Tom Brady MVP? (1 Viewer)

[moleculo]

Its even better when people bring Matt Cassel into the discussion as if it was in any way relevant; did everyone forget that the Broncos made the playoffs with Tebow and without Welker or Julius? How do Cassel and Tebow matchup?

Speaking of Tebow, serious question here. Do you believe Tebow should have been MVP in 2011?

I ask because, unlike Brady in 2013, we actually got to see that Bronco team without Tebow. They were 1-3 that season and had won just 5 of their last 20 games. They made ONE change, to Tebow, and suddenly were a playoff team. The defense statistically did not improve at all and remained in the bottom 3rd of the league (24th after Tebow took over). Also remember that, at the time, the Broncos "weapons" (DT and Decker) were considered amongst the worst in the league.

I'm guessing the obvious answer here is "no", which is kind of the point. I don't see any way you can claim Brady should be MVP in 2013 without also saying Tebow should have been MVP in 2011. You can't have it both ways.

Its pretty simple because - without Tebow they were just as good or better than they were with Tebow, if this was 2012, and the Pats had a healthy Gronk, Hernandez, Lloyd and Welker, I think the Pats would put up a reasonable record with Mallet, likely win their division, maybe win a playoff game. But in 2013 with four rookies and all the elite talent on the offense now injured - absolutely not.Also I guess my memory is fuzzy, I don't recall ever having heard that DT was ever considered not an elite talent.

Go re-read the 60 page Tebow thread. There were some who claimed that Tebows poor stats were a function of receivers not being able to catch, or receivers running poor routes.

 

[moleculo]

At what point does it become relevant that Eric Decker has the same number of drops as Kenbrell Thombkins, and Wes Welker has the same number of drops as Aaron Dobson?

 

[moleculo]

At what point does it become relevant that Eric Decker has the same number of drops as Kenbrell Thombkins, and Wes Welker has the same number of drops as Aaron Dobson?

Or, that Broncos are tied with Patriots for 4th worst in the league in terms of drops percentage?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Its even better when people bring Matt Cassel into the discussion as if it was in any way relevant; did everyone forget that the Broncos made the playoffs with Tebow and without Welker or Julius? How do Cassel and Tebow matchup?

Speaking of Tebow, serious question here. Do you believe Tebow should have been MVP in 2011?

I ask because, unlike Brady in 2013, we actually got to see that Bronco team without Tebow. They were 1-3 that season and had won just 5 of their last 20 games. They made ONE change, to Tebow, and suddenly were a playoff team. The defense statistically did not improve at all and remained in the bottom 3rd of the league (24th after Tebow took over). Also remember that, at the time, the Broncos "weapons" (DT and Decker) were considered amongst the worst in the league.

I'm guessing the obvious answer here is "no", which is kind of the point. I don't see any way you can claim Brady should be MVP in 2013 without also saying Tebow should have been MVP in 2011. You can't have it both ways.

Its pretty simple because - without Tebow they were just as good or better than they were with Tebow, if this was 2012, and the Pats had a healthy Gronk, Hernandez, Lloyd and Welker, I think the Pats would put up a reasonable record with Mallet, likely win their division, maybe win a playoff game. But in 2013 with four rookies and all the elite talent on the offense now injured - absolutely not.

Also I guess my memory is fuzzy, I don't recall ever having heard that DT was ever considered not an elite talent.

Fuzzy memory is an understatement.

When Tebow came into the starting role for the Broncos, they were considered to potentially be the worst team in the entire NFL. The general consensus here about the move to Tebow was that they were just going ahead and locking up the #1 pick the next year. Many lamented during both Tebow and Orton's reign that they had little receiving talent to work with. Colin Cowherd took flack for saying that the Broncos receivers weren't THAT bad, and were actually as good as being mediocre compared to the rest of the league.

The Broncos had won 5 of their last 20 when Tebow took over, and then won 6 of their next 7.

Again, you're bewilderingly fuzzy memory aside, you can't argue that Brady should be MVP of 2014 without arguing that Tebow should be MVP of 2011, or even that Hoyer should be considered for MVP of 2014 as well.

