What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Peyton Manning wins 4th MVP award (1 Viewer)

Slam dunk. This wasn't his best statistical season, but the Colts probably win 3 games without him. He's that valuable.
This sort of thinking is nonsense. The Jamarcus Russell won that many freaking games.Where does this idea that the Colts are nothing without Manning come from? They have a solid running game and a decent defense. They would be a good team with any half-decent QBOh, mean the last 2 games where Painter came in prove how much the Colts need Manning.Well here's a clue:1. Painter sucks2. It wasn't just Manning who came out. It was most of the first teamSo yeah, the Colts backup aren't great. What does that prove? Absolutely nothing.
 
I DO believe that an injury to a starting QB will have more negative impact on an NFL team's record than any other single injury, on average.

I do ALSO believe that the gap between Manning and his backups is probably greater than that between any other team's starting QB and their backup.

I do NOT believe this is the recipe for picking an MVP. If it were, I'd agree with Manning, but would probably have Kurt Warner in a virtual tie for 1st, and would never vote for anything but QB's.

 
Regardless of statistics, I doubt there is any player in the league that means more to his team than Manning.
Ask the Saints how they feel about Brees or the Chargers how they feel about Rivers (or Brees for that matter)If 'value to your team' is the metric, Brees and Rivers have it all over Manning
 
Slam dunk. This wasn't his best statistical season, but the Colts probably win 3 games without him. He's that valuable.
This sort of thinking is nonsense. The Jamarcus Russell won that many freaking games.Where does this idea that the Colts are nothing without Manning come from? They have a solid running game and a decent defense. They would be a good team with any half-decent QBOh, mean the last 2 games where Painter came in prove how much the Colts need Manning.Well here's a clue:1. Painter sucks2. It wasn't just Manning who came out. It was most of the first teamSo yeah, the Colts backup aren't great. What does that prove? Absolutely nothing.
Preach! :thumbup:
 
Mario Kart is killing me. The Colts without Manning would win 10 games. Fishing trip of gigantic proportions!
2 years ago you would probably felt the same way if someone told you the Pats would win 10 games without Brady.
The Pats won 11 games last year without Brady and a QB that hadn't started since high school, so I don't see why the Colts couldn't win 10 without Manning.
Which just goes to prove Manning is many, many times more valuable than Brady. :thumbup:
 
He's also the best player in the league.
The stats say otherwise, and it's not even close
Playing quarterback in the NFL is the toughest position to play in sports. Period. The level that Manning has played at his position for as long as he has is almost mind-boggling.
This isn't supposed to be a career-achievement awardIt's a 'what-have-you-done-lately' award.And what Manning has done lately is absoutely nothing special
 
Mario Kart is killing me. The Colts without Manning would win 10 games. Fishing trip of gigantic proportions!
2 years ago you would probably felt the same way if someone told you the Pats would win 10 games without Brady.
The Pats won 11 games last year without Brady and a QB that hadn't started since high school, so I don't see why the Colts couldn't win 10 without Manning.
Because the Colts are built around Manning. The Pats are not built around Brady.
 
The Pats won 11 games last year without Brady and a QB that hadn't started since high school, so I don't see why the Colts couldn't win 10 without Manning.
Because the Colts are built around Manning. The Pats are not built around Brady.
What does 'built around' mean?They have a GREAT offensive line? They have elite receiving threats?Yeah, any other QB trying to step in such a 'difficult' situation is doomed to failure :thumbup:
 
Mario Kart is killing me. The Colts without Manning would win 10 games. Fishing trip of gigantic proportions!
2 years ago you would probably felt the same way if someone told you the Pats would win 10 games without Brady.
The Pats don't rely on Brady like the Colts do Manning. So, no, my position stands. The Pats have always had more complete teams since Manning and Brady have been in the league. Thus, more rings.
 
1) A question for the CJ for MVP crowd, should Brees have won MVP last season? Only the second player to throw for 5000 yards, on an 8-8 team. I don't remember anyone clamoring for him last year.

