During the Seahawks-Lions game, Cris Collinsworth admitted that this was one of the hardest years he could think of when it came to choosing the MVP. Collinsworth ultimately voted for Tom Brady because "looking at his body of work, what more could he have done?" Well, Cris, HE COULD'VE PLAYED THE ENTIRE SEASON INSTEAD OF MISSING THE FIRST FOUR GAMES BECAUSE HE WAS SUSPENDED FOR CHEATING!!
Whatever your feelings on Brady's suspension are, the fact remains he missed a quarter of the season because he wasn't allowed to play. Yes, he put up ridiculous numbers in the 12 games he did play. In other years, that might be enough to earn you MVP honors. But in a season with so many quality candidates, the slimmest of margins will determine who wins. And I don't see any possible way to justify giving the MVP to a guy that missed four games (when he wasn't even allowed to be around the team!) over those who put up similar numbers over the course of a full season.
Let's go back to the whole furor over Deflategate for a second. Remember when Brady announced that he was dropping his appeal and would serve the four-game suspension? Remember how everybody thought the Patriots would be lucky to go 2-2 without him? Well, they ended up going 3-1 without him, while using both Jimmy Garoppolo and Jacoby Brissett at quaterback! And that game they lost came after Brissett got hurt and they had no idea who was going to play quarterback. My point here is that Brady's valuable, no question, but the team did just as well without him, so how can you call him the most valuable? It seems to me the Patriots' real MVP is Bill Belichick.
Now let's look at Matt Ryan. Or Aaron Rodgers. Or Ezekiel Elliott. Is there any chance their teams would've gotten anywhere close to where they ended up without them? Take the Raiders. Derek Carr got hurt and they completely fell apart. Over the span of three weeks, Oakland went from a legitimate Super Bowl contender to losing in the wild card round. The Patriots proved in September that you can take Brady away and they'll do just fine. If that's the case, how can you argue that he's any more valuable than those other names I just mentioned?
Had Brady played the entire season, or even if he'd missed just one or two games, his MVP "case" would be much stronger. But you can't tell me that he had a better year or was any more valuable to his team in 2016 than Ryan, Rodgers, Elliott or Carr. If I had a vote, Brady would be no higher than fifth, behind each of them.
Knowing the media and the general obsession with Tom Brady and the Patriots that most of America seems to have, don't be surprised to see if some of the other starry-eyed voters did the same thing as Collinsworth. But Brady doesn't deserve to be the MVP. I'm not saying that because of his suspension, I'm saying that because the suspension resulting in him missing a quarter of the season. And the MVP is awarded based on the entire season, not just three-quarters of it. (Sidebar, if any other player missed four games because of a league-issued suspension, he wouldn't even be in the conversation. But Tom Brady gets a pass?)
Matt Ryan was selected as the First Team All-Pro quarterback, which revived some of my faith in the media, many of whom vote for both awards. Ryan was the NFL Player of the Month for September (when Brady was sitting on his couch and going to Michigan games). He was the best player on the best offense in football, and the Falcons wouldn't have been anywhere near as good without him.
And if you compare Ryan's numbers to Brady's, they really aren't that different. Ryan threw 38 TDs to just seven interceptions, compiled 4,944 yards passing and had a 117.1 rating. Brady supporters keep pointing to his 28-2 TD-interception ratio. He also had 3,554 passing yards and a QB rating of 112.2. If you were to hypothetically add in the four missing games, Brady would have 37 TDs, 3 INTs, and 4,738 yards (I have no idea how QB rating is computed, so I'm not even going to try). As you can see, Ryan has the edge in two of the three categories (and probably QB rating, as well).
To me, the choice is clear. The MVP should go to the player who had the most impact on his team's success from September-December. Not October-December. In any other year, Matt Ryan would be the runaway MVP. So why should this year be any different just because his biggest "competition" is Tom Brady? Hopefully the voters (at least the voters not named Cris Collinsworth) realize that this entire conversation is downright silly. Because it shouldn't even be close.
Your 2016 NFL MVP should be Atlanta Falcons quarterback Matt Ryan. It'll be a travesty if it isn't. (For the record, my top five would be Ryan, Rodgers, Elliott, Carr, Brady.)
No comments:
Post a Comment