NationStates Jolt Archive

A discussion here has led me to wonder what the sports minded generalites think on this subject.

Which currently playing individual sportsman in a team sport is the most valuable player in all of team sports.

The candidates here were:

Ronaldinho at Barcelona
Kobe for the Lakers
Peyton with the Colts
Fat Albert for the Cards

and my personaal choice (a lot more obscure in its own way) was Claude Makelele for Chelsea.

I consider him to be the most valuable player as his presence is key to the whole of the Chelsea team functioning. He allows the defence to have confidence that they will not be badly exposed and provides the base for the rest of the midfield and attack to build on.

WHo do you consider to be your personal MVP, for whom and why?

Ritchie Mccaw for New Zealand, close call between him and Dan Carter though.

youve already said it. peyton manning. i am a colts fan and i know that if peyton wasnt there our offense would suffer greatly. look at the detriot loins. awsome recievers but no one to throw the ball to them. it would be the same story in indy...

Out of the four sports you took your MVPs from, I only follow one (football), so I wouldn't be able to judge.

Personally, I'd go with Stevie Gerrard. Liverpool would probably be battling for 4th with Spurs and Arsenal if it weren't for him, and they certainly wouldn't have won the CL last year. He is by far and away the best player Liverpool have, and he frequently carries the whole team.

Edit: Ah, crap. A case could be made for Andrew Flintoff (cricket) as well. England would be nowhere near as good without him. Not only is he supremely talented (I'd say more so than any other cricketer playing right now), but he has such a massive influence on his team mates as well.

Ritchie Mccaw for New Zealand, close call between him and Dan Carter though.

I really don't see how RU lends itself to the MVP concept. It is too much a co-operative venture in my mind. I suppose that place kickers can turn matches and maybe you could single out one player or another on the basis of their inspirational qualities.

Additionally living in Brazil and getting only either local or US based sports, I am more than a little out of touch with the Rugby scene at the moment. (Brazil has an RFU, but I think we would struggle to compete with Thailand!)

Ritchie Mccaw for New Zealand, close call between him and Dan Carter though.
Ah, slight mistake as to what you meant here, I thought it was the best players in the world.

In terms of team's best players, Dwayne Peel for Wales, even when everything else has buggered up, he still plays great.

Ronaldinho at Barcelona
Kobe for the Lakers
Peyton with the Colts
Fat Albert for the Cards

and my personaal choice (a lot more obscure in its own way) was Claude Makelele for Chelsea.
WHo do you consider to be your personal MVP, for whom and why?

True about the obscureness- I have no idea even what sport Chelsea is a team in.

And Kobe for the lakers isn't even the best MVP candidate in the NBA. Nor is Peyton for the Colts. They still had E.J., and he was a stat machine last year. I would have gone with Alexander for the Seahawks.

The problem with MVP's are their subjectiveness- and comparing them across sports is even harder. Not everyone agrees what the qualifications for an MVP are- what exactly is "most valuable?" Is it the best player on the best team? The biggest stat machine? The best leader? Or the one guy who stands out and makes an average or bad team into a contender?

I've always thought that the MVP usually comes from a playoff team, but not the champion. Why? Because if you don't make it to the playoffs, then you haven't succeeded that year- because making it to the playoffs is every teams goal, every year. You don't do that, and no player is valuable enough. The championship team always has to have more than one guy step up- teams sports require team effort, and you don't usually win the championship with one great guy, and a bunch of meh guys. Jordan always had Pippen, who would have been the #1 guy on any other team, for example.

Which leaves us with the other playoff teams- if you have one guy who puts you over the top (without him, you'd miss the playoffs) - makes you good enough to be a contender- well, I would say he'd be most valuable. Thus- Alexander from the Seahawks. But that's just my opinion, and opinions are like assholes- everyone's got one.

I really don't see how RU lends itself to the MVP concept. It is too much a co-operative venture in my mind. I suppose that place kickers can turn matches and maybe you could single out one player or another on the basis of their inspirational qualities.

Additionally living in Brazil and getting only either local or US based sports, I am more than a little out of touch with the Rugby scene at the moment. (Brazil has an RFU, but I think we would struggle to compete with Thailand!)
As much as football I'd say. A single player can make things easier and insprise players around them. A good scrum half can keep the forwards organised and get quick ball for backs, dictate the style of the game. Ditto for outside half and kicking/passing. Wingers etc less so because they're more peripheral. But there are possibilities.