2) Brees should have won this year. Better than Manning in virtually every stat, with similar team success.

 
The Pats don't rely on Brady like the Colts do Manning. So, no, my position stands. The Pats have always had more complete teams since Manning and Brady have been in the league. Thus, more rings.
No of course the Pats with no running game to speak off did not rely on a QB who was coming off a 50 TD season the way the Colts do Manning. Sure.
 
I seriously believe that if you stick Carson Palmer on the Colts, they win 10.

If you stick him on the Saints, they're jockeying for draft position.

 
Manning performed at baller status levels all year. You can say "the Colts could win 10 games without him" in a vacuum, but not 10 of those games they won this year. No way.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Pats won 11 games last year without Brady and a QB that hadn't started since high school, so I don't see why the Colts couldn't win 10 without Manning.
Because the Colts are built around Manning. The Pats are not built around Brady.
What does 'built around' mean?They have a GREAT offensive line? They have elite receiving threats?Yeah, any other QB trying to step in such a 'difficult' situation is doomed to failure :lmao:
They have elite receiving threats only because of who is throwing the ball to them. There was a thread a little while back about who had the greatest hands in the league. And I don't recall anyone mentioning Wayne, Clark, Collie, Garcon or anyone else on the Colts. Welker and Moss were getting a lot of votes on the other hand. And the line is great, but a huge part of that is how Manning reads the defense and makes corrections at the line. I am also not aware of any other team that calls in 3 plays and lets their QB make the call as to what he wants to go with. I know that the Pats don't do it.
 
1) A question for the CJ for MVP crowd, should Brees have won MVP last season? Only the second player to throw for 5000 yards, on an 8-8 team. I don't remember anyone clamoring for him last year.
I'd have been good with Brees winning last year but his year his statistical dominance differed from CJ's for a few reasons. Brees had a great year and came close the single season passing record but did not eclipse the record. CJ on the other hand beat Marshalls record for most yards in a season and did so with a vastly inferior supporting cast than Marshall had. The other item is QB's with strong stats on teams without winning records have to be viewed differently than RB's due to flow of the game which often allows them to put up huge stats while trailing or playing a shootout.
 
The Pats don't rely on Brady like the Colts do Manning. So, no, my position stands. The Pats have always had more complete teams since Manning and Brady have been in the league. Thus, more rings.
No of course the Pats with no running game to speak off did not rely on a QB who was coming off a 50 TD season the way the Colts do Manning. Sure.
The Pats do have a running game. Check their team ranking from last year. They have better coaching as well. Not to mention they also have a better defense.I'd argue that this year the Pats team overall is not as good as in years past. Plus Brady was returning from injury. Therefore, they were not as dominant.

Count Brady's regular season MVPs. I'll go with what the voters say.

 
Mario Kart is killing me. The Colts without Manning would win 10 games. Fishing trip of gigantic proportions!
2 years ago you would probably felt the same way if someone told you the Pats would win 10 games without Brady.
The Pats won 11 games last year without Brady and a QB that hadn't started since high school, so I don't see why the Colts couldn't win 10 without Manning.
Because the Colts are built around Manning. The Pats are not built around Brady.
Besides Manning, here are all the guys that have been Pro Bowl players from the Colts that have played with Manning . . .Reggie WayneDallas ClarkJeff SaturdayDwight FreeneyRobert MathisJoseph AddaiBob SandersAntoine BetheaMarvin HarrisonTarik GlennEdgerrin JamesCato JuneMike VanderjagtKen DilgerMarshall FaulkI'm thinking he's had a pretty decent supporting cast.
 
Who in the AFC East has been consistently sound to compete with the Jets?

I mean, that's 5 wins for the Pats most seasons. Then 5 against other teams that aren't as good as the Pats.

Obviously I have blinders on. All I see is Sorgi and now Painter and I know what we have in them. NOTHING.

