Just saw the Disney ad...

[kraftykraft]

Dominic Rhodes is going to Disney, huh?

 

He was my choice for MVP, too.

 

 

I would have given it to Rhodes or Rhodes and Addai together. Peyton got the monkey off his back, but he had a pretty mediocre game (1 TD, 1int, 1 fumble, 6.5 yds/att passing) doing it.

[xMRogers]

calling either RB the MVP is pretty silly, IMO. when there's no other clear-cut candidate, it's obviously going to go to the QB 9 times out of 10...10 times out of 10 if it's a QB of manning's cache.

 

 

 

 

 

I think this is the main crux of the matter - going into a game, there's always a player on each team that is the favorite (both figuratively and literally in terms of gambling) for the award, so assuming that team wins, the other guys have to "go past" the favorite.

 

The one that I always point out is Ray Lewis - he had a good game, but that award goign to him was preordained as long as the defense did well and no one pulled a Dexter Jackson, 2 TD sort of thing..and he deserved it cause he was the leader of that defense.

 

Same with Manning (and to an extent Brady) - yea, if someone had gone for 150 and 2 TDs, maybe a different story, but when it was a well rounded effort, the award goes to the leader of that effort as long as he didn't personally suck it up (ie, Roethlisberger year before).

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

Um, my original comment was that QBs tend to get the sentimental vote, sometimes at the expense of a player who might have deserved it more (Law). And then you jumped in to defend your boy. I wasn't attacking Brady. Brady's an awesome QB who put played as well in SB 36 as could be expected from a second-year player with very little experience. But I don't think that he should've received the MVP in that game. I also don't necessarily think that Peyton was deserving of it on Sunday - he got it because no other single player put up an incredible performance AND because of the sentiment factor.

 

And Manning does get unfairly raked over the coals here - and in a lot of other places as well. There's no denying that.

 

 

from PFT

 

Colts quarterback Peyton Manning shouldn't have been named the MVP of Super Bowl XLI. Period. The award should have gone to running back Dominic Rhodes. And if rookie running back Joseph Addai, who was only one catch from tying the Super Bowl single-game record, hadn't mysteriously disappeared from the offensive attack just when it looked like Addai might be the first rookie to win the MVP award, he might have secured the free Cadillac and place in Super Bowl history.

 

Is it just our opinion? Based on Super Bowl history, it's a fact.

 

Consider Super Bowl XXV. Giants running back Ottis Anderson won the MVP award with 21 carries for 102 yards and a touchdown, and one reception for seven yards. Left in the dust was quarterback Jeff Hostetler, the original "game manager." Hostetler, a former WVU quarterback who transferred from Penn State after they wanted to make him into a linebacker, completed 20 of 32 passes for 222 yards and a touchdown.

 

His passer rating for the game? 93.4.

 

Fast forward 16 years. Rhodes, like Anderson, had 21 carries, one touchdown, and one reception. But Rhodes had 11 more yards rushing, and one more yard receiving, than Anderson.

 

Manning's passer rating? 81.8.

 

Let's put this in perspective. For the 2006 season, David Carr, Jake Delhomme, and Mark Brunell had better passer ratings than 81.8.

 

And among all of the 21 quarterback performances that resulted in a Super Bowl MVP award, Manning's was statistically the worst.

 

Only Joe Namath's 83.3 in Super Bowl III was even close, and Tom Brady's 86.2 in Super Bowl XXXVI was the only other MVP passer rating under 90.

 

(We know this because we calculated all 21 of them on Wednesday night. Every one of them. The best? Phil Simms in Super Bowl XXI, who generated a 150.9.)

 

So how did Peyton Manning win the MVP? Because he's Peyton Manning.

 

And because the voting is done on the fly, with no opportunity for reflection or research or deliberation.

 

Our suggestion? Name the Super Bowl MVP at halftime of the Pro Bowl. It'll give the voters a chance to think things through more carefully.

 

And it actually might give folks a reason to watch the otherwise boring game that concludes the NFL season.

[Bill Swerski]

I didn't realize that PFT was based in New England.

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

I didn't realize that PFT was based in New England.

 

 

lol...i dont believe it is

[Bill Swerski]

lol...i dont believe it is

 

 

Why would they write an article bashing Manning for winning the MVP? Oh, right, they don't like Manning. And I don't remember them saying anything about Brady not deserving the SB 36 MVP, despite them pointing out his 80-something QB rating and not mentioning the fact that he only completed something like 15 passes in the game.

 

Their Otis Anderson argument is stupid. Anderson had over 20 carries in that game and was the primary back - no other player had over 9. On the other hand, Rhodes had 21 carries and Addai had 19. Oh, and Addai had 10 receptions on top of it. Rhodes didn't get the MVP because he split carries with Addai almost 50/50. And Addai was arguably more deserving of the award anyway. Morans.

Edited February 8, 2007 by Bill Swerski

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

Why would they write an article bashing Manning for winning the MVP? Oh, right, they don't like Manning. And I don't remember them saying anything about Brady not deserving the SB 36 MVP, despite them pointing out his 80-something QB rating and not mentioning the fact that he only completed something like 15 passes in the game.

 

Their Otis Anderson argument is stupid. Anderson had over 20 carries in that game and was the primary back - no other player had over 9. On the other hand, Rhodes had 21 carries and Addai had 19. Oh, and Addai had 10 receptions on top of it. Rhodes didn't get the MVP because he split carries with Addai almost 50/50. And Addai was arguably more deserving of the award anyway. Morans.

 

 

no...yer right...they didnt mention anything about brady not deserving the superbowl 36 mvp

 

but perhaps based on this quote, and the fact that nobody else really stood out, you could see why they(and maybe others such as myself) might not feel brady winning it was far fetched

 

"And because the voting is done on the fly, with no opportunity for reflection or research or deliberation."

 

as ive said before...brady was involved in a tie game with a 1:20 left and no timeouts...and moved the team in position to win the game...and thats probably the last thing the voters remember...ringing fresh in their minds...in a game in which nobody else really stood out

 

i dont know how anyone could really say that brady won the award based on sentimentalism....whereas you can clearly make a case that peytons was a lifetime achievement award

Edited February 8, 2007 by forever in debt to mo lewis

[Bill Swerski]

no...yer right...they didnt mention anything about brady not deserving the superbowl 36 mvp

 

but perhaps based on this quote, and the fact that nobody else really stood out, you could see why they(and maybe others such as myself) might not feel brady winning it was far fetched

 

"And because the voting is done on the fly, with no opportunity for reflection or research or deliberation."

 

as ive said before...brady was involved in a tie game with a 1:20 left and no timeouts...and moved the team in position to win the game...and thats probably the last thing the voters remember...ringing fresh in their minds...in a game in which nobody else really stood out

 

i dont know how anyone could really say that brady won the award based on sentimentalism....whereas you can clearly make a case that peytons was a lifetime achievement award

 

 

There's one major difference in these two games:

 

In SB 36, Ty Law CLEARLY deserved the MVP (even Czarina agrees with me on this one). He picked Warner early in the game, scored as many TDs as NE's offense, scored that TD early enough that it took pressure off of NE's offense, and held Bruce to 56 yds and no scores. Without Law's TD, there's no way that NE wins that game against a much better (but pooly-coached) Rams team. None.

 

In SB 41, there was no ONE player who clearly deserved the award. Because of that, Peyton pretty much got the award by default. The Colts would've won the game if either Rhodes or Addai didn't play (in which case, one would've carried the load rather than splitting time in the backfield). The Colts still managed to win the game after Ryan Diem and Nick Harper left with injuries. But I seriously doubt that they would've won it with Jim Sorgi under center.

Edited February 8, 2007 by Bill Swerski

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

There's one major difference in these two games:

 

In SB 36, Ty Law CLEARLY deserved the MVP (even Czarina agrees with me on this one). He picked Warner early in the game, scored as many TDs as NE's offense, scored that TD early enough that it took pressure off of NE's offense, and held Bruce to 56 yds and no scores. Without Law's TD, there's no way that NE wins that game against a much better (but pooly-coached) Rams team. None.

