Brady for MVP?

[Gallo]

I guarantee that if the roles were reversed Manning would be getting the nod as the best QB in the game.

Yeah, because Brady has never won one before. Oh, wait, he won 2. Again, there is no argument against Manning, unless you think Brady shouldn't have won it in 2007. But of course, you don't think that, do you?

 

[Huckleberry1]

Serious question for borg and company. How can any fan of any team that is the most successful in their sport and of their era only have negative things to say about that team?



Football team's are large enterprises with many moving pieces and considerations, so no team is ever perfect and all teams are in need of pieces to improve, that is what has always made football fascinating to me and why I have devoted so much time to following football and the Patriots. No matter how good they are there are always areas to be addressed and room for critiques of the team and what they need to keep getting better, and this Patriots team is clearly no exception to that rule. I can see fans criticizing the play of their OL this season, the ongoing mistakes from the receiving corps (drops), the weakness of their run D (a product of the injuries to the interior DL ), a propensity to allow long third down conversions (up for debate), and the problems the LB's have covering skill players (up for debate), as well as the play of some of their draft picks and those choices. What I cannot in any way see is how any fan can look at this team, despite some of the problems they have, and come away with it with the conclusion that they suck and are just a bad team that doesn't do anything right, which is what any poster who only focuses upon the negative is essentially doing. I believe all of the areas I outlined are up for critiques and valid discussion, what I don't believe makes any sense is the endless pounding away at their faults with no recognition of just how good they are, how hard they play, and how much success they ultimately have, because you simply cannot suck as bad as those ZI consider trolls claim they suck, and win as much as they do, it simply does not add up, nor does their claim that they are just being realistic and those who tout their success are just homers wearing rose colored glasses. Rather it is the other way around, and they really need to either take a massive amount of prozac or remove their dung stained glasses so some reality can seep in.


I'm always up for any valid discussion about the pros and cons of the Patriots, what i am not up for is a non stop stream of trashing the team and those who run it, because that in no way reflects the reality of the situation and is really just a mechanism for trolling and starting arguments. So yes, i will call out those who do that as trolls, and i am far from alone in doing so.

 

[Ring 6]

OP is delusional, the award is based on stats and Peyton with 40 TDs maybe 48 or so is never losing an MVP race, if it was the other way around nobody would say Peyton deserves it over Tom.

Is the question who deserves it or who will get votes.
I could argue that Brady is more deserving, but the voters will choose Manning due to stats.
Personally I think 280 yards and 2 TDs in a 28-27 win is a more valuable player that 325 and 4 TDs in a 48-10 win. The problem is no one will ever look close enough to find out what happened inside the stats.

 

[Ring 6]

Serious question for borg and company. How can any fan of any team that is the most successful in their sport and of their era only have negative things to say about that team?



Football team's are large enterprises with many moving pieces and considerations, so no team is ever perfect and all teams are in need of pieces to improve, that is what has always made football fascinating to me and why I have devoted so much time to following football and the Patriots. No matter how good they are there are always areas to be addressed and room for critiques of the team and what they need to keep getting better, and this Patriots team is clearly no exception to that rule. I can see fans criticizing the play of their OL this season, the ongoing mistakes from the receiving corps (drops), the weakness of their run D (a product of the injuries to the interior DL ), a propensity to allow long third down conversions (up for debate), and the problems the LB's have covering skill players (up for debate), as well as the play of some of their draft picks and those choices. What I cannot in any way see is how any fan can look at this team, despite some of the problems they have, and come away with it with the conclusion that they suck and are just a bad team that doesn't do anything right, which is what any poster who only focuses upon the negative is essentially doing. I believe all of the areas I outlined are up for critiques and valid discussion, what I don't believe makes any sense is the endless pounding away at their faults with no recognition of just how good they are, how hard they play, and how much success they ultimately have, because you simply cannot suck as bad as those ZI consider trolls claim they suck, and win as much as they do, it simply does not add up, nor does their claim that they are just being realistic and those who tout their success are just homers wearing rose colored glasses. Rather it is the other way around, and they really need to either take a massive amount of prozac or remove their dung stained glasses so some reality can seep in.


I'm always up for any valid discussion about the pros and cons of the Patriots, what i am not up for is a non stop stream of trashing the team and those who run it, because that in no way reflects the reality of the situation and is really just a mechanism for trolling and starting arguments. So yes, i will call out those who do that as trolls, and i am far from alone in doing so.

You answered your own question

 

[JMC00]

Serious question for borg and company. How can any fan of any team that is the most successful in their sport and of their era only have negative things to say about that team?

Because they either don't want to be considered a homer, love being a contrarian, or is just a doom and gloomer.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Yeah, because Brady has never won one before. Oh, wait, he won 2. Again, there is no argument against Manning, unless you think Brady shouldn't have won it in 2007. But of course, you don't think that, do you?

