I should've stopped reading here.
i) First of all, I'm not the type of person who "shoehorns' any particular position into being the standard in which MVPs are valued by. Don't accuse me of doing such if you don't know my reasoning.
That's what it looks like when you say someone that has played 50% of the games to be the favorite so far.
ii) While yes they did go 3-1 without him, they never really looked in complete control (apart from the Texans' game) during any of those matchups and the offense never really was at the forefront during that stretch without him. Never mind the fact that Arizona missed a makeable FG that would've had them winning in the season opener. That all changed when Brady returned.
Cardinals were a tough opponent and they were expected to lose: they won.
They were dominating the Dolphins before Jimmy got hurt, at which point they weren't able to move the ball anymore and lost momentum. They were definitely in control of the game before they had to go to their third string QB.
iii) Their team record prior to his return only is part of the MVP equation - it doesn't fall completely on that - certainly not when you see the level Brady's been playing at.
Should certainly factor a lot into the equation considering you expect a steep drop-off without the MVP, not a team that only struggled once they had to resort to their third string QB.
iv) I don't think it's clear cut who the MVP is at this stage, I just simply give the nod to Brady because in the games he's played in, he's been BY FAR the most dominant player in football (honorable mention goes to Donald); arguably looked better than he ever has and is pretty much re-writing the record books for just about every single QB-stat imaginable.
As I said the level of competition so far has been hardly anything to marvel at. If he continues the historic play against the Seahawks then his case gets stronger.