The fact that the CFL site has to write an article explaining why Chad Kelly was worthy of the George Reed Award, seems to imply that it was needed, For me, Kelly was a worthy winner, but I do not consider him in the same league as George Reed, Reed had a number of consecutive BIG seasons and was a franchise player. Kelly rode the bench most of last year, but granted, he had a very good season this year as the Argos’ starter. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against Kelly, but maybe the CFL has to re-examine their criteria for such awards, For example - maybe they should be asking - who has played well and stood out this year and last year.? Which I believe would add more credibility to the George Reed Award and help spread the awards around a bit more - Toronto had a great year, but didn’t win the final Eastern Conference agame, where Kelly had a very bad game. This award for him seems a little too much - but it could be just me.
So are you saying this award can only go to a player that has many seasons of excellent play?
Quite the caveat for a yearly award.
Even more so when it is by definition for the regular seasonReed himself had absolute dominance in regular season play but won one single championship.
Or did you not take that into account either
No rider01 - I didn’t say that, I said that perhaps a better way of selecting the MOP is to take into account what they did the year before, as well. It was a point to promote a discussion as to whether there is a better way of selecting the MOP in the CFL. It has nothing to do with how many championships a player might have been involved in - as you suggested. To me, Kelly had a great regular season, but fizzled in the playoffs and should not have won the MOP - afterall he played well for only one season. I’m suggesting that we look a little deeper than what we are. (Mod Edit)