 
1) A question for the CJ for MVP crowd, should Brees have won MVP last season? Only the second player to throw for 5000 yards, on an 8-8 team. I don't remember anyone clamoring for him last year.2) Brees should have won this year. Better than Manning in virtually every stat, with similar team success.
1) answer: yes2)answer: debateable...the only problem I have is CJ got ZERO votes this year in a record breaking season, it really looks like the guys voting on this thing just gives it to the guy they "like" better as long as his stats aren't too far off from other candidates.
 
Well deserved.

If not for the ####### management/coaching decision(s) he would have led the Colts to a 16-0 record.

 
The Pats don't rely on Brady like the Colts do Manning. So, no, my position stands. The Pats have always had more complete teams since Manning and Brady have been in the league. Thus, more rings.
No of course the Pats with no running game to speak off did not rely on a QB who was coming off a 50 TD season the way the Colts do Manning. Sure.
The Pats do have a running game. Check their team ranking from last year. They have better coaching as well. Not to mention they also have a better defense. I'd argue that this year the Pats team overall is not as good as in years past. Plus Brady was returning from injury. Therefore, they were not as dominant.Count Brady's regular season MVPs. I'll go with what the voters say.
Since Brady became a starter in 2001, the Patriots defense has allowed only 2.75 points per game fewer than the Colts ( a 9-year stretch). NE having a defense leaps and bounds better than the Colts is mostly a myth.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mario Kart is killing me. The Colts without Manning would win 10 games. Fishing trip of gigantic proportions!
2 years ago you would probably felt the same way if someone told you the Pats would win 10 games without Brady.
The Pats won 11 games last year without Brady and a QB that hadn't started since high school, so I don't see why the Colts couldn't win 10 without Manning.
Because the Colts are built around Manning. The Pats are not built around Brady.
Besides Manning, here are all the guys that have been Pro Bowl players from the Colts that have played with Manning . . .Reggie WayneDallas ClarkJeff SaturdayDwight FreeneyRobert MathisJoseph AddaiBob SandersAntoine BetheaMarvin HarrisonTarik GlennEdgerrin JamesCato JuneMike VanderjagtKen DilgerMarshall FaulkI'm thinking he's had a pretty decent supporting cast.
I would agree. Except that only Faulk has done it without Manning playing on the same team.
 
They have elite receiving threats only because of who is throwing the ball to them.
I cannot think of ANYONE who has made his living throwing to elite receivers more than ManningLet's look at Manning's top 2 receivers over the years2009: Wayne, Clark2008: Wayne, Clark2007: Wayne, Clark2006: Harrison, Wayne2005: Harrison, Wayne2004: Wayne, Harrison2003: Harrison, Wayne2002: Harrison, Wayne2001: Harrison, Pollard2000: Harrison, Pathon1999: Harrison, James1998: Faulk, HarrisonNow, what do these have in common?Faulk, Harrison, James, Wayne and Clark were all 1st rounders and Pathon was the 1st pick of the 2nd round. Only poor Marcus Pollard doesn't have the pedigree2 top receivers * 12 years = 24 top receivers22 of his 24 top receivers have been 1st round picksSo please, please stop with the 'Manning makes his receivers' garbage
And the line is great, but a huge part of that is how Manning reads the defense and makes corrections at the line.
It doesn't matter how many 'corrections' or 'adjustments' you make if your players simply suck. And the Colts line clearly does not.
I am also not aware of any other team that calls in 3 plays and lets their QB make the call as to what he wants to go with. I know that the Pats don't do it.
WHO CARES?All that matters is results. I don't care if they have to explain each play to him like a child. It's how he executes the play and how successful he is that counts.Whether they give him 3 plays or he calls his own plays, the simple fact is that the other QBs are crushing his production.If other QBs can be MORE SUCCESSFUL with simpler play-calling and worse offensive lines, then perhaps Manning should be put on a tighter leash and only given 1 play so he can be AS SUCCESSFUL as all the other QBs
 
I've made the argument that Manning has had prime rib as receivers to throw to, but he certainly has done his part in getting them the ball. So to a certain extent I think he made his receivers better (even though they were solid to start).