True about the obscureness- I have no idea even what sport Chelsea is a team in.
Well, I don't know what sports the 'Colts' and the 'Cards' play. I'm fairly sure the Lakers are basketball. Chelsea's football, by the way. Soccer, sorry. It's only obscure to you because you're taking a US-centric view, much as I take a UK-centric view of sport. I don't imagine you have much of a clue who Andrew Flintoff is.

I really don't see how RU lends itself to the MVP concept. It is too much a co-operative venture in my mind. I suppose that place kickers can turn matches and maybe you could single out one player or another on the basis of their inspirational qualities.

Additionally living in Brazil and getting only either local or US based sports, I am more than a little out of touch with the Rugby scene at the moment. (Brazil has an RFU, but I think we would struggle to compete with Thailand!)

Not really. RU can easily have MVP's.

Ireland has Brian O' Driscoll.

Argentina had Dominguez for many years.

And so forth.

Co-op sports as you put it can be changed by a single 'lynch pin' player- much like football and Ronaldinho (saw him live at a Spanish football match recently- a god of football to rival Pele)

True about the obscureness- I have no idea even what sport Chelsea is a team in.
Football (Soccer to you) the English premiership champions and about to repeat. (Sorry I.V., but you know its true)

I've always thought that the MVP usually comes from a playoff team, but not the champion. Why? Because if you don't make it to the playoffs, then you haven't succeeded that year- because making it to the playoffs is every teams goal, every year. You don't do that, and no player is valuable enough. The championship team always has to have more than one guy step up- teams sports require team effort, and you don't usually win the championship with one great guy, and a bunch of meh guys. Jordan always had Pippen, who would have been the #1 guy on any other team, for example.

True. There are two ways of looking at this though. One is that a true MVP is unlikely to be on a championship team as the importance of one player is rarely that great, the otrher is that he is likely to be on a championship team as part of his value is in raising the game of the others. Thus, assuming this second view to be possible, an argument can be made for Peyton Manning in that without him Edgerin James and Michael Harrison would not be the forces they are. Would Shaun Alexander have had the season he had without a - the O line and b - Hassleback. I think not.

Now in non playoff league sports (European soccer in particular) one player may be the sole reason why a team was not relegated, or obtained a place in the European competitions for the following season etc.

Which leaves us with the other playoff teams- if you have one guy who puts you over the top (without him, you'd miss the playoffs) - makes you good enough to be a contender- well, I would say he'd be most valuable. But that's just my opinion, and opinions are like assholes- everyone's got one.

I tend towards agreeing with you that the most valuable player to a team may be considerd to be the outstanding player on a mediocre team. However I still feel that if one player on a good team is the key to the others being able to perform to their highest levels, his value is higher still.

Well, I don't know what sports the 'Colts' and the 'Cards' play. I'm fairly sure the Lakers are basketball. Chelsea's football, by the way. Soccer, sorry. It's only obscure to you because you're taking a US-centric view, much as I take a UK-centric view of sport. I don't imagine you have much of a clue who Andrew Flintoff is.

Yeah, never heard of him. 'Colts' and 'Seahawks' are football. American football/gridiron, sorry. 'Cards' are baseball, the crappy sport that's a combination of cricket and "tag". I am sure that everyone takes a whatever-country-they-are-in-centric view of sports to some degree at least- and people tend to tune out any info about sports they don't like. (For instance, I am an American, but know next to nothing about baseball) And yes, I do fit the yank persona of thinking soccer/footy is... well, lets just say I don't like it.

Football (Soccer to you) the English premiership champions and about to repeat. (Sorry I.V., but you know its true)
I know. I don't mind, they deserve it. Though I wish Man Utd. had beaten Sunderland. Then a win for them against Chelsea this weekend would make the last couple of games very interesting...

Only the league though, other than that it's not been a great season.

Ronaldinio. He is just too phenomenal a player. Bastard.

There are two ways of looking at this though. One is that a true MVP is unlikely to be on a championship team as the importance of one player is rarely that great, the otrher is that he is likely to be on a championship team as part of his value is in raising the game of the others. Thus, assuming this second view to be possible, an argument can be made for Peyton Manning in that without him Edgerin James and Michael Harrison would not be the forces they are. Would Shaun Alexander have had the season he had without a - the O line and b - Hassleback. I think not.

