Its inconceivable Andy wont win the SPOTY. If he doesn't win it they should just close it down because it will lack any credibility. Mo Farah is a great distance runner but Britan have had plenty of great distance runners over the decades. Thing that makes me laugh is when they mention the great British sporting summer they mention the British Lions beating Australia, winning the Ashes etc in the same breath as Andy winning Wimbledon as though they are on an equal footing. Winning the Ashes involves beating 1 team. Australia! In all honesty Andy should have got it last year since he was the first Brit in 300 attempts to win a Slam. People go on about how long it is since England won the World Cup but there have only been about 12 world cups since England won it, not the 300 Grand Slams since a Brit won a Slam
Many, including Lord Co, are touting Mo as Britain's greatest ever distance runner, so he's definitely worthy of serious consideration. However, I definitely agree about wins for the Lions and especially the Ashes being over-egged. Everyone knew that the Australian cricket team wasn't particularly strong this year. The Ashes are a big historical event that the press likes to big up, but in sporting terms, it doesn't have much more value than Andy beating Tomic in Miami this year.
By comparison, every slam has 128 entrants, and except for a few wildcards, every one of them has earned their place the hard way, and even wildcards need to be justified. At this year's Wimbledon there were just five wildcards to the men's draw, and sixteen qualifiers, with the rest gaining entry based on ranking, ie the best tennis players over the previous 12 months. There are 128 men in the qualifying draw, which has its own entry system including direct entry, wildcards and other rounds of qualifying.
I know people like to talk about how draws open up, but the starting draw was made up of the very best, and except for a couple of walk-overs, everyone made it to the next round because they won their match.