Homer: Please just say no to Peyton Manning

[MattFancy]

I'm cutting and posting from my last post to make sure you see this and address it:

Do people not realize that with the new collective bargaining agreement, rookies hit free agency earlier now? So let's talk about what happens if the Redskins did actually sign Peyton Manning and draft a rookie to sit around a watch him play. For starters, Manning is going to want to stick around (I'm guessing) for at least three years. And then, in all likelihood, you're signing a guy like Robert Griffin III or Ryan Tannehill for four years. Let's say, by some miracle, Manning did remain healthy and played all three years. Then you're looking at that same rookie quarterback going into the final year of his rookie deal without having ever taken an actual snap, meaning you're still not sure he's actually any good and you're going to have to break the bank to keep him around. So I ask again, why is bringing Manning in a good idea?

I understand that. But what if a guy like RG3 take a couple of years to get the system right. So after a few years he's been okay, but not great. Wouldn't that be the same problem?

[themurf]

And even if Manning should bust (which is unlikely if he can still throw hard), there are at least 3 franchise QBs in next year's draft.

But what if the Redskins are in the same situation again next year and can't get any of your three supposed franchise quarterbacks without trading up? And what if they did trade up and the guy didn't work out? Then what?

Again, it kills me that the same fans who want to throw money at every aging superstar the NFL has ever known are terrified of drafting and developing their own future stars because there's a chance with every rookie player in the history of football that "he might not work out." Maybe I'm just crazy for wanting the Redskins to find their own Peyton Manning (i.e. - face of the franchise) rather than waiting 15 years and signing an over-the-hill Robert Griffin III or Ryan Tannehill in 2027.

[MattFancy]

I'm cutting and posting from my last post to make sure you see this and address it:

Do people not realize that with the new collective bargaining agreement, rookies hit free agency earlier now? So let's talk about what happens if the Redskins did actually sign Peyton Manning and draft a rookie to sit around a watch him play. For starters, Manning is going to want to stick around (I'm guessing) for at least three years. And then, in all likelihood, you're signing a guy like Robert Griffin III or Ryan Tannehill for four years. Let's say, by some miracle, Manning did remain healthy and played all three years. Then you're looking at that same rookie quarterback going into the final year of his rookie deal without having ever taken an actual snap, meaning you're still not sure he's actually any good and you're going to have to break the bank to keep him around. So I ask again, why is bringing Manning in a good idea?

I understand that. But what if a guy like RG3 take a couple of years to get the system right. So after a few years he's been okay, but not great. Wouldn't that be the same problem?

[SkinsHokieFan]

I understand that. But what if a guy like RG3 take a couple of years to get the system right. So after a few years he's been okay, but not great. Wouldn't that be the same problem?

It hurts both sides in regards to nobody knows the true value of a player.

RG3 wants to play early so he can establish his value and sign the BIG deal 3 years from now.

The Redskins want him to play early so they determine his value as well.

Its the reason why people who said Manning and Luck would coexist in Indy were foolish. The Favre-Rodgers deal was probably the last of its kind, and the only one in a generation (after Montana-Young)

[LD0506]

I think people seriously underestimate just how much having Peyton Manning under center would disrupt the offensive scheme and O line play. He is going to want to run the show the same way that Indy had him doing, he is NOT going to meekly morph into Kyle's sock puppet. There will be a battle of wills that cannot be good for the season.

A large part of the success he enjoyed with the Colts was because of the longterm continuity between him and the rest of the offense. The linemen were attuned to his vocal cues, they knew instinctively how he would react in a given situation, it was never all him, it was the sum of the parts.

He could never have that with us. It takes years of playing together to get that and even in the best case scenario he only plays a couple more, period. So you spend that time adapting everything to him, and then he retires and you don't have a quality replacement and you're scrood.

[KDawg]

But what if the Redskins are in the same situation again next year and can't get any of your three supposed franchise quarterbacks without trading up? And what if they did trade up and the guy didn't work out? Then what?

Again, it kills me that the same fans who want to throw money at every aging superstar the NFL has ever known are terrified of drafting and developing their own future stars because there's a chance with every rookie player in the history of football that "he might not work out." Maybe I'm just crazy for wanting the Redskins to find their own Peyton Manning (i.e. - face of the franchise) rather than waiting 15 years and signing an over-the-hill Robert Griffin III or Ryan Tannehill in 2027.