 

In SB 41, there was no ONE player who clearly deserved the award. Because of that, Peyton pretty much got the award by default. The Colts would've won the game if either Rhodes or Addai didn't play (in which case, one would've carried the load rather than splitting time in the backfield). The Colts still managed to win the game after Ryan Diem and Nick Harper left with injuries. But I seriously doubt that they would've won it with Jim Sorgi under center.

 

 

haha well...i dont know how you could say ty law clearly deserved it...but its your opinion...no big deal(just because one female patriots fan agrees with you, doesnt make your opinion fact)...hey lets give it to mike vrabel then, for applying the pressure on warner and forcing the throw! cant disagree with ya though, law did a heck of a job on bruce in single coverage...but so many guys played well on that defense in that game....laywer milloy was great...willie mac...hell richard seymour was great...

 

laws int clearly helped set the tone and the tempo of the game...but it was hardly a one man effort there...the pats did a good job of getting pressure on warner and pushing his pocket...got him rattled and erratic

[Bill Swerski]

but it was hardly a one man effort there

 

 

True, and you could say that about every winning team from every SB. That's why I think that SB MVPs are kind of stupid.

 

It just amazes me that people (not you) attack Peyton Manning because she was awarded the SB MVP... but I didn't hear anything in the press about Brady's SB 36 MVP.

 

(just because one female patriots fan agrees with you, doesnt make your opinion fact)

 

Never said that it did. It just speaks volumes that a Pats fan who NEVER agrees with me did in that case.

Edited February 8, 2007 by Bill Swerski

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

True, and you could say that about every winning team from every SB. That's why I think that SB MVPs are kind of stupid.

 

It just amazes me that people (not you) attack Peyton Manning because she was awarded the SB MVP... but I didn't hear anything in the press about Brady's SB 36 MVP.

Never said that it did. It just speaks volumes that a Pats fan who NEVER agrees with me did in that case.

 

 

i agree with ya..superbowl mvps are pretty stupid...but then theres always those games like superbowl 38 and 39(and others)...where guys clearly stand out and its kind of nice that theyll always be remembered for those efforts...or at least always have them documented

 

when i was talking about it hardly being a one man effort...i was talking about the defense specifically(i realize that even on offense...its never a one man effort as well)...i mean willie mac did a great job...lawyer was all over...richard seymour playing the game at the nose...never gave warner a chance to get comfy and step up in the pocket to make good throws(well maybe not never..but most of the evening)

 

i think just my basic point is that you cant really call tom brady a sentimental mvp in superbowl 36..i mean he was a second year guy who won it with a team that really no one was sure was going be making a stay at the top of the nfl(and arguably the least talented team to ever win it)... i find myself almost embarassed for saying this...but there were alot of people(granted very dumb...i could see it...and i think anyone with any clue about the game of football knew) who werent sure if he would clearly have the starting job the following year

 

again..at the risk of being very redundant...there werent any real clear standouts in superbowl 36...and i think the way the game ended loomed large in the voters heads....whereas...there were two guys i thought that stood out for the colts even though they played the same position

 

brady was still relatively an unknown entity at the time...so you werent going to hear many people or people in the press question his mvp...the fact that peyton has the lineage and came into the league as the number 1 overall pick certainly doesnt help him when people try to grasp at straws to scrutinize him...and tom...well almost everyone loves to hear a good underdog story about a guy who was looked over and worked hard to get where he got....well until he wins 3 superbowls at least

[Bill Swerski]

i think just my basic point is that you cant really call tom brady a sentimental mvp in superbowl 36..i mean he was a second year guy who won it with a team that really no one was sure was going be making a stay at the top of the nfl(and arguably the least talented team to ever win it)... i find myself almost embarassed for saying this...but there were alot of people(granted very dumb...i could see it...and i think anyone with any clue about the game of football knew) who werent sure if he would clearly have the starting job the following year

 

Agreed that the "sentimental" factor with Peyton was a LOT higher this year than it was with Brady back in early '02. That said, Brady was pretty much the Toast of New England that year... especially after they beat the Raiders in that playoff game (I guess you could say the same about Vinatieri, but nobody's going to care THAT much about a kicker... at least not until he won the Pats two SBs on last-second kicks ). Even back in the winter of '01, ESPN began dubbing NE's offense the "Brady Bunch" and the attention on him was in full-swing immediately after they won that first SB. So, I think that there WAS some sentimental value for the 6th-round pick who came out of nowhere to help lead the Pats to their first-ever SB victory even back then.

