Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
kilroy69

Derrick Henry for MVP

Recommended Posts

In a pass heavy league he was a man amongst boys. No qb this year should get it over a rb that had 2k yards. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gets my vote, he lead my team to a come back victorious championship. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henry was historically good, Rodgers was one of best qbs this year good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe he should, but he won’t. Rodgers will win it easily regardless of whether he ‘should’...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*I* also think Henry should get it.  His season much more .. rare, than what Rodgers and Mahomes are doing (in the CURRENT defensive rule environment).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I would rank the MVP candidates in this order...

  1. Rodgers
  2. Mahomes
  3. Henry
  4. Brady
  5. Allen

So for the sake of argument the yardage total for rogers would not put him in the top 20 of all time. His 48 tds are tied for 5th.

 

Derrick Henry rushed for the 5th all time amount of yards in a season and is the first back to hit 2k yards since 2012 and is only the 4th in the last 20 years. Keep in mind that this is a passing league now and no one else even came close to 2k this year.

 

Rogers season was great for a regular year. Henrys performance was historical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus 5.4 yards per rush att, and three games Henry had 200 plus rush yards. 

He should be the mvp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, kilroy69 said:

So for the sake of argument the yardage total for rogers would not put him in the top 20 of all time. His 48 tds are tied for 5th.

 

Derrick Henry rushed for the 5th all time amount of yards in a season and is the first back to hit 2k yards since 2012 and is only the 4th in the last 20 years. Keep in mind that this is a passing league now and no one else even came close to 2k this year.

 

Rogers season was great for a regular year. Henrys performance was historical. 

In today's NFL, a RB is more easily replaceable than a QB.  If both Rodgers and Henry go down Week 1, both teams would suffer of course, but the Packers (and Chiefs), would suffer more than Tennessee.  I mean, hell, if Brady got hurt Week 1, Tampa would have been in the running for Trevor Lawrence, but that's neither here nor there.  The point is, regardless of the type of season (historically), these guys had, teams are able to make do with lesser RB's than QB's if need be.

Case in point, Dallas.  I'm a huge advocate for Elliott and not so much for Prescott, but look what happened when Prescott got hurt.  That team was dreadful.  I mean, in the first 5 weeks they weren't much to write home about, but that was because their defense sucked... not their offense.  They went from averaging 32 ppg to 21.  Averaging 488 yards per game down to 319.  Had Elliott gotten hurt and not Prescott, do you think Dallas struggles that much?

Is Tennessee in the playoffs with Henry?  No.  They'd probably have been a 7 or 8 win team though.  Without Rodgers, the Packers are probably a 4-win team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

In today's NFL, a RB is more easily replaceable than a QB.  If both Rodgers and Henry go down Week 1, both teams would suffer of course, but the Packers (and Chiefs), would suffer more than Tennessee.  I mean, hell, if Brady got hurt Week 1, Tampa would have been in the running for Trevor Lawrence, but that's neither here nor there.  The point is, regardless of the type of season (historically), these guys had, teams are able to make do with lesser RB's than QB's if need be.

Case in point, Dallas.  I'm a huge advocate for Elliott and not so much for Prescott, but look what happened when Prescott got hurt.  That team was dreadful.  I mean, in the first 5 weeks they weren't much to write home about, but that was because their defense sucked... not their offense.  They went from averaging 32 ppg to 21.  Averaging 488 yards per game down to 319.  Had Elliott gotten hurt and not Prescott, do you think Dallas struggles that much?

Is Tennessee in the playoffs with Henry?  No.  They'd probably have been a 7 or 8 win team though.  Without Rodgers, the Packers are probably a 4-win team.

Without henry the titans would be a 2 win team. The play action opens up what tannahill can do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kilroy69 said:

Without henry the titans would be a 2 win team. The play action opens up what tannahill can do. 

In 3 years without Tannehill, Henry was "a nice RB".  After Tannehill, he's a stud.  I think the argument could be made that Tannehill's respectability as a passer is what allowed Henry to be able to do what he did.

 

Tennessee 2019... Mariotta started the first 6 games.

Derrick Henry in those 6 - 113 attempts, 416 yards, (3.68 ypc), and 6 TD's. (Tennessee was 2-4)

Derrick Henry in the 10 with Tannehill - 190 attempts, 1,124 yards (5.92 ypc), and 12 TD's. (Tennessee was 7-3)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

In 3 years without Tannehill, Henry was "a nice RB".  After Tannehill, he's a stud.  I think the argument could be made that Tannehill's respectability as a passer is what allowed Henry to be able to do what he did.

In his first 3 years he had a former pats coach as his head coach and they guy loved dion lewis. He was used in a RBBC. The Addition of Vrabel had a far bigger effect that tannahill did. Henry went from 110, to 176 to 215 to 303 and finally 378 rushes in a season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kilroy69 said:

So for the sake of argument the yardage total for rogers would not put him in the top 20 of all time. His 48 tds are tied for 5th.

