Articles from around the Web
PDF VERSION NOW AVAILABLE
Click here to buy PDF version.
Click here to buy PDF version
Official Account: @fboutsiders
Scott Kacsmar: @FO_ScottKacsmar
Ben Muth: @FO_WordofMuth
Aaron Schatz: @FO_ASchatz
Vince Verhei: @FO_VVerhei
-- plus --
Bill Connelly: @SBN_BillC
J.J. Cooper: @jjcoop36
Cian Fahey: @Cianaf
Brian Fremeau: @bcfremeau
Tom Gower: @ThomasGower
Rivers McCown: @RiversMcCown
Chad Peltier: @CGPeltier
Matt Waldman: @MattWaldman
Rob Weintraub: @robwein
06 Feb 2011
Tom Brady has won the Associated Press's Most Valuable Player award. He reportedly received all 50 votes.
Posted by: Bill Barnwell on 06 Feb 2011
21 comments, Last at
11 Feb 2011, 1:34am by
I really hate Tom Brady but have no valid argument here. Anything I say can be trumped by mentioning his insane 36-4 TD-INT numbers.
All 50 votes might be a bit much though.
It's not like there were any other viable candidates. Brady was clearly the best QB candidate and no RB or WR really broke away from the pack. The close contest for defensive player of the year illustrates the unlikelihood that we'd see a defensive player win - certainly not when there was such a dominant candidate at QB.
If a player is clearly the best candidate, shouldn't he get all the votes? It's not like there's a person whose job it is to vote for a different candidate, just to ensure a lack of unanimity.
In what manner is it "a bit much"? The voters don't get to put in multiple selections. They only get to go all in on one guy. What other player even came close to measuring up to Brady's season. Perhaps you can see a tiny bit of an argument for Jamaal Charles if you squint real hard, but that's about it.
Not trying to attack you in particular here, but this is tangential to a common gripe you hear that really annoys me... People, announcers and analysts especially, being all incredulous that so-and-so player who had a great season didn't get any votes even though he had an awesome year, while still hedging that the guy that actually won was the right choice. Well, you just admitted that your guy, while having a fine year, was not the actual MVP, so if you're using the system right, you wouldn't have voted for him either.
In baseball, where voters enter a multi-player ballot, sure, keep an eye out to see whether he got the recognition you feel he deserved, but in the NFL, there's a relatively small amount of voters who get to put in only one name. Stands to reason that a very select few will actually get votes. It's silly to say this guy or that was good enough to deserve one or two votes.
If he wasn't good enough to get all or at least most of the votes, then he shouldn't get any if the voters themselves are voting for they honestly believe deserves it. This year, with the aforementioned Charles as a possible exception if you're being very generous IMO, no one fits the bill except Brady. [Much as it pains me to admit it as well =)]
You've done a good job articulating what I was thinking.
If you mean 'hate' as in 'he beat my team,' them I'll take that as rhetorical overindulgence and cut you some slack.
Or he could mean "hate" as in "that ref whiner who begs for flags even though he's protected like no other QB in the league".
Brady's 2007 missed it because some people voted for Favre to protest Spygate. Manning's 2004 missed it because some lone idiot voted for Michael Vick, who, ironically, had a much much mucb better case this year.
Yeah I was thinking it was odd this had never happened before.
I'm a little saddened this is the first unanimous MVP as I'm sure to hear about it approximately 1 billion times until the next MVP is chosen, other than that I don't care. Brady deserved it this year.
"I'm a little saddened this is the first unanimous MVP as I'm sure to hear about it approximately 1 billion times"
I wouldn't worry about it, at least not coming from Patriots fans. Any self-respecting Pro-Brady veteran of the irrational Manning-Brady debates should be embarrassed to celebrate an MVP award after a season in which the Patriots lost their first playoff game. This MVP award merely proves that Brady cares more about padding his stats than winning (oh wait, that was Manning circa 2004).
It was an easy pick, so it makes sense. It surprises me that noone else was ever unanimous though.
It's not "a bit much" unless people start using the "first unanimous vote" to tout him as having had the best season ever, which would be a ridiculous argument.
True. All the unanimous vote means is that no one else happened to be in the running. It's more about the lack of a clear competitor than evidence that Brady's season was historic.
"Tom Brady is a crappy player therefore he should not have won" is a valid argument.
It just isn't sound.
It's a logically cogent argument. But it's not valid.
Well, it maybe needs an unspoken/implicit second premise along the lines of "Crappy players should not win MVP", but I'd say the insertion of such was pretty standard practice in the formalisation of natural language arguments.
Valid: premises entail conclusion.
Sound: true premises entail conclusion.
The problem with the argument is the falsehood of the premise, not a failure of entailment.
totally unsurprisieng awrad winner here since T. Brady win OPOY waward a few days aogo.
In other news, Earth is round.
Yes - Round like Gisele's...
It's too bad it was so open-and-shut this year. I rather enjoyed that Manning-Rivers argument last year.
Yet oddly enough Philip Rivers was named Quarterback of the Year by the NFL Alumni Association. Tired of seeing Brady get post-season accolades, or a pre-emptive strike on a player whose strongly engaged in the Players' Union on behalf of retired players?
Maybe they were drunk?
Or maybe the ballots were due four weeks before the end of the season?
dnruk. It's spelled, 'dnruk' in these parts.
Is Johnson capable of NFL brilliance? Burst will ultimately tell the tale.
See All XP | NFL XP | College XP
© Football Outsiders, Inc. // Site powered by Stein-Wein // Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties