Was AP the most deserving?

[OSUViking 505]

By that logic, DMac, you can take out Peyton and put in Rodgers or Brady. Actually... the Broncos do better in the playoffs there. The logic you just applied to AP (replacing him with another star running back) also applies to Peyton. Also, if we have almost the same offense as last year, but AP's numbers skyrocketed and our record increased from 3-13 to 10-6, can't one assume that is almost entirely because of AP's play on offense? Not trying to discredit the defense here, but AP without a doubt had the biggest impact on our team. Yes; it's a 3 stage game. Did AP do it all by himself? No. Was he without a doubt the biggest factor? Hell fucking yes he was.

[OSUViking 505]

And let's not act like that Oline was a bunch of nobodies ever. In the second and first game against us regardless of whether AP ran in or out he wasn't getting touched before picking up at least 4 yards on most plays.

 

I think a little over half of AP's yards were after initial contact; I'll look that one up. I'll be the first one to acknowledge that our FBs and OL did great this year, but shit... AP still deserves a ton of the credit there.

 

EDIT: Unrelated to above, but I wasn't trying to take away from Peyton earlier. My point was that obviously the Broncos could make the playoffs without Peyton. This year, the Vikings don't even make six wins without AP. I think that impact alone carries AP to the MVP vote.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Vikingfan465

[oochymp 2,393]

if I had a vote for MVP it would have gone to JJ sWatt, the season he put together was just incredible, but I certainly wouldn't call AD undeserving

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

How about quarterbacking one of the best offenses in the NFL while putting up elite numbers? As apposed to leading an average offense despite your great numbers?

 

The individual stats AP piled up gets him an OPOTY award. Not MVP of the whole league. That should go to a guy who led one of the best units in the league, not a guy who led a middle of the road offense.

 

And let's not act like that Oline was a bunch of nobodies ever. In the second and first game against us regardless of whether AP ran in or out he wasn't getting touched before picking up at least 4 yards on most plays.

 

Peyton would never win the MVP award with your own logic. The Broncos won a playoff game without Peyton. What, say, the Packers would do with Aaron Rodgers scares me. The more valuable player is unquestioned.

 

QBing "one of the" best offenses this year is destroyed by arguably "the best" run by a back ever.

 

I also don't care about level of play of the Vikings line. That's like discrediting Peyton because he has Thomas or his line. Not only does he never get sacked, but he doesn't even get touched. I am not going there with that because it's beyond moronic.

 

With the season AP put together, Peyton would have had to up numbers more similar to Aaron Rodgers of last year to actually win it.

[BwareDWare94 723]

How about quarterbacking one of the best offenses in the NFL while putting up elite numbers? As apposed to leading an average offense despite your great numbers?

 

The individual stats AP piled up gets him an OPOTY award. Not MVP of the whole league. That should go to a guy who led one of the best units in the league, not a guy who led a middle of the road offense.

 

And let's not act like that Oline was a bunch of nobodies ever. In the second and first game against us regardless of whether AP ran in or out he wasn't getting touched before picking up at least 4 yards on most plays.

 

By stating that Minnesota's offense was average despite AP's ridiculous numbers, you're implying that he could have somehow done more. I really don't understand that perspective. The best season an RB has ever had. What more could he have done? Minnesota's offense struggled for reasons completely out of AP's hands.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

 

I still don't understand why people continue to bring up what the Broncos did last year to somehow discredit what Manning did to that team. The Broncos made the playoffs two years ago because they played in a weak division, defense, special teams, and some last second comeback wins that they probably wouldn't of ever been in position to make without their defense.

 

I don't mean to say Manning's numbers were prolific, but they were elite, the offense was prolific though. There's no questioning that. And that was because of Manning.

 

Would the Vikings really be a 6-10 team without AP? Take away AP, and put in Charles, and how much would that offense really dip in terms of overall production? AP played every game 2 years ago outside of the last two, and the offense was putting up almost identical numbers, as they did this past season.

 

It is not to discredit manning by any means. However it is a keystone to the argument you are making. We are trying to get to the root of who is more valuable as the name of the reward implies correct ? If that is the case you have to ask what the team would do without them in comparison to with them right ? What other baseline would you use.