 

Derrick Henry rushed for the 5th all time amount of yards in a season and is the first back to hit 2k yards since 2012 and is only the 4th in the last 20 years. Keep in mind that this is a passing league now and no one else even came close to 2k this year.

 

Rogers season was great for a regular year. Henrys performance was historical. 

It's the same old argument we see in all team sports every year: what does most valuable actually mean? The ancillary question is should there be a most outstanding player of the year, alongside the MVP award? Obviously the MVP favors the QB, almost in the same way it favors them in the Heisman. They are simply more valuable to winning than any other position. Rodgers Total QBR of 84.5 (or so) is the third highest ever, higher than Lamar Jackson last year's MVP and higher than Mahomes the winner the year before. Only Brady and Peyton's historic seasons were higher. The packers are the # 1 seed. There is no way analytically speaking, one can argue Henry is more responsible for winning to a greater degree than Rodgers. Again, 2000 yards is special, and from a fantasy perspective much more valuable, but from an NFL, real football perspective, Rodgers will win the MVP, rather easily...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, kilroy69 said:

In his first 3 years he had a former pats coach as his head coach and they guy loved dion lewis. He was used in a RBBC. The Addition of Vrabel had a far bigger effect that tannahill did. Henry went from 110, to 176 to 215 to 303 and finally 378 rushes in a season. 

Legit point.  But, I'll circle back to 2019.  The last 10 with Tannehill and the first 6 with Mariota is a perfect example of the impact a QB can have on the RB.  I think it shows more to how Tannehill is more responsible for the teams' performance as well as Henry, than the other way around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Legit point.  But, I'll circle back to 2019.  The last 10 with Tannehill and the first 6 with Mariota is a perfect example of the impact a QB can have on the RB.  I think it shows more to how Tannehill is more responsible for the teams' performance as well as Henry, than the other way around.

You could also look at it as the dolphins paid the titans to take Tannahill off their hands and he was on his way to being a backup for the rest of his career till they started using Henry in the way they have been. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, kilroy69 said:

You could also look at it as the dolphins paid the titans to take Tannahill off their hands and he was on his way to being a backup for the rest of his career till they started using Henry in the way they have been. 

You could, but then I'd make the same coaching point you did.  Adam Gase & Joe Philbin are clearly not good HC's.  The one thing that both Henry and Tannehill have in common is 2019.  Henry was significantly better once he had Tannehill as his QB.  Henry with Tannehill at QB is dramatically better than Henry with Mariota.  Certainly, you could make the argument that Mariota isn't an NFL QB and that brought Henry down.  I'd at least give credence to it.  But I think QB's have a bigger impact on the game than RB's do.

Even with bad coaching, Tannehill was a solid QB.  Special/great?  Of course not, but he was a solid NFL QB and never had any real pieces around him other than Jarvis Landry.  Their OLine was mediocre to below average and their RB's were "meh".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only three of the previous 2,000 yard rushers won the MVP outright...  Another tied for the award...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe Devante Adams should be MVP...  Second in catches (and set the Packers franchise record), tied for fifth in yards, led with 18 TDs, all while missing 2.5 games...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take Rodgers off GB and they'd go from 13-3 to 2-14.  Take Mahomes off of KC, they'd go from 14-2 to 7-9.  Take Henry off of Tennessee, they'd go from 11-5 to 6-10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/3/2021 at 5:49 PM, kilroy69 said:

Henry was historically good, Rodgers was one of best qbs this year good.

Rodgers was historically good as well. No QB had ever thrown 48 or more TDs with 5 or fewer INTs. In fact, not even with 9 or fewer INTs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, kilroy69 said:

Derrick Henry rushed for the 5th all time amount of yards in a season

And Rodgers passed for the 5th most TDs, if I'm not mistaken.

To be Henry and Rodgers are equally worthy. People can talk about Tannehill's impact on Henry, but you could say the same about Adams (who wasn't healthy last year) for Rodgers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, t.j said:

And Rodgers passed for the 5th most TDs, if I'm not mistaken.

To be Henry and Rodgers are equally worthy. People can talk about Tannehill's impact on Henry, but you could say the same about Adams (who wasn't healthy last year) for Rodgers.

No you can't.  Unless you're kidding yourself.  Last year the Packers were 13-3.  Adams missed 4 games and the Packers were 4-0 in those games, including a 31-24 win against the Chiefs.  This year, Adams missed 2 games and the Packers were 2-0, including a 37-30 win against the Saints.  In 2017, Rodgers missed 7 games (9), but Adams only played in 7 of those... in those 7, the Packers were 3-4.  So, without Adams, Rodgers is 6-0... without Rodgers, Adams is 3-4.  I think it's quite obvious that Adams needs Rodgers and not the other way around.