It'll be harder to move up next year as well. As I'm assuming, that even with adjustments, if we land Manning, we're going to win a few more games. And we still might not make the playoffs. So now what?

And who says there actually ARE three franchise QBs in next years draft? I'm entirely unsold on Wilson. Landry Jones, to me, isn't anywhere near as good as he's heralded to be. The only one who I think can reach that status is Barkley, and in my opinion he would have been the third rated QB in this years class if he came out.

We have an opportunity, and it's no slam dunk that we pull it off, to grab a franchise guy that fits everything we do in Robert Griffin III. So let's stop playing the waiting game and go and friggin do it.

[Chump Bailey]

Do people not realize that with the new collective bargaining agreement, rookies hit free agency earlier now? So let's talk about what happens if the Redskins did actually sign Peyton Manning and draft a rookie to sit around a watch him play. For starters, Manning is going to want to stick around (I'm guessing) for at least three years. And then, in all likelihood, you're signing a guy like Robert Griffin III or Ryan Tannehill for four years. Let's say, by some miracle, Manning did remain healthy and played all three years. Then you're looking at that same rookie quarterback going into the final year of his rookie deal without having ever taken an actual snap, meaning you're still not sure he's actually any good and you're going to have to break the bank to keep him around. So I ask again, why is bringing Manning in a good idea?

I don't think it would be anything like breaking the bank murf. We're talking lower 1st - high 2nd round signing. The rookie contracts are also much more cap friendly now too or so I thought. The above scenario worked out well enough in Green Bay with Farvre and Rodgers. I really don't think signing Peyton and drafting a player like Foles or Tannehill is the team killer you seem to think it would be. I'm sure they will have seen enough of the person by that time be it Foles or Tannehill to arrive at some reasonable conclusion whether or not that player is worth extending when the time comes. Again, 98% of the time I would be aboard with you, but Peyton Manning is someone IMO that is worth rolling the dice on. We've obviously been down this road before and things have not panned out, but sometimes they do. We've had successful FA signings. I can't imagine the contract being some sort of albatross with the health questions revovling him right now. Both sides are fully aware and it would seem a reasonable deal could be struck. I also really don't think you or others here are giving nearly enough credit to Peyton, who is arguably the smartest QB the game has seen in a very, very long time.

[KCClybun]

Murf, I like reading your stuff, always well thought out. But to say we're not rational Skins fans because we have a different opinion than you, doesn't mean we're not rational. You have a perfectly good reason for wanting to go after Griffin, I respect that and would be fine with Griffin. However, I also wouldn't have a problem with Manning if we also drafted a QB to study under him. That doesn't mean I'm not a rational fan, that just means I see things differently.

But that kind of ignores what he's saying, which is a fantastic point;

With the new rookie salary cap, the way contracts are set-up is that most of your high round player are going to sign 4 year deals; I think you can include an option for a 5th yearr, but that's based on good play. I think. When you get to the second half of the first round and into the 2nd round, you're more likely to see guys take three year deals, four years if we take a guy high in the second.

Let's say Manning comes in and is healthy and he plays for four seasons. Well, that's all fine and dandy, but guess what; your prized disciple of Peyton Manning? Yeah, he's looking at free agency, without ever having seen the field once. Congrats, you just blew a draft pick on a guy who never even saw the football field, and who may be disinclined to resign with your football team.

Which means we'd be right back at square one.

I think the reason murf's saying it's irrational is because WE HAVE READ THIS BOOK BEFORE with the signing veterans players thing, and yet fans seem willing to ignore history, both recent and in our more distant past, and yet people are gung ho to have a four year stop gap (at best) rather than risk it on a guy who could become a starter for the next 10-15 years.

And even if RGIII does bust...so what? Say we don't have a first round pick in 2013. Okay. It takes like, what, two, three years to determine if a guy is a bust? Well, then we can just go back in the draft and get a new guy in 2014, and because of the rookie cap, we'll barely be on the hook for his paycheck.

It's risk assessment. Redskins fans are traditionally piss poor at assessing what the odds involved in any given situation are, so they'll take the short term solution that's a slightly smaller risk, even if everything points to that having a much, much lower success rate, over taking a bigger risk that, while it's basically a coin flip in terms of the risk level, still has SUBSTANTIALLY bigger odds off success than the smaller risk.

At most we get four good years out of Manning. And then what? End up right back in the same frakking place we started in? No quarterback of the future, a team that at that point will be full of pending free agents, and we'll likely not be in a position to draft a new guy to replace Manning. If we draft a guy now, he'll likely be staring down free agency too, and probably asking for more money despite never playing a snap.