 

And come on man. Replace AP with Charles. Really? So you want me to subsitute one star runner for another ? how is that a legit comparison ? Take Manning out and put in Brees. The probably do just as well if not better. That argument is no good.

 

The reason it is important to bring up two years ago is to look at the team. Manning took a team that the year before he got there was in the playoffs. He had the SAME cast. He still had a great defense, he had better special teams, and a better RB setup imo. The division is still the same. The chargers choking the shit out of themselves, the raiders and chiefs both sucking. That is almost an identical scenario to what Tebow had to what Manning has. Lets not forget manning has better TE's as well. I am pretty sure that Manning had the better situation. Take him away and substitute a crappy thrower and the are still a playoff caliber team.

 

On the flip side take away AP. Two years ago he has pretty much the same team as well, except Harvin was still in the passing game making them much more explosive. This year Kyle Rudolph emerged and better QB play makes it a wash for missing Harvin 8 games. So you take AP out of that offense this year and you have Ponder (Average QB at best to this point), Rudolph who admittedly played well, and then who ? His o line was good but so was mannings which I think are comparable as both are imperative to both positions success. That offense does little to nothing without AP. That team is not .500 where as the Broncos are and it is proven.

 

So yeah last year matters as a baseline for comparison. Not to discredit manning because they are a better team with him imo. You wont hear me argue that. However I think to say that manning has more impact then AP is ludicrous. AP being out would have a far larger effect on his team than Peyton would as last years records proved.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

AP strung together arguably the best run for any RB in NFL history in the 2nd half of the season with a sports hernia... lmao

His numbers weren't simply "elite". They were nearly unmatched in the history of the league.

 

Peyton's numbers weren't even close (as great as they were)

 

Exactly.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

MVP wise, it was between two rookies this year. RG3 or LUCK. I know no one seems to want to give a rookie the MVP award, but if they deserve it, who the fuck cares? Luck and RG3, both teams werent expected to COMBINE for 10 wins. Thats 5-11 for each team basically. They both took their teams to the playoffs. Both teams are not on the level of Minnesota. Minnesota's Defense for most of the year, was top 10. Their run D was good as hell too.

 

Peyton was deserving as well but i would take RG3 over anyone for MVP. Then Luck. AP only carried the offense, and even thats only half a season basically. When Harvin was in, he was among the leaders for yards and catches before he got hurt. Then from then on it was AP. Vikings have peices on offense, lets not forget that. Good tightends, solid, not great but you can win with them. AP was MOST OF THE OFFENSE before Harvin got hurt and then it was all AP. AP had a defense behind him. RG3 and Luck did not. So if both Washington and Indy were complete shit last year, and then they add a few peices, nothing major, and then those two rookies. Then make the playoffs, how do they NOT get any spotlight for MVP? Just because it hasnt happened before doesnt mean shit. People need to get out of the old ways, and look at who's deserving and not just stats.

 

MVP Race for me was

1. RG3

2. Luck

3. Peyton

4. AP

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

By that logic, DMac, you can take out Peyton and put in Rodgers or Brady. Actually... the Broncos do better in the playoffs there. The logic you just applied to AP (replacing him with another star running back) also applies to Peyton. Also, if we have almost the same offense as last year, but AP's numbers skyrocketed and our record increased from 3-13 to 10-6, can't one assume that is almost entirely because of AP's play on offense? Not trying to discredit the defense here, but AP without a doubt had the biggest impact on our team. Yes; it's a 3 stage game. Did AP do it all by himself? No. Was he without a doubt the biggest factor? Hell fucking yes he was.

 

No you can't. Because, again, despite AP's numbers skyrocketing, the offense's production as a whole didn't. It improved, but the improvement was equivalent to like, 2 more points on offense. How can you possibly claim that that's where the biggest impact was being made when your defense was giving up almost an entire touchdown and XP less?

 

Also to your other comment, AP did lead all HBs in Yards after contact. And you need to go to the Madden thread and let me know when you can play meh!