 
The Pats don't rely on Brady like the Colts do Manning. So, no, my position stands. The Pats have always had more complete teams since Manning and Brady have been in the league. Thus, more rings.
No of course the Pats with no running game to speak off did not rely on a QB who was coming off a 50 TD season the way the Colts do Manning. Sure.
The Pats do have a running game. Check their team ranking from last year. They have better coaching as well. Not to mention they also have a better defense. I'd argue that this year the Pats team overall is not as good as in years past. Plus Brady was returning from injury. Therefore, they were not as dominant.Count Brady's regular season MVPs. I'll go with what the voters say.
Since Brady became a starter in 2001, the Patriots defense has allowed only 2.75 points per game fewer than the Colts ( a 9-year stretch). NE having a defense leaps and bounds better than the Colts is mostly a myth.
I said a better Defense. Roughly a FG a game is better. Who said "leaps and bounds better"?
 
Count Brady's regular season MVPs.
I prefer to count SB rings.
Yes, of course you do. Therefore Terry Bradshaw is better than Brady! Hell, for that matter, Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino!
Rich Gannon won twice as many MVP awards as Bradshaw, Marino and Brady so yes I can certainly see why you would use that as your defining characteristic for judging a QB.
I count 1 MVP for Gannon, so I'm not sure where you are going with this.As for the Manning and Brady debate, clearly Manning has been helped by playing a lot more indoors.Manning passer rating:Indoors (104 games): 100.4Outdoors (88 games): 89.6Brady passer rating:Indoors (13 games): 98.7Outdoors: (116 game): 92.8Certainly neither guy could have done anything about his playing environment, but I'm guessing it's harder throwing the ball in the cold and snow of New England than a nice climate controlled dome later in the season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Count Brady's regular season MVPs.
I prefer to count SB rings.
Yes, of course you do. Therefore Terry Bradshaw is better than Brady! Hell, for that matter, Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino!
Rich Gannon won twice as many MVP awards as Bradshaw, Marino and Brady so yes I can certainly see why you would use that as your defining characteristic for judging a QB.
WTF are you talking about? I said no team relies on their QB more than the Colts do Manning. Now you're trying to turn that into this?Have a nice day. :mellow:
 
The Pats don't rely on Brady like the Colts do Manning. So, no, my position stands. The Pats have always had more complete teams since Manning and Brady have been in the league. Thus, more rings.
No of course the Pats with no running game to speak off did not rely on a QB who was coming off a 50 TD season the way the Colts do Manning. Sure.
The Pats do have a running game. Check their team ranking from last year. They have better coaching as well. Not to mention they also have a better defense. I'd argue that this year the Pats team overall is not as good as in years past. Plus Brady was returning from injury. Therefore, they were not as dominant.Count Brady's regular season MVPs. I'll go with what the voters say.
Since Brady became a starter in 2001, the Patriots defense has allowed only 2.75 points per game fewer than the Colts ( a 9-year stretch). NE having a defense leaps and bounds better than the Colts is mostly a myth.
I said a better Defense. Roughly a FG a game is better. Who said "leaps and bounds better"?
Not you specifically, but similar threads crop up multiple times a year and a number of people still try to say the Pats defense was in a different class entirely than the Colts.
 
Count Brady's regular season MVPs.
I prefer to count SB rings.
Yes, of course you do. Therefore Terry Bradshaw is better than Brady! Hell, for that matter, Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino!
Rich Gannon won twice as many MVP awards as Bradshaw, Marino and Brady so yes I can certainly see why you would use that as your defining characteristic for judging a QB.
WTF are you talking about? I said no team relies on their QB more than the Colts do Manning. Now you're trying to turn that into this?Have a nice day. :mellow:
Excuse me but you are the one who went here when you, not me, chose to diminish Brady by saying you were going with the MVP voters who only voted for Brady once. Sorry if me pointing out that Rich Gannon won it twice pokes a giant hole in that argument but it is what it is.
 
