Brady MVP - not Rodgers

[bhuggins]

http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/35276/tom-brady-not-aaron-rodgers-is-mvp

This was posted by ESPN's AFC East blogger. He's obviously showing his bias. Same old arguments - Pats have less talent, etc.... Last time I checked, the Packers are not loaded with pro-bowlers and our running game is no better than the Patriots. Our defense can stink up the joint just as much as New England's. AND.... the Packers do not get to play the Colts!

 

[Bensalama21]

Basically his biggest argument was that the Packers had a better backup in Flynn which is why Brady is MVP over Rodgers.

 

[greenandgold]

So, Brady is better because the Packers have a good backup QB who only plays if we are way ahead.

Makes total sense to me!

 

[Bogart]

I didn't know the Patriots played the Colts twice, yet I do remember when they did about 15 years ago, before Brady and Manning even came into the league.


Brady is a great quarterback, but he's easily the golden boy as far as favoritism, just like Manning. I've always felt like quarterbacks get over looked because they just want to focus on Brady and Manning. I'm actually shocked it's him and not Brees that's a competition to Rodgers for the MVP Race. Some may not agree with me, but I think Brees is a hell of a lot better quarterback than Brady, and even after he beat Manning in a Super Bowl, he still gets snubbed as far as being a top elite, I guess he'll always be behind Manning and Brady as long as he's around, no matter how great he is.


Sorry, but Rodgers is the MVP this year, and if anyone is second place, make it Drew Brees. Brady had a 4 interception game, and has been a bit off this year, he has definitely showed his age, when he forces the ball in double coverage to Wes Welker as if he were Jerry Rice. I do like Brady for some reasons, and have nothing against him, but every year his name is in the MVP race, and this is the first time in a long while we haven't had to hear about the other golden boy in the MVP Race (Peyton Manning). Rodgers does have a good supporting cast, but he's on the money every game. How many times do we see Rodgers force the ball in double coverage? Also, Rodgers distributes the ball very well, you do not see him constantly throw to just one or two guys like Brady can do with Welker and Branch, I believe in one game Rodgers had 4 Touchdowns to 4 different receivers. He totally spreads the ball around, and plays un-selfish. If anyone comes second to Rodgers, I'm taking Brees. In 2009, Brees broke the record for highest percentage completion with average wide receivers (all whom would show how average they were in 2010), and he was snubbed the MVP for the league's golden boy. Looking at his numbers this year, he may actually break his own record, it's possible.

As far as the argument of "Pat's don't have near the talent of the Packers" um is that meant to be a joke? Any other time they'll be calling Wes Welker an all time receiver, but Brady does have Welker, Gronkoswki, and a veteran WR in Dieon Branch, but of course I'm just joking, the Pats really don't have any good players on offense and have average B and C receivers. They were just 14-2 last year when Brady broke that really old record from Bernie Kosar for least interceptions, all to lose in the divisional round to the Jets.

 

[Raptorman]

No, No, No! Tebow is the MVP! Come on man everyone knows it!

 

[packerfan4ever]

On nfl.com they think Manning Payton that is should be,in the race because of what he doe's for his team,even though he is not playing they say,that is why team is playing bad if he were playing their d-line would be doing better because he puts up the numbers,I think Rodgers is deserving he is an all around q.b of course I'm prejudiced Brees is 2nd to me.

 

[TJV]

IMO the MVP should be renamed BPY: Best Player of the Year. To me the winner should be as simple as, which player had the best season. Because if it's truly "most valuable" than my vote goes to the guy who proved he is "most valuable" by not playing.

(Aside: I remember "way back when" when some Packers fans would post or say something like, 'Favre is worth 10 wins all by himself'. At the time I thought no rational fan could believe that but there's a reason "fan" is short for "fanatic". Anyway, then the 2005 season happened and the Packers won 4 games.)

Fast forward to this season and answer this question: How many games is Peyton Manning "worth". The Colts go from 10-6 to 0- and horrible and the biggest difference is the absence of one player. Now, I confess to not following the Colts closely. Or at all. So I don't know of the other losses that team has suffered or additions it gained. But I do know their organization relied foolishly way too much on one individual. And if you are sticking to the strict interpretation of "most valuable" to a team, then it's gotta be Peyton, doesn't it? (As opposed to Manning Peyton, packerfan4ever. ) What more proof would you need? But that in itself is foolish right? I agree and that's why if they don't want to change the name of the award I hope there will at some point be a broad consensus (if there's not one already) that what the award really means is BPY.