Brady went unbeaten in the 2007 regular season. If you want to make an argument for another player to have won that by all means make it. It might help take your mind off blowing that 24 point lead in Foxboro a few weeks ago.

That must have sucked for you guys.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah, because Brady has never won one before. Oh, wait, he won 2. Again, there is no argument against Manning, unless you think Brady shouldn't have won it in 2007. But of course, you don't think that, do you?

That is flawed logic, unless you think number of TD passes is the only critieria.
The Brady argument is that he has been more instrumental to his teams success because he is surrounded by much less talent when you factor in injuries.
Are we saying that if team A wins 28-24 with its QB throwing 2 TDS, and team B wins 42-24 with its QB throwing 4 that teams Bs Qb was more valuable? I'm not sure that is true.

 

[Dutchmaster617]

Is the question who deserves it or who will get votes.
I could argue that Brady is more deserving, but the voters will choose Manning due to stats.
Personally I think 280 yards and 2 TDs in a 28-27 win is a more valuable player that 325 and 4 TDs in a 48-10 win. The problem is no one will ever look close enough to find out what happened inside the stats.

Thread says Brady for MVP, I obviously like Brady more and want Pats to win every game and award, but there is no way Manning (or Brady, maybe Brees/Rodgers) has a 45+ TD season and doesn't win it, unless the other guys top 45.

I don't see what the issue is, we can whine and make excuses, but that doesn't make Brady an MVP candidate, its over and all that matters here is playoff run.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Because they either don't want to be considered a homer, love being a contrarian, or is just a doom and gloomer.

Deus fits all of that criteria but he isn't a troll, he's more of a Felger wannabe but still very clearly a Patriot fan. I am really referring only to those who only post to be negative, and who never show any support whatsoever for the team, and there are only a few who actually meet that criteria. Even the most negative draftniks are actually Patriot fans, and they prove that by supporting the team, even if they are delusional about the draft.

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, because Brady has never won one before. Oh, wait, he won 2. Again, there is no argument against Manning, unless you think Brady shouldn't have won it in 2007. But of course, you don't think that, do you?

Of course there's an argument against Manning that wasn't there for the Brady 2007 year. What Manning is doing is what was expected. What Brady did was unprecedented, and was done with a receiver who was thought to be over-the-hill (Moss), a receiver who was known to be tough to cover but not a star yet (Welker), a pair of disappointing top 33 pick WRs (Gaffney/Stallworth) and a pair of disappointing first round TEs (Watson/Brady). And he went 16-0.

Manning's got a pair of top echelon WRs (Welker/Thomas) and a second tier WR (Decker), along with an excellent receiving RB who can play all 3 downs (Moreno), and an up and coming tight end (J. Thomas), as well as his bailout TE2 (Tamme) who can be used if J. Thomas is unable to play. And he's already lost 2 games this season, including one to Brady.

 

[Ring 6]

Thread says Brady for MVP, I obviously like Brady more and want Pats to win every game and award, but there is no way Manning (or Brady, maybe Brees/Rodgers) has a 45+ TD season and doesn't win it, unless the other guys top 45.

I don't see what the issue is, we can whine and make excuses, but that doesn't make Brady an MVP candidate, its over and all that matters here is playoff run.

Well I guess you are having your own little argument with yourself, because the discussion is both about who deserves the award and who will receive the votes.
If you think there is nothing to discuss, then refrain from posting. Is it that hard?

 

[wolverinejoe80]

Re: Brady should be the MVP

Manning is doing that with the greatest group of offensive weapons the game has ever seen. Did you even see the state the Eagles were in before Foles stepped in?

talk about reaching

by your logic brady should not have won 07 mvp. and give me a break. broncos weapons are not even top 5 offensive weapons all time.

and eagles suck because vick is so inconsistent. when he was on, they had no problem moving the ball. bottom line you can't fault peyton or 07 brady to have great weapons around them and didn't get hurt.

brady has much better chance to win than friggin foles

 

[Huckleberry1]

You answered your own question

I agree, they aren't actually Patriot fans but are really trolls who post to stir sh.t up and start arguments. That they cry about being called out for it is really ironic and comical imo. If you go to a fan site simply to talk trash then you should not be surprised when actual fans of that team call you out for being a douchebag.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Well I guess you are having your own little argument with yourself, because the discussion is both about who deserves the award and who will receive the votes.
If you think there is nothing to discuss, then refrain from posting. Is it that hard?