 

[Run It Up]

Again, you're bewilderingly fuzzy memory aside, you can't argue that Brady should be MVP of 2014 without arguing that Tebow should be MVP of 2011, or even that Hoyer should be considered for MVP of 2014 as well.

It seems like you're trying to insult me somehow and failing miserably. Do you really credit the success of the 2011 Broncos to Tebow? I really don't see how these two scenarios are similar.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Pats stats:

Pass O - ranked #17

Run O - ranked #11

Scoring D - ranked #6

This thread is awful, and the only argument for Brady to be MVP seems to be "just cause." A better argument can be made that the running game and D are carrying Brady.

What's awful is not knowing what MVP stands for.

This thread is beyond destroyed. Mods can close it whenever they're ready.

 

[lbouchard]

Its even better when people bring Matt Cassel into the discussion as if it was in any way relevant; did everyone forget that the Broncos made the playoffs with Tebow and without Welker or Julius? How do Cassel and Tebow matchup?

Speaking of Tebow, serious question here. Do you believe Tebow should have been MVP in 2011?

I ask because, unlike Brady in 2013, we actually got to see that Bronco team without Tebow. They were 1-3 that season and had won just 5 of their last 20 games. They made ONE change, to Tebow, and suddenly were a playoff team. The defense statistically did not improve at all and remained in the bottom 3rd of the league (24th after Tebow took over). Also remember that, at the time, the Broncos "weapons" (DT and Decker) were considered amongst the worst in the league.

I'm guessing the obvious answer here is "no", which is kind of the point. I don't see any way you can claim Brady should be MVP in 2013 without also saying Tebow should have been MVP in 2011. You can't have it both ways.

Its pretty simple because - without Tebow they were just as good or better than they were with Tebow, if this was 2012, and the Pats had a healthy Gronk, Hernandez, Lloyd and Welker, I think the Pats would put up a reasonable record with Mallet, likely win their division, maybe win a playoff game. But in 2013 with four rookies and all the elite talent on the offense now injured - absolutely not.

Also I guess my memory is fuzzy, I don't recall ever having heard that DT was ever considered not an elite talent.

Fuzzy memory is an understatement.

When Tebow came into the starting role for the Broncos, they were considered to potentially be the worst team in the entire NFL. The general consensus here about the move to Tebow was that they were just going ahead and locking up the #1 pick the next year. Many lamented during both Tebow and Orton's reign that they had little receiving talent to work with. Colin Cowherd took flack for saying that the Broncos receivers weren't THAT bad, and were actually as good as being mediocre compared to the rest of the league.

The Broncos had won 5 of their last 20 when Tebow took over, and then won 6 of their next 7.

Again, you're bewilderingly fuzzy memory aside, you can't argue that Brady should be MVP of 2014 without arguing that Tebow should be MVP of 2011, or even that Hoyer should be considered for MVP of 2014 as well.

Eric Decker was on pace for 80/1,080/16 in the 4 games that Kyle freakin Orton started. This was in his 2nd year in the league, after he had been insanely productive both raw and advanced stat wise at Minnesota. He went in the 3rd round, but would have gone higher if not for an injury. Demaryius was a first round pick that same year, the first WR taken (ahead of Dez Bryant). He had an explosive career at GT. He tore his Achilles and came back with Tebow starting. Due to a combination of easing back into the game and Tebow hardly passing, he wasn't used much at first. However, in the last 7 games of the season, DT went for: 35/745/4. Over a 16 game season, that's pace for: 80/1702/9.

Tebow's offense might have hurt the value of the WRs they had, because they didn't pass much. But if you're trying to say that they were mediocre weapons and then Manning solely elevated them, you're wrong. Unless you also believe that Dez Bryant was a mediocre player and then was finally elevated in his third season. You could see the young talent flash, they just hadn't put it all together yet. Both DT and Decker would have been more than fine if Peyton hadn't come to town.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Again, you're bewilderingly fuzzy memory aside, you can't argue that Brady should be MVP of 2014 without arguing that Tebow should be MVP of 2011, or even that Hoyer should be considered for MVP of 2014 as well.

It seems like you're trying to insult me somehow and failing miserably. Do you really credit the success of the 2011 Broncos to Tebow? I really don't see how these two scenarios are similar.

