Should a defensive player win the MVP? (NFL)

[indeedproceed]

Defense wins championships. People are always saying defense wins championships. Well darn it, if defenses win championships, why aren't defensive players ever MVP's?

I just got done reading this (honestly, mostly fluff) piece by ESPN that asked the MVP question, but targeted their efforts predominantly at Luke Kuechly of the Carolina Panthers. The gist of what they're saying:

Here's my MVP quarterback pick: Luke Kuechly, quarterback of one of the league's best defenses.

He stops a lot of touchdowns.

What the Carolina Panthers' middle linebacker did Sunday against New Orleans was nothing short of spectacular. Officially, Kuechly had 24 tackles, the most in the league in six years and tied for the most since tackle stats first were recorded in 1994.

The Carolina coaching staff credited the former Boston College star with two more tackles during Monday's game review.

That's 26. Panthers coach Ron Rivera used to take three or four games to get that many when he played linebacker for the Chicago Bears.

That's like a six-touchdown game for Manning.

And did I mention that Kuechly had an interception, as well? That made him the first player since Derrick Brooks in 2001 to have 20-plus tackles and an interception.

That's like a seven-touchdown game for Manning.

Kuechly isn't a one-game wonder, either. He collects tackles like Manning does passing yards. His tally of 165 with a regular-season game remaining at Atlanta is one more than he had last season when he led the league as a rookie.

It wouldn't surprise me to see him one day break the single-season league record of 195 set by Detroit linebacker Chris Spielman in 1994.

Kuechly deserves MVP consideration because he's a big reason the Panthers are 11-4, but defensive players seldom, if ever, get that level of respect. There hasn't been a defensive player named MVP since Lawrence Taylor in 1986.

Maybe that should change.

But Kuechley isn't the first guy who has deserved to at least have this debate. Ray Lewis's leadership and defensive abilities (enhanced by his freakish athleticism and..ahem...killer instinct) of the early 2000's was nothing short of phenomenal. Brian Urlacher and Zack Thomas both had all-time performances in the 90's. Mike Singletary's Chicago defenses are actually now considered Mid-West American Folk-art.

But the only guy who's ever managed to grab the coveted NFL MVP trophy during the last 50 years who wasn't a quarterback or a running back is Lawrence Taylor. And he's only 1 of 3 guys who have ever won the MVP award who were not QBs or RBs, and one of two defenders (the other being Alan Page, a DT for the Vikings) to ever win the award.

But if Defense Wins Championships, and if a team is obviously a better defensive team than offensive team (as was the case for many NFL super bowl teams over the past 20 years), why haven't defenders taken the MVP more often?

Now one reason might be because defenses don't have an official "quarterback", a player who handles the ball every possession, who often decided where to send it, and when, and a guy who is ultimately responsible if crap hits the fan, its worth noting that just about every defense, even the bad ones, have this player in some capacity.

And its doubly worth noting that in 1986, LT didn't win it because he was the quarterback of the defense. That honor likely went to HOFer Harry Carson. LT won the award because he was literally the most valuable player for a juggernaut of a defense. LT was the type of player who literally changed the way the game was played.

But so did Dion Sanders. So did Joe Greene. So did Ronnie Lott.

But as I said before, its just somehow (for sure unjustly) easier to dismiss defensive players than offensive players. Offensive players score touchdowns. When the team you hope wins (or loses) makes a big play, its the offensive player who gets the close-up, and if it was a reception, the quarterback gets to double-dip. Defenders are part of a 'defensive unit' while QB's are leaders. Running backs are runaway trains while defensive tackles are 'walls'. Maybe its just the nature of the spectator to put more emphasis on progress instead of stubborn immovability.

And just like any other year, if someone says Luke Keuchly deserves the MVP, someone else will point to Star Lotulelei, Greg Hardy, or Charles Johnson. And they're all great players. In the case of Hardy, a potential HOFer. But its Kuechly's defense. Maybe he's not an MVP, but the fact that Cam Newton will have an outside shot at the award and nobody will even mention the defense is a pretty poor state of events.

NBA Addendum:

In the NBA, it's a little more varied, as players from all 5 positions have won MVP's throughout the last 20 years (and that's just counting LeBron James). But, defense is always the side of the ball that gets the crap end of the stick in terms of recognition, and basketball is no different.