 

Peyton would never win the MVP award with your own logic. The Broncos won a playoff game without Peyton. What, say, the Packers would do with Aaron Rodgers scares me. The more valuable player is unquestioned.

 

QBing "one of the" best offenses this year is destroyed by arguably "the best" run by a back ever.

 

I also don't care about level of play of the Vikings line. That's like discrediting Peyton because he has Thomas or his line. Not only does he never get sacked, but he doesn't even get touched. I am not going there with that because it's beyond moronic.

 

With the season AP put together, Peyton would have had to up numbers more similar to Aaron Rodgers of last year to actually win it.

 

My logic is referring more to the fact that leading your offense to being average can be done by a lot of elite or complete HBs.

 

If you counter that with saying that any elite QB could lead an offense the way Manning did this year, then I'd agree, but that doesn't change the fact that AP led his offense to being average and Manning led his to being elite.

 

The MVP shouldn't go to whomever put up the more impressive offensive numbers, once again, that's what the OPOTY is. It should go to whomever led his team to the most success, and how can you argue with a guy who turned around an offense that could barely put up 20 points a game to one that only put up less then 30 like 3 times last year?

 

The fact that the Broncos made the playoffs, again, is irrelevant in this argument because they were a .500 team, they were bad in a division that was bad, this year they were a great team and arguably the NFL's best.

 

By stating that Minnesota's offense was average despite AP's ridiculous numbers, you're implying that he could have somehow done more. I really don't understand that perspective. The best season an RB has ever had. What more could he have done? Minnesota's offense struggled for reasons completely out of AP's hands.

 

Couldn't he have done more? Is that what you are saying? He was ranked 25th among HBs in receiving yards. You don't think AP could of played a bigger role in making that passing offense better?

 

And no. This is turning into an exaggeration thread. AP's season was not the best season a HB has ever had. Hell, a thread comparing this season to the one CJ had was made and nobody at the end of the day had a better argument for AP outside of, "he was coming off a torn ACL". Maybe from a rushing perspective, yea you could make your case for the best ever, but that's abou tas far as you can go.

 

LT put up more yards from scrimmage then AP and didn't rush for anywhere near as many yards as AP did.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

That offense does little to nothing without AP.

 

 

I disagree with you on that. Vikings have the best run blocking line in the league. In a division where the GB run D and Lions D SUCKED, i could see Vikings winning 3 out of those 4 times without AP vs both teams. Ponder is average, but he is just a game manager. With that beast run blocking oline, they could still run on teams and with that tough D, still win close games. All Ponder has to do , is not turn it over. Which he started the season out great by not turning the ball over. Vikings have a solid tightend duo, a good run game without AP. ( With AP its GREAT ) and a ok passing game. They could win 6-8 games without AP.

 

Which is far worse when u take out RG3 or Luck for their teams. ( See my previous post )

[Dutch 874]

MVP wise, it was between two rookies this year. RG3 or LUCK. I know no one seems to want to give a rookie the MVP award, but if they deserve it, who the fuck cares? Luck and RG3, both teams werent expected to COMBINE for 10 wins. Thats 5-11 for each team basically. They both took their teams to the playoffs. Both teams are not on the level of Minnesota. Minnesota's Defense for most of the year, was top 10. Their run D was good as hell too.

 

Peyton was deserving as well but i would take RG3 over anyone for MVP. Then Luck. AP only carried the offense, and even thats only half a season basically. When Harvin was in, he was among the leaders for yards and catches before he got hurt. Then from then on it was AP. Vikings have peices on offense, lets not forget that. Good tightends, solid, not great but you can win with them. AP was MOST OF THE OFFENSE before Harvin got hurt and then it was all AP. AP had a defense behind him. RG3 and Luck did not. So if both Washington and Indy were complete shit last year, and then they add a few peices, nothing major, and then those two rookies. Then make the playoffs, how do they NOT get any spotlight for MVP? Just because it hasnt happened before doesnt mean shit. People need to get out of the old ways, and look at who's deserving and not just stats.

