Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

If we sign Orton then I'm going to puke. There's a reason he's on his 3rd team. As much as I'd hate to give up a pick, I'd rather them go get someone who hasn't had a chance ( Hoyer, Flynn) then bring in Orton.

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

[Son Of Man]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

Option 2.....all day.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

#2 all day.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

Sounds like in your opinion signing Orton is an indication that the skins will make a serious push for RG3.

Those are really the only 2 workable options to me. Orton is not enough of an immediate upgrade to pair with any sort of developmental QB and if they get Manning spending extra resources to move up for RG3 is highly unlikely.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by celts32

Sounds like in your opinion signing Orton is an indication that the skins will make a serious push for RG3.

Those are really the only 2 workable options to me. Orton is not enough of an immediate upgrade to pair with any sort of developmental QB and if they get Manning spending extra resources to move up for RG3 is highly unlikely.

Not necessarily. I was just throwing it out there as an option. Of the two choices I'd prefer Manning (healthy), RT, and picks. Largely bc I don't think the gap between RG3 and RT is that big

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Not necessarily. I was just throwing it out there as an option. Of the two choices I'd prefer Manning (healthy), RT, and picks. Largely bc I don't think the gap between RG3 and RT is that big

this is the problem. Manning could never play again, he may only play another season, he could be in and out of the lineup for the next several years...either of those happenings is a massive, epic fail. Tannehill is not ready to start, he cant even throw right now. He will be a project.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Not necessarily. I was just throwing it out there as an option. Of the two choices I'd prefer Manning (healthy), RT, and picks. Largely bc I don't think the gap between RG3 and RT is that big

Ok. I will take the RG3 package. Your reasoning makes sense but is largely based on your opinion of there being a small gap between RG3 & RT. I am no scout but from everything i have read and heard you are in the minority on that front. Most seem to think RG3 can start soon if not right away and may have the highest ceiling in the draft while most think RT is a good prospect but needs a year or 2 on the pine.

Just to be clear...I like the healthy Manning/RT package also but I like it less because I think we will need to decide before we are positive Manning is healthy. And if we find out he's not healthy after we pull the trigger then we are in big trouble with a washed up Manning and an RT that's not ready. That's the riskier option to me then parting with a couple extra draft picks.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by celts32

Your reasoning makes sense but is largely based on your opinion of there being a small gap between RG3 & RT. I am no scout but from everything i have read and heard you are in the minority on that front. Most seem to think RG3 can start soon if not right away and may have the highest ceiling in the draft while most think RT is a good prospect but needs a year or 2 on the pine.

Even though I think Tannehill is an above average playmaker himself, I think Griffin clearly out classes everyone in this draft when it comes to playmaking and that is the trait I value most.
And he was certainly a more efficient QB in Baylor's offense then Tannehill was at A&M.
But in the NFL both will start from scratch in brand new systems and most pro systems will be closer to A&Ms then Baylor's.
But outside of those 2 areas I don't see where the a huge gulf in their skill set exists.
What factors do you see that create the vast difference in their skill sets?

I think there is as much to suggest that Tannehill could start week 1 as there is to suggest that he couldn't.
There is arguably more to suggest that Griffin would need to sit then there is to suggest that Tannehill would need to sit, especially in our offense.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

I would do neither. Losing two high draft picks is just too much. We're not good enough to give away picks. As I said, Qb's can be found later in the 1st round or 2nd round. Orton is just another Rex that doesn't know the system.

I wouldn't mind trading down but under NO circumstances do we bring Manning here. No more quick fix BS and then try and sell that crap to the fans. Manning is 36 years old with a bad neck. That's like buying a sports car with 150,000 miles. Only a matter of time before something goes wrong. Not a fan of Tannehill cause he's too raw. Draft Foles or Cousins, keep Rex and maybe try and sign Hoyer. So...next year you'd have a rookie qb, Hoyer and Rex.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

Quite honestly I'd be happy with either option. And this is why I'm glad I don't make those decisions.

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by mooby

Quite honestly I'd be happy with either option. And this is why I'm glad I don't make those decisions.

And this is the sad reality we live in. With rex grossman, john beck and donovan Mcnabb, either of those options sound absolutley wonderful. Just shows you how bad the Shanahans have screwed the pooch when it comes to the QB position. Sorry, but if a coach has been in control for over 2 years, and there is absolutely NO answer of any sort, and by that I mean NO YOUNG TALENT or anything that even resembles a qb that will give you chances to win games, then he needs to be held accountable. Ignoring the most important position on the squad, and adding marginally better young talent in two years, well, lets hope he really flashes his genius this year.

