PatsFan24
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2005
- Messages
- 4,459
- Reaction score
- 1
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
The (not so) unstated implications of Tom Brady winning a Super Bowl MVP are...
sb mvp should always trump any kind of regular season award
I'm not a Pats fan but obviously it's better to have a regular season MVP and a super bowl victory. Besides, super bowl MVPs are kind of cheap; they're almost always awarded to the quarterback of the winning team.
On the other hand, regular season MVPs are much more difficult to attain because even though QBs are favored to win it, there's a lot of competition amongst QBs to see who will get it.
Brady has to compete with Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Philip Rivers, and Aaron Rodgers every year to win the regular season MVP, and that's just counting the quarterbacks.
Even if you win the super bowl as well?
Eh...it depends. The SB MVP Aaron Rogers got last year was not a cheap award. Same with the ones Montana got. Or the Brady MVP in 2003. Now the year Peyton Manning got it...that was a cheap one
But if Rodgers played just average he most likely would have won it either way, unless another player on the Packers had an outstanding game.
When can you say in recent memory that a player won a regular season MVP without having played well?
You can argue that certain players deserved it more, like how Manning seems to get it when others perform better than him, but usually it still goes to a player who had good stats.
I can see your point on that. Still though the SB MVP has rewarded some of the best performances in NFL history, and doing it on the biggest stage with everything on the line. To me that is not a cheap award.
If you get the SB victory either way, then I would rather that Brady get the regular season MVP and someone else on the Pats (Welker? Mayo?) get the SB MVP.
It's true that certain players have played great in the SB and therefore the award wasn't cheap for them.
Players like Eli Manning though, got it even though they had lackluster performances. Everyone remembers that one throw he made and that one drive that won them the game; the rest of the game he played like crap.
And, if Patriots fans are being honest with themselves, Tom Brady won a cheap MVP in the 2002 super bowl. These were his stats:
16 of 27 passes completed for 145 yards and a touchdown.
I don't see how anyone can argue that those stats are worthy of an MVP.
I think we need to understand that this team is going to win the SB because they won the first game. It looked like they were going to be a last place team after the Lions game, but now they are going to the SB.
If you get the SB victory either way, then I would rather that Brady get the regular season MVP and someone else on the Pats (Welker? Mayo?) get the SB MVP.
I can see your point on that. Still though the SB MVP has rewarded some of the best performances in NFL history, and doing it on the biggest stage with everything on the line. To me that is not a cheap award.