 

MVP Race for me was

1. RG3

2. Luck

3. Peyton

4. AP

 

 

[GA_Eagle 595]

I only skimmed this topic... but why do people keep saying that AP only carried the offense? What the fuck else was he supposed to do? He's a running back. I didn't see Manning, Brady, Rodgers, or any of the other people mentioned lighting it up on the opposite side of the ball either.

 

edit: I also am not sure if he was a clear cut MVP but that keeps rubbing me the wrong way.

Edited February 21, 2013 by GA_Eagle

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

 

Great post. I can see all your valid points on why u think im wrong and a valid response. Not.. Prove me wrong on either or winning MVP better then AP? Are u serious?

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

I only skimmed this topic... but why do people keep saying that AP only carried the offense? What the fuck else was he supposed to do? He's a running back. I didn't see Manning, Brady, Rodgers, or any of the other people mentioned lighting it up on the opposite side of the ball either.

 

edit: I also am not sure if he was a clear cut MVP but that keeps rubbing me the wrong way.

 

Because people are using AP's performance this season as the alpha reason why the Vikings made the playoffs. Which isn't the case.

[Dutch 874]

I disagree with you on that. Vikings have the best run blocking line in the league. In a division where the GB run D and Lions D SUCKED, i could see Vikings winning 3 out of those 4 times without AP vs both teams. Ponder is average, but he is just a game manager. With that beast run blocking oline, they could still run on teams and with that tough D, still win close games. All Ponder has to do , is not turn it over. Which he started the season out great by not turning the ball over. Vikings have a solid tightend duo, a good run game without AP. ( With AP its GREAT ) and a ok passing game. They could win 6-8 games without AP.

 

Which is far worse when u take out RG3 or Luck for their teams. ( See my previous post )

 

This post is nothing but generalities and no substance. With that beast run blocking oline, they could still run on teams? Their tough (15th ranked lol) defense they'd still win close games? What good running game without A.P are you referring to? You're referring to the 2nd string complimentary RB Toby Gerhart who's never had to carry the load of an entire season? You talk about their TE duo. Kyle Rudolph is a rising star imo, but the amount of focus A.P gets from opposing defenses without a doubt makes his job easier. You spoke on Ponders "okay" passing game; do you realize how much worse it would have been without A.P in the backfield? A.P was the oil that made that machine (team) run and made everyone's job easier without question. You make it seem as if you take A.P out and plug in RB "B" that the Vikings would have almost the same results because of their "beast" o-line, 15th ranked defense, good TE duo and average passing game... Your entire post is trying to validate your opinions off of "what if" scenarios. No facts, no substance, just assumptions.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

This post is nothing but generalities and no substance. With that beast run blocking oline, they could still run on teams? Their tough (15th ranked lol) defense they'd still win close games? What good running game without A.P are you referring to? You're referring to the 2nd string complimentary RB Toby Gerhart who's never had to carry the load of an entire season? You talk about their TE duo. Kyle Rudolph is a rising star imo, but the amount of focus A.P gets from opposing defenses without a doubt makes his job easier. You spoke on Ponders "okay" passing game; do you realize how much worse it would have been without A.P in the backfield? A.P was the oil that made that machine (team) run and made everyone's job easier without question. You make it seem as if you take A.P out and plug in RB "B" that the Vikings would have almost the same results because of their "beast" o-line, 15th ranked defense, good TE duo and average passing game... Your entire post is trying to validate your opinions off of "what if" scenarios. No facts, no substance, just assumptions.

 

Ok so if u want to scratch that go head. End of the day, you take out AP, RG3 nd Luck from their teams, Vikings would be better then all three is what im saying. Rg3 and Luck were the TRUE MVP's of their team and were the MAIN reason for making the playoffs. Washington 28th in total D, Indy 26th. again, Vikings D for MOST OF THE YEAR, was top 10. A few bad games slid them to 16th.

[Dutch 874]

MVP wise, it was between two rookies this year. RG3 or LUCK. I know no one seems to want to give a rookie the MVP award, but if they deserve it, who the fuck cares? Luck and RG3, both teams werent expected to COMBINE for 10 wins. Thats 5-11 for each team basically. They both took their teams to the playoffs. Both teams are not on the level of Minnesota. Minnesota's Defense for most of the year, was top 10. Their run D was good as hell too.

