Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

[REDSKINS4ever]

Originally Posted by Lotus

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.

What would the specifics be? Sign Peyton Manning in free agency and draft Ryan Tannehill or Nick Foles in the 2nd round of the draft and develop whichever one we pick? This way, the Redskins keep their picks instead of trading up for RG3.

The other option would be to let Peyton Manning be, sign a veteran free agent QB to take over for Grossman or even keep Rex, and then use whatever ammunition we have to trade up and select RG3 2nd overall.


I like the second option the best. The only thing is maybe sacrificing high draft choices in the move to get RG3. But unlike Manning, RG3 has played football in the past year, is 14 years younger than Manning, and has his best years ahead of him. Peyton Manning on the other hand while still capable of playing at a high enough level, has been inactive since the 2010 playoffs, has had surgery on his neck, and although he's been cleared by doctors to play, is only a short term solution at QB, and is in the twilight of his career.

That said, RG3 is the better option than Manning.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

/thread


Best post in this thread no doubt.

[MTK]

Yup, S10 nails it.

As for the bickering here



Let's end it ok

[Chico23231]

I think Schneed made me change my mind. the huge BUT is Peyton healthy enough to play. If he comes in and is injuried, then another waste of a year not developing a QB. I think you get Manning with the steadfast intention of still drafting a QB in the 2nd or 3rd this year.

Also Schneed, change RG3 out with Luck, same argument? Im thinking now Luck is the much better, more prepare QB prospect and I would go with Luck over Manning. On the fence now with RG3.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think Schneed made me change my mind. the huge BUT is Peyton healthy enough to play. If he comes in and is injuried, then another waste of a year not developing a QB. I think you get Manning with the steadfast intention of still drafting a QB in the 2nd or 3rd this year.

Also Schneed, change RG3 out with Luck, same argument? Im thinking now Luck is the much better, more prepare QB prospect and I would go with Luck over Manning. On the fence now with RG3.

Not necessarily, if you draft a guy like Tannehill who you wouldn't expect to play in year 1 anyway, you would still need a veteran who can play now.

[bertoskins2]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

Very much agree.

[CultBrennan59]

Yeah Shneed's post was a very helpful factor in me re-updating my decision.

I would have to add a few counter points to his post.

- We don't know if Manning will ever throw like an NFL QB ever again, so that right there should give the edge to RG3.

- We don't know if Manning and Shanahan will clash heads in terms of how the offense should be run. RG3 being a well spoken rookie I know won't be telling the coaches how to run their offense.

-Manning (pretty similar to the post above) is going to change this growing continuity of the offense. He's been trained an accustomed to staying in the pocket, throwing a lot, and doing a no huddle. Not a lot of bootlegs, rollouts, more of a running based type of offense.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

Yeah Shneed's post was a very helpful factor in me re-updating my decision.

I would have to add a few counter points to his post.

- We don't know if Manning will ever throw like an NFL QB ever again, so that right there should give the edge to RG3.

- We don't know if Manning and Shanahan will clash heads in terms of how the offense should be run. RG3 being a well spoken rookie I know won't be telling the coaches how to run their offense.

-Manning (pretty similar to the post above) is going to change this growing continuity of the offense. He's been trained an accustomed to staying in the pocket, throwing a lot, and doing a no huddle. Not a lot of bootlegs, rollouts, more of a running based type of offense.

I think if both of these things happen, then our entire FO needs to be fired. If Manning is not able to throw at NFL speed before he is signed, then we have morons running our team. Also if our genius coach cant make one of the best QBs in the past ten years work, then he needs to be fired.

[irish]

Even if Manning is let go by the Colts I dont see him coming to DC because I dont think he will see this a very good situation as this team has 0 playmakers. I would expect him to go somewhere with more weapons that is closer to winning now (maybe like AZ).

To answer the question though, if Manning is healthy than there is no reason to look any further. Signing Manning is risk free while giving up picks for a QB whose style just doesnt win in the NFL is loaded with risk. Manning is the pick for sure.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think Schneed made me change my mind. the huge BUT is Peyton healthy enough to play. If he comes in and is injuried, then another waste of a year not developing a QB. I think you get Manning with the steadfast intention of still drafting a QB in the 2nd or 3rd this year.

Also Schneed, change RG3 out with Luck, same argument? Im thinking now Luck is the much better, more prepare QB prospect and I would go with Luck over Manning. On the fence now with RG3.