While there are a good number of elite two-way players in the NBA's MVP list (Over the past 20 years players like Hakeem, David Robinson, Jordan, Shaq, Garnett have all won the MVP and they're All-NBA level defenders) but only once in the last 20 years and twice in the history of the DPOY award have the MVP and DPOY coincided (Hakeem in 94 and Jordan in 88).

[Roy H.]

A defensive guy could potentially win the MVP, but he'd have to be an LT-caliber player who consistently dominated.

This year, of course, it's a non-starter.  Peyton Manning is as clear-cut an MVP as there has ever been in the NFL.

[indeedproceed]

A defensive guy could potentially win the MVP, but he'd have to be an LT-caliber player who consistently dominated.

This year, of course, it's a non-starter.  Peyton Manning is as clear-cut an MVP as there has ever been in the NFL.

LT also dominated for what..6 years prior to winning?

Manning's case this season, its undeniable. But was AP last year more dominant than Keuchly has been this year?

And also, Manning's performance this season, while again, utterly dominant, comes in a year where highs were set for team PPG and Passing yds per game, which comes on the heels of a year that set highs for passing YPG, and was within a tenth of a TD for passing TDs per game, which came on teh heels of the year that had set the mark for passing yards per game, blah blah blah...

I'm saying the game we're seeing today..its a bit different than where it was 10 years ago. These passing statistics look eye-popping now, but its a trend seems like.

[Roy H.]

But was AP last year more dominant than Keuchly has been this year?

I would say so.  AP came within a handful of yards from breaking the NFL rushing record.  That's in a era where the sport is evolving toward pass-heavy offenses.

Kuechly's got 88 solo tackles and 58 assisted tackles.  He's third in the NFL.  He's got 2 sacks, no forced fumbles, and a more impressive four interceptions.

It's a great season, but not one of the greatest of all time.

[Fafnir]

Brian Urlacher never played a snap in the 90's.

[Fafnir]

But was AP last year more dominant than Keuchly has been this year?

I would say so.  AP came within a handful of yards from breaking the NFL rushing record.  That's in a era where the sport is evolving toward pass-heavy offenses.

Kuechly's got 88 solo tackles and 58 assisted tackles.  He's third in the NFL.  He's got 2 sacks, no forced fumbles, and a more impressive four interceptions.

It's a great season, but not one of the greatest of all time.

Defensive players don't win MVPs usually because great performances defensively often don't come with counting stats that can be measured.

Urlacher's most impressive plays often involved him faking a blitz or run support look and then dropping back 20 yards to deny the seam route entirely to the QB. Or chasing Michael Vick around as a spy resulting in a D-lineman getting the tackle because he was trying to get the edge on Urlacher.

That's just two examples from a "MVP" caliber defensive player I've watched.

[indeedproceed]

Brian Urlacher never played a snap in the 90's.

You never played a snap in the 90's.

[Moranis]

I think the problem defensive players have is, is the perception that if you took one guy out, even a dominant one, you wouldn't affect the overall defense that much nor the win/loss record.  I mean if Kuechly wasn't playing, would Carolina be a 4 win team or would they be a 9/10 win team.  I think most people would peg them as a 9/10 win team without Kuechly, while on the flip slide if you took Cam Newton out I think most people would believe Carolina would be significantly worse than 11 wins and no where near the playoffs.  That is why defensive players won't win the MVP except in extremely rare circumstances.

I also think for a defensive player to win he is going to have to be a field position and possession changing player i.e. a guy with a lot of sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, and interceptions.  A guy that gets a lot of tackles is nice, but he isn't the game changer that a guy that gets sacks and forces fumbles is. 

[indeedproceed]

I think the problem defensive players have is, is the perception that if you took one guy out, even a dominant one, you wouldn't affect the overall defense that much nor the win/loss record.  I mean if Kuechly wasn't playing, would Carolina be a 4 win team or would they be a 9/10 win team.  I think most people would peg them as a 9/10 win team without Kuechly, while on the flip slide if you took Cam Newton out I think most people would believe Carolina would be significantly worse than 11 wins and no where near the playoffs.  That is why defensive players won't win the MVP except in extremely rare circumstances.

I also think for a defensive player to win he is going to have to be a field position and possession changing player i.e. a guy with a lot of sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, and interceptions.  A guy that gets a lot of tackles is nice, but he isn't the game changer that a guy that gets sacks and forces fumbles is.

I disagree with this, especially in football, and I'd argue that it is extremely dependent on the quality of the backup.

Sometimes the guy you have behind the franchise QB is Matt Barkley, but sometimes its Nick Foles.