 

Peyton was deserving as well but i would take RG3 over anyone for MVP. Then Luck. AP only carried the offense, and even thats only half a season basically. When Harvin was in, he was among the leaders for yards and catches before he got hurt. Then from then on it was AP. Vikings have peices on offense, lets not forget that. Good tightends, solid, not great but you can win with them. AP was MOST OF THE OFFENSE before Harvin got hurt and then it was all AP. AP had a defense behind him. RG3 and Luck did not. So if both Washington and Indy were complete shit last year, and then they add a few peices, nothing major, and then those two rookies. Then make the playoffs, how do they NOT get any spotlight for MVP? Just because it hasnt happened before doesnt mean shit. People need to get out of the old ways, and look at who's deserving and not just stats.

 

MVP Race for me was

1. RG3

2. Luck

3. Peyton

4. AP

 

Rg3 and Luck were without a doubt the most important pieces on their respective teams. They took their teams from losing records to playing in the play offs. Definitely Mvps on their teams. Rg3 and Luck played outstanding but they didn't perform better over other players in the league. A.P had a historic performance. Harvin was definitely balling when he was playing. A.P was still have a good year as well. Harvin went down and ALL the pressure was on A.P and he had the best stretch of any RB in the history of the game during that period. There is no way you can talk down on that as if it means nothing. Those good TEs you keep referring to could be focused on if A.P wasn't in the back field. Teams were stacking like 9 in the box to stop A.P so naturally that should open up plays in the passing game. Rudolph took advantage of the A.P effect and scored a lot of TDs in the redzone. You keep talking about this Vikings defense.They were in the middle of the pack; an average defense allowing like 21 points a game. Stop hyping them up as if

they were a top 5 or top 10 defense. Luck and Rg3 had amazing rookie years but can't compare to A.P's year. You keep trying but you can't downplay A.P's season. It was just too amazing.

[Dutch 874]

What on earth are you talking about? The Broncos were #20 in total defense in 2011.

 

They were #24 in scoring defense.

 

Totally true. That was my mistake and glad you caught it. In 4 of those game winning drives, if the Broncos defense didn't play good and keep it a low scoring game, Tim Tebow would've never had the chance.

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

Rg3 and Luck were without a doubt the most important pieces on their respective teams. They took their teams from losing records to playing in the play offs. Definitely Mvps on their teams. Rg3 and Luck played outstanding but they didn't perform better over other players in the league. A.P had a historic performance. Harvin was definitely balling when he was playing. A.P was still have a good year as well. Harvin went down and ALL the pressure was on A.P and he had the best stretch of any RB in the history of the game during that period. There is no way you can talk down on that as if it means nothing. Those good TEs you keep referring to could be focused on if A.P wasn't in the back field. Teams were stacking like 9 in the box to stop A.P so naturally that should open up plays in the passing game. Rudolph took advantage of the A.P effect and scored a lot of TDs in the redzone. You keep talking about this Vikings defense.They were in the middle of the pack; an average defense allowing like 21 points a game. Stop hyping them up as if

they were a top 5 or top 10 defense. Luck and Rg3 had amazing rookie years but can't compare to A.P's year. You keep trying but you can't downplay A.P's season. It was just too amazing.

 

AP season was amazing, however RG3 and Luck both had amazing seasons too. TWO ROOKIES, at QB, hardest position in football. Took shitty teams, and turned them into a playoff team. Im sorry, i see that as a better reason for MVP then AP. AP could fall back on his D. And YES they were good for most of the year, its you who is down playing that. MOST OF THE YEAR, they had a top 10 D. Third time saying that. Only case people made for AP, was his injury which means nothing to winning MVP. Its a feel good story, but if he was healthy that would be pointless to bring up for his case, so why would an injury mean anything? If it just makes u feel its more impressive then i guess. but Being more impressive doesnt mean anything for MVP..

 

When has a rookie Qb ever come in and lead a horrible bottom 3 team, to the playoffs in ONE YEAR? With no help at ALL on defense? RG3, had a pro bowl season, did way more with less.

