In response to this article, I posted the following:
running game (76.9 yards per game, 31st in the league coming into Sunday's game), it would be fair to say the Colts rode Manning's arm into the playoffs.
Guess who was 32nd? Yup, the Cardinals with 71.1 YPG. Warner had more yards, more TD's and only one more INT. He took a team that was flat out terrible last year to a division title. Yes the west is incredibly weak, but the Cards have no running game, no offensive line, no defense. That team is 6-10 at best without him.
Manning? He is one of the top 5 QB's of all time, but the Colts are a strong team regardless. They have a much better defense than the Cards at 19.9 PPG vs 27 PPG for the cards, their offensive line is substantially better. Obviously we found out that Brady is Valuable but the Pats were still able to get 10 wins without him. The Colts are the same way
Seems your analysis needs some help as you didn't actually compare Manning to anyone, you just talked about Manning taking a bad team to the playoffs. Well, sorry, the Cards were worse and Warner played better.
For example, although Warner has Breaston, Boldin and Fitzgerald, he has no outlet like a Dallas Clark, Addai or Rhodes. In addition, Manning still has Harrison, Gonzalez, and somebody by the name of Reggie Wayne. Thus, the Cards were one diminsional and Warner still got it done.
So please, go back, actually compare stats and the team and then get back to us, instead of making conclusions with no analysis.
The same can be said for AP. The Vikes had a platoon of offense this year but AP came through and carried that team. However, even comparing Warner and AP. The Vikes had one more win than the Cards but gave up 7 less points a game on Defense. With that kind of defense the Cards would have won 12-13 games
I would really like to hear why, with analysis, you think Manning or anyone deserves the award over Warner.
I really wouldn't have a problem with AP winning the MVP, the Vikings would be no where without him. I just think Warner was more valuable.