Excuse me but you are the one who went here when you, not me, chose to diminish Brady by saying you were going with the MVP voters who only voted for Brady once. Sorry if me pointing out that Rich Gannon won it twice pokes a giant hole in that argument but it is what it is.
Gannon was MVP in 2002. Since when is one more than one?
 
As for the Manning and Brady debate, clearly Manning has been helped by playing a lot more indoors.

Manning passer rating:

Indoors (104 games): 100.4

Outdoors (88 games): 89.6

Brady passer rating:

Indoors (13 games): 98.7

Outdoors: (116 game): 92.8

Certainly neither guy could have done anything about his playing environment, but I'm guessing it's harder throwing the ball in the cold and snow of New England than a nice climate controlled dome later in the season.

The dome effect is quite large. It isnt just passing stats, its also what type of team you create. Is there a reason why the colts have always had smaller, faster guys who can make quick cuts on defense? A reason they prefer a certain kind of receiver and scheme and they never really have to/want to change how they run routes? A lot of it relates to playing in a dome 10+ games a year. You have a dome, you have manning, you build a team around those two things. Makes complete sense but manning wouldnt have the numbers he does if he had to worry about field condition, wind, snow, rain, cold or heat. Not a slam at all, just the colts taking the logical route. Personally I think all the teams should play in domes or none of them should. We can't correct for miami heat, green bay cold or buffalo wind but we can control the stadiums. As far as the mvp award, eh I dont care much, I think it devalues the award somewhat, it seemed that this year, starting from preseason, manning had to do something to -lose- it rather than other guys having to do things to win it.

 
Excuse me but you are the one who went here when you, not me, chose to diminish Brady by saying you were going with the MVP voters who only voted for Brady once. Sorry if me pointing out that Rich Gannon won it twice pokes a giant hole in that argument but it is what it is.
Gannon was MVP in 2002. Since when is one more than one?
Maxwell MVP 2000.
I was my HS Chess team's MVP twice, so I guess I'm tied with Gannon. :shrug:
 
Excuse me but you are the one who went here when you, not me, chose to diminish Brady by saying you were going with the MVP voters who only voted for Brady once. Sorry if me pointing out that Rich Gannon won it twice pokes a giant hole in that argument but it is what it is.
Gannon was MVP in 2002. Since when is one more than one?
Maxwell MVP 2000.
Faulk is generally recognized as the MVP in 2000, as the AP has become the de facto choice as the NFL's MVP (although there really is no official NFL MVP award).
 
They have elite receiving threats only because of who is throwing the ball to them.
I cannot think of ANYONE who has made his living throwing to elite receivers more than ManningLet's look at Manning's top 2 receivers over the years2009: Wayne, Clark2008: Wayne, Clark2007: Wayne, Clark2006: Harrison, Wayne2005: Harrison, Wayne2004: Wayne, Harrison2003: Harrison, Wayne2002: Harrison, Wayne2001: Harrison, Pollard2000: Harrison, Pathon1999: Harrison, James1998: Faulk, HarrisonNow, what do these have in common?Faulk, Harrison, James, Wayne and Clark were all 1st rounders and Pathon was the 1st pick of the 2nd round. Only poor Marcus Pollard doesn't have the pedigree2 top receivers * 12 years = 24 top receivers22 of his 24 top receivers have been 1st round picksSo please, please stop with the 'Manning makes his receivers' garbage
And the line is great, but a huge part of that is how Manning reads the defense and makes corrections at the line.
It doesn't matter how many 'corrections' or 'adjustments' you make if your players simply suck. And the Colts line clearly does not.
I am also not aware of any other team that calls in 3 plays and lets their QB make the call as to what he wants to go with. I know that the Pats don't do it.
WHO CARES?All that matters is results. I don't care if they have to explain each play to him like a child. It's how he executes the play and how successful he is that counts.Whether they give him 3 plays or he calls his own plays, the simple fact is that the other QBs are crushing his production.If other QBs can be MORE SUCCESSFUL with simpler play-calling and worse offensive lines, then perhaps Manning should be put on a tighter leash and only given 1 play so he can be AS SUCCESSFUL as all the other QBs
So you agree that they have built their team around Manning since they have drafted players in the first round for him to throw to.Who is "crushing" Manning? Every year Manning is at the top of the list for TD, Yards, Passing Pct, QB rating. No one else except for Brady is close every year. And Brady really didn't get there until they brought in Welker and Moss. As for success? I'm guessing you mean rings. And if that's the case I would argue that the Pats and the Steelers have had better coaches than the Colts have. I agree that Brees and Rivers look really good right now. Rodgers as well. But a few years ago I thought Bulger was a top QB. Manning is consistently one of the top 5 QB's every year.
 