You're right, they're not similar. Take Brady off the Pats and they're still nowhere near the worst team in the league. On the flipside, prior to Tebow taking over in Denver they were considered by most to be just that.

ETA: This is obviously not an attempt to illustrate that Tebow is anywhere on the same planet as Brady. Rather, it is to illustrate how absurd it is to base your argument out of the W/L record of a few games. Again, the Broncos were considered to be far worse than a Bradyless Patriots team when Tebow took over. The arguments being applied to Brady are no different than the ones you could apply to Tebow and Hoyer and countless others. The only difference is name recognition.

 

[DoubleG]

Pats stats:

Pass O - ranked #17

Run O - ranked #11

Scoring D - ranked #6

This thread is awful, and the only argument for Brady to be MVP seems to be "just cause." A better argument can be made that the running game and D are carrying Brady.

This thread is beyond destroyed. Mods can close it whenever they're ready.

Well at least the Pats homers and the rest of the planet agree on 1 thing.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

 

[moleculo]

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

After facing the Broncos offense, its difficult for any defense to be rated highly, especially with a small sample size.Look at Baltimore, for instance. Outside of the Bronco game, they have given up 12.7 points per game and 291 yards - a pace that would put them in 4th and 4th in points and yards, as opposed to 12th and 17th.

Eta: I've also gotta wonder how much lower the Jets D would be ranked if they didn't get to pad their stats in week 2.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

After facing the Broncos offense, its difficult for any defense to be rated highly, especially with a small sample size.

Look at Baltimore, for instance. Outside of the Bronco game, they have given up 12.7 points per game and 330 yards - a pace that would put them in 4th and 13th in points and yards, as opposed to 12th and 17th.

Right. Same things goes for the W/L record of opponents, since if your record is 4-0, your combined opponents' record is already gonna be 0-4 before even looking at other games. And if those opponents played each other (like the Jets and Bucs, two of NE's opponents), that is an automatic win, which inflates your opponents' combined record. Too early to put much stock into stuff like that.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

After facing the Broncos offense, its difficult for any defense to be rated highly, especially with a small sample size.Look at Baltimore, for instance. Outside of the Bronco game, they have given up 12.7 points per game and 291 yards - a pace that would put them in 4th and 4th in points and yards, as opposed to 12th and 17th.

Eta: I've also gotta wonder how much lower the Jets D would be ranked if they didn't get to pad their stats in week 2.

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

After facing the Broncos offense, its difficult for any defense to be rated highly, especially with a small sample size.

Look at Baltimore, for instance. Outside of the Bronco game, they have given up 12.7 points per game and 330 yards - a pace that would put them in 4th and 13th in points and yards, as opposed to 12th and 17th.

Right. Same things goes for the W/L record of opponents, since if your record is 4-0, your combined opponents' record is already gonna be 0-4 before even looking at other games. And if those opponents played each other (like the Jets and Bucs, two of NE's opponents), that is an automatic win, which inflates your opponents' combined record. Too early to put much stock into stuff like that.

Except it takes this into account:

Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods

The biggest variable in football is the fact that each team plays a different schedule against teams of disparate quality. By adjusting each play based on the opposing defense’s average success in stopping that type of play over the course of a season, we get DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. Rushing and passing plays are adjusted based on down and location on the field; passing plays are also adjusted based on how the defense performs against passes to running backs, tight ends, or wide receivers. Defenses are adjusted based on the average success of the offenses they are facing. (Yes, technically the defensive stats are actually “offense-adjusted.” If it seems weird, think of the “D” in “DVOA” as standing for “opponent-Dependent” or something.)

 

[MoveToSkypager]

This thread is beyond destroyed. Mods can close it whenever they're ready.

I bet they weren't waiting on your signal.

 

[moleculo]

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

After facing the Broncos offense, its difficult for any defense to be rated highly, especially with a small sample size.Look at Baltimore, for instance. Outside of the Bronco game, they have given up 12.7 points per game and 291 yards - a pace that would put them in 4th and 4th in points and yards, as opposed to 12th and 17th.

Eta: I've also gotta wonder how much lower the Jets D would be ranked if they didn't get to pad their stats in week 2.

