This is absurd. Of course a QB has a bigger impact on a team than a RB. A QB has a bigger impact than any other position on the field, and it's not close. By your logic MVP would be given to a QB every year. Seriously, RB might as well be disqualified by rule. If arguably the greatest RB season of all time can't beat a relatively average QB performance (again, PM didn't even have the best QB season in the AFC), then MVP is a QB award.Demi wrote: If you put AD on Broncos and Manning on Vikes...are Broncos still going to be #1 seed and Vikings barely make the wild card? I have a feeling we win the Division and Broncos get a wild card at best.
It's tilted more towards QBs because QBs *are more valuable* than running backs. You can have the best running back in the game and win 10 games and the final wild card spot, heck last year he was 2-8 as a starter! You have the best quarterback in the game you're looking at a top 2 seed year in and year out. Shouldn't that count for something? Bring up the inflated numbers all you want but the position is still the most important in the game. Can you name the running back on recent super bowl winning teams? They're interchangeable. The top HBs in any given year, MJD, CJ2K, AD, Jamaal Charles...their teams don't even make the playoffs more often than not.
I also believe AD should get it, but I hardly think it's as cut and dry as some people are making it out to be.
Sorry bud. This is cut and dried. Both players are having "comeback" seasons. Both had tremendous impacts on their team. One did it as a QB who didn't lead the NFL in nearly any key metrics at his position. The other dominated his position in nearly every key stat and almost caught an untouchable historical mark. Take the politics out and it is cut and dried.
Also, I don't know how you can have watched the same 16 games I just watched and say that running backs are interchangeable. Put Michel Leshoure on the Vikings and tell me that this team is in playoffs this year. Go ahead, think about it.