"First, let’s be clear that this award is a distinctly individual honor in the ultimate team sport, which makes it extremely difficult to sort out in the first place.
As such, it cannot be based on statistics, which reap their own rewards. The term we are addressing here is Most Valuable Player, which I take to mean most valuable to one’s team. It is, at best, an awkward phrase to evaluate, let alone quantify or justify. But, again, mere statistics should not be the sole basis of consideration. So it takes an understanding of a larger picture to get this into focus.
Tom Brady is a great player on a great team filled with great players in a highly evolved system and a proven, veteran coach. That team, that franchise was expected to win 14 games and it won 16. Brady was awesome behind an awesome line and with awesome wide receivers in a great system with the help of excellent defense and special teams. He threw 50 touchdowns, 23 to Randy Moss. I appreciate all of that. Great players, great offense, great stats, great organization. It’s all awesome.
In addressing the subject of the individual honor of Most Valuable Player, however, one is confronted by one of those chicken-or-egg scenarios. Was Brady great because of his team or was the team great because of Brady? There is no right or wrong answer there, just endless debate. I am familiar with this debate because it raged when Brady’s idol, Joe Montana, was the quarterback in the 49ers West Coast offense. But the fact that the question can be asked opens the way for comparing Brady’s individual accomplishments in 2007 with those of other NFL players.
In fact, one might ask if Randy Moss was the MVP, considering that Brady and the Pats did not manage 16 wins or 50 touchdown passes before Moss arrived. Or Welker, for that matter.
Moving on..
Favre was the quarterback and unquestioned leader of the youngest team in the NFL, one that was expected to win only five games. He led that team to 13 wins. I think that was a more valuable INDIVIDUAL achievement than what Brady managed with his great team.
How can one measure “Value?” …Not sure. But Favre hoisted the fate of an entire franchise squarely on his shoulders. This is a franchise that was stumbling into the 2007 season with no concept of what it could accomplish. He inspired his team as much with his attitude, on and off the field, as he did with his arm. The fact that he returned to play at all infused the team with a positive attitude and may have prevented the franchise from emotionally imploding. There’s no statistic that accurately reflects his impact on the success of the Packers franchise in 2007. But there is a terminology that is apt and that is Most Valuable Player.
Hell, it doesn’t even mean he was the best quarterback in the league. It means exactly what it says, that he was the most valuable player to his team. Period.
The Patriots have and will continue to garner incredible team honors. It was an historic season for the Patriots and many of their players. Within that team there are many great players, starting with Brady and including Moss, Welker and one of the best offensive lines we have seen in years. But Most Valuable Player is an individual honor and I think as an individual that
Favre was the Most Valuable Player on his team.
Finally, I support everybody’s right to voice their opinions and theories for our great game of football and the great people who take part in it. It’s part of what makes our great sport what it is. It is, after all, a complex game of conflict.
Congratulations to Brady for having a spectacular seaon and to the Patriots front office for putting together perhaps the most dominant franchise in the history of the game.
If Patriots fans would allow it, however, I think that my vote was justified for another historic player who breathed life into another historic, albeit floundering, franchise. Even amidst a flurry of honors that are indeed owed to Brady and the Pats, Favre’s contribution to the 2007 season and the Packers is certainly worthy of note and, therefore, received my one vote.
Enjoy the postseason.
Regards."
Wow!
Is he seriously suggesting he would take Favre over Brady? Isn't that the crux of the MVP debate? The guy you'd start your franchise with? He's taking FAvre? I seriously wonder how many people in Green Bay would be singing Favre's praises if they suddenly had the chance to acquire TFB. What would Ted Thompson do?
Vote for whoever you want, but come up with a valid argument that trumps an individual candidate based on skills.
Don't tell me about their teams. Tell me why Favre got more wins in Green Bay than Brady had he been the Packers QB. He can't. Nobody thinks Favre is a better QB than Brady. You see, that's how you are supposed to look at a league MVP.
How can you have a League MVP that you would dump for a better player on another team?
Re: Moss, doesn't the MVP have to be the last guy your team would ever part with? How is that Randy Moss? How is it even close? How does Moss get one GM out of 32 to vote for him over Brady? Someone please explain to me how even one writer out of 50 is justified in voting for someone other than the obvious choice?
It's either a bias against the Pats or Brady or a bias for Favre....there's no objective way to say Favre is potentially a more valuable commodity on the free agent market than Brady.
Tom plays the most valuable position on perhaps the most QB-dependent team in the league. That team went undefeated in the parity era, a feat that may never again be duplicated, behind +42 TDs:Ints, more than half of which did not go to Moss, while Tom engineered the greatest offense in league history.....
but because you "expected" him to be great he's not as valuable as a guy who everyone expected to suck? Please explain this.
But he doesn't stop there. He actually dug up the whole "system QB" cliche. This is where you know you've entered the Twilight Zone.
I've never seen Peyton sit in the gun with 3-5 spread sets for an entire game against average defenses, much less week in and week out for an entire season (other than Miami part II).
Something tells me that "highly evolved system" looks more like a Chinese firedrill with anyone else under center...someone isn't watching the games.
And sorry, but if you think that O-line is one of the greatest we've ever seen, go throw a slumber party with Dr. Z and quit now. Indy's front four dominated them, so how can they possibly be "great?"....they are not the Chiefs like 4 years ago (lol)....they are a solid veteran unit with a smart tough center, a dominant left guard, a highly overrated LT, and a constantly rotating stable of who-dats on the other side.
This is not David Carr behind a great O-line as you actually suggest...it's TFB...wake the **** up. Rewind to 2005 when the O-line gave up the most "hits" in the league, and got our running backs killed...with zero protection, zero big play receivers with which to dictate coverages, and zero running game, but still on a team somehow "expected" to 3-peat (probably had something to do with Brady don't you think???), he led them to the playoffs and led the league in passing. Would the Iron Man have survived while taking the most hits in the NFL? You'd see the trademark Favre chuck and duck....and "you tell me in that formula" if he's leading the league in passing.
For once the line has been relatively healthy this season....but if you can't see that Brady put those guys in the Pro Bowl you're blind....the ability to audible protections, audible plays, read coverages after the snap while sensing the rush, the uncanny elusiveness, the lightning release, the fearlessness with which he stands into throws and takes hits that don't show up as sacks....
there's now seven years of evidence on this guy's ridiculous skill set....to suggest "there's no right or wrong answer" or whether he's a chicken or egg?....spare us the Donald Trump routine and fire your own ass.
There is no "endless debate"....YOU ARE ALONE. Ever consider that? The right answer is Brady....the chicken AND the egg...put Favre on this team and they easily lose 4-5 games...assuming of course the "iron man" survives behind that awesome O-line.
He's right about one thing, it goes beyond stats. It's about finding ways to take over a game and carry your team to victory when the chips are down...to suggest that winning EVERY game is no big deal because the team was good on paper is just so ignorant...this wasn't the 72 Fins that went under the radar and played against nobody....these guys were being anointed after WEEEK TWO....go back to the press conference with Belichick after the San Diego game....they've played with this pressure all season....to flippantly dismiss Tom's part in winning an unprecedented 16 games -- merely a couple more than they "were supposed to win" (like 14 wins is chump change) -- is so dumb.
I know it was 49 out of 50 votes and this rant is over the top, but I can't remember wanting to strangle somebody more in my life....
Take his vote away.
For the good of the game.
Please.
