Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

Well of course they have a better chance of making the SB than the Clippers, the Clippers are an NBA team. :D

Joke aside, don't sleep on the Clippers. If they can get their act together with Griffin, Paul, and Butler, they can make some noise in the playoffs.

How about we just say they have a better chance of making the SB than the Colts of this previous season.


You didn't really have to spell that out in your mind? Did you?

This team blows because we have had sorry a$$ QBs that can't score.
Ehhhh, I'd have to say it's been a little bit more than that.

Poor o-line play has been a trademark of the Skins, whether it be due to lack of depth or lack of talent at the starting positions.

Since Bailey we haven't had a shutdown corner

Our pass-rush up until this season has been relatively weak.

Moss had about a year or two where he was a legitimate #1 WR, but for the most part we haven't had a #1 WR.

And lastly we haven't had any consistency, constant roster turnovers, and scheme changing is not likely to produce a winner.

But when you are losing 4 to 6 games by 7-8 pts. it is frustrating, because that is a small margin of victory. All people are saying here is that a healthy Manning with some additions (that would occur since we don't have to trade the farm to move up) would make this a winning team.
I actually agree that adding Manning could make us a contender, but not because we're that close, it's because we're talking about possibly the greatest QB of all time here. The implosion of the Colts this season, I would argue is evidence of this.

Furthermore, the current state of the NFCe despite the G-men winning the SB, isn't very strong. The Eagles "dream team" was nothing more than a dream, JJ thankfully ensures that the absorbent amount of talent DAL has will never be put to good use, and the Giants for whatever reason don't seem to match up well against the Shannahan coached Redskins.

Ehhhh, I'd have to say it's been a little bit more than that.


Yes I know. If you read back, my whole argument is that picking up Manning will leave us with a lot of draft ammo to improve this team. I have not said that we are close, but I feel that adding Manning, plus quality FA/rookies can make us a playoff team.

My whole point with the point differential is to show that we are not that bad. We need improvements, and all those improvements I've mentioned can make a huge different.

This team blows because we have had sorry a$$ QBs that can't score. But when you are losing 4 to 6 games by 7-8 pts. it is frustrating, because that is a small margin of victory. All people are saying here is that a healthy Manning with some additions (that would occur since we don't have to trade the farm to move up) would make this a winning team.

Yeah but that is today's NFL, no one is really getting blown out that often. So saying you lost by 7 or 8 doesn't hold water that you are on the verge of being a good team.

NFL Average Margin of Victory by Decade
Decade Avg MOV 1940s 15.24 1950s 13.67 1960s 13.39 1970s 12.37 1980s 11.67 1990s 11.41 2000s 11.80
Statistical tour de douche: history of the NFL elite | Cold Hard Football Facts (http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_3379_Statistical_tour_de_douche%3A_history_of_t he_NFL_elite.html\)

Come draft day I don't think it will take 4 picks to move up because they could just trade with Minnesota and force St. Louis's hand.
2012 1st
2012 3rd
2013 1st
Is what I think someone will eventually give up if it comes to that.

Ehhhh, I'd have to say it's been a little bit more than that.

Poor o-line play has been a trademark of the Skins, whether it be due to lack of depth or lack of talent at the starting positions.

Since Bailey we haven't had a shutdown corner

Our pass-rush up until this season has been relatively weak.

Moss had about a year or two where he was a legitimate #1 WR, but for the most part we haven't had a #1 WR.

And lastly we haven't had any consistency, constant roster turnovers, and scheme changing is not likely to produce a winner.


I actually agree that adding Manning could make us a contender, but not because we're that close, it's because we're talking about possibly the greatest QB of all time here. The implosion of the Colts this season, I would argue is evidence of this.

Furthermore, the current state of the NFCe despite the G-men winning the SB, isn't very strong. The Eagles "dream team" was nothing more than a dream, JJ thankfully ensures that the absorbent amount of talent DAL has will never be put to good use, and the Giants for whatever reason don't seem to match up well against the Shannahan coached Redskins.


Nice post. I enjoyed your reserved optimism.

Yeah but that is today's NFL, no one is really getting blown out that often. So saying you lost by 7 or 8 doesn't hold water that you are on the verge of being a good team.

Again, I'm not saying that we are on the verge of being a good team. The exact same team as last year, with Manning, is probably a 9-7 team, maybe a .500 team. I am saying that our team plus Manning, plus any additions we can make in the draft and free agency can make us a very good team.

You know when this whole argument of "we are not a QB away from winning" was true? When people here were willing to trade a good portion of our draft picks for Cutler. That would have been plain stupid. This is a risky move, but it allows the team to use draft picks and possibly free agency to get better.

Again, I'm not saying that we are on the verge of being a good team. The exact same team as last year, with Manning, is probably a 9-7 team, maybe a .500 team. I am saying that our team plus Manning, plus any additions we can make in the draft and free agency can make us a very good team.

You know when this whole argument of "we are not a QB away from winning" was true? When people here were willing to trade a good portion of our draft picks for Cutler. That would have been plain stupid. This is a risky move, but it allows the team to use draft picks and possibly free agency to get better.

What? If we had Manning on our team last year we would have played every down with 10 men. How could we have had a better record?

What? If we had Manning on our team last year we would have played every down with 10 men. How could we have had a better record?

I meant Manning with last year's roster, with no additions and whatnot. Better?

Again, I'm not saying that we are on the verge of being a good team. The exact same team as last year, with Manning, is probably a 9-7 team, maybe a .500 team. I am saying that our team plus Manning, plus any additions we can make in the draft and free agency can make us a very good team.

You know when this whole argument of "we are not a QB away from winning" was true? When people here were willing to trade a good portion of our draft picks for Cutler. That would have been plain stupid. This is a risky move, but it allows the team to use draft picks and possibly free agency to get better.That was also incredibly stupid because Cutler was very overvalued in the spring of 2009. He still has been unable to replicate (or get close to) his 2008 season.

Yet, there would still be defenders of that hypothetical deal that would point out that Cutler would be the best QB on our roster today. That is true, but more because of the systematic mismanagement of the roster against not having better options available.

Even before Shanahan, Zorn made a number of questionable decisions come August that always seemed to leave the Redskins lacking in depth. I mean, Vinny signed Jeremy Bridges, Zorn cut him. That was less than 3 months after cutting Jansen as well. A bunch of people were surprised at the time that they kept D'Anthony Batiste, who didn't last the season. What I'm saying is: this is a problem that would appear to be bigger than the quarterback, and bigger than the head coach. Everyone complains about not having depth -- and how that is responsible for sub-.500 performance -- but is anyone really doing anything about it?