Why postpone things four years? Just go out, get your guy you can build around, and move forward.

[Missouri_Skins_Fan]

Love Manning, but the risk of getting him is > than drafting RG3 or Luck, imo.

#1)Is he healthy?

#2)Are we running Manning's offense--Shanny's? Either way...Somebody is taking a back seat here. Is this a good idea?

#3)Can Manning run the Shanny infamous Bootleg's? Or QB plays that require QB mobility & movement?

#4)Can our O-Line block for Manning? Will Manning be getting crushed before making his 5 or 7 step drop?

#5)How many years do we commit to Manning, or how long will he be able to play? 1...2...3? Longer?

And is this our window for making the playoffs or SB run?

Now...ask these same questions on RG3 or Luck & see what you come up with.

Pass on Manning, but do everything you can to land Luck or RG3.

[MattFancy]

But that kind of ignores what he's saying, which is a fantastic point;

He was saying that if Manning plays another 3 years and we have a rookie under contract for 4, we'll really only get to see 1 year of the rookie before making a decision. My point is that what if through 3 years of RG3's rookie contract, he hasn't done what we expected of him. Then what? Its still the same dilemma.

In either of these situations there are alot of what ifs. IMO, the Manning and a rookie QB scenario has the least amount of risk. It could help us win now and win in the future. I would love to have RG3, but will the cost of adding him outweigh the benefits?

[TotalRecall]

But what if the Redskins are in the same situation again next year and can't get any of your three supposed franchise quarterbacks without trading up? And what if they did trade up and the guy didn't work out? Then what?

Again, it kills me that the same fans who want to throw money at every aging superstar the NFL has ever known are terrified of drafting and developing their own future stars because there's a chance with every rookie player in the history of football that "he might not work out." Maybe I'm just crazy for wanting the Redskins to find their own Peyton Manning (i.e. - face of the franchise) rather than waiting 15 years and signing an over-the-hill Robert Griffin III or Ryan Tannehill in 2027.

Well, that's the crux of the matter. Who's better at predicting the future? Obviously, the ones making personnel decisions for most of the past 20 years have sucked at it. We can evaluate players/coaches all we want, but picking winners involves some amount of luck for they are humans also with human emotions, injuries, and weaknesses. You obviously feel RG3 will be a superstar with many playoff appearances, whereas I am more skeptical. For me, the risk/reward is less with Peyton in 2012 (if he passes the workouts) and then drafting a QB in 2013.

[KDawg]

Well, that's the crux of the matter. Who's better at predicting the future? Obviously, the ones making personnel decisions for most of the past 20 years have sucked at it. We can evaluate players/coaches all we want, but picking winners involves some amount of luck for they are humans also with human emotions, injuries, and weaknesses. You obviously feel RG3 will be a superstar with many playoff appearances, whereas I am more skeptical. For me, the risk/reward is less with Peyton in 2012 (if he passes the workouts) and then drafting a QB in 2013.

Riddle me this:

1. What results do you see with Peyton under center for 2012?

2. Who do you propose we draft in 2013?

3. How do you propose we draft that person in 2013?

[themurf]

Well, that's the crux of the matter. Who's better at predicting the future? Obviously, the ones making personnel decisions for most of the past 20 years have sucked at it. We can evaluate players/coaches all we want, but picking winners involves some amount of luck for they are humans also with human emotions, injuries, and weaknesses. You obviously feel RG3 will be a superstar with many playoff appearances, whereas I am more skeptical. For me, the risk/reward is less with Peyton in 2012 (if he passes the workouts) and then drafting a QB in 2013.

After seeing the new regime successfully navigate the draft last year and add a dozen new players who can likely contribute for years while not costing the team a fortune, why wouldn't more people around here want the team to continue to make that the priority? Last offseason was all about maximizing what you can get out of the draft and targeting players who were typically around the age of 27 in free agency. Barry Cofield, Stephen Bowen and Chris Chester weren't big names, but they fit Shanahan's system.

So stick to the plan. Focus the bulk of your attention on the draft. If RG3 is your man, then by all means go all in. If it's one of the other guys, then you're in good shape because you don't have to give up anything extra to get them. But I refuse to believe that acquiring Manning at this stage in his career helps the Redskins stick to the plan and build for long-term stability. To me, it's another example of the Redskins being star @#$%ers -- the franchise who is obsessed with big names rather than building an actual football team.

