Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Sports Forum

Sports Forum

  1. 04 Nov '11 14:52
    I think there is a case to be made. There are now 8 examples of what the absence of Manning means to the team.
  2. 04 Nov '11 15:10
    Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
    I think there is a case to be made. There are now 8 examples of what the absence of Manning means to the team.
    I always feel that the MVP should go to the guy who had the best year regardless of his teams sucess. But, if you believe the MVP is an award based on the difference you make to success or failure of a team there is no one more deserving then Peyton Manning.
  3. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    04 Nov '11 15:54
    Originally posted by quackquack
    I always feel that the MVP should go to the guy who had the best year regardless of his teams sucess. But, if you believe the MVP is an award based on the difference you make to success or failure of a team there is no one more deserving then Peyton Manning.
    Well, The Colts don't win the Super Bowl much under Peyton.
    You might say Tom Brady might surpass him in that respect.

    As far as this year goes, it is hard to overlook the job Aaron Rogers is doing in Green Bay.
  4. 04 Nov '11 16:14
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Well, The Colts don't win the Super Bowl much under Peyton.
    You might say Tom Brady might surpass him in that respect.

    As far as this year goes, it is hard to overlook the job Aaron Rogers is doing in Green Bay.
    Packers can win without ARod, maybe not 8-0 but still some wins. Indy was built around PM and his audibles at the line are his greatest asset.
  5. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    04 Nov '11 16:58
    Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
    Packers can win without ARod, maybe not 8-0 but still some wins. Indy was built around PM and his audibles at the line are his greatest asset.
    Indy could win with Brady, or Rodgers or even Matt Schaub.
    They may not win them all, but Peyton didn't either, and they would certainly win more than zero.
  6. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    11 Nov '11 13:00 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Indy could win with Brady, or Rodgers or even Matt Schaub.
    They may not win them all, but Peyton didn't either, and they would certainly win more than zero.
    You can't compare Rodgers and Brady to what the Colts have. The question isn't whether the Colts would be winless with Rodgers or Brady (obviously, they would not), but whether they'd win with the Colts as many games as the Colts have over the last decade with Manning. I'd say doubtful in the case of Brady. As for Rodgers, it's still so early in his career that we really don't know just how great he is. It's a little premature to compare his career to Manning's or Brady's. Right this second, of course, he's clearly ahead of both of them.
  7. 11 Nov '11 13:53
    Can we please not call Aaron Rodgers ARod.
  8. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    11 Nov '11 16:21
    Originally posted by dryhump
    Can we please not call Aaron Rodgers ARod.
    Technically, they should call him AaRod.
  9. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    11 Nov '11 16:32
    Originally posted by sh76
    You can't compare Rodgers and Brady to what the Colts have. The question isn't whether the Colts would be winless with Rodgers or Brady (obviously, they would not), but whether they'd win with the Colts as many games as the Colts have over the last decade with Manning. I'd say doubtful in the case of Brady. As for Rodgers, it's still so early in his career that ...[text shortened]... anning's or Brady's. Right this second, of course, he's clearly ahead of both of them.
    I think you are being a bit short sighted here.
    I agree that Peyton is a great QB and a great leader.
    However, he doesn't play defense, and Indy has won, what? One super bowl with him?
    Matt Schaub will NEVER match up in a comparison with Peyton, but in the Texans
    current scheme (without Andre Johnson for the last 5 games), they are chewing
    teams up. So you can't say the QB is the end all be all, although it helps.

    I have never believed that Tom Brady is a better QB than Peyton, but he does have
    more Super Bowl wins to show. Again, the whole product allows him to function better
    than if he was with the Dolphins for example.

    Peyton does not deserve consideration for MVP while not playing simply because the
    Colts haven't stopped anyone on defense all year, so Peyton's offense wouldn't make
    as much impact. Sure they would have won more games than they have, but they
    have been blown out in several.

    Aaron Rodgers is a fine young player, but he isn't Montana, Marino or Farve yet.
    He has a great cast surrounding him, and he is doing remarkably well with them.
    But I am not ready to send him to Canton yet.
  10. 11 Nov '11 18:49
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Technically, they should call him AaRod.
    He is on the twelve step program to rid Green Bay of Favre's memory.
  11. 14 Nov '11 04:55
    Originally posted by dryhump
    Can we please not call Aaron Rodgers ARod.
    I hear what your'e saying. Maybe we could continue to call Rodgers A- Rod and start calling Rodriguez Juice- Rod
  12. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    14 Nov '11 19:29
    Originally posted by mudpie
    I hear what your'e saying. Maybe we could continue to call Rodgers A- Rod and start calling Rodriguez Juice- Rod
    You sure seem to be a "juice" expert.

    How much juice are you sucking down?
  13. Standard member RBHILL
    Acts 13:48
    17 Nov '11 17:28
    Originally posted by cheshirecatstevens
    I think there is a case to be made. There are now 8 examples of what the absence of Manning means to the team.
    Like in Basketball, I guess there can be an "I" in team in Football too.
  14. Subscriber shortcircuit
    The Energizer
    17 Nov '11 17:45
    Originally posted by RBHILL
    Like in Basketball, I guess there can be an "I" in team in Football too.
    Manning is NOT the MVP, nor will he be voted the MVP.
  15. 18 Nov '11 20:43
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    Manning is [b]NOT the MVP, nor will he be voted the MVP.[/b]
    Is he the most valuable player to his team? Are they capable of playing a competent game of football without him?