Patrick Mahomes is now the overwhelming NFL MVP favorite

[htismaqe]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...yIbOTl70ncM4Zs

NFL odds: After Sunday night, Patrick Mahomes is now the overwhelming NFL MVP favorite

Frank Schwab 2 hrs ago

We can cease and desist with any debate about someone other than Patrick Mahomes being the NFL MVP favorite.

You’ll hear people argue that Kyler Murray, Russell Wilson, Alvin Kamara or anyone else should be “in the conversation,” but the only real talk is that the Kansas City Chiefs quarterback is the overwhelming favorite until further notice. Everyone else is vying for NFL offensive player of the year, though Mahomes should probably win that too.

Sunday night’s heroics, leading a game-winning drive over the Las Vegas Raiders everyone knew was coming, solidified Mahomes’ position. He’s the best player in football and he’s having a phenomenal year.

The odds at BetMGM reflect that.

Mahomes is -118 to win MVP at BetMGM. Next on the list is Wilson at +350. Aaron Rodgers is +550 and nobody else is less than 12-to-1.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by Basileus777

I don't remember any goalline defenses, what I remember is the lack of heavy boxes for most of the first half.

Well then all I can say is re-watch the second half. Spags calls GLD twice. From around the 40-50. I remember it very clearly because I was watching that game at a place called Roosters in Scottsdale with some of the Phoenix Gathering CPers, and standing right next to me was Scho, and someone at the table said, "are we running goal-line defense here?" And after the play one of the announcers said something about it. It was one of the ballsy-est calls I think I've ever seen in an Conference game.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

As always, it depends on what is meant by "valuable." If that means "If you could choose any player in the NFL, who would you choose?', the answer is Mahomes.

Of course, the answer to many questions is Mahomes, so he should probably get it regardless of definition.

Any team looking for a coach or GM this offseason, the first thing any candidate should be asked is -

"If you could have any player in the NFL to start a team right now who would it be?"

If they say any name but Mahomes you tell them the interview is over.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

I can't speak to execution per every DC. But in the pre-game presser Todd said everything every DC says about the Chiefs. "We gotta stop Mahomes from getting outside the pocket, we have to keep a lid on the big plays by Hill, Kelce and Hardman." Words to that effect. How he tried to do it was strange, but he knew who he needed to stop, which was my point.

I'm not saying that Spags didn't respect Tannehill, because I'm sure he did, but he knew that to make Tannehill just average he had to stop the run, so he had to stop Henry. He just didn't try to do it for an entire game, like everyone assumed he would. He did it to start the 2nd half. And kept doing it until we had a two score lead, then he focused on harassing Tannehill.

Tannehill and Henry take Tennessee to the AFCCG. Mariota and Henry don't even make the playoffs. Who in those scenarios is the same and who is different? Don't get me wrong, Henry is a beast and dominated in the playoffs but that example shows why RBs don't win MVPs anymore .

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Tannehill and Henry take Tennessee to the AFCCG. Mariota and Henry don't even make the playoffs. Who in those scenarios is the same and who is different? Don't get me wrong, Henry is a beast and dominated in the playoffs but that example shows why RBs don't win MVPs anymore .

That's the question, and my answer is " I don't know." I haven't spent much time reviewing just who was on that team prior to Tannehill, either players or coaches so it's still up in the air, imo.

hell, I don't really care anyway. To me it's pretty simple: am I more scared of Henry or Tannehill? The answer is obviously Henry. Derrick Henry is exactly the kind of RB that the Chiefs aren't designed to stop efficiently. Not sure if any defense really is, but the Chiefs D isn't built to deal with 260-lb. fast RBs that are sneaky quick. Henry is an elite RB with homerun capability.

Tannehill is just an above average QB, a la Kirk Cousins or Jared Goff. Just not scary. And then take away Henry and make him pass more than run and he's really average-looking. Not a homerun hitter. More a contact hitter type. Heck, just re-watch the AFCCG 2nd half. Once we stuffed Henry and got a two score lead, Spags and the defense handled Tannehill pretty easily. He got 1 TD on a muffed coverage but other than that he was not a big deal.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

That's the question, and my answer is " I don't know." I haven't spent much time reviewing just who was on that team prior to Tannehill, either players or coaches so it's still up in the air, imo.

hell, I don't really care anyway. To me it's pretty simple: am I more scared of Henry or Tannehill? The answer is obviously Henry. Derrick Henry is exactly the kind of RB that the Chiefs aren't designed to stop efficiently. Not sure if any defense really is, but the Chiefs D isn't built to deal with 260-lb. fast RBs that are sneaky quick. Henry is an elite RB with homerun capability.

Tannehill is just an above average QB, a la Kirk Cousins or Jared Goff. Just not scary. And then take away Henry and make him pass more than run and he's really average-looking. Not a homerun hitter. More a contact hitter type. Heck, just re-watch the AFCCG 2nd half. Once we stuffed Henry and got a two score lead, Spags and the defense handled Tannehill pretty easily. He got 1 TD on a muffed coverage but other than that he was not a big deal.

