Submitted by charlie, Jan 5, 2007 12:23

Drew Brees is not more valuable to his team. To say that is to greatly diminish the talent around him which includes Reggie Bush, Deuce McAllister, Joe Horn, Marcus Colston, etc... The Saints receiving corps has been fantastic this year. Imagine how potent the New England Patriots would be if Tom Brady (who is far better than Brees) could throw to the same receivers Drew Brees has been throwing to. And please keep in mind the Saints play in the NFC and could manage only ten wins. The NFC has been awful this year. It is clearly inferior to the AFC. And if Brees is so good how come the Chargers have been completely transformed into such a powerhouse after he left? If LT is not such an important component of the Chargers that means that Phillip Rivers gets all the credit for the Bolts fantastic season. What does that say about Brees that the moment he left and got replaced by a quarterback with no experience that team had the best season IN ITS ENTIRE HISTORY!

"LT amassed outrageous stats to lift a playoff team to the number one seed. But, Drew Brees amassed outrageous stats to take a dejected, young, losing team and made them the best 10-6 team in the NFL."

The Chargers did not make the playoffs last year and every pundit in the offseason predicted they would finish in the basement of the AFC West. To go 14-2 in the AFC and get the number one seed is an astounding accomplishment. Apparently you are unaware of how inferior the NFC is to the AFC. Don't worry, you'll find out in the Super Bowl. As for being the best "10-6" team in the NFL. That is hardly the stuff of MVP stature.

"Take the players in question away from their teams and we would have a seriously different picture. Take Bress out and the Saints are not even sniffing .500, am I wrong?"

Yes you are wrong. The Saints are loaded with talent. Playing in the NFC they could have still made the playoffs with an 8-8 record.

"Take LT out of the equation and the Chargers lose a few games, sure, but they have capable backups in Turner and Sproles (I believe he's still there, right?) that can keep the running game around 4 yds/rush, and Rivers can keep the offense not only stable, but productive, and their defense is MUCH more spectatular (remember the playoffs vs. the Colts?) such that they could still win a good 10, 11 games with LT on the sidelines this year."

The Bolts most certainly do not win 10 games without LT. The Charges have done well with Rivers (again that shows how disposable Brees is as a quarterback). Michael Turner is a fine back. But he is a pounder and not as explosive as LT. LT is not just a fantastic runner he is a deadly receiver, in fact the best receiver on a team with mediocre receivers at best (antoinio gate being TE). Recall the Denver Broncos game where LT BROKE THEIR BACK with that 50 yard td reception. Sorry, but Turner doesn't make that reception and go the distance. That's why he is riding the pine.

"To me, it's clear that Drew Brees was a more valuable player to his team than any other player in the NFL and more deserving of the MVP award than any other, although the Offensive Player of the Year award should undoubtedly go to Ladainian Tomlinson."

Drew Brees is overrated. He is a good quarterback and has had a magical season as have the Saints. But the MVP vote was a no brainer this year. What LT accomplished in San Diego was eye popping. It was a season for the ages. LT is going to the Hall of Fame barring injury. He has dominated the league and is the number one reason the bolts are 14-2 against the cream of the NFL crop.

But if the Saints somehow get to and win the Super Bowl I'll be happy to take all this back. But I think it is safe to say even the most delusional Brees for MVP supporter wouldn't be foolish enough to take me up on that bet. And therein lies the reason Drew Brees did not win the MVP.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.