MVP debate rages on

PFW staff offers its choices for NFL’s most valuable

Thursday, Jan. 10, 2002

Ron Pollack, Editor-in-chief

To me the vote comes down to one team — the Rams. They are the best team in football with the two players who had the best seasons in the league. Trying to pick between Rams QB Kurt Warner and Rams RB Marshall Faulk really requires one to split very thin hairs. In my opinion, Warner and Faulk were both extremely dominant. I'll give Warner the edge because statistically he was more dominant at his position than Faulk was at his and the fact that an injury to Warner would harm the Rams more than would an injury to Faulk. The latter point does not mean I think Warner is a superior player to Faulk. Again, it's a coin flip. Warner is more indispensable because the Rams would be doomed if he got hurt, whereas they have Trung Canidate to fill in when Faulk is injured. I didn't pick Kordell Stewart because, as incredibly improved as he's been, the Steelers are a running team so I can't see making their quarterback MVP. Plus, the Steelers’ percentage of touchdowns inside the red zone was terrible during the regular season, which has to reflect on the quarterback. I think Stewart had a fabulous season, just not an MVP season. As much as I am impressed by Brett Favre's season, I didn't pick him for MVP because his passer rating is more than seven points below Warner’s and the fact that Warner plays for a No. 1 seed, while Favre's team did not earn either a bye or a division title. If the Packers had won the NFC Central title and a first-round bye, Favre would have received even more consideration from me for MVP. The Raiders’ late-season woes knocked Rich Gannon out of MVP consideration. I couldn’t go with defensive stars like Michael Strahan or Brian Urlacher because I think it is very difficult for a defensive player to have as much of an impact as a superstar quarterback or running back.

Dan Arkush, Executive editor

With apologies to Rams QB Kurt Warner, I have to give the nod to his teammate Marshall Faulk. Faulk is the glue that keeps one of the league’s all-time great offenses together. While both players’ numbers are absolutely outstanding, I believe Warner, who tied for the league lead in throwing the most interceptions, is more mistake-prone than Faulk, whose turnovers are few and far between. Whether he's lining up as a running back or as a wide receiver (you never know) in Mike Martz's multiple formations, Faulk is always a threat to go all the way. In addition to scoring a league-leading 21 touchdowns and becoming the first player in league history to gain 2,000 yards from the line of scrimmage four consecutive seasons, he provides tremendous leadership both on and off the field and sets a marvelous example with his strong work ethic and attention to detail.

Jeff Agrest, Senior editor

It's difficult to choose between QB Kurt Warner and RB Marshall Faulk of the Rams. So in a sense, I avoided the decision. Besides, both make the other a better player. Could the Rams survive without one or the other? They'd get by. But the Packers would be up a creek without QB Brett Favre. Not that Warner is solely reliant on Faulk or the other way around, but to argue that one is more valuable than the other is silly, especially when Favre is more valuable to the Packers than either Warner or Faulk is to the Rams. All season, Favre has made good receivers great. Warner already has great receivers. Favre has had to do what he's done with less. His toughness, competitiveness, leadership and overall ability are outstanding, and he alone puts the Packers in position to win every game.

Ken Bikoff, Associate editor

Rams RB Marshall Faulk is my guy because you have to look at all he brings to the table. He was the leading rusher and receiver for a St. Louis Rams team that boasts some of the best wideouts in the business. Faulk draws so much attention from opponents that he really opens up the field for his teammates to operate, and his versatility and ability to run in the open field make him a weapon few teams can match. A strong case can be made for Kurt Warner, but I think Faulk is really the linchpin of St. Louis' offense.

Andy Hanacek, Associate editor

Despite opinions highly to the contrary from some of my colleagues, I believe the league’s Most Valuable Player is Steelers QB Kordell Stewart. Stewart may not have the numbers that a Kurt Warner, Marshall Faulk or Brett Favre have, but I believe of those three, Favre is the only player who is close to Stewart in VALUE to his team. Without Stewart, the Steelers would not be a popular pick to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl. Stewart's improvement has been the key cog in Pittsburgh’s playoff run, and that is why he's the league's most valuable player.

Jeff Reynolds, Associate editor

My vote for NFL MVP goes to Rams QB Kurt Warner — by a length over thoroughbred RB Marshall Faulk. While he might not be the best player on his own team, Warner was the most valuable. With Faulk out of the lineup, the Rams were able to turn to second-year RB Trung Canidate, and the offense didn't skip a beat. Playing through a thumb injury and spells of turnovers, Warner kept the Rams moving forward. He threw for the second-best single-season yardage total in NFL history (4,830), behind only Dan Marino's 5,084-yard season in 1984. And despite turning the ball over 22 times via interceptions, Warner emerged as the league's highest-rated passer (101.4), tossed 36 touchdowns and threw for 280 yards or better in 12 games. While the team actually voted Faulk its MVP for the third consecutive year, it is Warner whom this offense couldn't live without.

The identity of the NFL Most Valuable Player, as selected by the staff and writers of Pro Football Weekly and the members of the Professional Football Writers of America, will be announced in Issue 29 of PFW, which goes to press Jan. 21.

The Archives
2001 - 2002 Season