First, Adrian Peterson would be my pick for MVP. That being said, I think Rodgers was the most valuable QB. Here's why:

1. Better TD:INT ratio than Brady and Peyton. When Brady was under serious consideration, his low number of INT's was the number that stood out the most. Rodgers has as less INTs than Peyton and is tied with Brady, he's also thrown more TDs than either.

2. Rodger's has had the toughest schedule of the three. Hebeat to the Texans, as Brady did, and lost to the 49ers and Seahawks, as Brady did as well. He lost to Indy but beat Arizona...so he shares the same record as common opponents with Brady.

3. Three of his top weapons (Nelson, Jennings, and Cobb) have all missed at least one game, with Jordy and Jennings missing 4 and 8 respectively. He also lost his starting rb and has had virtually no help from the run game all season.

4. His Oline is just dreadful. Yeah, he holds on to the ball a bit too long, but his oline is far worse than what NE or DEN have.

5. On paper, I still think GB has the best defense of the three. Statistically, it's the worse in terms of points per game. That defense also lost its two best players, Matthews and Woodson, for 4 and 9 games respectively.

6. If not for a Fail Mary call, Rodgers has the same record as Brady and the Pack earn the bye.

Everyone on these boards thinks the awards should go to Brady or Peterson. Everyone else outside of thinks it should go to Manning or Peterson. 

MVP has no bearing on who wins the Super Bowl and I'm sure the players could care less while theyre still competeting, but regardless, I'd like to see the right guy win it.

I think AP should get it because it's harder to carry a team as a rb than it is to do it as a QB. I do not believe him coming back from a torn ACL has any bearing on an award that only judges you by what you do during the 2012 regular season. Also hate it when people bring up the fact that Manning came back from neck surgeries and a year out of football. That's what comeback player of the year is for. If AP does not win the award, I think it should be Rodgers. Just one man's opinion. I'd like to hear an argument for Brady or Manning if anyone has one to offer.

There are a few QBs worth consideration. Rodgers is a little lean on yards. (btw, Brady has been missing Gronk for much of the year) Hard to pick between all those very good and comparable seasons. But Peterson has had an historic year.

Peterson as MVP and Fetus Head as CPOTY seems a no-brainer for the voters. But the Manning hype machine is always in play.

What? He's been getting it all year!

 

Rodgers? No. At least not the media hype that Manning had, and what Brady had prior to the SF game. Based on what I've been reading. Rodgers will probably finish no better than third.

 

With regards to Rodgers yards, Brady had 3900 in 2010.

 

Another point I wanted to make about QBs and the MVP award. If Brady, Rodgers, Manning and MAYBE Brees all swapped teams, I'm sure all those teams would be relatively close to where they are recordwise right now.

Don't know if any other runningback could've carried the Vikings to 10-6

I agree  . . . I think Rodgers has probably had the best season of all the elite QBs this year.  Manning is next, with Brady close behind.  Matt Ryan and Russell Wilson deserve some attention too.

dapats - Manning's had the hype for any number of reasons -

1.  He's a 4 time MVP.

2.  He changed teams, which means new personnel, new coaches, new system, no dome (which was always a big deal to many). 

3.  He's coming back from an injury that caused a loss of strength in his throwing arm and 4 surgeries in an attempt to correct it.  He missed an entire year, and many speculated that he would be nowhere near the same player.  Some thought his strength due to the severely pinched nerve would never return. 

4.  He's turned receivers from ranking in the 60s'and 70's into top 10 receivers according to Football Outsiders. 

5.  His team finished at the top of the AFC. 

All of this said, this doesn't mean that Brady or Rodgers couldn't do the same.  They could.  But this year Manning truly transformed a team.  He probably gets some consideration for that. 

Finally, I still think that Peterson gets the MVP which would make the rest moot. 

 

As much as I love Brady, Adrian Peterson is the only logical choice for MVP.  The season he had was sick, period.  If not AP, just call it the MVQuaterback award.

In response to UD6's comment:

I disagree. I understand why there is hype. However, MVP is strictly in regards to the 2012 Regular season. Where he was/what happened last season or previous seasons should have no bearing on the award. That stuff is criteria for comeback player of the year.