In the past I had seen Manning being an MVP candidate, true, but not last season. E.J. was far to much of a force. Manning got shut down quite a few times (especiall against those pesky Jaguars), but James ran for 100 and a touch pretty much every week. And if you remember, both of them were on the MVP ballot last year. I think if two people are candidates from the same team- than neither of them deserves it. And it is true that Alexander wouldn't have gotten the rushing title without a) a halfway decent QB and b) some pushy linemen. One guy and ten cheerleaders won't win anything. But you couldn't have just plugged any other rb in there and made it to the playoffs.

Well, I don't know what sports the 'Colts' and the 'Cards' play. I'm fairly sure the Lakers are basketball.

Colts = Indianapolis Colts - American Football
Cards = St. Louis Cardinals - Baseball
Lakers you got right

Flintoff seems to practically carry the England team.

He's sort of a more consistant Botham.

Peyton with the Colts

O rly? lookee at what I made.

MVP (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v723/Luporum/Champion.jpg)

O rly? lookee at what I made.

MVP (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v723/Luporum/Champion.jpg)

Pure. Fucking. Gold.

I agree about Stevie Gerrad.

Although Ronaldinho is fan-fuckin-tastic, he is surrounded by Larrsson, Deco, Xavi, Van Bommel, Eto'o etc etc,

Stevie Gerrard has Crouch, Morientes, Garcia, Riise etc.

From that I can only say Gerrard has more of a team to carry than Ronadinho, hence is IMHO a better candidate for MVP.

Problem with Chelsea is they so many good players. Personally I would put Petr Cech, John Terry or Frank Lampard (15 + goals from a midfielder speaks for itself)

Problem with Chelsea is they so many good players. Personally I would put Petr Cech, John Terry or Frank Lampard (15 + goals from a midfielder speaks for itself)

But are any of them irreplaceable?

Chelsea can replace any of them if injured, Liverpool can't replace Gerrard.

Teemu Selanne for the Anaheim Ducks (NHL). He's a very large part of the reason they're in the playoffs this year.

But are any of them irreplaceable?

Chelsea can replace any of them if injured, Liverpool can't replace Gerrard.

Cech can definitely be replaced by Cudichini. Terry? I'm not so sure, Gallas is a capable defender when he's not throwing his elbows but Carvalio (sp?) is nothing special. How could yo really replace Lampard? Even in a squad that size I think Moriniho left him out once this season in league, FA cup and Champions league. There's no doubt that Gerrard's had a good season but is he the player everyone is building up?
Clearly the PFA do because he's PFA Player of the year but I'm still not sure.

Cech can definitely be replaced by Cudichini. Terry? I'm not so sure, Gallas is a capable defender when he's not throwing his elbows but Carvalio (sp?) is nothing special. How could yo really replace Lampard? Even in a squad that size I think Moriniho left him out once this season in league, FA cup and Champions league. There's no doubt that Gerrard's had a good season but is he the player everyone is building up?

Well, you've got Huth, Gallas and Carvalho, who aren't exactly bad.

I would say Gerrard is more versatile (having played across the whole of midfield and even right back), but Lampard gets far more goals. But depending on the system Jose wants to play you could put Makelele and Essien (think of the broken legs) in the middle and wingers out wide.


Awww bugger, the Ronaldinho advert of him as a kid is on tv. How the hell can he do that?

World Soccer -- Ronaldinho
La Liga -- Ronaldinho
English Premier League -- Steven Gerrard
Serie A -- Luca Toni
Bundesliga -- Michael Ballack

NFL -- good question... probably Peyton Manning

NBA -- Kobe Bryant (best player in the world)

PGA -- Phil Mickelson (right now)

NHL -- Jaromir Jagr

MLB -- we'll see... probably Alex Rodriguez (AL) and Albert Pujols (NL)

Well, you've got Huth, Gallas and Carvalho, who aren't exactly bad.

I would say Gerrard is more versatile (having played across the whole of midfield and even right back), but Lampard gets far more goals. But depending on the system Jose wants to play you could put Makelele and Essien (think of the broken legs) in the middle and wingers out wide.


Awww bugger, the Ronaldinho advert of him as a kid is on tv. How the hell can he do that?