 

LOL at the people who weren't sure if Brady was going to be the starter next year. Did they not notice that Bledsoe skipped the victory parade? Granted, I'm not an expert in talent evaluation, but even I saw something special in the kid. Hell, I drafted him (9th round, IIRC) as the starter in one of my fantasy leagues in '02.

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

Agreed that the "sentimental" factor with Peyton was a LOT higher this year than it was with Brady back in early '02. That said, Brady was pretty much the Toast of New England that year... especially after they beat the Raiders in that playoff game (I guess you could say the same about Vinatieri, but nobody's going to care THAT much about a kicker... at least not until he won the Pats two SBs on last-second kicks ). Even back in the winter of '01, ESPN began dubbing NE's offense the "Brady Bunch" and the attention on him was in full-swing immediately after they won that first SB. So, I think that there WAS some sentimental value for the 6th-round pick who came out of nowhere to help lead the Pats to their first-ever SB victory even back then.

 

LOL at the people who weren't sure if Brady was going to be the starter next year. Did they not notice that Bledsoe skipped the victory parade? Granted, I'm not an expert in talent evaluation, but even I saw something special in the kid. Hell, I drafted him (9th round, IIRC) as the starter in one of my fantasy leagues in '02.

 

 

i think something that gets lost in that raiders game(because of the tuck and the vinny kicks) is that brady was 26-39 for like 240 in the 2nd half...in those conditions

 

yeah i agree....brady was the toast of new england that year...of course we are an entire region who was clamoring for a title...the sox still hadnt won it...and we were coming off a 5-11 year in which hardly anyone expected us to even compete for a playoff spot, let alone a championship

 

its hard to fathom bill i know....and maybe i should restate what i said about people not sure if brady was going to be the starter the following year...because yer right...there were some obvious signs(aside from the obvious discrepancies in quality quarterbacking skills)that bledsoe wouldnt be back...but there was still a legion of fans very loyal to drew(extremely loyal people who remember how he had a part in keeping this team in NE...and believe me... I attended every home game he started..and that started when i was 13..i hung on every ball he threw as a teenager... that didnt sound right did it)...they flooded talk shows and started a war...too loyal to a fault to not see the obvious....it was kind of sad...

 

but yeah peytons that guy that everybody hates cuz hes just better than you...and always has been...tom was that overachiever that you always rooted for until he had too much success

[Bill Swerski]

i think something that gets lost in that raiders game(because of the tuck and the vinny kicks) is that brady was 26-39 for like 240 in the 2nd half...in those conditions

 

Exactly. He was off-the-hook good in that game.

 

but yeah peytons that guy that everybody hates cuz hes just better than you...and always has been...tom was that overachiever that you always rooted for until he had too much success

 

 

Well-put

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

swerski...i gotta say this...cause i only saw the play once,live,and i couldnt recall off memory...but you said manning threw a pump fake on his td to wayne...i just watched the highlights on inside the nfl...he did not pump fake on that play...that was a complete breakdown in coverage

[Bill Swerski]

swerski...i gotta say this...cause i only saw the play once,live,and i couldnt recall off memory...but you said manning threw a pump fake on his td to wayne...i just watched the highlights on inside the nfl...he did not pump fake on that play...that was a complete breakdown in coverage

 

 

Actually, I watched the re-airing on Game of the Week last night and you're right. Then again, he threw the TD pass with Tank Johnson pulling him down.

 

I also watched (and really enjoyed) the documentary on the '01 Pats last night. Brady's sole TD pass to Patten in the SB also involved a breakdown in coverage (the CB bit on the Out route). Great catch by Patten as well.