How does Football Outsiders rank the top WRs? In 13 games last season, D. Thomas got 851 yards and 5 Tds. That's on pace for 1047 yards in a 16 game season. Here's the important part, he did all that with Tebow. Competent QB, maybe he gets 1200 yards, P Manning, 1400.

I don't understand people who thinks Manning made Thomas and Decker. They both had solid seasons for WRs who had the most inaccurate qb of all time throwing to them. It's just like people who said P Manning made Wayne, when he posted 1300 with Luck, or he made Garcon, when he played well this season when he was healthy.

My order would be:

1. Peterson

2. Rodgers

3. Manning

4. Brady

 

Honestly, I want to put Watt in there. Barwin was a disappointment this season. Their middle linebacking corp has dwindled with injuries and Jonathon Joseph is the only good cover corner they have. Oh yeah, they're QB is kind of a choke too. Don't know if HOU wins its division without JJ. However, I think Foster is almost as important as him, and based on the way I judged things, having two players on one team as MVP candidates is a contradiction

Peterson doesn't win MVP and they should just rename it the Peyton Manning award.

The Patriots have a running game the Packers don't. If the Patriots didn't run the ball Brady would have more TD's and yards.

In response to dapats1281's comment:

You asked about the hype.  I gave you my opinion of the reasons for the hype.  You may think differently than the voters about what should or should not be.  I am just giving you my thoughts on the hype. 

As for football outsiders.  They are an advanced stats site using their own developed metrics.  You can agree or disagree with them, but they evaluate every play.  Here's their information for 2012.  You can do your own work to see where the Denver receivers were in 2011. 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/wr2012

I never said that Manning made the receivers, but I do think that maximized their value.  That's no different than what Brady or Rodgers would have done, but for Manning they are all new as was the system and the team and the venue.  None of the same could be said for Rodgers or Brady. 

I think alot of people think Watt should be in the consideration.  Maybe he will be.

 

 

 

 

"We cannot yet fully separate the performance of a receiver from the performance of his quarterback. Be aware that one will affect the other.

These statistics measure only passes thrown to a receiver, not performance on plays when he is not thrown the ball, such as blocking and drawing double teams"

Those are both big and skew those stats. Malcom Floyd and Lance Moore are too high on that list.

Didn't mean to target you specifically but a large number of fans in general. As I pointed out, Manning does get more out of his receivers than most Qbs can.

As for your third point. I'm not too sure how different the system is. New headcoach does not necessarily mean a different system. From what I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, Manning did not want to go to SF because of the offensive system. I thought the Bronco's largely adjusted the offensive system to be extremely similar to the one in Indy. Remember, Fox completely changed the offensive system to help Tebow, no reason to think he would not do the same for P. Manning. And again, MVP vote starts in 2012. What happened in the past should have no bearing.

Last question, and an honest question, not a sarcastic one. What defines an offensive system? Because for someone like Brady, he started his career with a lot of i formation and short passes. During the 2007 and 2009 season, the offense completely changed and became more of a spread offense. 2010-2012 has largely been back to the short and intermediate pass routes with 2 TE sets.

In those three different time periods, the offenses were completely different. Does that constitute as a different system? If not, what does? Different terminology?

 

In response to FLY2K's comment:

That is not necessarily true. His numbers may have improved or they may have gotten worse. Can't really say for sure.

But for the sake of debating a point:

Running game helps keep more drives alive. If the Patriots did not have a running game, you could argue that some of those TD drive would have stalled and become nothing less than punts or FGs.

Running game also helps open up passing lanes. Whether it's keeping pass rushers honest or fooling those in coverage with the playaction.

His completion rate and  Y/A may have dropped, while his INTs may have risen as well.

In response to dapats1281's comment:

must be part of that "anti-Pats" media queenie keeps going on about

Because he's not named Manning.  Manning has not had the best passer rating since 2006 when he was playing with possibly the most gifted offense in NFL history loaded with first rounders at every position and two HOF WR's.  He's the only QB to win MVP without the best passer rating the last 20 years besides Favre and he's done it now 3 times of his 4.