Lampard might be a slightly better scorer, as he's good at following up the attack to convert back-passes or knock in the rebound...

but imo, in terms of being the total central midfielder -- great passing, dangerous shot from distance, ability to beat a man with the dribble -- Gerrard is tops in the Prem.

but... crap, Wayne Rooney and C. Ronaldo are going to rule that league for the next decade if they stick around... Rooney might already be the best player in England.

Serie A -- Luca Toni

Luca Toni? Really?

What about Totti?

PGA -- Phil Mickelson (right now)



Probably the best player right now, true, but MVP? For whom?

Refused Party Program is undeniably the most valuable player ever in the sport of Refused Party Programming.

Well, my $.02 on this one would be...

American sports.

Football: Shaun Alexander. No question

Baseball: So far this season, I'm favoring David Ortiz.

Basketball: Ben Wallace

Luca Toni? Really?

What about Totti?

he's the best goal-scorer in Serie A, with all respect to Super Pippo, Sheva, Gilardino, Adriano, Trezegol, etc.

On top of being the best (or clearly top-three), he's also what drove Palermo last year and is the main reason Fiorentina will likely be in the Champions League.

If the Azzurri decide to continue attacking (PLEASE don't go to catenaccio with a 1-0 lead, Italy!), Toni stands to score a lot of goals at the world cup. They put 4 on Germany and 3 on Holland fairly recently. If they attack, they'll be hard to beat. Why did they ever rely on that bubble defense, with 11 guys playing defense?

Totti is the best player in Serie A -- passing touch of Gerrard, doggedness of Rooney (goes hard to win the ball), scoring ability of Lampard -- but the injury has kept him out of a lot of games.

Probably the best player right now, true, but MVP? For whom?

hehe

Most Outstanding Golfer then (at least until Tiger stops three-putting on par-5 holes).

Cech can definitely be replaced by Cudichini. Terry? I'm not so sure, Gallas is a capable defender when he's not throwing his elbows but Carvalio (sp?) is nothing special. How could yo really replace Lampard? Even in a squad that size I think Moriniho left him out once this season in league, FA cup and Champions league. There's no doubt that Gerrard's had a good season but is he the player everyone is building up?
Clearly the PFA do because he's PFA Player of the year but I'm still not sure.
Lampard's had an average season at best, not just by his standards, but by the standards people expect of him. He's scored 15 in the league, yes, which I won't deny is good for his position, but he hasn't actually played that well, considering how we know he can play.

Well, my $.02 on this one would be...

Football: Shaun Alexander. No question

One of your points is invalid because that's downright questionable. After his performance in the Super Bowl and everything...

but... crap, Wayne Rooney and C. Ronaldo are going to rule that league for the next decade if they stick around... Rooney might already be the best player in England.
Nope. Henry and Fabregas will. Am I the only one who thinks C Ronaldo isn't all that? Yeah, fine, he's got his little pedaladas but too many times his final ball into the box isn't up to scratch. FA Cup semi-final 2004, he was virtually anonymous when up against Gael Clichy. Rooney is perhaps the best English player in England, but I don't think he's as good as Henry, even putting my Arsenal bias aside. Give it three or four years, he'll be in the top 3 in the world, but he isn't yet.

Now...I'm off to watch the Villarreal-Arsenal game.

One of your points is invalid because that's downright questionable. After his performance in the Super Bowl and everything...

His performance in the superbowl was better than Peyton Manning's...;)

His performance in the superbowl was better than Peyton Manning's...;)

Ashlee Simpson's performance at the orange bowl was equal to Peyton's performance during the playoffs.

The Peyton family is doomed to never win a superbowl.

here's Luca Toni huffing and puffing in the massacre of Germany

http://www.splashblog.com/lucatoni/?albumid=All&navigation=1&preview=270994

he's the best goal-scorer in Serie A, with all respect to Super Pippo, Sheva, Gilardino, Adriano, Trezegol, etc.

On top of being the best (or clearly top-three), he's also what drove Palermo last year and is the main reason Fiorentina will likely be in the Champions League.

If the Azzurri decide to continue attacking (PLEASE don't go to catenaccio with a 1-0 lead, Italy!), Toni stands to score a lot of goals at the world cup. They put 4 on Germany and 3 on Holland fairly recently. If they attack, they'll be hard to beat. Why did they ever rely on that bubble defense, with 11 guys playing defense?

Totti is the best player in Serie A -- passing touch of Gerrard, doggedness of Rooney (goes hard to win the ball), scoring ability of Lampard -- but the injury has kept him out of a lot of games.