Hub Arkush, publisher of Pro Football Weekly, lifelong Bears (and Cubs!) fan, said last night on the radio: 'If Rodgers isn't the unanimous choice for MVP something is very, very wrong.' Yep.

 

[Gmcman22]

The only guy I think can legitimately lay a claim to MVP over Rodgers would be Brees. Even that seems like a stretch given the success the Packers have had and the unreal numbers Rodgers has so far.

 

[okcpackerfan]

Here are my rankings for MVP at this point in the season. Let's remember that Most Valuable Player means most valuable to their particular team.

1. Aaron Rodgers - Without him the packers would be a less than .500 team, I truly believe this.
2. Tim Tebow - Say what you want about stats, he is inspiring his whole team in a way we haven't seen in a very long time. I have reservations about putting him this high since I think an MVP should carry his team into the playoffs, but, if the broncos make the playoffs because of tebow i would be split on who deserves the MVP more, AROD or Tebow. (blasphemy i know)
3. Drew Brees - He has as much talent around him as Aaron Rodgers, with a better running game.
4. Tom Brady - Wes Welker is the only LEGITIMATE threat at WR. His offensive line is the best in the league at pass protection.
5. Matt Forte (until he got injured) - He WAS the chicago bears offense. He accounted for almost 50% of their offense before he went down.

 

[El Guapo]

+1 ThxJackVainisi

The MVP award is a misnomer. These days it really is for best player and I think that by most statistical categories that goes to Rodgers. Brees and Manning can claim slightly more yards but that's their main argument.

If it were truly an MVP award, I think that it goes to Manning in a heartbeat. If not to Manning then it goes to Tebow, because he really is the valuable player that turned things around. After that it's a free for all.

 

[El Guapo]

okcpackerfan

Great point about Forte. You might be able to make the same argument about Cutler, but I just blew a Cheerio out of my nose shuttering at the thought.

My only counter argument about Brady is that he's got more than just Welker. Deon Branch is a pretty good receiver and there is no way that you can discount their stud tight ends in Gronkowski and Hernandez. I might be so bold as to say that Gronkowski is a better overall TE than Finley...not a better pass catcher but a better all around TE.

 

[okcpackerfan]

There is no possible way this award can go to manning, you cannot give someone who hasn't played a game all year the award. What if he retires at the end of the year? Then you effectively can start giving MVP awards to retired players. Also, we don't know what the colts record would be with him in the lineup.

 

[okcpackerfan]

okcpackerfan

Great point about Forte. You might be able to make the same argument about Cutler, but I just blew a Cheerio out of my nose shuttering at the thought.

My only counter argument about Brady is that he's got more than just Welker. Deon Branch is a pretty good receiver and there is no way that you can discount their stud tight ends in Gronkowski and Hernandez. I might be so bold as to say that Gronkowski is a better overall TE than Finley...not a better pass catcher but a better all around TE.

I think it is new englands scheme more than anything. Deon Branch is average at best. I agree the tight ends are good players but its easy to get open when you have 1-2 more seconds on average AND Tom Brady throwing you the ball.

 

[bhuggins]

I didn't know the Patriots played the Colts twice, yet I do remember when they did about 15 years ago, before Brady and Manning even came into the league.


Brady is a great quarterback, but he's easily the golden boy as far as favoritism, just like Manning. I've always felt like quarterbacks get over looked because they just want to focus on Brady and Manning. I'm actually shocked it's him and not Brees that's a competition to Rodgers for the MVP Race. Some may not agree with me, but I think Brees is a hell of a lot better quarterback than Brady, and even after he beat Manning in a Super Bowl, he still gets snubbed as far as being a top elite, I guess he'll always be behind Manning and Brady as long as he's around, no matter how great he is.


Sorry, but Rodgers is the MVP this year, and if anyone is second place, make it Drew Brees. Brady had a 4 interception game, and has been a bit off this year, he has definitely showed his age, when he forces the ball in double coverage to Wes Welker as if he were Jerry Rice. I do like Brady for some reasons, and have nothing against him, but every year his name is in the MVP race, and this is the first time in a long while we haven't had to hear about the other golden boy in the MVP Race (Peyton Manning). Rodgers does have a good supporting cast, but he's on the money every game. How many times do we see Rodgers force the ball in double coverage? Also, Rodgers distributes the ball very well, you do not see him constantly throw to just one or two guys like Brady can do with Welker and Branch, I believe in one game Rodgers had 4 Touchdowns to 4 different receivers. He totally spreads the ball around, and plays un-selfish. If anyone comes second to Rodgers, I'm taking Brees. In 2009, Brees broke the record for highest percentage completion with average wide receivers (all whom would show how average they were in 2010), and he was snubbed the MVP for the league's golden boy. Looking at his numbers this year, he may actually break his own record, it's possible.

As far as the argument of "Pat's don't have near the talent of the Packers" um is that meant to be a joke? Any other time they'll be calling Wes Welker an all time receiver, but Brady does have Welker, Gronkoswki, and a veteran WR in Dieon Branch, but of course I'm just joking, the Pats really don't have any good players on offense and have average B and C receivers. They were just 14-2 last year when Brady broke that really old record from Bernie Kosar for least interceptions, all to lose in the divisional round to the Jets.

Brady also happens to have two multi-pro bowl linemen protecting his blind side. Aron Rodgers is playing behind an average at best o-line.

 

[PackersRS]

I used to get riled up over crap like this. I don't need to point the flaws, you guys nailed it.

But what I have to give for advice is this: don't get upset about opinions that have agenda. I sincerely doubt that Walker thinks that way, and even if he did, nobody else does (well, somebody else does but he fits the same criteria).

He greatly appreciate you clicking on his article and talking about it, though. In the end it's all about ratings. Some can get it with great writing, or a differentiated argument. Some people resort to taking in stances purposely to create discussion.

Don't want to see these "morons" anymore? Ignore them. If everybody does it, they get fired.

Journalism, nowadays, is about business.

 

[ivo610]

Not really sure how much more valuable you can be than the best player on an undefeated team.

 

[okcpackerfan]

It should be said that the best player on the best team isn't necessarily more valuable to his team then the best player on a mediocre team that makes the playoffs (Rodgers vs Tebow debate). It isn't a default award to the best player on the best team. I will say that if Tebow and the Broncos win out, depending on how he plays, I am unsure of who I would vote for if I had a vote. And I am the biggest packers homer I know.

I don't like the mindset people have gotten into lately, most notably in college football in regards to the heisman, on giving the award to the best player on the best team. The NFL MVP goes to the player deemed "most valuable" and at this point in the season I believe that person IS aaron rodgers. The Heisman is supposed to go the "most outstanding college player" which it rarely ever goes to anymore. Charles Woodson was one of the few that won this award that it actually lived up to the purpose of the heisman (even though Michigan was the best team in the country, he was "outstanding""

 

[El Guapo]

...and that's because of the ambiguity of the MVP award - does it go to the best player or the guy who was most valuable to his team?

 

[okcpackerfan]

...and that's because of the ambiguity of the MVP award - does it go to the best player or the guy who was most valuable to his team?

The National Football League Most Valuable Player Award (NFL MVP) is given by various entities, most notably the Associated Press (AP), to the player who is considered most valuable in the league.

I would take that to mean the most valuable player to his team because players play on teams. LOL at my last setence. But yes you are right there is a great deal of ambiguity in the award.

 

[highlander2190]

This probably seemed like the most ridiculous article to just about anyone. As a pats fan I know it was stretching a lot in order to make a case for Brady. Rodgers is still without a doubt MVP, and Brady can't take that away from him even if he tried. At the same time I feel I got the sense there is a giant misperception about the Patriots this season. The way people have shot down this article saying that it is complete bunk (which there is some garbage in there), seems to indicate people don't really know a lot about the Patriots this season. As a pats fan i'd like to clarify what pats followers really mean when they try to make arguments for Brady over Rodgers.

