Inasmuch as the Colts were pretty much awful when Bert Jones was hurt and pretty darn good when he was healthy, the similarities to Manning are better than Unitas — they got to a Superbowl without Johnny U, after all.

I always forget Jones because, as a long suffering Steeler fan (my Dad took me to my first game in 1960 when the Steelers played in Pitt Stadium and were probably the worst team in the NFL) I spent most of the Bert Jones Era in Steeler Heaven.

Eerie similarity: Jones’ ended his career with a neck injury. I hope Peyton will break the symmetry in that regard, and wish he’d get back, soon (as long as he continues to lose to Pittsburgh when it matters.)

You need help. Professional help. I hear thearapy I really affordable nowadays.

Thanks for letting me know never to bother buying that garbage. The NFL should be ashamed of itself for spitting on real players.

Everything that you need is on the Interwebs… /Sarcasm

Okay, maybe that’s going too far, but I totally disagree with Freeney’s “DISRESPECT” card. It’s a subjecteive award that hinges on whatever people feel like should be valued. Honestly, it’s not like some mandatory part of the game that will be ‘ruined’ if they decide to do something unorthodox with it. Maybe he should just focus on collecting his millions and trying to lead his team to a SINGLE win, before getting so fired up about this inconsequential matter.

Colts without Manning and with a true back-up…..7-9 ish………proof being Orlofsky….passes for almost 400 yards and goes 31 or 37…..seems like the offense can function without Manning

Why is that a better question? Only QBs on undefeated teams should be voted MVP???

Man, the logic here is lacking.

Quite an argument: “Great players on great teams have been picked as MVP before so it must mean they are MVP.” Ooh. Tautology.

Still, it depends on definitions of MVP. Montana went down with injury, 9ers still won games. Brady goes down, Pats still win games. In Emmitt Smith’s case, when he wasn’t playing Dallas lost, so that one might be meaningful. Also Sanders – great player on better than average team made a big difference to their win/loss average.

To me, you have to evaluate what the team would do WITHOUT that player. If you feel they would be nearly as good then is that player really MVP? Compared to a team that would be garbage without a key player?

There are awards for best player at your position – Pro Bowl, All-Pro. The MVP is for what that player means to his team. You should be able to consider a player that gets a horrible team to an 8-8 record, for instance. Or a missing player that results in his teams utter collapse.

Picking a great player on a great team is meaningless as an MVP award.

Rodgers is All-Pro, no doubt. But that doesn’t mean he is MVP. Tebow is NOT All-Pro, but he means the world to that team

Next argument.

Get an argument.

Colts without Manning = 0-16.
Colts with Manning, on average, over the last 10 years he has played = 12-4 (ok, its really 11.5-4.5, BUT whatever)

That puts his Wins Above Replacement at 11.5 That’s value there. While WAR both means a little less and is really harder to evaluate in the NFL compared to other sports due to a shorter season, its still a very telling stat in this case.

While I can’t see giving it to him this year due to Rodgers having the best season of any QB ever, its hard not to put him in at least the top 5 (given Brady and Brees’ record setting paces, they also should be high on the rankings)

Manning is the MVP because the Indy coaches couldn’t re-tool the offense for Painter’s skill set?

Great ‘analysis,’ NFL Magazine.