Why anyone arguing against Brady as MVP proves themselves a biased Brady hater

[JMC00]

 

[AtomicDawg]

Just look at that idiot's Twitter handle. "360 FANTASY FOOTBALL". I play it, but I know when to seperate real from the fake.

I also know not to listen to fantasy "analysts" attempt to talk real football.

 

[luuked]

I stopped caring about all of that MVP/individual awards/stat leaders crap.

In the end who gives a ****, it's living through the moments on the field that really matter to me and not more fodder for the eternal debates with fans of other teams about who was better than who.

 

[JMC00]

I stopped caring about all of that MVP/individual awards/stat leaders crap.

I agree. I think Ryan, Elliot or Rodgers all deserve to win as does Brady. I'm just saying people look like completely f**cking idiots campaigning against Brady.

 

[patchick]

Useful point of reference: In 1989 Joe Montana posted a 112 passer rating. Nobody else in the entire league put up higher than 92.

In other words, it was no contest. There was no Matt Ryan in 1989 with a better QB rating, higher completion percentage, more yards per attempt, more yards per game, and more TDs per game than Montana.

 

[JMC00]

Just look at that idiot's Twitter handle. "360 FANTASY FOOTBALL". I play it, but I know when to seperate real from the fake.

I also know not to listen to fantasy "analysts" attempt to talk real football.

Ya I didn't even bother to look at what that guy said. My point was more how there is a campaign in the media against Brady because the whole "missed games" thing and there are several arguments that completely kill the whole "Team was 3-1 without him" argument.

 

[WaterfallJumper]

Useful point of reference: In 1989 Joe Montana posted a 112 passer rating. Nobody else in the entire league put up higher than 92.

In other words, it was no contest. There was no Matt Ryan in 1989 with a better QB rating, higher completion percentage, more yards per attempt, more yards per game, and more TDs per game than Montana.

Good call. He was worlds better than the field. If the award goes to Ryan this year, I wouldn't complain. Obviously I think Brady is better, but I'm focused on the real prize, anyway.

 

[AtomicDawg]

Ya I didn't even bother to look at what that guy said. My point was more how there is a campaign in the media against Brady because the whole "missed games" thing and there are several arguments that completely kill the whole "Team was 3-1 without him" argument.

True dat. The "PATS WENT 11-5 WITH CASSEL" thing is so played out also. It isn't much of a shock these people want to discredit Brady. I believe some of them do this because they are in awe. That's why they use the suspension argument also. Whatevs.

 

[fnordcircle]

I'm fine with votes for Ryan.

What I don't like is the votes against Brady. I think that MVP voter fatigue is high with how Brady/Manning dominated the voting talk for nearly 2 decades. Which is ******** given that Brady has only won it twice.

 

[JMC00]

Useful point of reference: In 1989 Joe Montana posted a 112 passer rating. Nobody else in the entire league put up higher than 92.

In other words, it was no contest. There was no Matt Ryan in 1989 with a better QB rating, higher completion percentage, more yards per attempt, more yards per game, and more TDs per game than Montana.

My point wasn't that Montana shouldn't have won or that Brady should hands down be the MVP. It was Brady shouldn't have games missed held against him because if you are arguing that then you argue that 49ers being 3-0 in starts (and 5-0 overall) without Montana means Montana shouldn't have either.

Because Steve Young came in and won 2 other games in addition to the 3 wins as a starter. 1 of those games was against the Pats which Montana went out in the 2nd quarter when it was 10-10. Young proceeded to throw 11 for 12, 188 yards 3 TD and posted a perfect passer rating

Which BTW in Montana's absence Steve Young had a

120.8 QB Rating
Better Y/A
69.6% (Montana was 70%)
8.7 TD % (Montana 6.7)

It it wasn't actually a small sample size given that Young played in 5 games.

 

[fnordcircle]

Sure but even if you do count those missed games against Montana, he still significantly outplayed every other QB is what I would guess @patchick 's point to be.

 

[primetime]

I don't find it implausible that Ryan would be deserving of the MVP even if Brady had played in all 16 games. And, since he didn't, the case is pretty clear for me. That's not to take anything away from Brady. He had a great season. He was just handicapped from the start when it came to individual awards. That he was even in the MVP picture at the end says it all, really.

 

[Le Numéro Douze]

Sure but even if you do count those missed games against Montana, he still significantly outplayed every other QB is what I would guess @patchick 's point to be.

That's probably her point, but the easy rebutal to that argument would be that his own teammate outplayed him or at the very least as efficient. So, if in 5 games, his backup played as good as him and the Niners didn't miss a beat, how can Montoya be the most VALUABLE player in the league?

Of course, history would tell us that Young was a HOFer in his own right. And, well, MVPs are generally given the best player in the league, at a glamour position, and it would be tough to argue Montana wasn't.

