PDA

View Full Version : Pretty obvious who should win the MVP after 9 weeks of football


Breed
11-15-2011, 10:56 PM
http://www.myclassiclyrics.com/artist_biographies/images/Peyton_Manning_Biography_3.jpg

BloodBrother
11-15-2011, 11:00 PM
We've had 10 weeks of football

descendency
11-15-2011, 11:03 PM
Some things people seem to be ignoring:
1) Curtis Painter is the worst QB in the NFL, bar none. Yes, I'd take Jimmy Clausen over Curtis Painter.

2) The Colts have been drafting absolutely abysmally the last few years which has finally left the team in a very peculiar spot... either pay free agents tons or suck. This includes guys that were colts already. (This isn't to call them cheap. It's just the reality you can't pay everyone. They're decimated on the bench because of having to pay for starters)

3) The Colts are built to succeed when they are up. Manning excels at keeping his team relevant, but if the offense struggles, the Colts lose.

Even Peyton Manning wasn't going to win 10+ games on this team. Aaron Rodgers is clearly the MVP, regardless of who is out for the year. Though, I promise you that Tom Brady will close the gap, it may be too late. (Brady finishes the season with the easiest schedule against porous defenses and inept offenses... he might go for 400 per game)

Jvig43
11-15-2011, 11:05 PM
Alex Smith?

MetSox17
11-15-2011, 11:18 PM
I hope this doesn't turn into an actual serious discussion.

thegreatone
11-15-2011, 11:19 PM
David Johnson.

Breed
11-15-2011, 11:20 PM
Some things people seem to be ignoring:
1) Curtis Painter is the worst QB in the NFL, bar none. Yes, I'd take Jimmy Clausen over Curtis Painter.

2) The Colts have been drafting absolutely abysmally the last few years which has finally left the team in a very peculiar spot... either pay free agents tons or suck. This includes guys that were colts already. (This isn't to call them cheap. It's just the reality you can't pay everyone. They're decimated on the bench because of having to pay for starters)

3) The Colts are built to succeed when they are up. Manning excels at keeping his team relevant, but if the offense struggles, the Colts lose.

Even Peyton Manning wasn't going to win 10+ games on this team. Aaron Rodgers is clearly the MVP, regardless of who is out for the year. Though, I promise you that Tom Brady will close the gap, it may be too late. (Brady finishes the season with the easiest schedule against porous defenses and inept offenses... he might go for 400 per game)

Of course Rodgers gets the nod...but I think this year has proved that Peyton really can win the MVP each year, since he's pretty much a 1 man football team. Manning is obviously the most important player to his team. The Colts are proving that week after week. With Manning in, they're firmly entrenched in 1st in the AFC South.

SickwithIt1010
11-16-2011, 12:33 AM
Its really the truth. Lets be real here, the Colts have absolutely dominated that division over the last decade. Without Peyton that are going after the dreaded 0-16 season. lol

Obviously stat wise A-Rod would get it regardless...but everyone knows now what Peyton means to this team.

the new jesus
11-16-2011, 06:49 AM
Of course Rodgers gets the nod...but I think this year has proved that Peyton really can win the MVP each year, since he's pretty much a 1 man football team. Manning is obviously the most important player to his team. The Colts are proving that week after week. With Manning in, they're firmly entrenched in 1st in the AFC South.

Right, because we've seen all the other teams play a season without their starting QB.

Gay Ork Wang
11-16-2011, 08:02 AM
Matt Forte anyone?

abaddon41_80
11-16-2011, 08:10 AM
Right, because we've seen all the other teams play a season without their starting QB.

Not sure if serious ...

Sloopy
11-16-2011, 08:22 AM
Right, because we've seen all the other teams play a season without their starting QB.

Not sure if serious either....

2008 Patriots saw Tom Brady go down in the opener (out for the season) went 11-5 that year.

cmarq83
11-16-2011, 08:27 AM
Not sure if serious either....

2008 Patriots saw Tom Brady go down in the opener (out for the season) went 11-5 that year.

Still not a great comparison. That Patriots team was pretty stacked, and had a backup QB who wasn't Curtis Painter. Different situations entirely IMO.

Sloopy
11-16-2011, 08:34 AM
Still not a great comparison. That Patriots team was pretty stacked, and had a backup QB who wasn't Curtis Painter. Different situations entirely IMO.

Oh I know, the point is that both were pretty comparable at the time in wins, and one COULD argue that while Manning was the sole reason that the team was winning all those games, the Pats were winning a similar # of games WITH a solid team and Tom Brady as there QB.

I will not try and turn this into a Brady vs. Manning thread, the argument is there, however, irrelevant as Peyton will not win the MVP award this year

Don Vito
11-16-2011, 08:37 AM
Yes, it is pretty obvious.

http://fantasyknuckleheads.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/gronk.jpg

the new jesus
11-16-2011, 08:37 AM
Matt Forte anyone?

LOL what? Not even a top 5 guy right now.

abaddon41_80
11-16-2011, 08:38 AM
Still not a great comparison. That Patriots team was pretty stacked, and had a backup QB who wasn't Curtis Painter. Different situations entirely IMO.

I agree but he never mentioned the circumstances.

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
11-16-2011, 09:05 AM
Even Peyton Manning wasn't going to win 10+ games on this team. Aaron Rodgers is clearly the MVP, regardless of who is out for the year. Though, I promise you that Tom Brady will close the gap, it may be too late. (Brady finishes the season with the easiest schedule against porous defenses and inept offenses... he might go for 400 per game)

********. Get that garbage out of here. The team is about the same as last year and went 10-6 and should have beaten the jets in the playoffs. This team still could have won 10 games, if Manning was playing i can see them being 6-4 right now and finishing 10-6.