 

RG3 Numbers 3200 passing yards, 20 TDs 5 ints <--- thats insane itself, 102.4 QB rating

Not to mention 7 rushing TD's to go with that. 815 rushing yards.

 

AP didnt even have the best season for a RB ever, CJ did. Not going to make this a CJ argument but im just throwing that out there. RG3's season, for being a rookie, his stats, having no defense, and taking a shitty team from the year before to the playoffs, in the NFC, is more impressive to me then what AP did. Not to mention AP had more help to obtain that kind of season, with his oline and a good D behind him. Luck stats werent as pretty but he took the same kind of team, 2-14 the year before, and turned them into a playoff team. No run game forreal or D. Thats why hes second on my list. Only reasons why these guys didnt get the nod, is they were rookies and people cant handle giving MVP to a rookie. Which is stupid but i guess.

[DonovanMcnabb for H.O.F 2,241]

While I don't agree with Mikey's list, at all. Dutch, I think you are massively underrating how good the Vikings defense was at times. There were games the Vikings would of, and could of lost if it wasn't for the defense's play this year.

[Dutch 874]

AP season was amazing, however RG3 and Luck both had amazing seasons too. TWO ROOKIES, at QB, hardest position in football. Took shitty teams, and turned them into a playoff team. Im sorry, i see that as a better reason for MVP then AP. AP could fall back on his D. And YES they were good for most of the year, its you who is down playing that. MOST OF THE YEAR, they had a top 10 D. Third time saying that. Only case people made for AP, was his injury which means nothing to winning MVP. Its a feel good story, but if he was healthy that would be pointless to bring up for his case, so why would an injury mean anything? If it just makes u feel its more impressive then i guess. but Being more impressive doesnt mean anything for MVP..

 

When has a rookie Qb ever come in and lead a horrible bottom 3 team, to the playoffs in ONE YEAR? With no help at ALL on defense? RG3, had a pro bowl season, did way more with less.

 

RG3 Numbers 3200 passing yards, 20 TDs 5 ints <--- thats insane itself, 102.4 QB rating

Not to mention 7 rushing TD's to go with that. 815 rushing yards.

 

AP didnt even have the best season for a RB ever, CJ did. Not going to make this a CJ argument but im just throwing that out there. RG3's season, for being a rookie, his stats, having no defense, and taking a shitty team from the year before to the playoffs, in the NFC, is more impressive to me then what AP did. Not to mention AP had more help to obtain that kind of season, with his oline and a good D behind him. Luck stats werent as pretty but he took the same kind of team, 2-14 the year before, and turned them into a playoff team. No run game forreal or D. Thats why hes second on my list. Only reasons why these guys didnt get the nod, is they were rookies and people cant handle giving MVP to a rookie. Which is stupid but i guess.

 

 

You are comparing two good/great rookie QB performances to one of the most prolific RB performances ever in the history of the game... Don't bring up statistics because A.P wins that all day. Peterson was really the only threat on the Vikings when Harvin went down outside of Kyle Rudolph in the redzone. He was 40% of their offense with a dismal passing game. RG3 had much help in the run game with a 1600 yard rusher. Granted, Alfred Morris benefited from the RG3 effect opening up lanes, he nonetheless made it easier for RG3 being able to take advantage of those opportunities. Luck had it harder than RG3 even with the help and guidance of future HoF Reggie Wayne because Luck's offense was still 1 dimensional just having a passing attack; easier for teams to game plan again. His season wasn't as pretty as RG3s working with less but stepped up to the plate ranking 6th in passing yards.

 

Even with all that said, their seasons still doesn't amount to Peterson's season. It's much harder to carry a team as a RB opposed to being a QB. You keep bringing up the Vikings defense... Even if they were a top 10 defense for some time during the season, a season is 16 games bro. You can't commend a player or unit for playing good for a while then began playing average / below average. It doesn't work like that. Since when can you can rely on your defense to win a game for you giving up 22 points a game with a dismal passing attack? Again, stop piping them up as if they were a top 5 or 10 defense.

 

You can't compare their seasons because A.P blows them out the water. You continually try to downplay A.P for whatever reason. I just find it funny that Chris Johnson finds his way into this topic.