If he doesn't, then maybe some difficult decisions need to be made. Lesser coaches have done WAY more with just as little talent, and also done it in a much shorter span than having over 24 months. Noone shanahan has brought in has knocked my socks off. Noone. he has made some solid acquisitions, but put in a situation, you have 53 chances to show that you are adding talent, and making the team better. When looked at as a whole, the only reason i feel ANY reason to be optimistic is that our team is on average 2.1 years younger on average at the end of this past season than two seasons ago. That is the only reason. There has to be a palpable show of proof, and having two years with both 1st and 2nd rounders each of his drafts, well, like I said, Im not astonished.

Here is to hoping he doesnt screw the pooch this year, and does what it takes to get a quarterback for our team.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Mechanix544

And this is the sad reality we live in. With rex grossman, john beck and donovan Mcnabb, either of those options sound absolutley wonderful. Just shows you how bad the Shanahans have screwed the pooch when it comes to the QB position. Sorry, but if a coach has been in control for over 2 years, and there is absolutely NO answer of any sort, and by that I mean NO YOUNG TALENT or anything that even resembles a qb that will give you chances to win games, then he needs to be held accountable. Ignoring the most important position on the squad, and adding marginally better young talent in two years, well, lets hope he really flashes his genius this year.

If he doesn't, then maybe some difficult decisions need to be made. Lesser coaches have done WAY more with just as little talent, and also done it in a much shorter span than having over 24 months. Noone shanahan has brought in has knocked my socks off. Noone. he has made some solid acquisitions, but put in a situation, you have 53 chances to show that you are adding talent, and making the team better. When looked at as a whole, the only reason i feel ANY reason to be optimistic is that our team is on average 2.1 years younger on average at the end of this past season than two seasons ago. That is the only reason. There has to be a palpable show of proof, and having two years with both 1st and 2nd rounders each of his drafts, well, like I said, Im not astonished.

Here is to hoping he doesnt screw the pooch this year, and does what it takes to get a quarterback for our team.

I think you are WAY off base. if you remember last years draft we were in position to draft Blain Gabbert, and for what ever reason Shanahan didn't like him (i was hoping to draft him) and out of all the rookies that played last year Gabbert looked freaking horrible. So I think he was left with the fact he had no choice but to suck it up and try and win some games with Rex and go after a QB this year. I think he knew the "franchise" QB was going to come out of this years draft, and he was/is going to be willing to throw a few picks away to get his guy. I think it was a fantastic move thinking Luck, Griffin, and probably at the time Barkely was coming out and we'd get one of them.

Now, as far as adding talent, I have no idea what team you are watching. The draft last season was spectacular in tems of adding more picks, adding young talent and the talent actually contributing on the field. If Jenkins had not been hurt, 11 or all 12 of the picks would have played and contributed. Helu, Royster seem to be pretty decent. Kerrigan, Gomes, Hurt, Hankerson, Jenkins, Neild - dont see your reasoning. Then the free agent grabs in Cofield and Bowen have absolutely helped, plus the drafting of Perry Riley the year before.(he is going to be a stud)

I dont think (in my opinion) this is a make and break year for Shanahan. It is his 3rd year, and there will be some improvement, hopefully a lot of improvement from the standpoint of wins and losses that is. As far as competing on the field, we were competative all year last year. Played down to the opponent, up to the opponent, so its just a matter of getting to a consistant level of play. WE are headed in the right direction.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd.
But I think this trade down scenario is easier said then done.
Depending on what happens in FA we still have to worry about the Dolphins (who signed Mike Sherman (Tannehill's HC as their OC) and we still have the QB needy Seahawks too.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't think the Ryan Tannehill who played at Texas A&M showed much of any of this, certainly I don't think he's in the same category with his arm or even with his athleticism that Andrew Luck is.

And this is the heart of the difference in our views of Tannehill.
I think Tannehill has better arm talent and is vastly more athletic then you.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Let me pose this question to you

Manning and trade down to get Tannehill and an additional pick in the 2nd/3rd

or

Orton and trade up to get RG3 and lose a 1st/2nd

With the healthy caveat on Manning, I'd go with that option. I love RGIII but his cost will be significant and 2 yrs from Manning with a handoff to Tannehill plus keeping picks is best short and long term. I think though that with Seattle sitting around 12 we won't be able to go too far down and still get him. Plan B could be Osweiler. I think he's got some talent but really needs to be coached up. He could be had in the mid-late 2nd and would be a nice Manning caddy.

[NM Redskin]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Plan B could be Osweiler. I think he's got some talent but really needs to be coached up. He could be had in the mid-late 2nd and would be a nice Manning caddy.

The hype I heard is he's sneaking into the 1st.