[MartinC]

Why postpone things four years? Just go out, get your guy you can build around, and move forward.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but here is my problem with just ignoring the opportunity to sign a free agent QB like Peyton Manning - the draft comes after free agency. If you pass on Manning as you are advocating and then despite our best efforts we cant draft RGIII after the Colts take Luck first overall whats your plan then? There will not be a viable starter available in free agency after the draft who is much if any of an upgrade from Rex.

[KDawg]

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but here is my problem with just ignoring the opportunity to sign a free agent QB like Peyton Manning - the draft comes after free agency. If you pass on Manning as you are advocating and then despite our best efforts we cant draft RGIII after the Colts take Luck first overall whats your plan then? There will not be a viable starter available in free agency after the draft who is much if any of an upgrade from Rex.

We can sign another QB that Shanahan feels at the very least comfortable with. Who is that guy? I don't know. It could be Chad Henne (doubt it), or it could be Josh Johnson, Dennis Dixon, Jason Campbell, Kyle Orton, Brady Quinn (if he got released), Jimmy Clausen, etc. We really have no idea who's even available. But all of those guys would be much better stop gap options than Manning. You sign Manning, you can't take Griffin without there being hard feelings.

If we sign Manning, we need to make a commitment to Manning.

[KCClybun]

In either of these situations there are alot of what ifs. IMO, the Manning and a rookie QB scenario has the least amount of risk. It could help us win now and win in the future. I would love to have RG3, but will the cost of adding him outweigh the benefits?

That's what I'm talking about. It may have be slightly less risky (certainly it's not the least risky), but the odds are stacked against success.

That's a fact; all statistical data says you're more likely to make it to the playoffs if you choose and develop you're own quarterback. 57% of the quarterbacks who have won the Super Bowl have been first round picks, and the average position of those quarterbacks is 6th.

Your BEST CHANCE OF WINNING A SUPER BOWL, even if the success rate of said quarterbacks in only 51%, is STILL drafting you're own quarterback, preferably at the top of the draft. Free agency has a much, much lower success rate. Period.

[MattFancy]

After seeing the new regime successfully navigate the draft last year and add a dozen new players who can likely contribute for years while not costing the team a fortune, why wouldn't more people around here want the team to continue to make that the priority? Last offseason was all about maximizing what you can get out of the draft and targeting players who were typically around the age of 27 in free agency. Barry Cofield, Stephen Bowen and Chris Chester weren't big names, but they fit Shanahan's system.

So stick to the plan. Focus the bulk of your attention on the draft. If RG3 is your man, then by all means go all in. If it's one of the other guys, then you're in good shape because you don't have to give up anything extra to get them. But I refuse to believe that acquiring Manning at this stage in his career helps the Redskins stick to the plan and build for long-term stability. To me, it's another example of the Redskins being star @#$%ers -- the franchise who is obsessed with big names rather than building an actual football team.

But wouldn't maximizing the draft require using all of our picks? If we add Manning, we would still have all of our draft picks and could even trade down like we did last year and acquire more.

---------- Post added February-14th-2012 at 09:31 AM ----------

That's what I'm talking about. It may have be slightly less risky (certainly it's not the least risky), but the odds are stacked against success.

That's a fact; all statistical data says you're more likely to make it to the playoffs if you choose and develop you're own quarterback. 57% of the quarterbacks who have won the Super Bowl have been first round picks, and the average position of those quarterbacks is 6th.

Your BEST CHANCE OF WINNING A SUPER BOWL, even if the success rate of said quarterbacks in only 51%, is STILL drafting you're own quarterback, preferably at the top of the draft. Free agency has a much, much lower success rate. Period.

But we still could draft and develop our own QB if we sign Manning.

[KDawg]

But wouldn't maximizing the draft require using all of our picks? If we add Manning, we would still have all of our draft picks and could even trade down like we did last year and acquire more.

No. We maximized last year with a ton of picks. This year, we can use less picks and maximize the impact on the roster. There is NO piece that would have the impact that Griffin would. Then you add other talent through whatever picks you have left this year, and you can maximize the impact of the draft again.

[GibbsFactor]

I don't understand how RGIII became a can't miss player.

Where have I been over the past 10 years. What's changed that allows a Spread Big 12 Mobile QB to become can't miss and who forgot to tell me?

