Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

Personally, I would settle for either. Either way is an upgrade on Rex v Beck.

Its a wrap folks. PFT says the fans of Washington don't want P.Manning.
There’s a lot anti-Manning sentiment in Washington | ProFootballTalk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/11/theres-a-lot-anti-manning-sentiment-in-washington/)

However some of you say we shouldn't listen to PFT with their hack writers. How funny he fails to list the commontators who are for having P.Manning here in Washington. Well the good news is PFT is only speaking for Washington, the very not bright people who would re-elect Mayor Berry after his "I accidently smoked from the crack pipe" incident. I'm so glad he didn't talk about the hooker he had bring it to his motel.

Maybe the writer should see what VA and MD thinks about P.Manning coming to the Skins.

I have to say this thread has turned into the best discussion we've had on this board for quite a while. Lots of good points being tossed around.

I just think the merits of either move should be measured not just on the likelihood that we'll win a superbowl, but also (and perhaps moreso) on the likelihood that we'll set our team back YEARS if we miss.

With Manning, all he costs is cap room. So if he sucks (yeah, right) or isn't right due to injury (possibly), you take a one-year dead cap hit - which won't be that bad given his stated intention to make a palatable deal. Otherwise, it's no harm no foul. You move on to finding your next QB - but by then the team will have the 6th overall pick this year, plus depth from other picks. The cap room Manning takes up comes with an opportunity cost, it represents players we can't sign in free agency. But that assumes our cap may approach the limit, which doesn't make sense given that we're currently something like $35 - $45 million UNDER the cap. And if we're thinking of shopping so much that we might approach that limit with Manning this year, then we're back to taking the wrong approach to free agency - the Cerrato approach. We're not going to do that.

With Griffin, you give up several picks. If he doesn't pan out you've lost significant young depth due to the lost picks. That's depth this team still needs bad. Missing out on that depth completely stalls this team's development in my mind. The lower cap number Griffin represents really isn't a factor either - as stated, we're so far under the cap it almost doesn't matter.

What people are failing to realize here is that with Manning, you KNOW you still need to find the QB of the future. With Griffin, it sure wouldn't make sense to shop for another QB until you realize he's a failure. By the time Griffin reaches failure status, you're scrambling. Manning gives you the benefit of taking your time over the course of three years to find his successor. You're not stuck reaching for someone.

So those arguments all center around the downside risk which is key to the discussion. As for the upside, if you don't think Peyton Manning gives you the upside to make deep playoff runs over the next three years, I can't help you. You're a lost soul.

I have to say this thread has turned into the best discussion we've had on this board for quite a while. Lots of good points being tossed around.

I just think the merits of either move should be measured not just on the likelihood that we'll win a superbowl, but also (and perhaps moreso) on the likelihood that we'll set our team back YEARS if we miss.

With Manning, all he costs is cap room. So if he sucks (yeah, right) or isn't right due to injury (possibly), you take a one-year dead cap hit - which won't be that bad given his stated intention to make a palatable deal. Otherwise, it's no harm no foul. You move on to finding your next QB - but by then the team will have the 6th overall pick this year, plus depth from other picks. The cap room Manning takes up comes with an opportunity cost, it represents players we can't sign in free agency. But that assumes our cap may approach the limit, which doesn't make sense given that we're currently something like $35 - $45 million UNDER the cap. And if we're thinking of shopping so much that we might approach that limit with Manning this year, then we're back to taking the wrong approach to free agency - the Cerrato approach. We're not going to do that.

With Griffin, you give up several picks. If he doesn't pan out you've lost significant young depth due to the lost picks. That's depth this team still needs bad. Missing out on that depth completely stalls this team's development in my mind. The lower cap number Griffin represents really isn't a factor either - as stated, we're so far under the cap it almost doesn't matter.

What people are failing to realize here is that with Manning, you KNOW you still need to find the QB of the future. With Griffin, it sure wouldn't make sense to shop for another QB until you realize he's a failure. By the time Griffin reaches failure status, you're scrambling. Manning gives you the benefit of taking your time over the course of three years to find his successor. You're not stuck reaching for someone.