Also, Davante Adams wasn't on the Packers in 2011 and 2014 when Rodgers won his last 2 MVP's.

 

You can try to make any argument you want about Henry, but the bottom line is that 2019 is clear that Tannehill had a bigger impact on the team than Henry did.  It's also clear that while Henry is great and elite... makes that team better, he's not as important as Tannehill.  Is Tannehill great?  Of course not, but his ability to actually be a good QB, is what allows Henry to be at his best.  I posted Henry's production from 2019 a few posts up.  He averaged 69 yards per game on 3.8 ypc, and 1 TD per game as the Titans went 2-4 with Mariota.  In the 10 games with Tannehill, where the team went 7-3, Henry averaged 112 yards per game on 5.92 ypc and 1.2 TD's per game.

 

You know what, I just convinced myself that Henry isn't even the team MVP and really shouldn't be an NFL MVP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Last year...

...while Adams was out or playing hurt most of the year, Rodgers threw 22 fewer TDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, t.j said:

...while Adams was out or playing hurt most of the year, Rodgers threw 22 fewer TDs.

... and yet, still went 4-0 without Adams and 13-3 with him hurt most of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're arguing a different point than what I was commenting on. One can argue that how the QB plays is always more valuable, than how the RB plays, and I will concede that as a valid argument. You can also generally argue (it's true for the vast majority of teams), that there's more dropoff from the starting QB to the backup QB, than there is from starting RB to the backup RB. On all that we are on the same page.

However, to the point that Derrick Henry needed Ryan Tannehill for succeed, certainly the QB change helped, but as kilroy pointed out I think it had far more to do with Vrabel and the offensive philosophy. (Getting AJ Brown some experience also helped the 2019 passing game, it wasn't all Tannehill.) And Henry has proved in the past that if you give him enough carries he can dominate with other QBs, see the divisional playoff win at KC in 2017. Sometimes the coach just has to be willing to commit to the run in order to get value out of their RB (back to the point about Vrabel).

And yes the Packers won a lot of games last year, but it was a different type of game they were winning. The 2019 Packers defense allowed less than 20 points per game, and they won 8 of their regular season games scoring 24 points or less (which is less than league average for points per game). This year the Packers were average at best on defense, but their offense upped their scoring by 133 points over last year, jumping from 15th in the league to 1st. That's a massive difference, largely attributable to Adams' health. (Adams himself increased his touchdowns from 5 to 18... at seven points per that's 91 of the additional133 points right there.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NFL is a team game.  EVERYONE needs to contribute to get the best possible results.  How they get those results, is irrelevant... THAT they get them IS.  With Mariota and Henry, the Titans were 2-4.  With Tannehill and Henry, they were 7-3.  With Adams and Rodgers (over the last 2 seasons), the Packers 20-6... without Adams and Rodgers, they're 6-0.  In BOTH instances, the QB is what makes the difference.

I don't care what historic stats Henry put up (or even Rodgers)... he wouldn't have those stats with a lesser QB and the Titans would probably have 4 or 5 wins.  If Henry gets hurt, the Titans would not have won the division... or even made the playoffs, but they'd probably have 7 to 9 wins.  Without Adams all season, the Packers and Rodgers have proven that they don't NEED him.  They would have still made the playoffs without Adams had he missed the whole season.  Would they have been the #1 seed?  No, but they'd definitely have won 10+ games and be in the playoffs.  Without Rodgers, and Adams playing the whole season, the Packers would be picking in the top 5 in the draft this year.

Yes, in Henry's first 55 games, including the 2 playoff games in 2017, Henry showed he can dominate... TWICE, so obviously that means the other 53 games are unimportant [sarcasm].  With a "lesser QB", Henry failed to reach 70 yards in 41 of his first 55 games.  In the subsequent 26 games, he's hit 70 yards in 22 of them.  Same coach by the way.  Sure, having Brown "helped", but let's not pretend it significant.  With Mariota, he had 14 receptions for 273 yards and 2 TD's.  In the first 6 with Tannehill, when Tennessee went 5-1, Brown had 20 receptions for 353 yards and 2 TD's.  So he basically had 1 extra catch for 13 yards per game more with Tannehill than with Mariota.  In those 6 games, Henry had 724 yards and 7 TD's, which is significant, compared to the 6 with Mariota when he had 416 yards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't care what historic stats Henry put up (or even Rodgers)... he wouldn't have those stats with a lesser QB and the Titans would probably have 4 or 5 wins.  If Henry gets hurt, the Titans would not have won the division... or even made the playoffs, but they'd probably have 7 to 9 wins.  Without Adams all season, the Packers and Rodgers have proven that they don't NEED him.  They would have still made the playoffs without Adams had he missed the whole season.  Would they have been the #1 seed?  No, but they'd definitely have won 10+ games and be in the playoffs.  Without Rodgers, and Adams playing the whole season, the Packers would be picking in the top 5 in the draft this year.

