Colts Officially Release Peyton Manning (QB Thread #11)

[Jontrem]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

cut that meat! Cut that meat!

Jerry! Jerry! You're my favorite Insurance Adjuster!

[Skinsfanatic]

1. At 4pm, sign Peyton Manning.
2. Trade for the #2 Pick and draft RGIII and let him learn from a master (he said he would be willing to sit behind Manning - of course he was talking about in Indy)
3. Use free agency to load up on help for Peyton. We have plenty of cap space.

We make a short term push with Peyton, and set up our future with RGIII. I think that, year one with Peyton, we win the NFC East.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

well same thing with signing manning

positives
+ he's one of the greatest QB's of all time
+ he's better than what we have now at QB

negatives
- he could be hit right in the neck and never play a down of football again or even be paralyzed.
- hes been in one offense his whole life
- hes had some great skill players around him in Indy
- he isn't mobile getting out of the pocket/he doesn't fit the mike shanahan zone blocking bootleg offense
- he is at the end of his career
- he wants $$$ and he knows we pay.
- we are out of the draft for a potential franchise QB like RG3

Guys it will be a blessing in disguise when Peyton doesn't sign here, trust me.

First of all, your first negative is not a valid point. On more than one occasion, a doctor has already came out to say that Peyton Manning has no more of a chance in getting a career ending injury as any of the other players on the field. The only issue was him getting his throwing strength back, and obviously that is coming back rather quickly.

Secondly, any team that picks Manning up is going to obviously have to tweak their offense to what Peyton Manning was doing in Indy. The Redskins offense is more of a vertical offense than what people think it is. Which brings me to my next point. How mobile was Rex Grossman? Not very. And he was able to run the offense (despite his charitable style of playing.) I don't put that much emphasis on being a mobile QB, but a quarterback than can scramble while still looking to complete a pass down field. Peyton can still do the latter, he doesn't have to be a Mike Vick. Next, I do seem to remember an article (and don't ask me where it is at this point) where it sounded as if Manning would be willing to work for an incentive based contract. We even had a decision about the pros and cons to that here a few months ago. Lastly, the Redskins or any other team SHOULD draft a developmental QB in waiting. So, even if that team only got two good seasons out of Manning, they would have a quarterback to step in and lead the team.

It really all comes down to how much it would cost to bring Manning in. If the emphasis is on an incentive based contract that works in the favor of both the team and the player, and the Redskins are still able to draft a Tannehill or Cousins (Cousins is probably more likely in this scenario) then I believe it costs us less. Certainly the Redskins would be able to keep their draft picks and continue building a solid team since they would have the luxury of an instant franchise QB. This is MUCH different from McNabb. McNabb was washed up by the time the 'skins picked him up. Manning does still have a few very good years left.

In my opinion, however, I think this might just be a ploy to show the Rams that the Redskins have options and will not settle on giving up such a high price for RGIII. I believe in the end, the Redskins still move up to draft RGIII, but don't give up as much to do so.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

1. Cardinals (Most likely:Indoor stadium, warm weather good for getting loose, L. Fitz, has a history of bringing in vet QB's like K. Warner, went 8-8 last year with pathetic QB play)
2. Dolphins (Likely: Owner wants a big name, has a good defense/WR's in place)
3. Seahawks (Maybe likely: Rumored to be willing to put a big package together)
4. Redskins (Possible: Maybe interested but still has equal interest in drafting RG3)
5. Chiefs (Less likely:Has a need at QB and some pieces to put around Manning)
6. Jets (Unlikely:Tough salary cap number, would overshadow 'lil bro, would have to cut Sanchez to sign Manning)

Interesting note by Rich Cimini that the Jets could save $9 million by cutting Sanchez this offseason (before March 28 I believe).

Anyhow, suppose he went to one of those other teams and suddenly Orton, Kolb, or Sanchez are on the market....who do you want?

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Interesting note by Rich Cimini that the Jets could save $9 million by cutting Sanchez this offseason (before March 28 I believe).

Anyhow, suppose he went to one of those other teams and suddenly Orton, Kolb, or Sanchez are on the market....who do you want?

none...that list is disgusting

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Interesting note by Rich Cimini that the Jets could save $9 million by cutting Sanchez this offseason (before March 28 I believe).

Anyhow, suppose he went to one of those other teams and suddenly Orton, Kolb, or Sanchez are on the market....who do you want?

Orton is serviceable as a short term starter or backup.

I think it's still way too early to toss in the towel on Kolb, I bet he would attract some attention if he hit the market.

Sanchez I'd want no part of.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

At first I asked why he would want to go to Arizona but after seeing that they finished with an 8-8 record with Kolb and Skelator as their QB's well safe to say the pitch writes itself. Then again every year is different.

Well Peyton could also be thinking Colts in the playoffs with me and 2/14 without. I can go to any team and win.

[Skinsfanatic]

No one wants Orton, Kolb, or Sanchez. It seems to me that our answer at QB HAS TO BE Manning, RGIII, Luck (if Colts were to take RGIII), or Tannehill. And actually, as I write this, I don't think Tannehill is an acceptable result.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Interesting note by Rich Cimini that the Jets could save $9 million by cutting Sanchez this offseason (before March 28 I believe).

Anyhow, suppose he went to one of those other teams and suddenly Orton, Kolb, or Sanchez are on the market....who do you want?

Orton...with either Griffin or Tannehill

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Orton is serviceable as a short term starter or backup.

I think it's still way too early to toss in the towel on Kolb, I bet he would attract some attention if he hit the market.

Sanchez I'd want no part of.

I'm tempted to flip the opinion of Sanchez and Kolb there

What if I throw in Schaub and Alex Smith?

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm tempted to flip the opinion of Sanchez and Kolb there

I agree I think Sanchez good be a best a Flacco level QB. I have probaly only watched a handful of games of him though and at times he does seem painfully behind where he should be as far as development.

[Skinsfanatic]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm tempted to flip the opinion of Sanchez and Kolb there

What if I throw in Schaub and Alex Smith?

No and No. Manning, RGIII, or Luck.

[skinsfaninok]

Sanchez=Grossman

Smith=JC

Schaub= Brad Johnson

Kolb= I don't even know????


So No I don't want any of those guys.

[musicmaster45]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm tempted to flip the opinion of Sanchez and Kolb there

What if I throw in Schaub and Alex Smith?

I would definatley take Schaub but according to Schefter's quote on rotoworld they wouldn't make a play for manning.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm tempted to flip the opinion of Sanchez and Kolb there

What if I throw in Schaub and Alex Smith?

Well, Schaub quietly has having a great season season before he got injuried. Smith is between the first group you listed and Schaub...not a bad game manager. You could argue Schaub over Manning I think.