Matthew Stafford Wins MVP But The Hypocrisy Of The Voters Is Damning

Matthew Stafford won the 2025 AP NFL MVP award in one of the tightest races in league history, edging Patriots quarterback Drake Maye by a single vote. Stafford received 24 votes to Maye’s 23, while Josh Allen picked up two votes and Justin Herbert surprisingly earned one despite not being a finalist. It marked the closest MVP finish since Peyton Manning and Steve McNair shared the honor in 2003.

My argument expands well beyond surface-level stats and challenges the logic behind awarding the MVP to Matthew Stafford over Drake Maye. While Stafford’s season was undeniably prolific: leading the NFL in passing yards and touchdowns while limiting turnovers and guiding the Rams to a 12–5 record, the case presented is that those numbers don’t fully capture what “most valuable” truly means. A major justification for Stafford’s win has been strength of schedule, with Los Angeles facing one of the league’s toughest slates while New England played the easiest. That distinction is acknowledged, but the point is made that schedule difficulty alone should not outweigh performance, efficiency, and impact, especially when other contextual comparisons tell a more nuanced story.

AP's 50 person voting panel for the MVP award and the COTY honor are the same panel. In one, they used a QB's SoS as a significant reason why he should not win MVP. In the COTY voting, SoS didn't come up once. Why? If SoS matters for one, it should matter for the other. The hypocrisy and double standards are off the charts. Making up the criteria as they go along and letting a narrative about a weak schedule hijack the voting when it didn't in previous years for QB's who won MVP without playing a tough schedule. Newton, Mahomes, and Allen played the easiest, third easiest, and fourth easiest schedules respectively in 2015, 2022, and 2024 respectively. Yet SoS didn't come up in arguments against their cases for league MVP.

To dig deeper, the discussion focuses on how both quarterbacks performed against identical opponents. The Patriots and Rams shared six common opponents, offering a cleaner comparison than league-wide averages. In those games, Maye’s Patriots went a perfect 6–0, while Stafford’s Rams finished 4–2. Maye was nearly as productive as Stafford as a passer in those matchups, but he separated himself by protecting the football far better and adding value with his legs. He threw only three interceptions compared to Stafford’s six and chipped in meaningful rushing yardage and a touchdown, while Stafford was essentially a non-factor as a runner. The takeaway is that against the same competition, Maye’s overall impact translated more directly into wins.

Season-long efficiency is another cornerstone of the argument. Stafford’s raw totals were higher, but Maye was consistently more precise and explosive on a per-play basis. He led the league in passer rating and QBR, completed a higher percentage of his throws, and averaged nearly nine yards per attempt, all while operating an offense that ranked near the top of the league in both scoring and total yardage. These numbers are used to reinforce the idea that Maye wasn’t simply managing games, he was driving elite offensive output with maximum efficiency.

The supporting-cast comparison further strengthens Maye’s case. New England’s receiving group, while functional, lacked the star power and depth of the Rams’ offense. Stafford threw to multiple high-end playmakers at wide receiver, benefited from a deep tight end rotation, and leaned on a strong, versatile running game. Maye, by contrast, elevated a far less heralded group and still produced one of the league’s most efficient and productive offenses. The contrast is framed as a clear example of a quarterback raising the level of his team rather than being lifted by it.

Ultimately, the argument circles back to team success and overall value. New England’s 14–3 record, division title, and No. 2 seed in the AFC are presented as evidence of Maye’s central role in a dramatic turnaround that reshaped the franchise’s trajectory. The Patriots improved by double-digit wins, and Maye’s performance is portrayed as the driving force behind that leap. Meanwhile, the Rams, despite Stafford’s brilliance, finished second in their division and entered the playoffs as a wild-card team. When efficiency, roster context, head-to-head comparisons, and team outcomes are all weighed together, the conclusion is that Maye’s impact on winning was greater, making his MVP case stronger even if Stafford’s season produced flashier headline numbers.

Despite narrowly missing out on MVP, Maye has a chance to claim the bigger prize. If New England defeats the Seattle Seahawks in Super Bowl LX, a Lombardi Trophy could quickly overshadow the disappointment of NFL Honors. Beating Seattle in the playoffs would also allow Maye to accomplish something Stafford never did, offering a powerful rebuttal to any lingering doubts.

Mina Kimes, an MVP voter, publicly explained why she cast her vote for Maye. She pointed to his dominance in advanced metrics like QBR, EPA per dropback, and success rate, along with the league’s highest completion percentage despite a deep average target depth. Kimes also emphasized Maye’s rushing ability, which added a dimension to New England’s offense that Stafford does not provide.