jand999

joined 11 months ago
[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

He's playing great football but isn't scoring enough TDs to really be in the conversation for winning.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Stroud won't win because their record won't be good enough. Tua and Dak have 0 wins against winning teams

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Tua is on pace to end just under 5,000 yards (4987), 70% completion percentage, 36 tds to 13.6 int. Is that the best season in nfl history?

Stats wise, I agree, but if Tua has 0 wins against winning teams, he isn't getting the MVP.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

I don't think that's how we should judge MVP. Mahomes would win every year wouldn't he? Regardless of how he is playing because everyone knows he's still the best and would trade any player in the league for him.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Last year I thought Mahomes and Hurts were good enough for MVP. I would give it to CMC or a defensive player. No QB deserves it so far.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Some of them have an outside shot at an all pro but I would bet the answer is 0.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

This is the year to give a non-QB MVP but they won't do it.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah but do you play football in the same pair every week? He also mentions he doesn't wash them during a hot streak. So if they win they don't get washed. He's truly a baseball player at heart because that is disgusting

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

This motherfucker is gonna be wearing 18 year old underwear in 10 years?

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Redzone struggles will cripple otherwise great offenses.

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

how belichek has always been a fraud

He's the GOAT but some people give Brady too much respect lol

[–] jand999@alien.top 1 points 10 months ago

We don't love 13 seconds?

view more: next ›