The NFL has taken a page out of baseball's book and is giving out its postseason awards one by one each day leading up to the Super Bowl, with the MVP being awarded sometime before the game on Sunday (possibly at the game, I don't really know, this is all new). I like the new way that they're doing it, giving each award its proper due on its own day. Since I broke down the baseball awards prior to their announcement, I feel inclined to do that for football, as well, even though, I have to admit, I like the way baseball does it better.
In baseball, you vote for 1, 2 and 3 in order (1-5 for the Cy Young, 1-10 for the MVP) and whoever gets the most points at the end is the winner. Football's method is much more straight forward. Everybody gets one vote. There's no ranking system. You have to pick one guy. Whoever gets the most votes wins. But using the baseball method and giving the writers an opportunity to rank their top three for each award is probably a fairer assessment of the season that just passed. Seriously, is Tom Brady any more deserving of the MVP than Michael Vick? Maybe. But it's certainly not a clear-cut choice in everybody's eyes. Likewise, how were these guys able to choose between Troy Polamalu and Clay Matthews for Defensive Player of the Year? Maybe Vick or Matthews wins if a points system is in place instead of a straight votes system.
Now it's time to talk about the awards, starting with Defensive Player of the Year, which was awarded on Monday. In an extremely close vote, Polamalu edged Matthews 17-15. The other 18 voters all voted for somebody else, although I'm not really sure why. This is exactly why I brought up the point about baseball's voting method. It was basically a flip of the coin between the two. If those remaining 18 voters had to rank three candidates in order, how many of them would've put Matthews second and Polamalu third or vice-versa? Would it have been enough to make a difference? I think it probably would've. For the record, my vote would've gone to Matthews (although Polamalu might have better hair).
On Tuesday, Tom Brady won Offensive Player of the Year over Michael Vick. Brady will probably also top Vick for MVP on Sunday, but there's a reason why these are two different awards. I hate to keep harkening back to baseball when I'm writing a blog about another sport, but the best way to illustrate my point is the McGwire-Sosa home run race of 1998. Mark McGwire was the best offensive player in baseball that season, but Sammy Sosa was clearly the MVP after leading the Cubs to the playoffs. The NFL distinguishes between the two, and I think that distinction is important. Tom Brady had another great season, and I think he deserved Offensive Player of the Year honors. But you can't tell me he was more valuable to his team than Michael Vick. Even without Tom Brady, the Patriots are still a playoff team. They probably still win their division. Can you say the same about the Eagles without Michael Vick? Certainly not. Vick will probably get Comeback Player of the Year as some sort of consolation, but MVP should be about more than just numbers. Michael Vick made his team better. Tom Brady did as well, but that's nothing new. And it's not as significant.
Likewise, will somebody please explain to me how Bill Belichick won Coach of the Year? The Patriots are always good! How exactly was this year any different? They finished with the best record in the NFL at 14-2. Big deal! The Chiefs went from nothing into unlikely division champs in the AFC West. Todd Haley should've been the winner hands down. Haley didn't even finish second in the voting! That went to Raheem Morris of the Bucs, although I have less of an issue with Morris. Tampa Bay was 4-12 last season and was supposed to suck again this year, but ended up 10-6 and just out of the playoffs. If the Rams had won that last game and won their division, Steve Spagnuolo would've rounded out my top three. Since they didn't, I'm going with the Falcons' Mike Smith as my bronze medalist. Honorable mentions to Leslie Frazier and Jason Garrett. They both took over trainwrecks at midseason and had their teams playing like the playoff contenders they were expected to be by the end of it.
There shouldn't be much controversy when they announce the Offensive and Defensive Rookies of the Year tomorrow. Sam Bradford and Ndamukong Suh were the top two picks in the draft because the Rams and Lions thought they'd both turn into franchise players. They were both right. Bradford almost took St. Louis to the playoffs one year after a 1-15 season, while Suh was one of the best defensive players in all of football, starting the Pro Bowl and being named All-Pro. He's probably the main reasons why the Lions returned to somewhat relevance this season. Suh was already named Pepsi NFL Rookie of the Year, which is voted on by the fans. If Bradford and Suh aren't named the Rookies of the Year, I have to seriously question the football knowledge of the voters.
The last award is Comeback Player of the Year, but that's so clearly going to Michael Vick that it's barely worth even talking about. The only other guys even worth talking about are LaDainian Tomlinson, who had a nice bounce-back year with the Jets, and Mike Williams, who went from out of football to starting at wide receiver for the Seahawks. But this vote shouldn't be close. Neither of those guys was in Michael Vick's league. Are we talking about Tomlinson as an MVP candidate? I didn't think so.
No comments:
Post a Comment