1. The O-line Argument: I understand that both the Packers and Pats have had injuries at O-line this year. Its tough for any quarterback to deal with that kind of change in his protection. One thing the media has completely missed out on about the pats O-line is that Brady has had 4 different centers this season. The pats pulled a guy off the street for their last game to fill in for one of the most important positions in the game. Other things you don't hear is how those so called pro bowlers aren't really playing to their pro bowl level this year. If you go back to mid season you would see the Pats 0-line being very exposed, it has caused a fair amount of concern for pats fans, praying that there isn't another injury like 2008. That legendary pass protection Brady has is not there this year.

2. The Better Weapons Argument: When this argument is made a lot of the time it seems like pats fans are trying to say we have no weapons. That is false we have probably the best TE in the game and Wes Welker. To clarify this, you would of had to of not only watched the majority of pats game but also seen a fair amount of the packers games too. I have watched a good amount of packers games this season and have been in envy of what some of your receivers can do. Some of the catches have been just unbelievable, between the one hand mid air catches, to the tip toeing line catches. Pats fans see that and we are envious of it because we haven't had a receiver who can do that since Randy Moss. You can't throw a high ball to Wes for him to make the play over the taller defender. Our TE's don't make tip toe catches at the sidelines. We don't have a receiver who can stretch the field. Brady has a lot less room for error with his receivers and most of the time less space to work with. And the stats show how much Brady depends on his #1 and 2. Welkers and Gronks stats are ridiculously high, and when you look at Finley, Nelson, and Jennings's stats they are all not only high, but also evenly spread between them. The drop off in stats between Welker and Branch or Gronk and Hernandez are staggering, both Welker and Gronk nearly have double the stats of Branch and Hernandez. It's even sadder for us knowing we don't have a reliable 3rd receiver we can switch in. Ochocinco's stats are comparable to Stark's receiving stats, difference is at least Starks catches half the balls thrown to him.

3. The Stats Argument: This is the only thing you can't argue unless you want to go full homer in the argument. Rodgers has the better stats than Brady that is 100% undeniable. Yes Brady has had bad games this season, Rodgers hasn't.Rodgers is a step ahead of Brady in the stat compartment, and that will be what will determine the MVP at the end of the year is the stats. The Packers will most likely go 16-0 and the Pats will be 13-3 and everyone will argue that you can't give MVP to the guy who lost 3 games over the guy who lost none. Stats most certainly make the strongest case for who is MVP.

In all honesty, I don't think a single Patriot fan wants to see Brady with the MVP, and would be okay seeing Rodgers receive it. Brady is without a doubt the MVP for the pats and without him we would be fighting with the Bengals for a wildcard spot at the moment. All we are praying for is that we can somehow win 3 playoff games this year. Anyway that's my rant taken care of, I wish you guys the best of luck with the rest of the season, as a pats fan I will tell you it gets incredibly nerve racking from week 16 and onward. Hitting that goal of perfection is no easy task. If things don't pan out at the end of the season, you will always be welcomed by pats fans who will know your pain quite well.

 

[El Guapo]

...and I would support you 100% on that. Brady is more valuable to his team than Rodgers is to the Packers IMO

 

[realcaliforniacheese]

 

[Forget Favre]

There will be lynch mobs or the 2011 equivalent if anyone else but A-Rod gets MVP.
But that won't be the determining factor.
It's just his playing ability alone which is why it's well deserved for Aaron.

 

[Jules]

OMG

Pats fans are starting to sound more and more like Colts fans as the years go on.

The award is meant for the player who is the most important to their team. Let that sink in, because this is a key element to this debate.

But what happens if you take Rodgers off the Packers? They won't be 16-0, but the defending Super Bowl champs would still keep the ball rolling with highly touted backup Matt Flynn and make it to the playoffs.

The "Brady factor" in New England is clearly stronger than the "Rodgers factor" in Green Bay.

It's like total homer fan boy stuff at times these days there (and in Indy). Then again East Coast fluffing is nothing new.

BTW Brady could not even out duel Eli this year. At home. After coming off a loss. In Pittsburgh. To Ben.


Enough of this BS. Aaron is the MVP and the most deserving and he will win it. He may win SB MVP again too.


There is no argument or debate. None. Moving on. Aaron. MVP.

 

[Powarun]

I confused didn't Aaron win NFL offensive player of the month for Sept. Oct. Nov.? Isn't that an indicator that he is doing great, beating out Brady? But we all know Pats fans are still gripping reality.