ravens smashed them. Just a thought....

Baltimore had the best defense this year, and they had 4 pro-bowlers for that very reason.

Ben, you're often right. I don't think it's so this time.

You want to reject a very simple meaningful stat like points per game (the only stat that really matters at the end of the day in ANY regard: individually OR team), yet use the number of PROBOWLERS as evidence instead? That's a really weak argument. I'm a biased Pats fan and I can't stand the Steelers more than anyone else (including the Jets), so I have nothing to defend here. But throwing away a stat like points per game when figuring out the better defense is not good football analysis.

I think that the 49ers were a squeak better than Pittsburgh, especially having played a harder schedule. Looking at the average offensive rank (by yards), the Ravens and Steelers had very comparable schedules (and actually rather easy ones...). The 49ers had a harder schedule (again..by Offensive Rank according to yards and not PPG because PPG includes points scored by the defense).

Anyway, it's certainly not clear that Baltimore was better defensively than the Steelers over the course of the season.

[David Lyons]

1) Baltimore and Pittsburgh do not (did not) play the same schedule. They each play the other twice, and Pittsburgh's defense is not the same as Baltimore's defense.

2) Baltimore and Pittsburgh do not (did not) play the same schedule. They finish in different seedings in their division, and 2 games each season are based upon your seeding in your division.

So, you're wrong on one point.

From there, you just used a bunch of volume stats which mean very little. I don't care about how many yards rushing they gave up a game. I care how many they gave up a carry. It is far more telling. Maybe people just didn't run on them, even though when they did so Pitt couldn't stop them.

We need these measurements precisely because some people are content to look at a bunch of meaningless numbers without context and then declare their team the best defense, even though their defense got smoked by the 49ers while the Ravens smashed them. Just a thought....

Baltimore had the best defense this year, and they had 4 pro-bowlers for that very reason.

I almost had added the word "essentially" before the phrase "the same schedule". I figured everybody would understand that "essentially" was implied. I guess not.

Yards per carry is just as meaningless as any other stat when put under a microscope. The real stat that counts is wins. Next in importance is points, since that determines wins. Dan Marino, who was a great quarterback that everyone would have loved to have on their team, set the record for passing yards precisely because his teams never had a great running game.

Anyway, Pittsburgh deserved more than 1 started on the Pro Bowl team. Maybe we should just leave it at that.

[Benjamin Burch]

Ben, you're often right. I don't think it's so this time.

You want to reject a very simple meaningful stat like points per game (the only stat that really matters at the end of the day in ANY regard: individually OR team), yet use the number of PROBOWLERS as evidence instead? That's a really weak argument. I'm a biased Pats fan and I can't stand the Steelers more than anyone else (including the Jets), so I have nothing to defend here. But throwing away a stat like points per game when figuring out the better defense is not good football analysis.

I think that the 49ers were a squeak better than Pittsburgh, especially having played a harder schedule. Looking at the average offensive rank (by yards), the Ravens and Steelers had very comparable schedules (and actually rather easy ones...). The 49ers had a harder schedule (again..by Offensive Rank according to yards and not PPG because PPG includes points scored by the defense).

Anyway, it's certainly not clear that Baltimore was better defensively than the Steelers over the course of the season.

Pitt is by far my #2 team. If the Dolphins aren't playing, I'm cheering for Pittsburgh. Have done so since 1995. So I should be lobbying for them.

I'm not simply disregarding points per game. I think it's significant, and probably the single most significant statistic. However, game situations can often determine if a team scores 24 or 31 against you just as much as your defense can determine that. That is why I used a myriad of statistics and, in just about all of them, Baltimore seems better.

Better QB Rating against. (1st in NFL)
Better ANY/A against. (2nd in NFL)
Better Rush Y/A against. (1st in NFL)
More turnovers.
Better Opponent RedZone %. (1st in NFL)
Better Opponent 3rd down%. (2nd in NFL)
Better 1st Down per play ratio. (1st in NFL)

Those are, in my opinion, the best single statistics for displaying how well a team played against the pass and against the run, how well they stopped teams once they got in scoring position, and how well they forced their opponent to turn the ball over. Also, how well they kill drives and get stops. Pittsburgh was dead last in turnovers. Baltimore almost doubled them in this category. Yikes.

To me, the difference in 2 points per game simply doesn't make up for all of that.

Thus, I think it's no coincidence that Football Outsiders had the Ravens as the #1 defense according to DVOA.
Thus, I also think it's no coincidence that the Ravens have 4 Pro-Bowlers.

[Benjamin Burch]

I almost had added the word "essentially" before the phrase "the same schedule". I figured everybody would understand that "essentially" was implied. I guess not.

Yards per carry is just as meaningless as any other stat when put under a microscope. The real stat that counts is wins. Next in importance is points, since that determines wins. Dan Marino, who was a great quarterback that everyone would have loved to have on their team, set the record for passing yards precisely because his teams never had a great running game.

Anyway, Pittsburgh deserved more than 1 started on the Pro Bowl team. Maybe we should just leave it at that.

Eh, in a normal year I'd totally agree. However, There were just too many better CB's than Taylor, and Harrison and Woodley had down years and were both injured for significant portions of the season.

I just don't see who else I'd put in the pro bowl this year for them on defense. Polamalu is the only one who I would pick. This coming from a guy who thinks Harrison is the best OLB in football and Hampton is the best NT in football.

Timmons also wasn't as impressive as D. Johnson. I just don't see anyone else to pick.

[Benjamin Burch]

bump....

I'm interested in responses.

[David Lyons]

Eh, in a normal year I'd totally agree. However, There were just too many better CB's than Taylor, and Harrison and Woodley had down years and were both injured for significant portions of the season.

I just don't see who else I'd put in the pro bowl this year for them on defense. Polamalu is the only one who I would pick. This coming from a guy who thinks Harrison is the best OLB in football and Hampton is the best NT in football.

Timmons also wasn't as impressive as D. Johnson. I just don't see anyone else to pick.

Well, when you put it that way. Injuries were definitely a problem for the Steelers this year. Actually, since the Steelers had the best passing defense in the league, based on the strange statistic called passing yards allowed, you would think that someone in the secondary would get recognized. I do understand that team greatness is not always easy to measure just by the individuals, whereas great individuals can stand out on not-so-great teams. Honestly, I have no problem with the Ravens getting recognition, since they were probably the second best defensive team in the league.

However, just as a thought, are the AFC North teams filled with great defenses, or are they filled with poor offenses which help the defensive stats? To answer my own question, the defenses still dominate against other teams, so I give the edge to the defensive greatness.

[Benjamin Burch]

Well, when you put it that way. Injuries were definitely a problem for the Steelers this year. Actually, since the Steelers had the best passing defense in the league, based on the strange statistic called passing yards allowed, you would think that someone in the secondary would get recognized. I do understand that team greatness is not always easy to measure just by the individuals, whereas great individuals can stand out on not-so-great teams. Honestly, I have no problem with the Ravens getting recognition, since they were probably the second best defensive team in the league.

However, just as a thought, are the AFC North teams filled with great defenses, or are they filled with poor offenses which help the defensive stats? To answer my own question, the defenses still dominate against other teams, so I give the edge to the defensive greatness.

Defensive greatness always wins out in my book.

However, if you're going to say Total Passing yards is a better metric than Completion%, Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt, and QB Rating... I'll gladly throw against your defense.