ChiefsPlanet - View Single Post - Football Arkush won't vote Rodgers for MVP because he's a jerk

**Rain Man** · 01-05-2022, 02:08 PM

Out of curiosity, is it legitimate to not vote for a guy for the Hall of Fame if he's a jerk?

In that case, I can see an argument for it. If a guy is jerk in the locker room, he's got less value to the team. (I see Terrell Owens over there glaring at me.) Or if a guy is a jerk in a way that damages the sport, he's not a good ambassador for football. (I see john elway drunkenly glaring at me.) But I think it's valid to withhold your Hall of Fame vote if a guy's off-field behavior tarnishes the sport.

For MVP I think it's a little different. A guy can still be MVP even if he's a jerk. But I don't know why I view them so differently. Maybe it's because the Hall of Fame is more big-picture in nature, whereas MVP is a very tactical look at what happened on the field.

01-05-2022, 02:08 PM	#3
Rain Man Seize life. Be an ermine. Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: My house Casino cash: $-752449 VARSITY	Out of curiosity, is it legitimate to not vote for a guy for the Hall of Fame if he's a jerk? In that case, I can see an argument for it. If a guy is jerk in the locker room, he's got less value to the team. (I see Terrell Owens over there glaring at me.) Or if a guy is a jerk in a way that damages the sport, he's not a good ambassador for football. (I see john elway drunkenly glaring at me.) But I think it's valid to withhold your Hall of Fame vote if a guy's off-field behavior tarnishes the sport. For MVP I think it's a little different. A guy can still be MVP even if he's a jerk. But I don't know why I view them so differently. Maybe it's because the Hall of Fame is more big-picture in nature, whereas MVP is a very tactical look at what happened on the field. __________________ Active fan of the greatest team in NFL history. Last edited by Rain Man; 01-05-2022 at 02:13 PM.. Reason: I accidentally capitalized elway's name, which implies respect. I changed it to lower case.
Posts: 145,584