Ah fair point about the injury.

I have to say Toni is one of my favourite strikers. He's a very English striker in many ways. Two good feet and can head the ball excellently.

Well, I don't know what sports the 'Colts' and the 'Cards' play. I'm fairly sure the Lakers are basketball. Chelsea's football, by the way. Soccer, sorry. It's only obscure to you because you're taking a US-centric view, much as I take a UK-centric view of sport. I don't imagine you have much of a clue who Andrew Flintoff is.

Ignorant foreigner!

Nope. Henry and Fabregas will. Am I the only one who thinks C Ronaldo isn't all that? Yeah, fine, he's got his little pedaladas but too many times his final ball into the box isn't up to scratch. FA Cup semi-final 2004, he was virtually anonymous when up against Gael Clichy. Rooney is perhaps the best English player in England, but I don't think he's as good as Henry, even putting my Arsenal bias aside. Give it three or four years, he'll be in the top 3 in the world, but he isn't yet.

Now...I'm off to watch the Villarreal-Arsenal game.

Fabregas is good... Henry isn't a spring chicken.

I'm talking about young players here, darn it! hehe

Now...I'm off to watch the Villarreal-Arsenal game.

TV card in my computer is great. NS and footie at the same time!

Fabregas is good... Henry isn't a spring chicken.

I'm talking about young players here, darn it! hehe

Van Persie then.

Fabregas is good... Henry isn't a spring chicken.

I'm talking about young players here, darn it! hehe

In that case hows about Aaron Lennon. He will be mint, and Walcott could be legendary.

Van Persie then.

if he can stay out of prison. hehe

I like Ronaldo's pace... he's perfectly suited to the English game --- run, run, run, cross.

if he can stay out of prison. hehe


Oooh. Snap!

if he can stay out of prison. hehe

I like Ronaldo's pace... he's perfectly suited to the English game --- run, run, run, cross.

Yeah, but he often leaves it too late rather than delivering a first time cross, if he did that, he could take Beckhams mantle.

'Dinho at Barca is irrefutably a contender, however two have, as far as I read, been omitted:

- Gerrard for the Scouse scum

- Henry for Arsenal.

Oh, and for Rugby Union:

- O'Driscoll for Ireland.

if he can stay out of prison. hehe

I like Ronaldo's pace... he's perfectly suited to the English game --- run, run, run, cross.

No. It's more as follows: Run, run, run, stepover, flick, shot wide high and swerving towards the bad end of Buckinghamshire.

No. It's more as follows: Run, run, run, stepover, flick, shot wide high and swerving towards the bad end of Buckinghamshire.
He's been getting better recently. Part of the problem I think is that he plays more of an "in the hole" role for Portugal, (and might be better in that position) hence looking to cut inside and beat players too much.

He's got all the skills required, just needs to improve decision making, and he's still only about 20, so some good coaching and more experience and he could be consistently great.

No. It's more as follows: Run, run, run, stepover, flick, shot wide high and swerving towards the bad end of Buckinghamshire.

yeah, but he's not the only one who misses by miles... one of the things that surprised me about soccer when i first got into it... was how badly most shots miss the target.

I suppose it's easier said than done to put a 20-yarder on goal, but they're the pros, aren't they?

I'm so lost in this thread right now.

I say give the MVP to Kemo VonOlhoffen for the assassination of Carson Palmer. :p

Hey it's another one! (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v723/Luporum/Goals.jpg)

edit: ^ link

yeah, but he's not the only one who misses by miles... one of the things that surprised me about soccer when i first got into it... was how badly most shots miss the target.

I suppose it's easier said than done to put a 20-yarder on goal, but they're the pros, aren't they?
Yes, but some of them aren't exactly picked for their shooting ability.:rolleyes:

yeah, but he's not the only one who misses by miles... one of the things that surprised me about soccer when i first got into it... was how badly most shots miss the target.

I suppose it's easier said than done to put a 20-yarder on goal, but they're the pros, aren't they?

Remember that they are not just aiming for the goal. That would be like a quarterback just aiming for the end zone. Easy and pointless. They are aiming for a small part of the goal, preferably with swerve and power. Now to get controllable swerve you have to step down the power somewhat, so trying to shoot with power tends to result in uncontrolled swerve. Hence the ball misses the target a lot.

