04/20/24
January 09, 2010
Peyton Manning wins 4th MVP award: Peyton Manning became the first player to win The Associated Press NFL Most Valuable Player honors four times. The Indianapolis Colts' sensational quarterback romped to the award Saturday in balloting by 50 sports writers and broadcasters who cover the league
as it is that I'm puzzled as to how Brett Favre could only earn one vote.
Not so shocking to me. He's given them 2 more wins than Tavarius Jackson/Ferotte gave the team last year. That's worthy of an MVP? He's not even the MVP of their team, much less the league.
posted by bdaddy at 02:40 PM on January 09, 2010
The Vikings are 12-4. Favre has thrown for 4,202 yards while Peterson has run for 1,383. I don't see how anyone could suggest that Favre isn't that team's MVP.
posted by rcade at 03:25 PM on January 09, 2010
Especially if you look at the fumbles, many in key situations, that AP has had, clearly Favre is the MVP of the Vikings.
Besides, if the logic is number of wins over the prior year, Manning only won two more games than in 2008.
posted by dviking at 04:32 PM on January 09, 2010
But Manning won MVP last year... so actually those extra two wins make him even more worthy.
posted by Goyoucolts at 06:17 PM on January 09, 2010
Manning probably could've delivered an extra four wins if he was given the opportunity.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 06:29 PM on January 09, 2010
He's a winnner.
posted by Drood at 07:27 PM on January 09, 2010
So if Manning wasn't playing for the Colts right now...who thinks they would still be a playoff team? Or a #1 seed in the AFC? Anyone? Seriously? They couldn't even finish off the lead against the Jets with their backup, much less a full season.
That to me is DEFINITION of MVP (and I'm no Manning fan, personally.)
We have pretty solid proof from last year that if Favre wasn't playing for the Vikings they would still be a playoff team. In fact we have proof that if Favre wasn't playing for the Vikings that a VERY BAD QB could still get that team into the playoffs and only 2 games fewer wins.
That to me is DEFINITION of NON-MVP to me. That seems to suggest that the TEAM has other more valuable players if it can still win even without this so-called "MVP".
I don't see how anyone could suggest that Favre isn't that team's MVP.
I definitely suggest it. They started losing games when AP went in the tank at the end of the year. He got 13 carries, they lost. He got 12 carries, they lost. Favre wins them some games with his arm, of course...but they aren't at 12-4 without AP. On the opposite side, without Favre they were 10-6.
posted by bdaddy at 10:18 PM on January 09, 2010
Favre played much better than anyone expected, but he had plenty of help. He had entire months where he didn't ever get hit. I don't want to discount his improved discipline and accuracy at all, but he didn't really have to work all that hard this year.
That said, I think their run blocking declined as the year went on and they weren't quite as good as last year. So the 08 vs 09 comparison isn't entirely fair. It doesn't help him, but I think the strength of schedule is more relevant. He wasn't really tested. The only good team they beat was Green Bay, twice in a few games when they weren't playing well.
OK, I guess Baltimore is good. They sure didn't look it back then though.
Anyway, I'd say that all the other candidate QBs, as well as Brady, were actually more valuable this year. Unlike baseball, in this sport you kind of have to look past the stats.
posted by Bernreuther at 11:16 PM on January 09, 2010
On the opposite side, without Favre they were 10-6.
It's highly questionable to compare year to year records the way you're doing here. Schedules change from year to year based on the previous year's record, there are other personnel changes and injuries are different. For all we know this year's Vikings would've gone 6-10 without Favre.
posted by rcade at 11:58 PM on January 09, 2010
It's highly questionable to compare year to year records the way you're doing here. Schedules change from year to year based on the previous year's record, there are other personnel changes and injuries are different.
In some cases...but in this case their schedule was significantly easier than last year (2008 - 5th toughest going in, 2009 - 30th toughest going in) and their personnel, at least offensively, is better (Harvin and a 1 year older Rice).
So I think it's easy to compare 2 teams that are basically the same from a personnel and coaching perspective. That's the best comparison you could get other then the guy actually going down mid-season with an injury.
Favre has played much better than anything I thought he had left in his tank, but at this point all he's done is take them to the playoffs...which is exactly what Gus freaking Frerotte did last year against a much tougher schedule. MVP credentials? Not based on that. Now if they go deep in the playoffs or SB, then I guess there's a valid argument. But since the voting is today, there's no question there are 3-5 other more deserving guys (which is what the voters thought as well).
posted by bdaddy at 12:37 AM on January 10, 2010
people...no one said Favre was the NFL's MVP, I was just said I was PUZZLED that he only got one vote. (others changed the sentiment to Shocked, which is a tad bit more aggressive than puzzled)
I was guessing Brett got the AP writer based in MN, but I thought surely the guy based in the Dakotas would go his way...the only other teams near there are KC and Denver, nobody on those teams to vote for.
As to some of the arguments thrown out, I think Minnesota's defense has not played nearly as consistently as they did last year, especially down the stretch. As to the only thing Favre has done is get his team to the playoffs, isn't that all that Manning has done at this point? Wasn't he one-and-out in the wild card game last year? Hardly what a MVP should be doing. But, again, my initial post wasn't that Manning wasn't deserving of the award, only that I thought Favre might get a few more votes, on a sentimental basis if nothing else.
posted by dviking at 01:48 AM on January 10, 2010
Wasn't he one-and-out in the wild card game last year? Hardly what a MVP should be doing.
The MVP is awarded before the playoffs. I think I would've voted for Brees.
posted by rcade at 09:45 AM on January 10, 2010
I'm fully aware of that, I was just comparing Favre to Manning...if Favre gets dinged because all he's done is get his team to playoffs, why would Manning not also be dinged?
posted by dviking at 11:40 AM on January 10, 2010
The only good team they beat was Green Bay, twice in a few games when they weren't playing well.
OK, I guess Baltimore is good.
I know I'm a complete homer and this isn't that kind of site, but there's a team from Cincinnati that went 3-0 against both of those teams who the Vikings completely manhandled.
posted by tahoemoj at 01:14 PM on January 10, 2010
It's not so much that I object to Manning winning the award, as it is that I'm puzzled as to how Brett Favre could only earn one vote.