Edited February 21, 2013 by dutchff7

[Dutch 874]

While I don't agree with Mikey's list, at all. Dutch, I think you are massively underrating how good the Vikings defense was at times. There were games the Vikings would of, and could of lost if it wasn't for the defense's play this year.

 

The same could be said about A.P though. A.P made plays that ended games as well and made plenty of plays to put his team in positions to win. The only difference is the Vikings defense and A.P is that there was nothing average about A.P's seasons all year. If went from a great year averaging about 97 yards a game in the 1st half of the season to having a historic year in the 2nd half of the season averaging 165 yards a game accumulating 1322 yards in 8 games. The Vikings defense didn't play well all year like A.P did.

[ATL_Predator+ 1,196]

Peyton had a typical Peyton season. There's nothing special about it whatsoever, what would've made it special was if he went above and beyond Peyton...and took the Broncos to the SB. There's really no excuse why he didn't...especially with that defense.

 

The fact that the Broncos played the Ravens at the end of regulation of that game with the mantra of 'not to lose' tells me all I need to know. You have a minute left, 2 TO's at your own 20 with a tie ballgame. All you need is a FG. Yet....the Broncos decide to knee. That's not MVP worthy to me...no reason why they couldn't of gone down the field. Yet....the Ravens and Joe Flacco can get a TD the length of the football field with one play the series before

 

AP literally had a historic year, Peyton had a typical Manning year. Nothing special about it...let alone the Most Valuable 'Player' to his team. That Broncos defensive unit is just as key to the Broncos as Peyton Manning is...hence part of the reason the Broncos lost.

 

Meanwhile, the Vikings are led into the playoffs by their fearless leader Joe Webb and their best WR being a rookie named Jairus Wright. Cmon now. Peyton is good, but let's not act like he himself is the main reason why the Broncos won as many games as they did last year. Yet....for some reason. It's been mentioned Jamaal Charles could replace AP

[oochymp 2,393]

MVP Race for me was

1. RG3

2. Luck

3. Peyton

4. AP

so you would name a QB who was #23 in the league in passing yards and #19 in TDs (Griffin) or a QB who was #7 in passing yards and #14 in TDs (Luck) MVP over the guy who was #6 in passing yards and #3 in TDs (Manning) and the guy who not only lead the league in rushing, but beat the second best RB (who, by the way, was playing behind Griffin) by 486 yards?

[56AceInDaPlace 110]

so you would name a QB who was #23 in the league in passing yards and #19 in TDs (Griffin) or a QB who was #7 in passing yards and #14 in TDs (Luck) MVP over the guy who was #6 in passing yards and #3 in TDs (Manning) and the guy who not only lead the league in rushing, but beat the second best RB (who, by the way, was playing behind Griffin) by 486 yards?

 

Like i said. When has a ROOKIE, with a ehh oline, OK weapons at skill positions, and a complete shit defense, come in and STILL make the playoffs. In the NFC, which of late has been the better conference in terms of better teams. Stats wise, you cant make a case for MVP. Or just stats i should say. You take out RG3, Redskins win maybe, MAYBE 3 games. You take AP out and they could still win 6 games at least.

 

Yall forget, it was PONDER who beat the 49ers defense. Not AP. Just saying. I say that to show proof they've won games without AP dominating or even having 100 yards. If u disagree, just watch the highlights of that game and tell me it wasnt Ponder. And we all know how great San Frans D is.

 

Its RG3's impact to his team and what he did to make that team win games. Did the Washington defense do anything all year? No they were horrible. If RG3 didnt perform, they lost point blank. If AP didnt perform, they could still win the game. Dutch's view of the Vikings 16th, to Washingtons 28th ranked D. 12 ranks higher. Still.

 

With RG3, Washingtons rush attack went from 25th to 1st in one year. And this is as a ROOKIE RG3 did this. Stats wise, for their positions, AP wins that no doubt. But its more then stats. Look at Washingtons team OVERALL, and then look at Minnesotas and tell me Minnesota isnt the better team?

Edited February 21, 2013 by 56AceInDaPlace