Here's a little gasoline to put on the Tom Brady for MVP fire...

The Patriots faced the #2, 3 & 6 defense in the first three weeks of the season.

Patriots: 2,3,6, 26

Broncos: 11, 22, 28, 29

After facing the Broncos offense, its difficult for any defense to be rated highly, especially with a small sample size.

Look at Baltimore, for instance. Outside of the Bronco game, they have given up 12.7 points per game and 330 yards - a pace that would put them in 4th and 13th in points and yards, as opposed to 12th and 17th.

Right. Same things goes for the W/L record of opponents, since if your record is 4-0, your combined opponents' record is already gonna be 0-4 before even looking at other games. And if those opponents played each other (like the Jets and Bucs, two of NE's opponents), that is an automatic win, which inflates your opponents' combined record. Too early to put much stock into stuff like that.

Except it takes this into account:

Performance is also adjusted for the quality of the opponent.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods

The biggest variable in football is the fact that each team plays a different schedule against teams of disparate quality. By adjusting each play based on the opposing defense’s average success in stopping that type of play over the course of a season, we get DVOA, or Defense-adjusted Value Over Average. Rushing and passing plays are adjusted based on down and location on the field; passing plays are also adjusted based on how the defense performs against passes to running backs, tight ends, or wide receivers. Defenses are adjusted based on the average success of the offenses they are facing. (Yes, technically the defensive stats are actually “offense-adjusted.” If it seems weird, think of the “D” in “DVOA” as standing for “opponent-Dependent” or something.)

sigh. My point wasn't just a SoS argument, it was also a small sample size argument.

Because it is early in the season, opponent adjustments are only at 40 percent strength; they will increase 10 percent every week through Week 10. Rushing includes all rushing, not just running backs.

i.e. because it's a small sample size, single game large variances have a large impact on opponent adjustments. They adjust for this by limiting the SoS adjustment early in the season.

note: Baltimore's D jumped from 20th to 12th, per their metrics. Was that jump up a function of giving up 23 points and 345 yards to the Bills, or a function of the beating the Broncos put on them being diluted by one more game?

 

[Zigg]

Pats stats:

Pass O - ranked #17

Run O - ranked #11

Scoring D - ranked #6

This thread is awful, and the only argument for Brady to be MVP seems to be "just cause." A better argument can be made that the running game and D are carrying Brady.

What's awful is not knowing what MVP stands for.

This thread is beyond destroyed. Mods can close it whenever they're ready.

The passing game is the weakest facet of the Patriots. Please explain what is so damn "V" about Tom Brady this year. Because to non worshipers, there is absolutely nothing "V" about his barely mediocre play this season.

 

[pizzatyme]

He's effing Tom Brady!

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Pats stats:

Pass O - ranked #17

Run O - ranked #11

Scoring D - ranked #6

This thread is awful, and the only argument for Brady to be MVP seems to be "just cause." A better argument can be made that the running game and D are carrying Brady.

What's awful is not knowing what MVP stands for.

This thread is beyond destroyed. Mods can close it whenever they're ready.

The passing game is the weakest facet of the Patriots. Please explain what is so damn "V" about Tom Brady this year. Because to non worshipers, there is absolutely nothing "V" about his barely mediocre play this season.

This is what happens when you read stats in a vacuum and ignore all of the rookies he has to throw to vs. veterans that QB's like Manning has the luxury to throw to.

 

[Zigg]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

 

[DoubleG]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Ooohh! Can we nominate Sam Bradford then, since he's throwing to Pettis, Givens and Austin who have a combined 5 years of experience between them? He and Brady both have thrown 7 TDs!!

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

 

[DoubleG]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

You keep saying this, yet the leading WR on the Patriots is Edelman - who has 5 years in the league. In week 1, where the Patriots slipped past the Bills 23-21, Danny Amendola (5th year in the league) lead the Patriots with 10 receptions - with Edelman close behind with 7. So please stop trotting this out like he's only throwing to rookies. When 2 of your top 4 WRs each have 4+ years of experience, it's pretty disingenuous to keep saying "he's throwing to 4 rookies".

 

[Pots]

So yea, I'm a homer.

