Love this article. Love, love love it. The whole Purdy/Jackson/MVP issue to me crystalizes the fact that MVP awards, like Hall of Fame awards (particularly the way baseball does that) or Heisman awards and other awards that aren't defined as being about something in particular, are defined by their sloppiness and that for myself I can't take them too seriously. Too much eye testing and rooting for your favorite team's players involved.
The cases for and against Purdy and Jackson, so opposite, in a season where there is no clear cut leader just show the weakness of this award. And yeah why not Josh Allen and Dak Prescott both of whom have strong cases and also serious areas of weaknesses depending on what you most value. The best thing I can say is thank god that it is voted on by writers and not players. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder here.
As a Ravens fan I'd most likely give my vote to Allen. But with serious reservations. In voting for Allen, I am saying that I am defining the MVP award as which player is hardest to replace on a team that is a serious Super Bowl contender-which is totally my own definition and most everyone else can think otherwise. To me Purdy is a) having a great year, and b) could be replaced by Jake Browning and few would notice. But his team at the moment seems like the best team in the league, that EPA is so sexy, and those things mean something since the MVP award has some sort of non-defined connection to overall team success. So then QB on the best team? Purdy. He's maxing out the riches that are in the SF offense. But maybe Buffalo is the best team right now so Allen? But those 6 losses do mean something, I don't know what, and they are a very convenient counting stat. And the new OC is finally revving up their run game that is not dependent on Allen.
I do not think the Ravens are the best team but why are they leading the AFC? I do see defensive holes such that talk of the D being historically great just seems silly. But it is very good that will probably get exposed next weekend. The team is getting better at holding a lead. So the very inconsistent Lamar? Possibly only Allen could replace him and get similar results. Maybe. I also see Lamar needing to do more designed runs for the team in their remaining games.
Ugh. Sorry for the long post which basically says I am clueless about this silly award.
I agree with your points and also have a hard time taking voter based awards seriously. The lack of defined criteria and tendency to rely on narratives render these awards questionable at best.
But here’s the unfortunate reality - awards matter a lot in historical evaluation because we have little else to go on. If some lineman made the All Pro team in 1973, who am I to question it since I wasn’t around? 50 years from now, the winner of the 2023 MVP award will carry a lot of weight in historical discussions even if it was handed out in a haphazard, illogical manner. For that reason I care about this stuff more than I’d like to.
I was wondering how EPA would handle Lawrence’s completion that ran out the clock in Q2. Glad it’s treated as a huge negative since it took at least three points off the board. That’s one of those situations where the boxscore doesn’t tell the story at all.
Love this article. Love, love love it. The whole Purdy/Jackson/MVP issue to me crystalizes the fact that MVP awards, like Hall of Fame awards (particularly the way baseball does that) or Heisman awards and other awards that aren't defined as being about something in particular, are defined by their sloppiness and that for myself I can't take them too seriously. Too much eye testing and rooting for your favorite team's players involved.
The cases for and against Purdy and Jackson, so opposite, in a season where there is no clear cut leader just show the weakness of this award. And yeah why not Josh Allen and Dak Prescott both of whom have strong cases and also serious areas of weaknesses depending on what you most value. The best thing I can say is thank god that it is voted on by writers and not players. But beauty is in the eye of the beholder here.
As a Ravens fan I'd most likely give my vote to Allen. But with serious reservations. In voting for Allen, I am saying that I am defining the MVP award as which player is hardest to replace on a team that is a serious Super Bowl contender-which is totally my own definition and most everyone else can think otherwise. To me Purdy is a) having a great year, and b) could be replaced by Jake Browning and few would notice. But his team at the moment seems like the best team in the league, that EPA is so sexy, and those things mean something since the MVP award has some sort of non-defined connection to overall team success. So then QB on the best team? Purdy. He's maxing out the riches that are in the SF offense. But maybe Buffalo is the best team right now so Allen? But those 6 losses do mean something, I don't know what, and they are a very convenient counting stat. And the new OC is finally revving up their run game that is not dependent on Allen.
I do not think the Ravens are the best team but why are they leading the AFC? I do see defensive holes such that talk of the D being historically great just seems silly. But it is very good that will probably get exposed next weekend. The team is getting better at holding a lead. So the very inconsistent Lamar? Possibly only Allen could replace him and get similar results. Maybe. I also see Lamar needing to do more designed runs for the team in their remaining games.
Ugh. Sorry for the long post which basically says I am clueless about this silly award.
I agree with your points and also have a hard time taking voter based awards seriously. The lack of defined criteria and tendency to rely on narratives render these awards questionable at best.
But here’s the unfortunate reality - awards matter a lot in historical evaluation because we have little else to go on. If some lineman made the All Pro team in 1973, who am I to question it since I wasn’t around? 50 years from now, the winner of the 2023 MVP award will carry a lot of weight in historical discussions even if it was handed out in a haphazard, illogical manner. For that reason I care about this stuff more than I’d like to.
I was wondering how EPA would handle Lawrence’s completion that ran out the clock in Q2. Glad it’s treated as a huge negative since it took at least three points off the board. That’s one of those situations where the boxscore doesn’t tell the story at all.