Manning will be named MVP in the biggest travesty in award history

[upstater1]

I wonder if these guys have ever had a look at Joe Montana's playoff stats?

Gd forbid Brady ever lose a playoff game to the Giants by the score of 49-3--he would be crucified!!!!

He also lost to the Giants 17-3 two years earlier.

And to cap it off, 4 years after that, he lost to the Giants 15-13.

Montana lost in the playoffs to the Giants the last 3 times he met them there.

And yet you hear nothing about how Phil Simms is a more clutch QB than Joe Montana.

 

[PatriotSeven]

I know some people think the MVP isn't all that important, and that Tom doesn't care that much, which to a certain extent, it is true.

But the MVP isn't just about Tom. It's about us, the fans too. Personally I want Tom to get the recognition he deserves and feel he's earned it from every possible category.

Now one could argue that because the quarterbacks are so even, and they have such a huge impact on the game, that when someone like Adrian Peterson does what he does, it means more.

I can see that argument, and I wouldn't be too upset if it went to him over Tom, but to give it to Manning, another quarterback who has done less, just because he has come back from an injury....well that just pisses me off.

He certainly should be in the consideration for Comeback Player of the Year, but that should not factor into the MVP discussion.

 

[BradyFTW!]

How is Adrian Peterson not being considered here?

In short: because if he was as valuable as Brady or Manning, then the Vikings wouldn't be 7-6.

 

[Yehoodi]

WTF?

Dude, before this year, he's never played with any of the guys he's playing now besides Stokley.

Brady, Ryan, Rogers, AP, and all these other guys have largely played with the same personnel for the past few years.

how many starts did Tebow have with he same crew when he was thrown in as a starter last year and went 7-4? ? ? ? ? Was Tebow a leading canidate for teh MVP last year . . . ? no . .,.

 

[Yehoodi]

I want Brady to win the MVP . . . i am tired of the 4 MVPs talks about manning . . .where teh4 2008 one was shaky . . . nice to have a 3rd mvp next to TBs name . . . and as he is in the hunt for one I want him to close the deal and get it . . .

the two games this weekend for the broncos and pats will help decide the debate . . . TB has an opportunity to beat another top team . . . we'll have to wait and see . ..

 

[ExpatPack]

I was championing Rodgers at the midpoint, but here's the major reason he shouldn't be an MVP contender: 41 sacks. If he's thrown away the ball half those times, he'd have as many as Brady or Manning, with a much worse QB rating. I hate how sacks don't factor into the traditional QB rating formula- Big Ben is another one who stat line looks better because a sack does not show up on the stat line, while an incompletion is 0/1, 0.0 average. It makes no sense.

In the ESPN QBR they are. But I don't agree with your argument completely. Yes, you're right, Rodgers hangs onto the ball too long sometimes because he'd rather risk a sack rather than risk an INT. That's his style, but that's not the #1 reason why he's got that many sacks. Packers OL is the weakest link in their team.

Brady has had better pass protection and it's not even close. Brady has far more time to stay in the pocket and check off receivers that Rodgers has. Rodgers has about enough time to dump it off to Cobb just to save his arse. He is not comfortable in the pocket at all this season and it shows.

That being said, no way Rodgers should be in consideration for MVP this year.

 

[ExpatPack]

If Adrian Peterson runs for over 2000 yards and propels the Vikings into a WC playoff seed, he should win the MVP hands down. Christian Ponder is a LMAO qb who looks good and makes the female sportscasters swoon, but that's about all he's worth.

Manning? meh. I agree with most of the posters here. He's the golden boy that all the talking heads want to be the MVP. Brady has had the better season. This team is now the prohibitive favorite for the SB from the AFC and the favorite to win it all. Brady is running this team like a race car.

 

[pherein]

Manning should get an Award for stealing the most Awards not earned, lol, took 2 of Brees in his prime. Im sure he will get this one, and like always it makes no sense. Manning only rates #1 on Net yards and Sack %. Brees as bad as he has been sometimes still beats his figures.
But if you look at all the data Brady clearly deserves to be MVP.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2012/leaders.htm

Which probably will not happen because MVP's are PM superBowls, and Brady is very over looked for a lot of awards because hes consistently good and they want to distribute the wealth I guess.

I mean why did Brady win Sports Illustrated sportsman of the year in only 2005 ? and not 2007, lol. Its seems silly when Brees won in 2010. Brady should have had that award more times. Just a thought. I think hes cheated out of a lot of awards sometimes.

Should have been MVP 2011 I thought

 

[ausbacker]

In short: because if he was as valuable as Brady or Manning, then the Vikings wouldn't be 7-6.

The Vikings record would probably be better if Christian Ponder stopped turning over the football. Also, replace AP with Toby Gerhart and that team is not 7-6. They're probably a 3 perhaps 4 win team.

 

[Haterproof]

Manning should get an Award for stealing the most Awards not earned, lol, took 2 of Brees in his prime. Im sure he will get this one, and like always it makes no sense. Manning only rates #1 on Net yards and Sack %. Brees as bad as he has been sometimes still beats his figures.
But if you look at all the data Brady clearly deserves to be MVP.