/thread

 

[Run It Up]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

You keep saying this, yet the leading WR on the Patriots is Edelman - who has 5 years in the league. In week 1, where the Patriots slipped past the Bills 23-21, Danny Amendola (5th year in the league) lead the Patriots with 10 receptions - with Edelman close behind with 7. So please stop trotting this out like he's only throwing to rookies. When 2 of your top 4 WRs each have 4+ years of experience, it's pretty disingenuous to keep saying "he's throwing to 4 rookies".

Wait, what?

He had two quarters of Danny Amendola, four full games of rookies and free agent pickups (Blount has been a surprising pickup), and of course the highly touted 3rd string special teams player with 5 years experience - Julian Edelman, who has been spectacular at absolutely nothing in the offense his entire career, including thus far this year.

 

[Run It Up]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:
a) The best performer
b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

 

[The Duff Man]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

 

[moleculo]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

doesn't change the answer one bit.

 

[moleculo]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

That is impressive. However, what is even more impressive is the QB who is off to the greatest start to a season in NFL history, all while handicapped by playing on a team that is as bad at catching the ball as the lowly Patriots.

Or is that a detail we are ignoring too?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Patriots WRs: Sucky

Jets WRs: Suck

Patriots O-line: Awesome

Jets O-line: Sucky

Patriots RBs: 4.74ypc

Jets RBs: 3.9ypc

Patriots offensive points vs common opponents: 46

Jets offensive points vs common opponents: 45

I wonder how many of these Pats fans would be clamoring for Geno Smith to be MVP right now if HIS defense was the one in the top 5 and they were off to a 4-0 start.

 

[Run It Up]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

doesn't change the answer one bit.

While true, its possible they are one in the same, but making known the definition of the award itself changes things a great deal. This thread is full of people arguing more than two different things, some aren't even opposed to one another.

 

[kyoun1e]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt Ryan

He can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

 

[kyoun1e]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

b)

And it's not Manning.

It's not Brady either.

It's AP.

 

[Run It Up]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

b)

And it's not Manning.

It's not Brady either.

It's AP.

I could see the argument, but they are 1-3 with Peterson, I have no doubt they would be 0-4 without him. Thats not much of an impact.

I think Rivers has been playing lights out considering the team they hobbled together this preseason.

74% completion percentage on 142 attempts, 1,200 yards, 11 TDs and 2 Ints.

Rivers is the only reason they are 2-2 right now.

 

[The Duff Man]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt RyanHe can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

I have the all-22 so why dont you go ahead and point me to the MVP play that Brady has performed that these guys wouldnt have.

I assume there must be a lot of them if he is in the MVP discussion.

Cause I have watched the games and dont see it.

 

[Run It Up]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt RyanHe can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

I have the all-22 so why dont you go ahead and point me to the MVP play that Brady has performed that these guys wouldnt have.

I assume there must be a lot of them if he is in the MVP discussion.

Cause I have watched the games and dont see it.

You could start with the number one criticism of Brady so far this season, that he keeps putting the ball in places that are tough for his receivers to catch (while being impossible for the defenders to catch).

The windows Brady is forcing some of his throws into to his rookies is spectacular. God help the NFL and fantasy football teams everywhere when Gronk returns, if his back doesn't explode he might give Graham a run for his money.

 

[pizzatyme]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

Brady isn't having an MVP performance. His team is having a terrific performance, however. Not quite as good as the Broncos team performance, but very close.

 

[DoubleG]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

See, here's the problem. If we go with "b" then it leads to idiotic things like people clamoring to give it to Manning the year he was out. The other problem with "b" is that for about 50% of the teams in the NFL, if you took out their starting QB and replaced it with their second stringer, the team would perform much worse (well, except for Sanchize... but I digress). How did the Bears do in 2011, after winning 5 in a row when Cutler went down? (they lost 5 in a row, including to the Raiders, the Tebow-lead Broncos and a 4-6 Chiefs team) How would the Saints be without Brees? The Packers sans Rodgers? The Lions with no Stafford? The Seahawks without Wilson? Or the Colts without Luck? We saw what that looked like...in 2011. How were the 4-0 Chiefs last year without Alex Smith?

