I'll give you one last response for lolz. I would have let it go if you didn't make the same mistake twice. And when I made that error in choice of words it was actually pretty awful because I said Brees didn't outperform Manning in the superbowl when he clearly did. That was just stupid of me and I admit it, but other than that you've been wrong on a lot.
Please. It was a desperate attempt to grasp at straws in an effort to somehow downplay my argument.
I'll use what you've been saying this whole time...is being the MVP about breaking records now?
What the fuck? Where did I say anything about breaking records = MVP?
Manning's online stopped being good as they aged/retired, he didn't have an elite offensive line in 2009 but he is one of the quickest QBs at getting rid of the ball after the snap. That isn't an opinion, that was a fact. He was getting the ball out of his hands faster than any other QB in the last couple of years with the Colts. It's not like he had all day in the pocket.
And Brees doesn't have a quick release as well, as his average of 2.2 seconds release time from last seasons Packers game indicates
That's because Brees had a more complete team, like I've been saying or are you trying to tell me it was Brees also playing defense and ensuring that the other team wasn't scoring? Yeah, that's what I thought.
What does having a more complete team have to do with anything that I said? Are you trying to insinuate that it wasn't because of Brees that we jumped out to huge leads early in most games that season and they were in fact gifted to us by "short fields" (which you haven't proven)? A more complete team should have no bearing in the better player, and trying to use wins given on who had the worse team out of the two as your primary argument for Manning deserving it is contradictory in and of itself. 7 fourth quarter comebacks? Big fucking deal.
Ugh, this is why I called you a m****. What separated Brees and Manning in 2009 was the wins and also how they went about winning those games.
So Manning was separated by 1 single win and having more comeback victories, although leading a far less efficient offense with a better offensive lineup which you readily admit. Okay.
In 2004 it was the vast differences in stats. If you honestly think that the MVP is won the same way every year then you really are a fucking m****.
Selectively applying your arguments again.
"Manning deserves 2009 because he had more wins."
"But Brees had better stats."
"It's not about stats it's about wins."
"But Brady had more wins than Manning in 2004."
"But Manning had better stats that year."
Again, revel in the glory of your omg FAVORITE PLAYER all you want. Just apply the same logic to everyone else.
MVP! MVP! MVP!