Time again for annual NFL MVP debate

As the NFL regular season approaches its end, the usual rumblings and exclamations over who should be named the league's Most Valuable Player have begun in earnest. After Sunday's games, two players stand out: LaDainian Tomlinson, the record-breaking running back of the San Diego Chargers, and Drew Brees, he of the reconstructed shoulder and gaudy passing numbers as well as the savior of the New Orleans Saints and, more importantly, the New Orleans metropolitan area.

On the outside looking in after a bad loss is the venerable Peyton Manning, the Colts quarterback, future Hall-of-Famer and ever-present name on MVP ballots.

Both Tomlinson and Brees have seemingly singlehandedly led their teams to vital conference wins. Tomlinson scored three touchdowns last week against the Denver Broncos to bring his season total to 29, an NFL record. That's quite a feat, considering he has three games in which to extend it.

Brees shredded a solid Dallas defense for almost 400 yards and set a record of his own. He is the only player in NFL history to throw five touchdowns against the Cowboys at Dallas Stadium.

Both players have performed all season and therefore each has a strong claim to the title of league MVP. Most commentators and fans (based on an ESPN poll) see Tomlinson as the clear favorite and as more deserving of the award.

Touchdowns are more often than not the barometer for MVP-dom: last year's award-winner, running back Shaun Alexander of the Seattle Seahawks, broke the previous single-season touchdown record and took home the award.

This year, however, Alexander has been set back by injuries and the loss of his best offensive lineman to free agency. His production has dropped, and he is no longer considered one of the best players in the NFL.

His case raises an interesting question: who should win the MVP award? Should it go to the best player on the best team, as it is most commonly supposed, or should it go to the most valuable player, as the award's name indicates?

Few people would have said last year that Alexander was the best player on the best team in the NFL. Many would have preferred Tomlinson or Manning based on pure talent alone, and the 2005 Seahawks were very good, but not great. Moreover, it was certainly debatable as to who was the most valuable player for the Seahawks, let alone the most valuable player in the league. Alexander was merely an effective cog in a well-oiled and smartly-run offensive machine.

Football is a team sport, and a player's actual worth is enhanced immensely if there are talented players surrounding him: look at Joe Montana and Jerry Rice, Troy Aikman and Michael Irvin and Emmitt Smith, Manning and Marvin Harrison. Furthermore, schemes and strategy have a great say in player production — Brees plays in a pass-happy offense, so is it completely to his credit that he puts up big numbers? In other words, what comes first: the player or the scheme? Is it possible that the scheme and the strategies make the player? That a lesser player can become a great one because of his coach?

Look at another case: that of the Arizona Cardinals' Edgerrin James. James joined the Cardinals in the off-season from the Colts and was considered, along with rookie Matt Leinart, to be a savior for the moribund franchise. He was a Pro-Bowler with the Colts, a top-five running back in the league and, with only three more great seasons, a possible Hall-of-Famer. Now he rots in the desert. Arizona has a poor offensive line and its strategy is not built around James. "The Edge," as he was once called, is now a mediocre back, his Hall-of-Fame aspirations evaporated.

Since an individual's production is based so much on the talent of those around him, the MVP should follow its name literally — the most valuable player is the player a team cannot do without. The Chargers would still win games without Tomlinson, for they have an accurate, young quarterback, a great tight end, and an attacking defense.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

The Saints and Brees are more interesting. Without Brees, the Saints may very well still reside in the NFL doldrums. Unlike Tomlinson, Brees is surrounded by mediocre talent on both sides of the ball, with a few exceptions. With Brees, though, the team from New Orleans is a Super Bowl contender.

But what then of Manning, who is effectively the offensive mind of the Colts? Without him, the Colts might conceivably win fewer games than the Saints without Brees. So should Manning be the MVP? Consider him and Brees to be neck and neck, with Manning holding onto a slight lead, coming up to the yellow tape hanging over the finish line. Under normal circumstances, I would pick Manning to win. But this year, I have to go with the sentimental favorite, the underdog, the player with the rebuilt shoulder who has helped emotionally rebuild New Orleans. Drew Brees for MVP.