Yes, in Henry's first 55 games, including the 2 playoff games in 2017, Henry showed he can dominate... TWICE, so obviously that means the other 53 games are unimportant [sarcasm].  With a "lesser QB", Henry failed to reach 70 yards in 41 of his first 55 games.  In the subsequent 26 games, he's hit 70 yards in 22 of them.  Same coach by the way.  Sure, having Brown "helped", but let's not pretend it significant.  With Mariota, he had 14 receptions for 273 yards and 2 TD's.  In the first 6 with Tannehill, when Tennessee went 5-1, Brown had 20 receptions for 353 yards and 2 TD's.  So he basically had 1 extra catch for 13 yards per game more with Tannehill than with Mariota.  In those 6 games, Henry had 724 yards and 7 TD's, which is significant, compared to the 6 with Mariota when he had 416 yards.

That's just not necessarily true. The last time a RB reached 2000 yards (Peterson/Vikings), they had no passing game to speak of. With a great RB like Henry/Peterson in their prime, their impact is more dependent on coaching commitment to the run game than it does the effectiveness of the passing game.

38 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Without Adams all season, the Packers and Rodgers have proven that they don't NEED him.

That was true in 2019 because the defense was so good. I don't think that is a true statement for 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The additional point that I suppose I need to state explicitly is that MVP is, for better or worse/like it or not, largely a statistical award. Did the 2018 Chiefs nees Pat Mahomes more than the 2018 Seahawks?Probably not, as they already had a ~11 win team every year before Mahomes took over, and there's no way that Hawks team would have sniffed even 6 wins without Russ. So according to your argument (a valid argument, but not one voters have necessarily voted according to), Wilson was the more worthy MVP. But Mahomes had the bonkers stats so he won the award. Hence it does matter that both Henry and Rodgers put up historic numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait; so everyone agrees that Derrick Henry shouldn't be the MVP.  We just disagree to which degree he shouldn't be the MVP?

 I'm reading this thread as tj thinks Derek Henry shouldn't be the MVP, and TBayXXXVII thinks Derek Henry really shouldn't be the MVP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chicago O-lineman (and former Wildcat) Cody Whitehair should be the MVP,  for moving from Center to Guard for the last part of the season and making David Montgomery look like a viable RB in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, nobody said:

Wait; so everyone agrees that Derrick Henry shouldn't be the MVP.  We just disagree to which degree he shouldn't be the MVP?

 I'm reading this thread as tj thinks Derek Henry shouldn't be the MVP, and TBayXXXVII thinks Derek Henry really shouldn't be the MVP.

No I think Henry and Rodgers are equally deserving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, t.j said:

No I think Henry and Rodgers are equally deserving.

That's just stupid.  Let's fight to the death.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, t.j said:

That's just not necessarily true. The last time a RB reached 2000 yards (Peterson/Vikings), they had no passing game to speak of. With a great RB like Henry/Peterson in their prime, their impact is more dependent on coaching commitment to the run game than it does the effectiveness of the passing game.

That was true in 2019 because the defense was so good. I don't think that is a true statement for 2020.

The difference is that Peterson did carry the team with a bad QB... Henry didn't do that.

How don't know how much better the Packers defense was last year compared to this year.  They seemed fairly similar.  Everything these days is behind a paywall.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, nobody said:

Wait; so everyone agrees that Derrick Henry shouldn't be the MVP.  We just disagree to which degree he shouldn't be the MVP?

 I'm reading this thread as tj thinks Derek Henry shouldn't be the MVP, and TBayXXXVII thinks Derek Henry really shouldn't be the MVP.

No, he thinks Henry should be a legit choice, I do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let Henry be the runner up.

The QB plays the most important position in football. Sure 48 TD's is only tied 5th, but he also only threw 5 interceptions. The man is also 36 years old. Just turned 37 actually. That might be the best TD:INT ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, thePRO said:

Let Henry be the runner up.

That would be appropriate...

It also provides a rationale for passing on Rodgers.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henry should be the Mvp. 

And I would agree, Henry’s strength is his abilty to be the runner.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thePRO said:

Let Henry be the runner up.

The QB plays the most important position in football. Sure 48 TD's is only tied 5th, but he also only threw 5 interceptions. The man is also 36 years old. Just turned 37 actually. That might be the best TD:INT ever.

It might be around the 8th bet TD:INT rate ever.  Foles had a 27:2 ratio one year.  I know Rodgers and Brady both had at least one higher than that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×