On Thursday night at the NFL Honors awards show, Matthew Stafford was announced as having won the Most Valuable Player award for the 2025–26 season. This is Stafford’s first MVP trophy and the award that really puts a cap on his outstanding, decade-plus career.
Stafford is a deserving MVP, but at the same time there are legitimate thoughts that he may not have won the trophy entirely based on sporting merit. The Maye vs. Stafford race garnered an absurd amount of attention and sparked intense debate that occupied nearly every football show and social media feed for much of the 2025-26 season.
As a Patriots fan, I admittedly was rooting for Drake Maye, but Stafford clearly had a legitimate case. This isn’t about claiming Maye was robbed as both players had strong seasons. The issue for me is how the narrative around the race shifted and how media coverage helped shape the final conversation.
Allow me to illustrate the main problem with the coverage.
Why the 2025 MVP Race Felt Different
The previous two MVP races were also influenced heavily by narrative. Lamar Jackson won a near-unanimous MVP in 2023 largely because it was widely acknowledged that he was carrying an offense without elite supporting talent. He led the team in rushing and was still viewed as one of the most impactful players in the league despite limited offensive infrastructure.
Similarly, in 2024 Josh Allen won the award despite having worse statistical output than Lamar in several categories. The reasoning at the time centered around Allen elevating a weaker supporting cast and still leading an elite offense.
However, when the 2025 MVP race began to take shape, that same discussion of offensive support, which overwhelmingly favored Stafford, largely disappeared. In its place was a heavy focus on schedule strength, something that had barely been emphasized in the two previous seasons.
That shift in criteria is the central issue. The conversation moved away from “doing more with less” and toward different evaluation points depending on which candidate was being discussed. This inconsistency was amplified by strong media support for Stafford’s candidacy.
How Media Narratives Shape Award Races
It’s also important to acknowledge the role of media personalities in shaping public perception. One of the most visible examples is Dan Orlovsky, who was Stafford’s backup in Detroit and has publicly described Stafford as both a close friend and former teammate.
There have been multiple instances over the past several years where Orlovsky and other Stafford supporters have openly pushed pro-Stafford narratives. That is understandable on a personal level, but it does raise questions about objectivity in award discussions.
For example, early in the 2021 season after the Rams lost to Arizona, ESPN’s First Take debated quarterback performance. Orlovsky stated, “I want Matthew Stafford. I’m never going to turn my back on Matthew Stafford… Matthew Stafford is my brother. I would rather be wrong than to turn my back on him.”
Those comments were honest, but they also highlight the tension between personal loyalty and analytical credibility, particularly when MVP voting and public influence intersect.
Loyalty, Relationships, and Public Influence
This was not the only time Orlovsky’s voting tendencies drew attention. During the 2024 MVP race, he publicly committed to Josh Allen well before the season concluded, stating there was nothing Allen could do to lose his vote despite weeks remaining.
More recently, similar dynamics appeared again during playoff discussions. When asked why he picked the Rams over Seattle, Orlovsky cited loyalty rather than matchup analysis.
He is not alone. Former teammate Andrew Whitworth also stated publicly that Stafford was his MVP because of their relationship.
Again, I get it. Former teammates are going to support each other. The question is whether those dynamics should show up on national television in clearly subjective ways while also influencing how award races are framed for a national audience.
The Bigger Issue Isn’t Stafford vs. Maye
Ultimately, this is less about Stafford vs Maye and more about how the current sports media environment shapes these races.
When Peyton Manning retired, he noted that he intentionally waited before entering broadcasting because he knew it would be difficult to remain objective about former teammates. That level of self-awareness feels increasingly rare in a landscape dominated by athlete podcasts and personality-driven debate shows.
It does not have to be that way. Objective, evidence-based analysis still exists and still draws an audience. Mina Kimes’ detailed breakdown of her vote for Maye is a recent example, and similar thoughtful cases have been made supporting Stafford as well.
The larger concern is that in an increasingly crowded sports media ecosystem, personality and loyalty often carry more weight than consistency in evaluation criteria. That trend will likely continue unless audiences actively choose to prioritize analysis that is grounded in performance rather than narrative.
In the end, Stafford is a deserving MVP. Maye would have been as well. The more interesting takeaway from this race is not the winner, but how the conversation around the award was shaped and what that says about the current direction of sports media.
If this was your kind of read, you’ll like what’s next. Get The Sandman Ticket, our free, weekly newsletter with picks, insights, and a little bit of everything we love about sports.