Why don't we just go with "a" then.

 

[The Duff Man]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt RyanHe can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

I have the all-22 so why dont you go ahead and point me to the MVP play that Brady has performed that these guys wouldnt have.

I assume there must be a lot of them if he is in the MVP discussion.

Cause I have watched the games and dont see it.

The windows Brady is forcing some of his throws into to his rookies is spectacular.

Talking head mumbo jumbo.

If anyone knows an easy way to post video from the all 22 (if that is even legal?) this is easy to refute.

 

[pizzatyme]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

See, here's the problem. If we go with "b" then it leads to idiotic things like people clamoring to give it to Manning the year he was out. The other problem with "b" is that for about 50% of the teams in the NFL, if you took out their starting QB and replaced it with their second stringer, the team would perform much worse (well, except for Sanchize... but I digress). How did the Bears do in 2011, after winning 5 in a row when Cutler went down? (they lost 5 in a row, including to the Raiders, the Tebow-lead Broncos and a 4-6 Chiefs team) How would the Saints be without Brees? The Packers sans Rodgers? The Lions with no Stafford? The Seahawks without Wilson? Or the Colts without Luck? We saw what that looked like...in 2011. How were the 4-0 Chiefs last year without Alex Smith?

Why don't we just go with "a" then.

B is far too subjective.

 

[Run It Up]

Talking head mumbo jumbo.If anyone knows an easy way to post video from the all 22 (if that is even legal?) this is easy to refute.

Look at all the TD throws Brady has thrown this year, look at the throw to Kenbrell over the defender last Sunday. Look at the over the shoulder deep balls to Dobson in week 2 (most of which he dropped). The several "over thrown" balls to KT where for one reason or another KT slowed or broke off.

I'm not talking about the handful of crossing routes where one of the rookies messes up his route, I'm talking about the balls that maybe 3 other QBs in the league might even be able to throw. Obviously there are some bad in with the good, everyone is human - its just over stated.

 

[Run It Up]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

Why don't we just go with "a" then.

B is far too subjective.

Then what is the point of voting on the award at all, its rarely subjective who had the most significant regular season performance - its as simple as watching a few games and then reading the regular season stats.

 

[kyoun1e]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt RyanHe can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

I have the all-22 so why dont you go ahead and point me to the MVP play that Brady has performed that these guys wouldnt have.

I assume there must be a lot of them if he is in the MVP discussion.

Cause I have watched the games and dont see it.

You assume I think Brady should be MVP.

I don't.

I'm just pointing out that your logic is absurd.

 

[moleculo]

Talking head mumbo jumbo.

If anyone knows an easy way to post video from the all 22 (if that is even legal?) this is easy to refute.

Look at all the TD throws Brady has thrown this year, look at the throw to Kenbrell over the defender last Sunday. Look at the over the shoulder deep balls to Dobson in week 2 (most of which he dropped). The several "over thrown" balls to KT where for one reason or another KT slowed or broke off.

I'm not talking about the handful of crossing routes where one of the rookies messes up his route, I'm talking about the balls that maybe 3 other QBs in the league might even be able to throw. Obviously there are some bad in with the good, everyone is human - its just over stated.

All 7 of them? Lol, if I want to see 7 Manning TD passes, I only need to watch one game.

 

[Zigg]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

My reading comprehension is fine, your grasp on reality is not.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt RyanHe can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

I have the all-22 so why dont you go ahead and point me to the MVP play that Brady has performed that these guys wouldnt have.

I assume there must be a lot of them if he is in the MVP discussion.

Cause I have watched the games and dont see it.

You assume I think Brady should be MVP.

I don't.

Why not?

 

[pizzatyme]

Can we please just define MVP so we can all stop wasting our times in this thread.

Does it mean:

a) The best performer

b) The player who if lost would having the biggest negative impact on the teams success

Why don't we just go with "a" then.

B is far too subjective.

Then what is the point of voting on the award at all, its rarely subjective who had the most significant regular season performance - its as simple as watching a few games and then reading the regular season stats.

I agree. It is a pointless practice.

 

[kyoun1e]

What has Brady done in any of their games to back the claim that he "led them to victory"?