So those arguments all center around the downside risk which is key to the discussion. As for the upside, if you don't think Peyton Manning gives you the upside to make deep playoff runs over the next three years, I can't help you. You're a lost soul.

I agree, great post. Manning would instantly make us a good team and a contender as long as we give him some help at WR which we can do. I'm all for RG3. But not if it's between him and Manning

You playing the race card bro?


http://www.frigginrandom.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/race-card-535x433.jpg

I would usually make this a teachable moment and explain to you why the above post is a tad out of line. However, based on immense number of your posts that I have been forced to endure (the one apparent negative of logging on to this site which, aside from you, I greatly enjoy)....I'll just chalk you up into the ignorant category and move on.

Its a wrap folks. PFT says the fans of Washington don't want P.Manning.
There’s a lot anti-Manning sentiment in Washington | ProFootballTalk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/11/theres-a-lot-anti-manning-sentiment-in-washington/)

However some of you say we shouldn't listen to PFT with their hack writers. How funny he fails to list the commontators who are for having P.Manning here in Washington. Well the good news is PFT is only speaking for Washington, the very not bright people who would re-elect Mayor Berry after his "I accidently smoked from the crack pipe" incident. I'm so glad he didn't talk about the hooker he had bring it to his motel.

Maybe the writer should see what VA and MD thinks about P.Manning coming to the Skins.

All of the writers quoted in the PFT article speak from a flawed either/or perspective. Their argument is that we should be developing our own QB rather than signing Manning as if only one of those moves is an option.

It seems clear to me that we could do both: add Manning AND add a home-developed QB for the future. If I am correct then all of the arguments quoted by PFT are meaningless.

C'mon guy? Insults? Dude, most of my posts come at work. Yes, I get paid to post on the Warpath and it comes compliments of the taxpayers. Does that make you mad bro? :cool-smil

I think that would upset any honest working taxpayer. Your pride in that post speaks volumes about your character...or lack ther of. Taking my current tax bracket into consideration, I don't expect to hear anything from you except...thank you.

How about we just not interact with each other while you continue to be a drain on the US Government's wallet.

I think that would upset any honest working taxpayer. Your pride in that post speaks volumes about your character...or lack ther of. Taking my current tax bracket into consideration, I don't expect to hear anything from you except...thank you.

How about we just not interact with each other while you continue to be a drain on the US Government's wallet.


Kid, I have no clue who who you are nor do I give a flying ****. I haven't said the first thing to you so if you have your panties in a bunch it's your problem. I you don't like me, put me on ignore and go about your way. If you are going to insult people (much like you did with me and others) and not bring anything else to the table, then I suggest you go over to Extremeskins where you'll be much more suited.

I'm here to talk football and other things. We don't often agree around here, but there is a line of respect we try to maintain. I've apologized a few times when I've been out of line, but I recognize that and correct it. You on the other hand are bitter about something so that's on you.

I find it funny you talk about "character" and yet you sit behind a computer insulting people you have zero clue about. What does that say about your character...or lack there of? I do my work, and my boss doesn't have to ask me twice to do anything. I get incredible reviews on my job. I am the utmost professional at my job. I said that to piss you off and it hit the mark, and for that, I'm glad.

If you got anything else to add (or not add in this case), then send it via PMs. You are detracting away from the discussion going on. Have a nice day.

Its a wrap folks. PFT says the fans of Washington don't want P.Manning.
There’s a lot anti-Manning sentiment in Washington | ProFootballTalk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/11/theres-a-lot-anti-manning-sentiment-in-washington/)

However some of you say we shouldn't listen to PFT with their hack writers. How funny he fails to list the commontators who are for having P.Manning here in Washington. Well the good news is PFT is only speaking for Washington, the very not bright people who would re-elect Mayor Berry after his "I accidently smoked from the crack pipe" incident. I'm so glad he didn't talk about the hooker he had bring it to his motel.

Maybe the writer should see what VA and MD thinks about P.Manning coming to the Skins.

The first thing PFT got wrong is they listened to Jason Reid.

Unlike Indy if we get PM we will be grooming a younger QB behind him.