Depending on what it takes to move up for Luck, I'd be willing to trade up for him. If Polian was still the GM for the Colts it'd probably would have been easier to make that deal. Now? I know it's still being discussed but the reality is that a trade to #1 is not likely.

My opinion is that the gap between Luck and the 2nd best QB in this draft (which most would say is RG3) is significantly great than that of say RG3 and Ryan Tannehill. Again, that's just my opinion. But that's one big reason why I wouldn't trade up for RG3.

[SBXVII]

I think a lot of us in favour of PM have been trying to say exactly what Schneed has said throughout this thread. Me for one.

PM won't cost us anything other then money and a roster spot.
We'll still have to draft a QB.

The team can sign PM and still have all of March and April to see if his swelling in his spine goes down enough for him to get his feeling back. Draft a QB anyway and possibly two QB's and let them start learning the system. "IF" PM is not ready we start one of the Rookies. "IF" Pm is ready then we play PM and let the Rookie QBs learn while watching him. It's a no lose situation. Plus if the team decides PM is not ever going to play then hopefully there is a clause in place for PM to be cut or retire.

Then if the Rookies are not working out we still have been able to build up the team more and next year we can go all in for one of the top QB's. By then hopefully we won't need to go all in but if we do the team will have a full compliment of decent players on Offense which will make the QB's job much easier.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

If I were a religious man, I would literally say a prayer that the Redskins FO isn't deciding to not worry about winning Super Bowls and is instead so terrified of making a mistake that they base decisions on that. Fortune favors the bold.

If you make good draft choices, they tend to work out. Bad luck can happen no matter what position you draft. Somehow people think they can talk about this as if Griffin comes with some curse attached which makes it unlikely he'll work out, while the picks spent elsewhere start off halfway to Canton.

And we "know" virtually nothing about what to expect from Manning. He isn't able to throw the ball effectively right now, and he needs nerve regeneration to happen before he does. That probably will happen, but no one knows when. Nor does anyone know how the year off will affect him. Or a change of scenery. Or the psychology of his injuries. What we do know is that his stats have already shown a downward trend thru his 30s and now we're talking about signing him for his age 36 and beyond years. People are assuming way too much about him for starters.

And RG3 is a full 14 years younger. The decision should really be made on him alone. If the team believes he is going to be a great QB, then they should do what it takes to get him. Peyton Manning shouldn't even enter into that decision. He should be considered only if the decision on Griffin is made in the negative.

[SBXVII]

Funny cause I'm beginning to think the Colts possibly take RGIII instead based off of maybe what the new OC is going to want to do and what his scheme calls for. RGIII is definitely more mobile then Luck.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by biffle

If I were a religious man, I would literally say a prayer that the Redskins FO isn't deciding to not worry about winning Super Bowls and is instead so terrified of making a mistake that they base decisions on that. Fortune favors the bold.

If you make good draft choices, they tend to work out. Bad luck can happen no matter what position you draft. Somehow people think they can talk about this as if Griffin comes with some curse attached which makes it unlikely he'll work out, while the picks spent elsewhere start off halfway to Canton.

And we "know" virtually nothing about what to expect from Manning. He isn't able to throw the ball effectively right now, and he needs nerve regeneration to happen before he does. That probably will happen, but no one knows when. Nor does anyone know how the year off will affect him. Or a change of scenery. Or the psychology of his injuries. What we do know is that his stats have already shown a downward trend thru his 30s and now we're talking about signing him for his age 36 and beyond years. People are assuming way too much about him for starters.

And RG3 is a full 14 years younger. The decision should really be made on him alone. If the team believes he is going to be a great QB, then they should do what it takes to get him. Peyton Manning shouldn't even enter into that decision. He should be considered only if the decision on Griffin is made in the negative.

Nothing wrong with taking risks, as long as they're calculated. The odds just don't stack up in Griffin's favor.

Fine line between bravery and stupidity.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

I think Schneed made me change my mind. the huge BUT is Peyton healthy enough to play. If he comes in and is injuried, then another waste of a year not developing a QB. I think you get Manning with the steadfast intention of still drafting a QB in the 2nd or 3rd this year.

Also Schneed, change RG3 out with Luck, same argument? Im thinking now Luck is the much better, more prepare QB prospect and I would go with Luck over Manning. On the fence now with RG3.

Trading up for Luck, I could get behind that. I view him as much more likely to "succeed" than Griffin.

Again, to me success at the QB position, on a player taken this high in the draft, does not equal a career like Carson Palmer's. If I'm going to trade up, the only way I do it is if I genuinely feel I've got a John Elway on my hands.