2012 NFL Leaders and Leaderboards - Pro-Football-Reference.com

Which probably will not happen because MVP's are PM superBowls, and Brady is very over looked for a lot of awards because hes consistently good and they want to distribute the wealth I guess.

I mean why did Brady win Sports Illustrated sportsman of the year in only 2005 ? and not 2007, lol. Its seems silly when Brees won in 2010. Brady should have had that award more times. Just a thought. I think hes cheated out of a lot of awards sometimes.

Should have been MVP 2011 I thought

He stole it from Drew Brees in 2009 as well. I ran out of F***S to give about that irrelevant award. I'll be happy if Brady wins it & I'll be even more happy if he doesn't. Brady should be 1st,AP should be 2nd & Peyton should be 3rd in the MVP votes IMO. I still can't believe how Rodgers is getting completely ignored this season. I know he won it last year. But what that dude has done this year has been remarkable. He literally put that team on his back. I won't mind AP winning @ all. He proved he's still without a doubt the best RB in the league. Good luck to Brady,Peterson & Manning! May the best man win.

 

[ExpatPack]

In short: because if he was as valuable as Brady or Manning, then the Vikings wouldn't be 7-6.

Remove AP and insert Brady or Manning and the Vikings are probably still 7-6.

Remove Ponder and insert any decent QB like Flacco, Schaub, Josh Freeman, or Andy Dalton and the Vikings win the NFC North division crown.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Maybe so,but without Peterson,the Vikings had an excellent chance at an 0-16 season.....they are that bad and are almost considered a one man band.

Ponder is not very good and Jared Allen has not had the kind of year you expect from him.

With that being said,I hope Peterson runs for 200 against the Texans defense in 2 weeks.

What that actually means is a lot of his yardage is of the empty variety. If they had a competent QB his numbers wouldn't be where they are.

Say you swapped QB and RB between the NEP and Vikings... Ridley has the same 10 TD's as AP. The value difference maker would be the QB's production...

MVP Brady
CPOY Manning
OPOY Peterson if he tops 2000 yards

 

[MoLewisrocks]

In the ESPN QBR they are. But I don't agree with your argument completely. Yes, you're right, Rodgers hangs onto the ball too long sometimes because he'd rather risk a sack rather than risk an INT. That's his style, but that's not the #1 reason why he's got that many sacks. Packers OL is the weakest link in their team.

Brady has had better pass protection and it's not even close. Brady has far more time to stay in the pocket and check off receivers that Rodgers has. Rodgers has about enough time to dump it off to Cobb just to save his arse. He is not comfortable in the pocket at all this season and it shows.

That being said, no way Rodgers should be in consideration for MVP this year.

Brady has been working behind a makeshift OL for most of the season. Once again he's make it look easier than it should, which is why everyone from fans to mediots seems oblivious to that simple fact. When he has time it's because he's bought it. Other than that he's releasing the ball in <3 seconds. Brady is unique in that his style is doing whatever it takes to win...

 

[upstater1]

In the ESPN QBR they are. But I don't agree with your argument completely. Yes, you're right, Rodgers hangs onto the ball too long sometimes because he'd rather risk a sack rather than risk an INT. That's his style, but that's not the #1 reason why he's got that many sacks. Packers OL is the weakest link in their team.

Brady has had better pass protection and it's not even close. Brady has far more time to stay in the pocket and check off receivers that Rodgers has. Rodgers has about enough time to dump it off to Cobb just to save his arse. He is not comfortable in the pocket at all this season and it shows.

That being said, no way Rodgers should be in consideration for MVP this year.

You totally disregard key aspects of the QB position. Like timing and pocket awareness and 3 step drops, 1 step drops. There's a reason why Brady looks the way he does. It's not a matter of having more talent up front.

The interior of the Patriots line has largely consisted off street free agents and undrafted free agents: Connolly, Thomas, McDonald, Wendell. Heck, one of these guys was a Packer!!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nick_McDonald.jpg

It's been this way over the years. Hochstein, Andruzzi, Jennings, Neal, etc.

And the one constant in the midst of all of this is Brady knowing how to move around the pocket, Brady making quick throws, a passing game designed to cover OL weaknesses, etc.

I am NOT saying Rodgers couldn't do any of this. Just saying that GB sends him back there with deep drops looking for long-developing pass plays.

It's just wrong to say Brady has the luxury of better offensive lines.

 

[BradyManny]

Brady has been working behind a makeshift OL for most of the season. Once again he's make it look easier than it should, which is why everyone from fans to mediots seems oblivious to that simple fact. When he has time it's because he's bought it. Other than that he's releasing the ball in <3 seconds. Brady is unique in that his style is doing whatever it takes to win...

This is the key for me, as to why Brady is not the lead MVP candidate at the moment.

What he's doing is not new.

Winning with depleted weaponry? Done it. Winning with depleted line? Done it. Scoring at nearly league record pace? Done it. Beating a schedule of good pass defenses? Done it. Adjusting to new offensive coordinator? Done it.