I think Manning will win it I just think that if the both win out then Brady's 13-3 with the win over Manning is better than Manning's 14-2. I think the real disconnect is between those who believe it is just a stat award and those who believe it should be more about who does the most for their team's success that season. Imo what Brady has done so far with this Patriot team has been more important for their success than what Manning has done with the Bronco's. Then again I have never really believed that stats tell the whole story in football so any discussion with those who do believe in the sanctity of stats in football is really going to be two people talking right past each other.

 

[Ring 6]

I think Manning will win it I just think that if the both win out then Brady's 13-3 with the win over Manning is better than Manning's 14-2. I think the real disconnect is between those who believe it is just a stat award and those who believe it should be more about who does the most for their team's success that season. Imo what Brady has done so far with this Patriot team has been more important for their success than what Manning has done with the Bronco's. Then again I have never really believed that stats tell the whole story in football so any discussion with those who do believe in the sanctity of stats in football is really going to be two people talking right past each other.

Its a legimate discussion. Manning has put so many points on the board that he probably hides his teams deficiencies, but it is ignorant to not recognize a lot of his success is due to who is surrounding him. Brady has overcome weaknesses on his team that would have otherwise resulted in losses, and is definitely doing it with less help from his supporting cast.
In the end stats will sway voters, and thats the problem with most awards, the voters only take a cursory interest in determining the right player deserving of their vote, so they let the stats pick the winner.

 

[TonyTucker]

I'm all for bashing Forehead and his stat padding/playoff chokes, but come on. The Broncos will go 14-2 and he's going to break Brady's TD record. And Brady hasn't lit the world on fire either. The defense was big in those early wins.

 

[Galeb]

Re: Brady should be the MVP

talk about reaching

by your logic brady should not have won 07 mvp. and give me a break. broncos weapons are not even top 5 offensive weapons all time.

and eagles suck because vick is so inconsistent. when he was on, they had no problem moving the ball. bottom line you can't fault peyton or 07 brady to have great weapons around them and didn't get hurt.

brady has much better chance to win than friggin foles

Manning's weapons are far superior to what Brady had in 07.

 

[Gallo]

Brady went unbeaten in the 2007 regular season. If you want to make an argument for another player to have won that by all means make it. It might help take your mind off blowing that 24 point lead in Foxboro a few weeks ago.

That must have sucked for you guys.

Yeah, i'm a Colts fan, will never really get upset over a Broncos loss. I would have preferred if the Broncos won, but no worries. About your "argument", well, it was not an argument. You just pointed out the only one difference between their historic seasons.

 

[Gallo]

Of course there's an argument against Manning that wasn't there for the Brady 2007 year. What Manning is doing is what was expected. What Brady did was unprecedented, and was done with a receiver who was thought to be over-the-hill (Moss), a receiver who was known to be tough to cover but not a star yet (Welker), a pair of disappointing top 33 pick WRs (Gaffney/Stallworth) and a pair of disappointing first round TEs (Watson/Brady). And he went 16-0.

Manning's got a pair of top echelon WRs (Welker/Thomas) and a second tier WR (Decker), along with an excellent receiving RB who can play all 3 downs (Moreno), and an up and coming tight end (J. Thomas), as well as his bailout TE2 (Tamme) who can be used if J. Thomas is unable to play. And he's already lost 2 games this season, including one to Brady.

The up and coming tight end that played like 2 games in the NFL before Manning? Also, D. Thomas was top echelon before 2012? Really? He was not. Same with Decker, who everybody thought about as a decent 2nd option, but no better. The truth is, outside of Welker, who really came in as a finished product obviously, Manning really made those guys, or at the very least put them on the map as top players at their position.

But even if you disregard that, let's talk about Brady... You guys really think he was the primary reason this team won at the beginning of the season? Because if remember correctly, lot of you guys bashed him even here, and he was putting up very pedestrian numbers. Obviously, it was tough with those weapons, but there is no way he should get most of the credit for those wins. The defense played pretty well that time, before the injuries. Also, if Manning breakes the TD record, isn't that unprecedented?

 

[Huckleberry1]

Yeah, i'm a Colts fan, will never really get upset over a Broncos loss. I would have preferred if the Broncos won, but no worries. About your "argument", well, it was not an argument. You just pointed out the only one difference between their historic seasons.

lmao-I knew you weren't a Patriots fan and were a Manning fan. Good job presenting your argument for who should have won the MVP over Brady in 2007.

Oh, wait, you didn't even make you one. You just cried a bit instead.


Let us know if you come up with one, until you can feel free to shut your piehole.

I have stated why i think Brady deserves it over Manning this season if both win out. 13-3 with this Patriots team, including a win over Manning and the Broncos is more impressive than 14-2 with a loss to Brady and the Patriots. I don't believe in stat based arguments about football, i think they only show a portion of the reality, not the actual reality. If you want to talk stats then find a fantasy fan, they are actually relevant to that.