There is a stronger case that his poor throws are the reason the first two games were close!

Look beyond the stats also applies to...look beyond the record. Watch the plays, then show me why he is MVP.

Bottom line: INSERT ANY TOP TEN QB HERE.....Pats are still 4-0

Matt RyanHe can't win and he's throwing to J. Jones, T. Gonzalez, and R. White.

Stafford would break all kinds of records for poor QB play if he was in Brady's shoes.

That's a lousy bottom line you've got there.

I have the all-22 so why dont you go ahead and point me to the MVP play that Brady has performed that these guys wouldnt have.

I assume there must be a lot of them if he is in the MVP discussion.

Cause I have watched the games and dont see it.

You assume I think Brady should be MVP.

I don't.

Why not?

Because it's a little silly to be talking MVP with only one quarter of the season in the books.

Now if come week 12 NE is in position for one of the top two seeds and neither Amendola nor Gronk has seen the field...well...then I think we have something to talk about.

Same goes for Manning.

Wake me up after a lot more football has been played.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

That is impressive. However, what is even more impressive is the QB who is off to the greatest start to a season in NFL history, all while handicapped by playing on a team that is as bad at catching the ball as the lowly Patriots.Or is that a detail we are ignoring too?

You are as bad as that Zigg guy that just knows how to look at box scores. How about we look at the breakdown of the receivers?

Receptions/Targets (%)

Broncos:

Demaryius Thomas (3 years) 29/38 (76%)

Wes Welker (8 years) 26/36 (72%)

Eric Decker (3 years) 24/35 (69%)

Julius Thomas (2 years) 18/24 (75%)

73% Average - 16 years of experience in the receiving corps

Patriots:

Julian Edelman (4 years) 34/43 (79%)

Kenbrell Thompkins (Rookie) 15/39 (38%)

Aaron Dobson (Rookie) 11/23 (48%)

Josh Boyce (Rookie) 1/6 (17%)

Zach Sudfeld (Rookie) 0/3 (0%)

54% Average - 4 years of experience in the receiving corps

The worst hands out of the Bronco receivers is Decker who happens to be better than the 4 rookies Brady is forced to throw to.

Anyone trying to say this is a level playing field between opponents played and quality of receivers thrown to has to put down the Tom Brady Haterade.

 

[moleculo]

So Tom Brady should be MVP because he has inexperienced WRs and mediocre stats. Awesome case you guys are making here.

Again your reading comprehension is bad, if you read the OP you'll note he is just pointing out who's had a more impressive performance given the circumstances. Patriots clearly played tougher defenses and Brady has helped the Pats remain undefeated even when throwing to 4 rookies, but keep ignoring the details and just look at all of those yards and TD's Peyton has since obviously your only knowledge of football comes from a fantasy football perspective.

That is impressive. However, what is even more impressive is the QB who is off to the greatest start to a season in NFL history, all while handicapped by playing on a team that is as bad at catching the ball as the lowly Patriots.Or is that a detail we are ignoring too?

You are as bad as that Zigg guy that just knows how to look at box scores. How about we look at the breakdown of the receivers?Receptions/Targets (%)

Broncos:

Demaryius Thomas (3 years) 29/38 (76%)

Wes Welker (8 years) 26/36 (72%)

Eric Decker (3 years) 24/35 (69%)

Julius Thomas (2 years) 18/24 (75%)

73% Average - 16 years of experience in the receiving corps

Patriots:

Julian Edelman (4 years) 34/43 (79%)

Kenbrell Thompkins (Rookie) 15/39 (38%)

Aaron Dobson (Rookie) 11/23 (48%)

Josh Boyce (Rookie) 1/6 (17%)

Zach Sudfeld (Rookie) 0/3 (0%)

54% Average - 4 years of experience in the receiving corps

The worst hands out of the Bronco receivers is Decker who happens to be better than the 4 rookies Brady is forced to throw to.

Anyone trying to say this is a level playing field between opponents played and quality of receivers thrown to has to put down the Tom Brady Haterade.

Lol

 

[pizzatyme]

If both the Broncos and Patriots go undefeated, who wins the MVP?

Whoever wins the H2H matchup?