I wrote an article a few days ago because Peyton Manning received the 1st team All-Pro vote from the Asscoiated Press and I dont understand how he was awarded that.
I dont want to repeat myself, so you can check it out here.
I'm hearing arguments like "Manning doesn't have a ground game like Brees or Favre" and it really bothers me. Not because they're right, but because they actually think (and it's scary to me because there are probably many people who have this line of thinking) this is a good argument. And the cold hard truth is that this is nothing short of absurd and ridiculous.
When Marino threw for 5,084 yards in 1984 he had great weapons. Yet he still received the rewards and accolades because he deserved them. He outperformed everyone else. I dont remember anyone else saying that Neil Lomax (He threw for 4,614 yds) should have been voted 1st team All-Pro because "he put up great numbers and he didn't have the weapons." And I know Brees didn't throw for 5,000 yards this year. But he put up better numbers. Hell he threw for 5,000 last year and still didn't get MVP! Manning got it. Go figure.
This goes with anything in any sports. What, am I in the Twighlight Zone here? You don't reward someone because "he could have done this" or "if he would have had that..." Do you see how absurd this argument is? You reward the player that had the better year. The player that had more success throwing the ball. This goes for any profession. The top salesman gets the "top salesman award." The best lineworker produces the most "gidgets" and gets the incentive bonuses.
It simply doesn't matter if the Colts couldn't run the ball. It wouldn't matter if his top four receivers went out in week one with year ending injuries. You have to give the award to the player that had the better year. THE PLAYER THAT HAD MORE SUCCESS THROWING THE BALL. Success brings awards (normally). I'd like to see one of the people that voted for Manning explain to Drew Brees why he didn't get his vote.
"Well Drew, I just thought Peyton had to work harder because he didn't have a ground game."
"So you voted for him even though I had a better year?"
"So you're saying that he was more deserving than me?"
"Well, no, but he didn't have a ground game, and if he did, he probably could have put up better numbers."
"Oh... so I didn't get your vote because maybe he could have done this if he had that, and I was more impressive this year, but it's just because I may have played on a better offense in your opinion, and so I dont deserve the award because I was fortunate to have a ground game? So he got your vote on "could haves and would haves" even though I did and he didn't."
"Well... yeah... I guess."
Wow! Great stuff. This really opens up a world of possibilities. What could Flacco have done with a better team? How about Vince Young, Kyle Orton, or David Gerrard? Maybe they should have been voted 1st team All-Pro. Rashard Mendenhall should have been voted 1st team. He ran for 1,108 yards behind an average O-line at best and he only had 7 carries in the first three games because he didn't start.
Do you see yet how utterly ridiculous this argument really is? It might be all true, but you can't start making excuses for players, because then, where does it end? Where's the line?
One more thing, look at Rivers' stats for 2008 and compare them with Manning's of that year and come up with a plausible reason why Manning was voted 1st team to the Pro Bowl and Rivers didn't even get an alternate vote when he had the better year. Rivers had the better year, hands down, and the numbers show that with absolutely no room for debate.
Rivers led the entire league in passer rating! Manning was 5th. And the All-Pro voting for 2008...Brees was 15 yards shy of breaking the all time record set by Marino for passing yards in a single season, passing for 5,069 yards. Warner had a great year and could have been voted 1st team All-Pro. And there's still Rivers. Guess who got it? Manning got 28 votes. Brees got 10. Rivers 9, and Warner 1! Do you see a trend here?
Why does Manning get ALL the votes, ALL the time when other players are putting up better numbers? Manning is a great quarterback. I'm fully aware of this. Everybody knows this. But the public perception of him being God or the ONLY great quarterback out there has got to come to an end.
People need to come out of their "Manning is Christ" coma. Because the coma has them voting for him for everything every year regardless whether he was the best or not. And these last couple years, he's been awefully good, but others have been better. And they're not getting recognized. It's not fair, it's not right, and it needs to come to a stop.