|
|
| Author |
Message |
Nate
Hall of Famer
Joined: 08 Aug 2001
Posts: 1459
Location: Indiana
|
 Posted: 1/10/2002, 4:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Guess they still thought the Flutie Flakes were fresh, though they were clearly past their expiration date.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rmcollins3
Prospect
Joined: 09 Dec 2001
Posts: 42
|
| Posted: 1/11/2002, 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Warner may have led the conference in INTs, but he also led it in yards and uhm....oh yeah...WINS. I think Faulk should have gotten it instead, but it's not a bad choice. However, if the MVP award is for the value of a player to the team, then Favre would be a great choice, since Jeff George could probably throw for nearly 5,000 yards with those receivers and backs!
As for ROY....I gotta go with AT as well. Without him, the Bears would probably be no where near the playoffs. If SD would have made a run at the playoffs, then I say LT would be a good choice, but IMO, you have to help the team get somewhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
defska17
Hall of Famer
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Posts: 4150
Location: So. Cal (near San Diego)
|
| Posted: 1/11/2002, 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
the MVP award is for how valuable a player is to his team...MVP means Most Valuable Player, and where else would a player be valuable then to his team. I think it is obvious that Favre leads in that category. Like I said earlier, Warner's performance led to criticism of the entire team!! THAT is not valuable.
In regards to ROY, in most cases, no matter how good or talented a rookie is, they will not have such a huge impact on an entire team as to greatly affect a team making the playoffs or not. Sure you can say that AT helped the Bears there, but LT helped the Chargers win 5 times as many games as they did last year. If you are looking at raw talent, and how they perform with the set of circumstances that they are given (which a rookie CANNOT have any influence on), LT exceeds them all.
...and Im not about to explain, again, for the tenth time, why the Chargers played Flutie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wedge231
VIP
Joined: 20 Mar 2001
Posts: 5870
Location: South Bend, IN
|
| Posted: 1/11/2002, 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
On 2002-01-11 12:41, defska17 wrote:
but LT helped the Chargers win 5 times as many games as they did last year.
|
LOL 
They could only improve anyway though...
_________________
-Wedge231 chris@c-wod.com
http://www.c-wod.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
defska17
Hall of Famer
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Posts: 4150
Location: So. Cal (near San Diego)
|
| Posted: 1/11/2002, 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| exactly. LT is a rookie, as is AT, and both of their respective teams did better than last season. So what argument is there in support of AT, if you cant argue the same argument in support of LT? Just because the Bears made the playoffs? The Bears are in the playoffs for many reasons besides AT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick
Administrator
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 13921
Location: Harbinger, NC, U.S.A.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
defska17
Hall of Famer
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Posts: 4150
Location: So. Cal (near San Diego)
|
| Posted: 1/12/2002, 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
5.
And i know that, that is what i am trying to say, the Bears went to the playoffs for more reasons besides AT. So, to say that AT is more deserving because the Bears made the playoffs is hypocritical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wedge231
VIP
Joined: 20 Mar 2001
Posts: 5870
Location: South Bend, IN
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
defska17
Hall of Famer
Joined: 01 Apr 2001
Posts: 4150
Location: So. Cal (near San Diego)
|
| Posted: 1/12/2002, 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
first of all, LT held the ball 100 more times than AT did, although that doesnt explain the 8-0 edge LT has in fumbles.
and whatever the fumble total is, that has nothing to do with saying AT is more deserving due to the Bears making the playoffs, thats a whole different topic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick
Administrator
Joined: 16 Mar 2001
Posts: 13921
Location: Harbinger, NC, U.S.A.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