David Ortiz for the Red Sox. Big Papi!

http://images.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/_photos/2003-10-05-inside-ortiz.jpg

http://images.sportsnetwork.com/baseball/mlb/allsport/boston/ortiz_david10a.jpg

I think I'll change my nomination for MVP...

...to Jens Lehmann. Arsenal's goalkeeper. :D

I think I'll change my nomination for MVP...

...to Jens Lehmann. Arsenal's goalkeeper. :D

Today only - Granted.

Well done to the gunners, even if the match was rather uninspiring.

I think I'll change my nomination for MVP...

...to Jens Lehmann. Arsenal's goalkeeper. :D

IT'S JUST NOT BLOODY FAIR!!!!!!!

I mean, for fucks sake, you're fifth in the league, we're a resolute second. Not to sound bitter or anything, but how on earth does Wenger do it? Other than a five man midfield of course.

(Am I being a bitter Manc?)

Oh, and on the sporting notion; I'm sure we all hope good old uncle Malcolm a swift recovery.....:rolleyes:

yeah, but he's not the only one who misses by miles... one of the things that surprised me about soccer when i first got into it... was how badly most shots miss the target.

I suppose it's easier said than done to put a 20-yarder on goal, but they're the pros, aren't they?

To be honest, I can hit the target 99 times out of 100 from any range up to 30 yards, however to make the shot worthwhile from range it necessitates immense power and spin, both of which tend to reduce the accuracy of the shot.

IT'S JUST NOT BLOODY FAIR!!!!!!!

I mean, for fucks sake, you're fifth in the league, we're a resolute second. Not to sound bitter or anything, but how on earth does Wenger do it? Other than a five man midfield of course.

(Am I being a bitter Manc?)

Oh, and on the sporting notion; I'm sure we all hope good old uncle Malcolm a swift recovery.....:rolleyes:


it's okay if you're a ManU fan

Arsenal have never won anything in Europe, and they're now on the cusp...

which will make it SO PAINFUL when they lose to Barca or Milan.

hehe

it's okay if you're a ManU fan

Arsenal have never won anything in Europe, and they're now on the cusp...

which will make it SO PAINFUL when they lose to Barca or Milan.

hehe

I just can't wait...:)

...1-1, going to PKs... Henry blowing his shot over the bar a la Baggio '94.

hehe

I for one, would like to see Arsenal succeed. This would then commit them to playing in the CL from the first qualifying round I believe (unless they catch Spurs). Let us see how they cope with that next year.

However I really do not see them beating either Barca or Milan on the basis of tonight's performance. (It was only the absence of Adams in the centre of the defence that convinced me it was not the Arsenal of old.)

I for one, would like to see Arsenal succeed. This would then commit them to playing in the CL from the first qualifying round I believe (unless they catch Spurs). Let us see how they cope with that next year.

However I really do not see them beating either Barca or Milan on the basis of tonight's performance. (It was only the absence of Adams in the centre of the defence that convinced me it was not the Arsenal of old.)

they looked like Juve tonight... happy to play a goalless draw.

I for one, would like to see Arsenal succeed. This would then commit them to playing in the CL from the first qualifying round I believe (unless they catch Spurs). Let us see how they cope with that next year.

However I really do not see them beating either Barca or Milan on the basis of tonight's performance. (It was only the absence of Adams in the centre of the defence that convinced me it was not the Arsenal of old.)

I do wonder as to whether Arsenal's strategy tonight was one of pragmatism, given that El Madrigal remains unconquered in the Chamions League. A Barcelona Arsenal final has the potential to be an epic affair, however this is not to assert that it will be.

it's okay if you're a ManU fan

Arsenal have never won anything in Europe, and they're now on the cusp...

which will make it SO PAINFUL when they lose to Barca or Milan.

hehe
Actually...we won the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup (predecessor of the UEFA Cup) in 1970, and the Cup Winners' Cup in 1994. And I'll be honest, I'm expecting Arsenal to lose the final.

I for one, would like to see Arsenal succeed. This would then commit them to playing in the CL from the first qualifying round I believe (unless they catch Spurs). Let us see how they cope with that next year.

However I really do not see them beating either Barca or Milan on the basis of tonight's performance. (It was only the absence of Adams in the centre of the defence that convinced me it was not the Arsenal of old.)
Actually the rules change means we'd go straight to the group stage. Fairly sure of that, anyway. Liverpool seemed to cope ok.