Since then Brady's led twice, and Rodgers twice but the average uninformed fan just believes what the media tells them, and they believe Manning has been the leading QB for the last 6 years despite all evidence.  Doesn't help that the Boston media lives to tear down its own team.

So that's it, the average fan believes Manning has been leading the NFL in every passing category with no defense for 12 years despite the fact that he's had the #1 and 2 defense and hasn't led much of anything in years.  But, no reason the facts should get in the way of a good story.

i can assure you that if the situations were reversed and Manning did what Rodgers did and vice versa then Manning would still get the award.

In response to shenanigan's comment:

more pats anti-peyton rot...still raging luck too?

In response to dapats1281's comment:

Fully respectful discussion here.  Don't think youre calling me out. 

Regarding Manning and the system.  I think you are right that Fox was willing to be flexible with much of the offense for Manning's sake. 

As for systems, I see two things.  I see philosophy (West Coast, Read Option, etc.) then I see nomenclature.  There are much smarter football people than me who could probably be completely accurate where I am somewhat speculating. 

I imagine that the broncos fully adopted the philosophy of play that Manning learned and excelled at.  What I don't know is whether or not he had to learn a whole new offensive nomenclature which I define as the "system". 

Either way, I think the change speaks volumes for Manning.  His arrival did bring about an entire philosophical change in the way the offense was run with Tebow (read option) to a more pass dominant style of play.  He had to get all of those offensive players to change their style of play and expectations.  Then as it regards the nomenclature, either he had to adopt theirs and relearn a new language or he had to help teach his offense that language. 

The thing about Manning (and I am obviously a fan, so take my comments only as you think valuable) is that he becomes the de facto offensive coordinator.  And for him this year, its all new.  That's not the case with Peterson, Rodgers, or Brady.  They all had the same personnel, same system, same coaches, same venue. 

Finally regarding systems and Brady.  He's been in the same system since day one.  That does not at all mean the system hasn't evolved.  I am sure it has by leaps and bounds, but the nomenclature, I am sure is consistent over the years.  A play that was run in 2001 could be run today by Brady and it would be called the same thing.

Last year's Broncos 8-8 (which snuck into the playoffs because of the third tie breaker in an epically bad division) had a -81 point differential. The worst ever for an 8-8 team. This year's broncos? +191. There was basically ONE difference between last years team and this years?

Peyton Manning. 

From a team that was lucky to be 8-8, to the super bowl front runner.

It's ABSURD if he doesnt get it.

In response to CornHole12's comment:

Actually, the difference between this season and last is the fact that The Broncos went from one of the worst QBs of all-time, to one of the best. Scoring 10 points with Tim Tebow was considered an impressive offensive performance last season. He won a game while only completing 2 passes. I kid you not, he won two other games while completing 9! He was no offensive juggarnaut and he wasted perfectly good WRs in Decker and Thomas.

1.) The Broncos went 7-4 with Tim Tebow, again, the worst QB of all time, with nearly that same team. That's a 63% winning percentage that would've translated to a 10-6 record. In essence, the Broncos were a 3 games better with Manning than with Tebow. 

2.) The Broncos defense had already showcased that they were an elite defense. They're the reason Tebow won 7 games, they're considerably better playing with a lead because it means Miller and Dummervile just have to pass-rush. P.S...Dummervile missed last season, but Peyton has the benefit of him once again. 

3.) You yourself have already admitted that The AFC West is the worst division in football. It doesn't take a lot to win it, similar to the AFC South Peyton came from. Once again, an 8-8 record has won it twice in the last 5 years. It's not really a division to brag about. 

4.) Peyton had the softest schedule in the NFL. The Broncos are tied for the lowest winning percentage opposition this season. 

5.) Peyton faced off against 4 playoff teams this year, Peyton is 1-3 against them. 

6.) Adrian Petetrson is a running back in the pass happy NFL with an subar QB who defenses do not respect and stuff the box against and he almost broke the NFL single season rushing record 6 months after tearing his ACL. 