Brady had an MVP-type season, but there are other candidates who haven't miss time. In the end, in those voted awards, perception plays a large part and Brady was suspended so it hurts perception. Ironically enough, it also tells a great story and could increase Brady's chance.

Anyway, on pure merit, Brady deserves to be in the conversation and there probably wouldn't be a conversation if Tom had played all 16 games.

 

[GodBrady]

I feel like this is fringing on a straw man argument at this point.

Yeah, there's been a lot of discussion about "should Brady even be eligible for MVP considering he missed 25% of the season?", but he has played so well that there aren't many people using this against him anymore.

I mean, yes, I'm sure you can Google "Brady doesn't deserve MVP because he missed games" and find 3-4 articles to post as evidence, that at this point that's a minority opinion. The vast majority of people believe that Brady is a legitimate MVP candidate.

Now, the question is, does he deserve MVP? Personally, I don't think he does. I simply cannot come up with a compelling argument for picking him over Matt Ryan. Ryan has a better passer rating (117.1 to 112.2), he has a better CMP% (69.9% to 67.4%), and he has better Y/A (9.3 to 8.2). The only argument I've heard for Brady over Ryan is that his TD:INT ratio is better, but Ryan's is extremely strong as well.

The only factor with Brady missing games is this: rate stats are harder to sustain over a larger sample size. For example, Jacoby Brissett might have a 2-game stretch where he maintains a high Y/A and passer rating, but it's very unlikely he'd sustain that pace for a 16-game stretch. Not only does Matt Ryan have better rate stats than Brady does, but he also sustained those over a larger period of time than Brady did. How well Matt Ryan has played is enough to warrant him being the MVP. The fact that he did it over a larger sample size is just the cherry on top -- it's hardly the crux of the argument.

 

[sambam94]

I stopped caring about all of that MVP/individual awards/stat leaders crap.

In the end who gives a ****, it's living through the moments on the field that really matter to me and not more fodder for the eternal debates with fans of other teams about who was better than who.

I feel the same way..to me, it's all about the games on Sunday. How many rings or MVP awards Brady gets really isn't that important to me.

 

[GodBrady]

Useful point of reference: In 1989 Joe Montana posted a 112 passer rating. Nobody else in the entire league put up higher than 92.

In other words, it was no contest. There was no Matt Ryan in 1989 with a better QB rating, higher completion percentage, more yards per attempt, more yards per game, and more TDs per game than Montana.

Yes, excellent point. Some people might think Matt Ryan had a better year than Brady. Some might think that Brady had a better year than Ryan. For voters that think they had comparable years, I could totally see how they would used games missed as a tiebreaker and give the edge to Ryan.

Like you said, it's a poor analogy because Joe Montana was indisputably the best quarterback in the league that year. That's hardly the case with Brady, who has some extremely strong competition in this year's voting.

 

[fnordcircle]

That's probably her point, but the easy rebutal to that argument would be that his own teammate outplayed him or at the very least as efficient. So, if in 5 games, his backup played as good as him and the Niners didn't miss a beat, how can Montoya be the most VALUABLE player in the league?

That's not an easy rebuttal unless you're arguing that Steve Young should have been in the MVP conversation as well in which case I suspect the 13 games he didn't play would also count against him somewhat.

 

[patchick]

Sure but even if you do count those missed games against Montana, he still significantly outplayed every other QB is what I would guess @patchick 's point to be.

Exactly. I don't think the Montana example in any way proves that missing games doesn't matter in the MVP calculation, just that it isn't an immediate disqualifier (an extreme position that AFAIK nobody's taking). Montana was so far ahead of the field that factoring in the missed time didn't bring him back to the pack.

This year is a totally different situation, with two very strong QB candidates. If a voter wanted to use games played as a mark in Ryan's favor, IMO that would be pretty reasonable.

 

[Le Numéro Douze]

That's not an easy rebuttal unless you're arguing that Steve Young should have been in the MVP conversation as well in which case I suspect the 13 games he didn't play would also count against him somewhat.

No, the easy rebuttal (two Ts?, sorry, I am French) is that since the Niners didn't miss a beat and Young played as good as Montana did, how can Montana be the MVP of the league if his backup is as efficient? The easy, and unfair, assessment would be that the Niners system made them standout from the pact statistically.

However, as I said, it would be the easy rebuttal, not necessarily a compelling argument. If Jimmy G. played all four games and posted stats similar to Brady's, I am SURE it would have been unfairly used against TB12.

In the end, Montana's stats were far above his competition (excluding his own backup) so it isn't a surprise that he won. Anyway, at the end of the day, who really cares about what the mediots think.

 

[hodgey]

I generally agree with the previous poster who didn't really give a crap about who wins the mvp. I think because of the fact Brady was screwed out of 4 games, which put him at a significant disadvantage in term of preparation, would make it sweet if he won. For me with all other stats being relatively close it comes down to wins and loses. Brady's winning percentage with an 11-1 record and comparable stats make him the hands down MVP.