Would that have been true if the 49ers won?
NFL Thread 2019
- Thread starter RobinLFC
- Start date
Would that have been true if the 49ers won?
Depends on Jimmy‘s performance.
He was garbage in this game.
To me it felt like a game made for Brady to win it. There were some easy looks, but Garappolo did not go that way.
For the greater narrative of the NFL and the Chiefs...sure he was the right choice in that perspective. Williams ran very effectively against the Niners. He scored the go-ahead TD and iced the game on his TD run. Mahomes didn't have a good game and credit to the Niners.
I’m all in for Mahomee but I also don’t think he necessarily was the MVP yesterday.
Damien should’ve iced the game on the play that boosted his stat line by stopping short of a TD and allowing his team to run the clock.
Mahomes raised his game when it mattered (contrast Jimmy G), even if it was late. And there wasn’t a defender that stood out enough to merit the MVP from KC aside from maybe Chris Jones.
That 40+ yard pass on 3rd and 15 was worthy of MVP by itself to be honest.
When it comes to US sports; just look up the comparable stats. Everything else is opinion, or exaggeration.
for what it's worth, I really couldn't care less. I watched 1/2 the game yesterday and that was the most NFL I've watched all season so I'm hardly that interested.
It's just that in a certain mood I tend to take things literally, or if someone makes an inflammatory or WUM statement....
Williams was consistent throughout the game and scored important TDs. His game was high the entire game. That wasn't a stat line boost, sorry. Niners were down by 4 during the Chiefs last scoring drive with 3 timeouts remaining. Chiefs had to get a first down to kill the game...but scoring was better as it killed the game totally.
Who's the first?
.
And I thought I didn't like Brady.
"Has there been a single completion by Brady that couldn't have been thrown by Geno Smith."
And I thought I didn't like Brady.
Sigh. Getting a first down was better because it would've iced the game, scoring meant the Niners got the ball back so definitely not "better".
Your whole view on this is wrong imo - the award is literally called "Most Valuable Player", not "best performance in the Super Bowl". RBs as a whole are simply not valuable at all, proven by the fact that the two featured RBs in the game went undrafted. You could've probably put 30 to 50 RBs in the game for the Chiefs and they would've done the same as Williams, who isn't even that good of a RB. It's all about Reid's system in which RBs historically play well. Same goes for Mostert and the Niners run offense.
With Mahomes, you couldn't find more than 3 to 5 other players on earth who could do what he does (not even 1 if you wanna stretch is). He's the reason their offense ticks, he's the reason they can explode at any point, and he was the reason they scored 21 points in Q4. It's totally justifiable giving it to Mahomes, and not to Williams because he had a nice stat line. If you really want to have a skill player win it other than the QB, Hill had a bigger influence on the game than Williams.
I'd always assumed Superbowl MVP was awarded to "best" (subjective) player/performance in the Superbowl.
Tyreek Hill is a good shout. TBH, nobody really really stood out as the outstanding candidate for the game.
Whoever won, there would be disagreements.
The thing is, Niners played a good to great game for 3 quarters and Chiefs and Mahomes were struggling until that 3rd and long completion. And that happens cos the Niners kinda blew it by not working the clock and killing time after that second Mahomes interception.
Whoever won, there would be disagreements.
The thing is, Niners played a good to great game for 3 quarters and Chiefs and Mahomes were struggling until that 3rd and long completion. And that happens cos the Niners kinda blew it by not working the clock and killing time after that second Mahomes interception.
The Most Valuable Player on the field was Mahomes.
James White had 139 yards and 3 TDs in Super Bowl LI, including the game-winning score and the all-time record for receptions in the Super Bowl, yet Brady was named MVP - and people are complaining about Damien fecking Williams not getting it
RBs are just not as valuable to a team as QBs, simple as.Ahuh, I'm not arguing about WHO got the award. It was just that you said it's not the best performance that dictates it and I'd always assumed that that was what the award was based on. Just curious as seems like I've misunderstood for numerous years and maybe helps explain some of the more dubious MVP awards.The Most Valuable Player on the field was Mahomes.
James White had 139 yards and 3 TDs in Super Bowl LI, including the game-winning score and the all-time record for receptions in the Super Bowl, yet Brady was named MVP - and people are complaining about Damien fecking Williams not getting it
Either way, I'd probably go Mahomes... QB who drives team to victory, clutch passes, a TD, couple of important runs....
The Niners getting the ball back when they are down two TD scores with less than 90 seconds and only 1 TO rendered the game over regardless.
And while your point of QBs being more valuable than RBs is obvious, you're completely understating the importance of a RB and the running game. Your comment of just replacing Williams with X 30 odd players is completely wrong and a complete discredit to him and how he's used for the Chiefs.
The Super Bowl is an isolated game where nobody else cares what the other 3 to 5 top players on earth can do, unless they are on the field. A QB touches the ball every single offensive play, so of course they have the highest potential influence by default. The NFL purposely builds up QBs as a bigger narrative because they understand the power influence of individual players as it relates to their image, which is fine. But you're completely dismissing Williams and his total impact on the game.
While I understand where you're coming from about QBs and their stature in the game, which I don't disagree with, fact is Mahomes didn't have that good of a game. His best throw was I believe to Watkins on the deep sideline throw where Sherman got beat off the snap and didn't turn his head around.
No it doesn‘t. I know it sounds counter-intuitive, but scoring there gives SF possession back with the chance to re-possess via an on-side kick. Unless that score pushes the lead to 3 possessions, the smart play there is to give up forward progress and run the clock out. (And SF had 2 time outs)
One RB did just that in a big game, think it was Philly vs Dallas? Either Sproles or Westbrook? Somebody help me out here... @MrMarcello @Eboue @RobinLFC
Westbrook
If you're talking about this year, Miles Sanders did it in Week 16. He was clean through to the end zone with Eagles leading 16 - 9 and 40 or 50 seconds remaining but he iced the game by taking a 1st down.
So it happened again in the same matchup
? I was going slightly old school there, since I sort of just gave up watching the NFC East this season.I can’t take another conversation about how RBs are relatively invaluable. I swear it crops up every 5 pages
On the topic of whether Williams should have iced the game by giving himself up rather than taking the TD, obviously he should have. The probability of SF coming back whether he did or didn’t wasn’t next to none in both cases, but in the purest sense the smart move was to just run down the clock. Hardly blame him though for seeing the glitz of getting another TD.
Yeah it was the game that essentially decided the NFC East Champions as both Philly and Dallas had mighty 7-7 records. It was easily the worst division this year.So it happened again in the same matchup
I blame @Eboue for spreading that mentality here
just accept that im right and we can move on
Gurley did that last season as well and it cost me a fecking win in fantasy, the bastard.
If anyone is interested here you have a podcast dedicated to the trenches.
What do you think about Jalen Hurst? Do you think that the Vikings should target him in the upcoming draft?
No
Hurts exploded his stat line at the start of the season, but once defenses copped on to Riley’s new scheme he stagnated severely because of his passing ability.
By the end of the season, one coach called our offense a ‘wishbone disguised as a spread’ or something like that because it was so reliant on the run game. And that was with NFL talent at WR.
But is that on Hurst? And does that mean that he shouldn't be one of the Vikings mid round picks?
hell yeah the offaeason is here