Nalej
11-16-2011, 09:29 AM
LOL what? Not even a top 5 guy right now.

LOL What? Minus the 2 fumble game, he's been a beast.
You could argue that he is the Bears offense right now.

BloodBrother
11-16-2011, 09:30 AM
Could argue? He is

although they got Earl the pearl Bennett back to help out

the new jesus
11-16-2011, 09:34 AM
LOL What? Minus the 2 fumble game, he's been a beast.
You could argue that he is the Bears offense right now.

Yes, he's been a great player. But he's not even close to the MVP.

PACKmanN
11-16-2011, 09:38 AM
the best qb in the nfl, mike vick

jth1331
11-16-2011, 10:26 AM
Obviously its Tim Tebow guys.
Broncos were 1-4 with Orton, are 3-1 with Tebow.

tjsunstein
11-16-2011, 10:58 AM
I'm going Jordyzzz Nelson.

BigBanger
11-16-2011, 03:48 PM
Even Peyton Manning wasn't going to win 10+ games on this team.
You can't be serious.

They went 10-6 last year and they had more injuries to their receivers and tight ends, then they do this year. They actually had less talent last year and still won 10 games, went to the playoffs and nearly beat the Jets while Manning was throwing to a guy named Jacob Tamme (he also played that game without Reggie Wayne since Revis completely took him out of the game).

Obviously you are not aware of Manning's regular season success. He's had two seasons where he won less than 10 games. TWO. In his entire career. One came in his rookie season when they went 3-13. The other? 2001. The season with the Jim Mora quote about "Playoffs?!" They went 6-10.

3-13 (1998)
13-3 (1999)
10-6 (2000)
6-10 (2001)
10-6 (2002)
12-4 (2003)
12-4 (2004)
14-2 (2005)
12-4 (2006) Super Bowl Win
13-3 (2007)
12-4 (2008)
14-2 (2009) Lost Super Bowl
10-6 (2010)


Now, explain to me how you could ever come up with the synopsis that, "Even Peyton Manning wasn't going to win 10+ games on this team." Unless you are a complete Peyton Manning hater (and judging from your Tom Brady comment you may have a natural bias), but what proof could you possibly have that this team could not win 10 games without Manning? It's been ten ******* years since they won less than 10 games. 10 ******* years, man.

Paul
11-16-2011, 04:04 PM
LOL what? Not even a top 5 guy right now.

must.not.feed.trolls......

So difficult

hockey619
11-16-2011, 04:06 PM
You can't be serious.

They went 10-6 last year and they had more injuries to their receivers and tight ends, then they do this year. They actually had less talent last year and still won 10 games, went to the playoffs and nearly beat the Jets while Manning was throwing to a guy named Jacob Tamme (he also played that game without Reggie Wayne since Revis completely took him out of the game).

Obviously you are not aware of Manning's regular season success. He's had two seasons where he won less than 10 games. TWO. In his entire career. One came in his rookie season when they went 3-13. The other? 2001. The season with the Jim Mora quote about "Playoffs?!" They went 6-10.

3-13 (1998)
13-3 (1999)
10-6 (2000)
6-10 (2001)
10-6 (2002)
12-4 (2003)
12-4 (2004)
14-2 (2005)
12-4 (2006) Super Bowl Win
13-3 (2007)
12-4 (2008)
14-2 (2009) Lost Super Bowl
10-6 (2010)


Now, explain to me how you could ever come up with the synopsis that, "Even Peyton Manning wasn't going to win 10+ games on this team." Unless you are a complete Peyton Manning hater (and judging from your Tom Brady comment you may have a natural bias), but what proof could you possibly have that this team could not win 10 games without Manning? It's been ten ******* years since they won less than 10 games. 10 ******* years, man.

thank you.
i had a post like this written up before but my computer pooped out on me. didnt feel like typing it back up.
he was just being a manning hater/patriot homer, this team has more talent than last years team with all the guys back from injury, though that aint saying much.

Don Vito
11-16-2011, 04:12 PM
Damn I didn't realize the Colts went 13-3 in Manning's second season.

jrdrylie
11-16-2011, 04:18 PM
LOL what? Not even a top 5 guy right now.

It may be blasphemous to say this, but Go to Hell new Jesus!. Did the Bears rape your mom or something? Who is better at running back right now than Matt Forte? Adrian Peterson, LeSean McCoy, and Fred Jackson are the only ones who have an argument. And none of them is anywhere near as valuable as Forte. Forte accounts for 44% of the Bears total offense. The Bears would have lost to Tampa Bay, Carolina, and Philadelphia without Forte. They are a 3-6 team (at best) without Forte.

Raiderz4Life
11-16-2011, 04:34 PM
It may be blasphemous to say this, but Go to Hell new Jesus!. Did the Bears rape your mom or something? Who is better at running back right now than Matt Forte? Adrian Peterson, LeSean McCoy, and Fred Jackson are the only ones who have an argument. And none of them is anywhere near as valuable as Forte. Forte accounts for 44% of the Bears total offense. The Bears would have lost to Tampa Bay, Carolina, and Philadelphia without Forte. They are a 3-6 team (at best) without Forte.

If he hadn't gotten injured DMC too but...he lost that privilege!!