And likewise, if the guy they have behind Keuchly is more Barkley than Foles, and suddenly their middle linebacker spot is played by a less than competent player..well that could highlight just how important he is.

[Moranis]

I think the problem defensive players have is, is the perception that if you took one guy out, even a dominant one, you wouldn't affect the overall defense that much nor the win/loss record.  I mean if Kuechly wasn't playing, would Carolina be a 4 win team or would they be a 9/10 win team.  I think most people would peg them as a 9/10 win team without Kuechly, while on the flip slide if you took Cam Newton out I think most people would believe Carolina would be significantly worse than 11 wins and no where near the playoffs.  That is why defensive players won't win the MVP except in extremely rare circumstances.

I also think for a defensive player to win he is going to have to be a field position and possession changing player i.e. a guy with a lot of sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, and interceptions.  A guy that gets a lot of tackles is nice, but he isn't the game changer that a guy that gets sacks and forces fumbles is.

I disagree with this, especially in football, and I'd argue that it is extremely dependent on the quality of the backup.

Sometimes the guy you have behind the franchise QB is Matt Barkley, but sometimes its Nick Foles.

And likewise, if the guy they have behind Keuchly is more Barkley than Foles, and suddenly their middle linebacker spot is played by a less than competent player..well that could highlight just how important he is.

Ray Lewis and Ed Reed aren't in Baltimore anymore and their defense is a lot better than it was last year by virtually every statistical measure.  Defensive players, even great ones, are fairly easily replaced.  They just aren't that important to a team.  A real special defensive player that forces a bunch of turnovers, scores TD's, etc. has value and can actually create wins from losses, but a guy like Kuechly is no where near that player.  Without him Carolina still wins 9/10 games no matter who the backup is. 

[guava_wrench]

The problem with defensive players is that they do not have enough stats.

Another problem is that the stats they have don't measure their impact as well as the stats of QBs and RBs do.

[indeedproceed]

I think the problem defensive players have is, is the perception that if you took one guy out, even a dominant one, you wouldn't affect the overall defense that much nor the win/loss record.  I mean if Kuechly wasn't playing, would Carolina be a 4 win team or would they be a 9/10 win team.  I think most people would peg them as a 9/10 win team without Kuechly, while on the flip slide if you took Cam Newton out I think most people would believe Carolina would be significantly worse than 11 wins and no where near the playoffs.  That is why defensive players won't win the MVP except in extremely rare circumstances.

I also think for a defensive player to win he is going to have to be a field position and possession changing player i.e. a guy with a lot of sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, and interceptions.  A guy that gets a lot of tackles is nice, but he isn't the game changer that a guy that gets sacks and forces fumbles is.

I disagree with this, especially in football, and I'd argue that it is extremely dependent on the quality of the backup.

Sometimes the guy you have behind the franchise QB is Matt Barkley, but sometimes its Nick Foles.

And likewise, if the guy they have behind Keuchly is more Barkley than Foles, and suddenly their middle linebacker spot is played by a less than competent player..well that could highlight just how important he is.

Ray Lewis and Ed Reed aren't in Baltimore anymore and their defense is a lot better than it was last year by virtually every statistical measure.  Defensive players, even great ones, are fairly easily replaced.  They just aren't that important to a team.

That's a really poor example though, because neither Ed Reed or Ray Lewis were top defensive players last year. (Top as in, top 3 positionally and top-10 within defensive players as a whole)

If you did the same experiment in 2004, the Ravens defense would be decimated.

In fact, look at the 6 games Reed missed in 2005. 1-5 for the Ravens without him, 5-5 with him. Neither mark is great, but thats a pretty glaring difference.

A real special defensive player that forces a bunch of turnovers, scores TD's, etc. has value and can actually create wins from losses, but a guy like Kuechly is no where near that player.  Without him Carolina still wins 9/10 games no matter who the backup is.

Well, we'll never know how well Carolina could've fared without Keuchly but that aside, I think what you're saying here is a fundamental problem with the perception of defensive players, and its what I was getting at in the OP.

If you had a middle linebacker who never made a bad read, perfect and consistent tackling technique, who never got tired, was extremely athletic for his position allowing him to make plays normal MLBs couldnt but didn't record more than 3 INTs or create more than 5 fumbles, he'd make the probowl maybe.

But a guy like that would very likely be the lynchpin to the entire defense. And if the defense was particularly good..