Peyton hasn't come back from neck surgery and played well before. It's new. It's that simple.

Now, there is hope - this Sunday, Peyton faces a top 10 pass defense for the first time in ten weeks, and a top five pass defense for the first time this season. He could struggle. If he does, then much like Vick in 2010, the comeback story will eventually be overwhelmed by facts.

 

[ExpatPack]

What that actually means is a lot of his yardage is of the empty variety. If they had a competent QB his numbers wouldn't be where they are.

Say you swapped QB and RB between the NEP and Vikings... Ridley has the same 10 TD's as AP. The value difference maker would be the QB's production...

MVP Brady
CPOY Manning
OPOY Peterson if he tops 2000 yards

But it's actually not true. Most of AP's yards are not of the empty variety. If you can believe it, he was used rather sparingly over the 1st half of the season in favor of Ponder throwing the ball. Matter of fact it wasn't until about 3-4 games ago that that moron of a Vikings Offensive Coach started feeding the ball to Peterson more in key red-zone situations.

Even with a quality QB, that would only increase Peterson's effectiveness. Maybe he'd get a few less runs, but I'll bet his total yardage wouldn't go down much.

 

[ExpatPack]

You totally disregard key aspects of the QB position. Like timing and pocket awareness and 3 step drops, 1 step drops. There's a reason why Brady looks the way he does. It's not a matter of having more talent up front.

The interior of the Patriots line has largely consisted off street free agents and undrafted free agents: Connolly, Thomas, McDonald, Wendell. Heck, one of these guys was a Packer!!!!

File:Nick McDonald.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's been this way over the years. Hochstein, Andruzzi, Jennings, Neal, etc.

And the one constant in the midst of all of this is Brady knowing how to move around the pocket, Brady making quick throws, a passing game designed to cover OL weaknesses, etc.

I am NOT saying Rodgers couldn't do any of this. Just saying that GB sends him back there with deep drops looking for long-developing pass plays.

It's just wrong to say Brady has the luxury of better offensive lines.

Well as compared to Rodgers Brady has had that luxury. Does that mean the Pats have had the best line in the NFL and Brady hasn't had to make adjustments? Definitely not saying that. There are a number of factors involved and you're right to cite several, like 3-step drops, quick passes and the like.

One more I'll add is the effectiveness of the cover-2 against the Packer offense. Everybody's playing it against the Packers and it has worked, and Mike McCarthy has been too stubborn over the season to think outside the box . . . until lately. They finally got a run game going. Nobody the caliber of Ridley, but that's another matter.

Cover-2 doesn't work as well against the Pats because they have a better run game and better TEs. Those two things are Cover-2 killers. Jermichael Finley is way too inconsistent to be compared with Gronk or Hernandez.

 

[upstater1]

Well as compared to Rodgers Brady has had that luxury. Does that mean the Pats have had the best line in the NFL and Brady hasn't had to make adjustments? Definitely not saying that. There are a number of factors involved and you're right to cite several, like 3-step drops, quick passes and the like.

One more I'll add is the effectiveness of the cover-2 against the Packer offense. Everybody's playing it against the Packers and it has worked, and Mike McCarthy has been too stubborn over the season to think outside the box . . . until lately. They finally got a run game going. Nobody the caliber of Ridley, but that's another matter.

Cover-2 doesn't work as well against the Pats because they have a better run game and better TEs. Those two things are Cover-2 killers. Jermichael Finley is way too inconsistent to be compared with Gronk or Hernandez.

Good post. Note however that Gronk and Hernandez haven't been the same either this year. Even when they've played, they've been limited.

 

[BradyManny]

Remove AP and insert Brady or Manning and the Vikings are probably still 7-6.

Remove Ponder and insert any decent QB like Flacco, Schaub, Josh Freeman, or Andy Dalton and the Vikings win the NFC North division crown.

Huh? Either I'm reading this wrong or this is one of the wackiest statements I've read on the board.

Peyton Manning and Tom Brady have been in 7 of the last 11 Super Bowls, and Ben Roethlisberger was in 3 of the other four. How you could possibly think that any roster would not be a SB contender with those two guys on it is beyond me. Brady & Peyton will win no matter who their RB is. They don't need Adrian Peterson.

Meanwhile, teams like the Vikings who build around premiere RBs continue not to matter, and will only matter when their QB is good.

It's a QB league. The best RB in the league, like AP, can be on a crappy team. He will not solely be able to improve his team. Brady & Manning will never be on a crappy team. They've had some pretty mediocre talent around them and still gone far.

Put Brady or Manning on the Vikings, and you can put Laurence Maroney at RB, and that team is going to be playing into late January.

 

[Deus Irae]

Remove AP and insert Brady or Manning and the Vikings are probably still 7-6.

Remove Ponder and insert any decent QB like Flacco, Schaub, Josh Freeman, or Andy Dalton and the Vikings win the NFC North division crown.

To say that you are wildly underrating the impact of Tom Brady is to make an enormous understatement.