Rack;2449442 said:
What the players have done individually has nothing to do with what the expectations were for the teams they play for.
Abraham has ALWAYS been a good pass rusher. He's doing NOTHING more this year then he's done year in and year out. He's not all of the sudden an "MVP" just cuz his team is doing better.
Porter, is another story. Cuz last year he looked like he was on the decline, and now he's second in sacks and has a shot and getting 20. All he has to do is get 2 sacks in one game, then 1 sack in the other 4.
Harrison is a beast. He shouldn't have his play viewed as anything less then what it truly is just cuz he plays on a great team. THe dude is a f'in monster.
Ware
Harrison
Hayneworth
Those should be the top 3. Maybe Porter gets in the top 3.
Well, of course, I disagree. The MVP is like the Heisman. It sometimes goes to individual of a team that is in the best position to either win or reap the accomplishments of its success.
Second, the most valuable player has to be tied to winning somehow. I mean how valuable are you to your team if you're playing lights out on a team like the Detroit Lions?
A part of that MVP argument is that if the player isn't there via injury, suspension or some other factor, would the team be winning.
Yes, John Abraham has been good. But he's now on a team that noone expected to be in the playoff chase. That adds to his value and his accomplishment.
Yes, Joey Porter has been good. But he's now on a team that noone (few) expected to be in the playoff chase. That adds to his value and his accomplishment.
Yes, these guys are doing very good individual things. But I don't think it would mean as much if they were doing those individual good things on winless teams or teams with few wins.