[Fafnir]

I think the problem defensive players have is, is the perception that if you took one guy out, even a dominant one, you wouldn't affect the overall defense that much nor the win/loss record.  I mean if Kuechly wasn't playing, would Carolina be a 4 win team or would they be a 9/10 win team.  I think most people would peg them as a 9/10 win team without Kuechly, while on the flip slide if you took Cam Newton out I think most people would believe Carolina would be significantly worse than 11 wins and no where near the playoffs.  That is why defensive players won't win the MVP except in extremely rare circumstances.

I also think for a defensive player to win he is going to have to be a field position and possession changing player i.e. a guy with a lot of sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, and interceptions.  A guy that gets a lot of tackles is nice, but he isn't the game changer that a guy that gets sacks and forces fumbles is.

I disagree with this, especially in football, and I'd argue that it is extremely dependent on the quality of the backup.

Sometimes the guy you have behind the franchise QB is Matt Barkley, but sometimes its Nick Foles.

And likewise, if the guy they have behind Keuchly is more Barkley than Foles, and suddenly their middle linebacker spot is played by a less than competent player..well that could highlight just how important he is.

Ray Lewis and Ed Reed aren't in Baltimore anymore and their defense is a lot better than it was last year by virtually every statistical measure.  Defensive players, even great ones, are fairly easily replaced.  They just aren't that important to a team.  A real special defensive player that forces a bunch of turnovers, scores TD's, etc. has value and can actually create wins from losses, but a guy like Kuechly is no where near that player.  Without him Carolina still wins 9/10 games no matter who the backup is.

Because Ray Lewis and Ed Reed of last year were high caliber players? Really strange choice for your example.

[Snakehead]

It's a good idea but harder to measure... and it just doesn't happen in sports as much.  Don't see the NFL being any different.  I think it would take a player having an insane amount of sacks to possibly win MVP.

But this year at least I think the MVP is clearly Peyton.

I think the problem defensive players have is, is the perception that if you took one guy out, even a dominant one, you wouldn't affect the overall defense that much nor the win/loss record.  I mean if Kuechly wasn't playing, would Carolina be a 4 win team or would they be a 9/10 win team.  I think most people would peg them as a 9/10 win team without Kuechly, while on the flip slide if you took Cam Newton out I think most people would believe Carolina would be significantly worse than 11 wins and no where near the playoffs.  That is why defensive players won't win the MVP except in extremely rare circumstances.

I also think for a defensive player to win he is going to have to be a field position and possession changing player i.e. a guy with a lot of sacks, tackles for loss, forced fumbles, and interceptions.  A guy that gets a lot of tackles is nice, but he isn't the game changer that a guy that gets sacks and forces fumbles is.

I disagree with this, especially in football, and I'd argue that it is extremely dependent on the quality of the backup.

Sometimes the guy you have behind the franchise QB is Matt Barkley, but sometimes its Nick Foles.

And likewise, if the guy they have behind Keuchly is more Barkley than Foles, and suddenly their middle linebacker spot is played by a less than competent player..well that could highlight just how important he is.

Ray Lewis and Ed Reed aren't in Baltimore anymore and their defense is a lot better than it was last year by virtually every statistical measure.  Defensive players, even great ones, are fairly easily replaced.  They just aren't that important to a team.  A real special defensive player that forces a bunch of turnovers, scores TD's, etc. has value and can actually create wins from losses, but a guy like Kuechly is no where near that player.  Without him Carolina still wins 9/10 games no matter who the backup is.

Because Ray Lewis and Ed Reed of last year were high caliber players? Really strange choice for your example.

ha exactly.  Ed Reed who has zero contributions this year and Ray who retired.

Yes you can replace some defensive players (the defense operates as a unit so much that some loss can definitely be overcome easier than on offense, I'd say) but still each player is very important.  If Watt or Ware or Wilfork or Mathis, any real great player, is lost that's a big deal to a defense.

[slamtheking]

Defense wins championships. People are always saying defense wins championships. Well darn it, if defenses win championships, why aren't defensive players ever MVP's?

I have no problem with a defensive player winning MVP - if they're worthy.  The thing is, great defense is truly a team effort, moreso than offense.  The only defensive player I've seen in my life (following football from the 80's on) that was so dominant in a game that they had an impact just being on the field was Lawrence Taylor in his prime.  There have been lots of great defenders in the past 30+ years, but Taylor was on a different level and the only defender IMHO that's been worthy of being league MVP.

someone older than I may be able to offer some insight into whether the great defenders of the 60's and 70's had that same impact.