MVP... or Best Stats Award?

Every year, football junkies like myself will break down every possible scenario and statistic to figure out who really deserves the MVP award. Last season, Aaron Rodgers took home the prize after posting a 45:6 TD-INT ratio.

In this 2012 campaign, the front-runners are Adrian “All-day” Peterson and Peyton Manning. Looking at the two names however, should the MVP be awarded simply based on statistics? Let me throw out a scenario for you: Peyton Manning has a decent game, but loses to the Baltimore Ravens and goes one and done for his 8^th time in his career.

If something crazy happens and Peyton loses to Baltimore at Mile High, does he really deserve the award? After all, he is the leader of his team and he would have failed to lead Denver to the big game when they were heavily favored. In my opinion, for Manning to be the “Most Valuable Player” for the entire league, he has to be valuable and take his team to New Orleans. If  he can’t do this, he certainly wouldn’t be deserving of this award.

I think Peterson’s case is a bit different. This guy led a team that had no hope with an awful QB to the playoffs. If it weren’t for AP, we wouldn’t have had one of the greatest stories all year. In the end however, you can’t say that Peterson was the “Most Valuable Player” in the NFL. He was great for Minnesota and the NFL’s fans but he wasn’t the most valuable. I’ll give him the Comeback Player of the year without question and award him but that is it.

So who really should be the MVP? It is impossible to find out at this point. The stories haven’t been finished. The final chapter hasn’t been written.

It’s possible that Marshawn Lynch can string together 3 more 100+ yard games and lead his team. What if he wins the Super Bowl? Then, he could deserve to win the coveted award. How about if Tom Brady wins The Big Game? He has had a fantastic year and if he wins it, he would be THE MOST VALUABLE PLAYER in the league.

Are you starting to get the theme here? A player can be great all year, but if he fails to lead his team to the Super Bowl, he isn’t the most valuable player of the league.

We all have gotten so crazy about this MVP award that we lose perspective of what the award really means and stands for. At the end of the day, every team’s goal is to win the last game at the end of the year. If it doesn’t happen, the year is considered a failure. Shouldn’t the “Most Valuable Player” be the guy that led the best team in the NFL to the ultimate goal—A Super Bowl?

The fact is, stories haven’t been finished. The book hasn’t been closed yet. It’s going to be a great read, but how will the 2012 version end?