This was the middle of last year so the person was Henry and the person who was different was the QB. My argument is not to diminish Henry as he is elite. Its no surprise that Henry started to dominate at a higher level once they made a QB change. If they only had to game plan for Henry why the sudden surge in yards once the QB switch?

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by tredadda

This was the middle of last year so the person was Henry and the person who was different was the QB. My argument is not to diminish Henry as he is elite. Its no surprise that Henry started to dominate at a higher level once they made a QB change. If they only had to game plan for Henry why the sudden surge in yards once the QB switch?

Wasn't week 10 2019 when TEN started running Henry more?

And wasn't Tannehill's record as a starter before that something like 2-2 before they turned Henry loose? And then they went 5-2 or something after Henry started running for 180 yds/game?

And didn't Tannehill throw for something like 160 yards through the first two playoff games last season? Combined? Something like 75 yards in the first game and 85 in the second game? And then in the AFCCG after we stoned Henry for less than 70 yds, didn't Tannehill throw for barely 200 yards and a single score in the second half?

I know, some of those numbers are off a bit because I'm doing this from memory, but pretty sure they're close.

Anyway, as I recall, before week 10 TEN tried the whole "let's be balanced" thing and then after week 10 they changed tack and went run the heck out of Henry. And Henry was averaging 180 yards a game. Carrying about 30 times a game? Maybe more?

Seems to me Henry was the reason TEN went 5-2 down the stretch not Tannehill. Insert a competent QB with Henry and TEN is dangerous. Take Henry away, like HOU and NOR did last season, only allowing Henry to run for about 180 yards combined between those two games, and let Tannehill try to win it with his arm, and TEN loses.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by CasselGotPeedOn

Looks like he had 18 carries for 112 and a TD. That looks good to me.

Lol that's really good. People here are dumb as hell.

[FloridaMan88]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

Lol that's really good. People here are dumb as hell.

Against a Cincy defense that gives up 137 yards rushing per game.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88

Against a Cincy defense that gives up 137 yards rushing per game.

Somehow CIN got up 17-7 on TEN in the first half. TEN was forced to throw more, so less Henry. Though as soon as they scored again and made it a one score game (judging this from the boxscore), it looks like the ball went back to Henry.

Anyone else notice that when Tannehill throws more than 30 times, TEN tends to lose more? Or that his numbers are very Alex Smith like? Less than 30 attempts, around 200-230 yds, about 60-65% completions, 1 or 2 TDs and an INT per game? Meanwhile Henry carries 25-35 times for 150+.

When Tannehill goes over 35 attempts, he might go aver 300, but mostly not, and he still usually gets a TD or 2, but his turnovers go up. The big difference is that Henry's carries go down significantly to 20 or less and TEN loses most of those games.

[Jeff.Fisher]

Originally Posted by Basileus777

We saw who the Titans were before Tannehill with Henry and how huge of a jump the offense made with Tannehill. If anything it's the other way around, we know that Henry without a decent QB leads to bad offense. You'd get a far lesser dropoff with Tannehill and a lesser RB. The Titans don't come anywhere near 10 wins with a lesser QB.


And the Chiefs in their playoff game against the Titans were more worried about Tannehill off PA than Henry, they didn't sell out to stop the run. Defensive coordinators know that the passing game is what leads to points and not rushing yards.

Lets not forget that the titans were coming off 4 straight road games with Henry being overused in the end. were lucky to draw the playoff matchups they had

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by Jeff.Fisher

Lets not forget that the titans were coming off 4 straight road games with Henry being overused in the end. were lucky to draw the playoff matchups they had

Your defense sucked absolute monkey nuts. Chiefs were packing their shit in regardless

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Jeff.Fisher

Lets not forget that the titans were coming off 4 straight road games with Henry being overused in the end. were lucky to draw the playoff matchups they had

Why?

[Jeff.Fisher]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Why?

Everybody knows the Titans did all the dirty work in the playoffs. The chefs drew the sorry texans and the titans after 4 straight wks on the road. Henry was also nursing some soreness from the workload.

[Jeff.Fisher]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Somehow CIN got up 17-7 on TEN in the first half. TEN was forced to throw more, so less Henry. Though as soon as they scored again and made it a one score game (judging this from the boxscore), it looks like the ball went back to Henry.

Anyone else notice that when Tannehill throws more than 30 times, TEN tends to lose more? Or that his numbers are very Alex Smith like? Less than 30 attempts, around 200-230 yds, about 60-65% completions, 1 or 2 TDs and an INT per game? Meanwhile Henry carries 25-35 times for 150+.

When Tannehill goes over 35 attempts, he might go aver 300, but mostly not, and he still usually gets a TD or 2, but his turnovers go up. The big difference is that Henry's carries go down significantly to 20 or less and TEN loses most of those games.

You are correct. The Titans are their best when Henry sets the game.
Tannehill can get it done though, they went up a few scores on the ravens then stopped throwing the ball. Why throw it when you can run henry down their throats. Although the heavy use backfired in the championship game though. got lucky there

[Hamwallet]

Originally Posted by Jeff.Fisher

Everybody knows the Titans did all the dirty work in the playoffs. The chefs drew the sorry texans and the titans after 4 straight wks on the road. Henry was also nursing some soreness from the workload.

Jackass