7.) Peterson took his team to the playoffs while playing in the best division in football (The NFC Central), a division with 3 double digit win teams and in a tougher conference.

8.) Without Peyton, the Broncos, with an adequet QB, probably win 8-10 games. The Vikings, without Peterson, win two. 

 

Peyton Manning had a great year, but he wasn't even the best QB, before I say the best  player in the NFL. 

If Adrian Peterson doesn't win the MVP, THAT IS ABSURD and the title of the trophy should be changed to the MVQB because the last time a non-QB won it was in 2006. Nearly 7 years ago. 

In response to CornHole12's comment:

Yes, because the Vikings were supposed to make the playoffs this year with that JUGGERNAUT of an offense, elite quarterback, and outstanding wide receivers.  Adrian Peterson was basically a complimentary piece.  Learn the game, goon.

For those that considered the AFC South weak, did you know that since the creation of 4 divisions, the AFC South has sent more teams to the playoffs than all divisions but the North. 

Some may complain about the year Brady was hurt - if so, we take out that year and Manning's year.  Then the AFC South has sent more teams to the playoffs than any division in the AFC. 

Not such a weak division. 

The AFC EAST is pretty weak too. Not much to brag about winning that soft division every year. 

It would be very easy to just list a ton of statistics from Manning’s season, as he looks to win a fifth MVP award. Manning rewrote the Denver record books for passing in his first season. He had a lot of numbers that were among the best he’s ever had in a career full of elite seasons. We will point out a few of them, but first let’s focus on the main argument for Manning as MVP.

Most value-added impact. No player had a bigger impact on his team, and while part of that is the value of the quarterback position, the fact is no quarterback changes the culture of an entire team more than Manning. He leaves an imprint on his team’s performances, demanding consistent perfection. 

Manning essentially changed the Denver Broncos into the Denver Colts, and the transformation was completed quicker than anyone expected.

Manning won at least 13 games in a season under a fourth head coach (John Fox) in his career. No other quarterback in NFL history has won more than 13 games with more than two coaches.

Denver scored 481 points (second most in the league). Demaryius Thomas (1,434 yards, 10 TD) and Eric Decker (1,064 yards, 13 TD) have stats that look like Marvin Harrison and Reggie Wayne circa 2004-2006. Denver went from 30th in third-down conversions last year to No. 3 this season.

This all comes a year after the Broncos struggled to an 8-8 record and played a prehistoric style of offense with Tim Tebow. Denver went from the most run-heavy offense in football to a high-volume, high-efficiency passing attack that Manning has mastered for years

At times, he looks as good as ever, just months after some questioned if he could ever play again.

Last season the Broncos were blown out badly by several opponents. This season they fell behind by 20+ points four times early in the season, but still made a game of it behind Manning, who made them believe they could win these games. They even did pull off a 24-point comeback in San Diego on the night Manning broke the record for fourth-quarter comebacks.

Denver’s 3-1 record at fourth-quarter comeback opportunities was the best percentage in the league this season. Manning has not trailed in the fourth quarter in the last eight games.

The end result this regular season is a 13-3 record, the Super Bowl favorite, and an 11-game winning streak. That is quite the improvement after a year in which Denver won the AFC West on a three team tiebreaker, and had the worst scoring differential (-81) for an 8-8 team in NFL history.

This season Denver outscored opponents by 192 points, which is the third biggest improvement in the 16-game era. It also matches the scoring differential for the 1998 Denver Broncos (best team in franchise history) and 2005 Indianapolis Colts (Manning again)...

Last year was a  ****ing fluke of a season for the Broncos. Freakin miracle wins, everybody knows that, it was fun, but a fluke.
Manning came here, in a new team with new players, and transformed this team to the #1 team in the AFC losing to 3 of the top teams in football, 2 on the road, by 6 points, 6 points and 10 points while completely dominating everybody else they played in a sense.

The reason the Vikings got into the playoffs is because Ponder actually showed up for a few games down the stretch, not because of Peterson. Even when Peterson was dominating games, Minnesota was still losing games. I'm not even sure AP was the Vikings MVP, let alone the league. Should probably be a slam dunk for offensive player of the year though.