I think tonight's performance was a one-off. We'll play better than that in the final. I'm not sure who I'd prefer Arsenal to be up against - Barca clearly have the better attack, but they can be dodgy in defence, whereas Milan are solid at the back and very good up front. However (I've said this before), Henry against Maldini isn't even a competition, even if Henry gave away a ten yard lead.

Edit: This is from wiki, so not necessarily 100% reliable, but:
An additional place in the group stage is reserved for the title-holders, in case they don't qualify via their domestic league.

Well, I don't know what sports the 'Colts' and the 'Cards' play. I'm fairly sure the Lakers are basketball. Chelsea's football, by the way. Soccer, sorry. It's only obscure to you because you're taking a US-centric view, much as I take a UK-centric view of sport. I don't imagine you have much of a clue who Andrew Flintoff is.
*applauds*
All praise The Flintoff!

David Wright on the Mets (baseball). Because I can't respect a guy whose name sounds like poo holes(albert pujols).

David Wright on the Mets (baseball). Because I can't respect a guy whose name sounds like poo holes(albert pujols).
Are you serious?! You can't respect one of the greatest power players in recent history who doesn't take steroids because of his NAME?!! I can't respect people who can make fun of great people's names (and I'm a Twins fan, so this isn't even the worst you would get). Personally, if the Twins do well, I would vote for Justin Morneau.

Are you serious?! You can't respect one of the greatest power players in recent history who doesn't take steroids because of his NAME?!! I can't respect people who can make fun of great people's names (and I'm a Twins fan, so this isn't even the worst you would get). Personally, if the Twins do well, I would vote for Justin Morneau.

lol, I was joking. I was just tying to come up with any justification not to pick Pujols. And he does have a funny name.

Oh, and good luck in the AL central. Or the AL in general.

Go Twins!!!!

NFL... the entire New england Patriots team cuz there awsome.
despite the loss of adam vinatri they will still be awsome

(im a new england partriots fan if that isnt obvious)

Out of the four sports you took your MVPs from, I only follow one (football), so I wouldn't be able to judge.

Personally, I'd go with Stevie Gerrard. Liverpool would probably be battling for 4th with Spurs and Arsenal if it weren't for him, and they certainly wouldn't have won the CL last year. He is by far and away the best player Liverpool have, and he frequently carries the whole team.

Edit: Ah, crap. A case could be made for Andrew Flintoff (cricket) as well. England would be nowhere near as good without him. Not only is he supremely talented (I'd say more so than any other cricketer playing right now), but he has such a massive influence on his team mates as well.

Undoubtedly agree with the first, he took that final by the scruff of the neck and made it his own. Although this season he's been somewhat overshadowed by Alonso, imho.

The all time classic was Keane, of course. There's an argument to be made that for a couple of seasons the only thing that kept Man U in contention was
(a) the memory of being champions before and
(b) Keane

Much as it pains to admit it, hating the scum and all who have played for them as i do, he was in his day an immense player.

On a similar note, see Matt Le Tissier, who almost singlehandedly kept Southampton in the top division for 10 years.

re: Shawn Alexander

One of your points is invalid because that's downright questionable. After his performance in the Super Bowl and everything...

That only increases my belief that he should be the MVP. Seattle abandoned the run, and threw the ball the whole game. Alexander only got what, 10 touches? So Seattle got beat. If he gets 25-30 carries, Seattle wins easily. The thing about MVP's- if they don't play, you lose. He didn't, so Seattle lost. Seattle tried to outthink the Steelers by NOT giving him the ball and it backfired on them. Would the dynasty era Bulls have benched Jordan to "outthink" the opposition? I think not. Jagr is hurt, and look at what is happening to that playoff team- outscored 10-2 through 2 games?! Pathetic. That's why Jagr is my choice for NHL MVP- without him his team blows.

Undoubtedly agree with the first, he took that final by the scruff of the neck and made it his own. Although this season he's been somewhat overshadowed by Alonso, imho.

The all time classic was Keane, of course. There's an argument to be made that for a couple of seasons the only thing that kept Man U in contention was
(a) the memory of being champions before and
(b) Keane

Much as it pains to admit it, hating the scum and all who have played for them as i do, he was in his day an immense player.

On a similar note, see Matt Le Tissier, who almost singlehandedly kept Southampton in the top division for 10 years.

Oh God, you're not a City fan are you? Or,even worse, a scouser?