*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap

[Memento Mori]

They should hide the names of some of the potential nominees and have them choose off of that, might help get rid of some bias

I don't like this for two reasons. First, it doesn't work in practice. If I ask you who you're picking of the QBotY nominees, if you don't already know that the one with the most touchdowns is Cooter Bigsby you can find that out in a few seconds.

Second, the context is important. For example, Sean O'Leary's receiving stats are made more impressive by the fact he was catching passes from 50 TPE Franky LaFleur for 5/13 games.

The awards committee narrows the field before the season is over. At least I think so. This could be what causes them to overlook some players.

That makes sense. I think the last regular season game was on May 20th, though. Two weeks before the awards stream. There's time for them to make some changes without reducing the time voters have to vote.

I think part of the consideration was that Ugarth was a first gen rookie. Also, to some of your other points, if you wanted the award to go to the guys who gets the most tackles, then why even vote on it? Why not just give the linebacker with the most tackles the award every season? And yes, often times in awards situations you can have players who had similar seasons, that's not a failure of the voters.

Ugarth was drafted in S21, so I think adding this caveat is a little misleading. But if younger players were given extra credit in the nomination process, why was this not applied to other players drafted in S21 or sooner like Rapid Eagle, Johnny Hellzapoppin or Quinn Hughes?

I think you've missed the point. I said the voters should decide, with the awards committee giving them the ability to make their own judgements on what they place the most value on. Not having Edmond on the ballot denies the voters the chance to decide how much to value tackles. I never said that Edmond, for example, should win the award, but that the voters should have had the ability to decide whether or not he should've done. I think Mo Berry should have won the award. But while some people made cases for someone like Honda Edmond, who wasn't even on the ballot, I didn't see a single case made for someone like Galf Wilf, who is.

I also didn't criticise the voters at any point, so I'm not sure what that part is referring to.