FARK.com: (6786992) Does Tom Brady deserve to be NFL MVP more than Aaron Rodgers? *YOU* make the call

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

		Does Tom Brady deserve to be NFL MVP more than Aaron Rodgers? YOU make the call (bleacherreport.com)		96
		More: Interesting, NFL MVP, Aaron Rodgers, MVP, NFL, Greg Jennings, Rob Gronkowski, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Jordy Nelson

• • •

1749 clicks; posted to Sports » on 04 Dec 2011 at 4:41 PM | Favorite | share:

more» |

Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends!

shirt it!

Share this link:

URL:

http://fk.cm/go/6786992

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

96 Comments (+0 »)

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

Sabyen91

2011-12-04 03:00:40 PM

No.

GAT_00

2011-12-04 03:04:55 PM

Not even close.

I still like arguing that Peyton Manning deserves it.

Sabyen91

2011-12-04 03:06:03 PM

GAT_00: Not even close.

I still like arguing that Peyton Manning deserves it.

I think Indy would have sucked with him this year (meaning a losing record). They have been sliding for awhile.

WideStance

2011-12-04 03:10:14 PM

Long answer: Nooooooooooooooo

Bunnyhat

2011-12-04 03:52:59 PM

Isn't Brees leading stat wise over both of them?

MBK

2011-12-04 03:58:53 PM

Bunnyhat: Isn't Brees leading stat wise over both of them?

Brees has 150-200 more passing yards...but a lower comp %, more INTs, less TDs, lower AVG, less wins, and a QB rating 20 points lower.

So no.

GAT_00

2011-12-04 04:10:14 PM

Sabyen91: GAT_00: Not even close.

I still like arguing that Peyton Manning deserves it.

I think Indy would have sucked with him this year (meaning a losing record). They have been sliding for awhile.

Yeah, but they still probably would have managed 8-8. Brees, Rodgers and Brady are all good, but the rest of their team is good enough they wouldn't have 8 fewer wins. Well, NE is more iffy given they don't have a defense, and I guess the Saints too. But should Brees go out, I don't think the Saints lose 8 wins.

tobcc

2011-12-04 04:26:49 PM

T E B O W!

hackhix

2011-12-04 04:36:48 PM

LOL Subby!

Pratty

2011-12-04 04:44:00 PM

Judging from subby's headline, this isn't even worth reading.

I Have The Touch of a Shocked Monkey

2011-12-04 04:46:18 PM

tobcc: T E B O W!

If the Broncos manage to make the playoffs, I think this is actually a possible answer.

However, as long as the Packers have 2 losses or less, it looks like Rodgers will be the indisputed MVP.

rorypk

2011-12-04 04:51:12 PM

Brady-good enough season to win one, but nowhere close to Rodgers this year

Can we have a Tebow thread regarding a good game on a Sunday instead of a troll one about his religion on Wednesday?

carnifex2005

2011-12-04 04:53:43 PM

Rodgers wins MVP because of his Kyle Vanden Bosch impression.

Pratty

2011-12-04 04:55:04 PM

rorypk: Brady-good enough season to win one, but nowhere close to Rodgers this year

Can we have a Tebow thread regarding a good game on a Sunday instead of a troll one about his religion on Wednesday?

Submitted one 'cause why not.

Palmer Eldritch

2011-12-04 04:56:22 PM

Article calls Wes Welker "limited." That should tell you everything you need to know about this article.

/Brady's the clear second, though

Slackfumasta

2011-12-04 04:56:55 PM

Lifelong patriots fan, Brady fanboi, but Rodgers is having the better season.

you are a puppet

2011-12-04 04:57:23 PM

I have one question about the MVP discussion: why is nobody talking about Colt Mccoy?

FutureWars

2011-12-04 04:59:18 PM

I move that we rename the MVP award to Stat-Whore award to end these stupid value arguments once and for all.

davideggy

2011-12-04 05:02:53 PM

I'm a Pats fan and even I think the article is a load of crap. In what world is a receiving corps with Welker, Gronkowski, and Hernandez somehow sub-par? Branch might be a little old and Ochocinco a lot useless, but a lot of teams would kill for that set of receivers. The only thing they are missing is a true deep, field stretching threat.

And the running game, seriously? I wasn't aware Grant and Starks were setting the world on fire. If anything, with Woodhead and Faulk in the passing game, the Pats are better off at RB.

The only real argument is the defense, but if you look a just the stats, I don't think the GB defense looks too great either. And the NE defense isn't even that terrible. They give up tons of yards, but are still middle of the pack in terms of points allowed.

Boxcutta

2011-12-04 05:03:58 PM

you are a puppet: I have one question about the MVP discussion: why is nobody talking about Colt Mccoy?

The same reason no one is talking about Phil Dawson for MVP.

Krazikarl

2011-12-04 05:05:03 PM

Packers are a better team with a better record. Their defense and the Pats D are both bad. Neither team has a running game. Receivers are about the same. So Rogers gets it by virtue of the Packers being a better team than the Pats.

basemetal

2011-12-04 05:07:40 PM

Only if he wins the Super Bowl this year. Then we'll talk.

qsblues

2011-12-04 05:09:37 PM

Fark Tom Brady in the ass with a rake. Rodgers is having a spectacular season, and I have a lot of respect for the Packers. Even though they beat my Steelers in the Superb Owl, they were clearly the better team that day, and I hope they repeat this year.

Did I mention Tom Brady and the rake yet?

you are a puppet

2011-12-04 05:09:51 PM

Boxcutta: you are a puppet: I have one question about the MVP discussion: why is nobody talking about Colt Mccoy?

The same reason no one is talking about Phil Dawson for MVP.

Youre thinking of Andre Dawson, and he actually did win MVP for the last place Chicago Bears, although he later lost it at Wrestlemania III to the tag team champions Hogans Heroes. He then went on to host Family Feud.

Soon Right Away

2011-12-04 05:12:12 PM

qsblues: Fark Tom Brady in the ass with a rake. Rodgers is having a spectacular season, and I have a lot of respect for the Packers. Even though they beat my Steelers in the Superb Owl, they were clearly the better team that day, and I hope they repeat this year.

Did I mention Tom Brady and the rake yet?

Beaten the Steelers one too many times?

basemetal

2011-12-04 05:13:11 PM

Rodgers 127.7 Brady 105.1 QB rating. That's significant.

SilentStrider

2011-12-04 05:20:43 PM

you are a puppet: I have one question about the MVP discussion: why is nobody talking about ~~Colt~~ LeSean Mccoy?

Fixed for the sake of something almost plausible.

And no, Rodgers over Brady. Not close.

merkey88

2011-12-04 05:20:47 PM

FriarReb98

2011-12-04 05:41:05 PM

Nah. I'm a Patriots fan and I think it's not worth going there. Especially not with the number of times he's been picked this year.

I'll just wait for him to make it to the Hall and be happy with that, at this point.

Callous

2011-12-04 05:42:02 PM

Here's the important numbers from NFL.com

Completion Percentage
71.8 - Rodgers
65.8 - Brady

TDs
33 - Rodgers
28 - Brady

INTs
4 - Rodgers
10 - Brady

QB Rating
127.7 - Rodgers
105.1 - Brady

Higher completion percentage, more TDs, less INTs, higher rating. I don't care how many yards you throw for, putting points on the board wins games. No question Rodgers is currently the MVP. Dude is on a level Brady last saw in '07.

/Pats fan.

R Kelly's Doo Doo Butter

2011-12-04 05:43:06 PM

Rivers?

you are a puppet

2011-12-04 05:44:57 PM

R Kelly's Doo Doo Butter: Rivers?

Can we talk?

qsblues

2011-12-04 05:45:44 PM

Soon Right Away: qsblues: Fark Tom Brady in the ass with a rake. Rodgers is having a spectacular season, and I have a lot of respect for the Packers. Even though they beat my Steelers in the Superb Owl, they were clearly the better team that day, and I hope they repeat this year.

Did I mention Tom Brady and the rake yet?

Beaten the Steelers one too many times?

I didn't mind losing to the Patriots in the regular season. Pittsburgh's 13-8 overall in the regular season. The playoffs are another matter; New England has the edge at 3-1. So yeah, I'm kinda bitter ...

Callous

2011-12-04 05:46:00 PM

Oh and Rodgers can run short for a 1st or TD if needed. Brady runs like cold maple syrup.

meddleRPI

2011-12-04 05:47:18 PM

Callous: Here's the important numbers from NFL.com

Completion Percentage
71.8 - Rodgers
65.8 - Brady

TDs
33 - Rodgers
28 - Brady

INTs
4 - Rodgers
10 - Brady

QB Rating
127.7 - Rodgers
105.1 - Brady

Higher completion percentage, more TDs, less INTs, higher rating. I don't care how many yards you throw for, putting points on the board wins games. No question Rodgers is currently the MVP. Dude is on a level Brady last saw in '07.

/Pats fan.

Brady in 2010 was better than Brady 2007. By a lot.

IAmRight

2011-12-04 05:47:39 PM

Sorry Rodgers is so good he's ruining any mystery, intrigue, or debate for stupid writers who want controversy. But that doesn't mean you have to keep trying to write MVP debate columns.

Callous

2011-12-04 05:52:34 PM

meddleRPI: Brady in 2010 was better than Brady 2007. By a lot.

Really?

2007 - Comp% 68.9 - TDs 50 - INTs 8 - Rating 117.2
2010 - Comp% 65.9 - TDs 36 - INTs 4 - Rating 111.0

Please justify your assertion that he was better in 2010.

robsul82

2011-12-04 05:56:05 PM

Uh, no. My man Drew is finishing #2, biatches.

/at least it'll be deserved this time

meddleRPI

2011-12-04 05:58:13 PM

Similar numbers, fewer interceptions, supporting four rookies in key roles (Woodhead, Green-Ellis, Hernandez and Gronkowski), losing Moss, and having Welker coming off a torn ACL less than a year prior.

Numbers don't tell the whole story. In 2007 he had veteran guys, including Randy Moss, and a much better defense.

Callous

2011-12-04 06:18:25 PM

meddleRPI: Similar numbers, fewer interceptions, supporting four rookies in key roles (Woodhead, Green-Ellis, Hernandez and Gronkowski), losing Moss, and having Welker coming off a torn ACL less than a year prior.

Numbers don't tell the whole story. In 2007 he had veteran guys, including Randy Moss, and a much better defense.

Woodhead wasn't a rookie(2010 was his 2nd year), Green-Ellis wasn't a rookie(2010 was his 3rd), Gronk and Aaron performed brilliantly Moss was a loss but he won 3 rings without him, Welker had an average year for him in 2010. It was his 2nd best year for TDs before this year, now it's his 3rd. Gronkowski was tied for 1st among TEs for number of TDs caught(7th among all receivers) and 16th for total yardage. Aaron was 14th among TEs in total yardage, 6th for TDs. And considering they were sharing touches with each other and Welker that's damn impressive. I'll give you the defense but that doesn't effect the QB's numbers much. 2007 was hands down his personal best year.

tooeasy

2011-12-04 06:21:53 PM

Interceptions are fairly random and more a reflection of luck than skill

Treygreen13

2011-12-04 06:23:59 PM

tooeasy: Interceptions are fairly random and more a reflection of luck than skill

I disagree, Phillip Rivers.

skinink

2011-12-04 06:27:47 PM

"First of all, Brady does not have the same talented group catching balls for him. He has two over-the-hill receivers in Deion Branch and Chad Ochocinco. He has two sophomore tight ends in Rob Gronkowski and Arron Hernandez. Finally, he has a limited guy in Wes Welker. In other words, Brady is producing with limited resources. "

I disagree with this paragraph. Branch may be older than other players but not over the hill. He's like Brady's safety blanket and is a reliable player. Ocho does seem to be over the hill though.

Gronk and Hernandez have played great this season and hardly play like second year players.

But you can tell the writer is full of it and is trolling when he calls Welker "limited". Brady is awesome but he does have a decent supporting cast. And I'd like to think I wish the defense was better, but with the team at 9-3 I think they are doing a decent job. It probably would have been better if Haynesworth wasn't a farkup and just did his job.

jake3988

2011-12-04 06:34:13 PM

Rodgers is good but every single part of the packers is INSANELY good. Their defense is insane, their receivers are insane, their offensive line is insane, hell, even their kicker had only missed 1 kick prior to today's game.

Brady, however, is the only reason the patriots are insanely good. Their defense is so horrendously horrifically bad that they would not be anywhere near their current record if they didn't have an amazing QB like Brady.

So, yes, I go with Brady.

Pratty

2011-12-04 06:36:33 PM

jake3988: Rodgers is good but every single part of the packers is INSANELY good. Their defense is insane, their receivers are insane, their offensive line is insane, hell, even their kicker had only missed 1 kick prior to today's game.

Brady, however, is the only reason the patriots are insanely good. Their defense is so horrendously horrifically bad that they would not be anywhere near their current record if they didn't have an amazing QB like Brady.

So, yes, I go with Brady.

?

fatalvenom

2011-12-04 06:42:36 PM

hackhix: LOL Subby!

You stole the first thing I wanted to post in a "Brady hate thread" since I first saw that.

That is pretty much exactly how every Farker reacts to Brady being mentioned. No reason, no discourse...just hate and vitriol for no apparent reason.

i1045.photobucket.com

Neeek

2011-12-04 06:45:37 PM

Rodgers is having a top 10 of all time season. And "10" is playing it safe. Top 5, probably with #1 potential.

VvonderJesus

2011-12-04 06:51:35 PM

It doesn't matter because Peyton deserves it more than both of them combined.

D-O-single_G

2011-12-04 06:57:40 PM

No, but Tom Brady is a better player than Aaron Rodgers. Let's wait until Rodgers has ten years as a starter under his belt before we get all crazy about how good he is. He hasn't even been elite long enough to escape flash-in-the-pan status, if everything suddenly went south.

/It causes me pain to compliment Tom Brady, but there it is.

fatalvenom

2011-12-04 07:11:14 PM