Excuse me but you are the one who went here when you, not me, chose to diminish Brady by saying you were going with the MVP voters who only voted for Brady once. Sorry if me pointing out that Rich Gannon won it twice pokes a giant hole in that argument but it is what it is.
Gannon was MVP in 2002. Since when is one more than one?
Maxwell MVP 2000.
I was my HS Chess team's MVP twice, so I guess I'm tied with Gannon. :shrug:
I thought you left.
 
just wanted to add about this whole manning means more to his team thing............that meme has been around for a long time now, what does it really mean? it cant be quantified and it just adds to the whole he has to do something to lose it rather than other folks being able to do things to win it.

i dont really like anyones chances other than manning for the mvp next year either.

manning media narrative (commercials, fawning over a performance, going all madden on the intangibles) + 4000/30/18 > anything other than a brady '07 season. running backs, linebackers, any qb on the west coast/not in a huge media market/not already an established nationwide commodity need not apply.

 
Excuse me but you are the one who went here when you, not me, chose to diminish Brady by saying you were going with the MVP voters who only voted for Brady once. Sorry if me pointing out that Rich Gannon won it twice pokes a giant hole in that argument but it is what it is.
Gannon was MVP in 2002. Since when is one more than one?
Maxwell MVP 2000.
I was my HS Chess team's MVP twice, so I guess I'm tied with Gannon. :shrug:
I thought you left.
Had to return to respond to this hilarious post of yours. Instant gem!
 
"Who is "crushing" Manning? Every year Manning is at the top of the list for TD, Yards, Passing Pct, QB rating."

yep, every year he elite in all of those. it just seems to accumulate. he is now the default choice. if next year he has lesser stats that brees, rivers, or rodgers he will still beat them in mvp voting. if brady has better numbers brady will win as hes the only other guy with a big enough media machine to do so. but dang, mvp is for a single season no? im tired of it not even being close. youve seen how the votes went right? he was that much better than anyone else?

 
So you agree that they have built their team around Manning since they have drafted players in the first round for him to throw to.
No, they didn't build it around the Manning, they built it around the PASSING GAME, any QB could look at least decent back thereTo succeed in such a QB-friendly system says far less than to succeed elsewhereElite receivers, elite line, playing in a dome, it's a passer's paradise.Manning should be annihilating the competition statisticallyThe fact that he isn't suggests he isn't nearly the player many think he is.Don't get me wrong, he's still very, very good. He just isn't the best
Who is "crushing" Manning?
Brees, Favre and Rivers for starters
Every year Manning is at the top of the list for TD, Yards, Passing Pct, QB rating. No one else except for Brady is close every year.
AGAIN THIS IS NOT A CAREER ACHIEVEMENT AWARD
As for success? I'm guessing you mean rings.
No, I'm talking about passing success on the field THIS YEAR
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Who is "crushing" Manning? Every year Manning is at the top of the list for TD, Yards, Passing Pct, QB rating."yep, every year he elite in all of those. it just seems to accumulate. he is now the default choice. if next year he has lesser stats that brees, rivers, or rodgers he will still beat them in mvp voting. if brady has better numbers brady will win as hes the only other guy with a big enough media machine to do so. but dang, mvp is for a single season no? im tired of it not even being close. youve seen how the votes went right? he was that much better than anyone else?
No, the vote means he was better in more people's eyes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top