Also, a swap of a first, a second, a third and next year's first? Chump change. And you guys are ****ting on Vinny? Irony.

The problem Manning supporters have is that he's clearly not ready and may never be 100%, plus many agree that we've blown our wad on signing older players. We simply can't do it anymore regardless of who these FAs are. Forget the fact that these same people advocate us signing a WR (a diva FA, that's gonna work) a CB and any other position we need and can't fill because we gave up our picks on a QB that might not even play this year. Oh, and forget the fact that this is year 3 of a regime that has not had many successes....

[TotalRecall]

Riddle me this:

1. What results do you see with Peyton under center for 2012?

2. Who do you propose we draft in 2013?

3. How do you propose we draft that person in 2013?

1. I think Peyton and some well-placed high round draft picks and a couple of FAs would get us 10 wins.

2. If Tyler Wilson came out this year, I would say draft him. We will just have to evaluate their 2012 performance/progress for 2013 draft.

3. It would depend on where we are in the 1st round and, if necessary, who will trade with us. I would take that unknown risk.

But, it's all pointless argument until we know if Peyton can still play.

[MartinC]

Can our O-Line block for Manning? Will Manning be getting crushed before making his 5 or 7 step drop?

Seriously?

Peyton is one of the least sacked QBs over his career in the whole NFL. Thats not becuase he has played behind a great line all his career either its becuase he reads coverages pre snap as well as any QB who has ever played, gets his team into good plays and good protections based on those reads and then makes quick and good decisions post snap and gets the ball out of his hands quickly. Manning would nogt be getting 'crushed' behind our line he will be making them look like a group of All Pro's with his quick release and pocket awareness.

There are good reasons to avoid signing Manning - he nerve regeneration, his age, the opportunity cost of not playing and developing a highly drafted rookie should we manage to get one ...... but I simply dont buy an argument based on Manning being a sitting duck in the pocket or him needing our whole scheme to be redesigned.

[MattFancy]

That's what I'm talking about. It may have be slightly less risky (certainly it's not the least risky), but the odds are stacked against success.

That's a fact; all statistical data says you're more likely to make it to the playoffs if you choose and develop you're own quarterback. 57% of the quarterbacks who have won the Super Bowl have been first round picks, and the average position of those quarterbacks is 6th.

Your BEST CHANCE OF WINNING A SUPER BOWL, even if the success rate of said quarterbacks in only 51%, is STILL drafting you're own quarterback, preferably at the top of the draft. Free agency has a much, much lower success rate. Period.

But we still could draft and develop our own QB if we sign Manning.

[KDawg]

1. I think Peyton and some well-placed high round draft picks and a couple of FAs would get us 10 wins.

2. If Tyler Wilson came out this year, I would say draft him. We will just have to evaluate their 2012 performance/progress for 2013 draft.

3. It would depend on where we are in the 1st round and, if necessary, who will trade with us. I would take that unknown risk.

But, it's all pointless argument until we know if Peyton can still play.

Your end point is dead nuts. But, let me refute what you said above because you contradicted yourself a bit.

You said we win 10 games.

That puts us picking in the 20s or so. How do we get one of the top QB prospects from the 20s?

You have to trade, as you said. But you're against trading this year.

That doesn't make much sense.

---------- Post added February-14th-2012 at 09:37 AM ----------

but I simply dont buy an argument based on Manning being a sitting duck in the pocket

You're absolutely right here. He might get hit a bit as the OL adjusts to Manning's schemes as far as blocking goes, but he knows how to get rid of the football. That's a non issue.

or him needing our whole scheme to be redesigned.

Still disagree here :beats dead horse into the ground with a sledge hammer:

[themurf]

I don't understand how RGIII became a can't miss player.

Where have I been over the past 10 years. What's changed that allows a Spread Big 12 Mobile QB to become can't miss and who forgot to tell me?

While I happen to big a fan of Robert Griffin III, at no time have I written anything to suggest he's a "can't miss" player. What I have been saying throughout this thread though is that if he's the guy Mike Shanahan thinks can best run this offense, then go all in. If it's Ryan Tannehill or someone else, then get that person.

Are we all caught up now?

[KCClybun]

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but here is my problem with just ignoring the opportunity to sign a free agent QB like Peyton Manning - the draft comes after free agency. If you pass on Manning as you are advocating and then despite our best efforts we cant draft RGIII after the Colts take Luck first overall whats your plan then? There will not be a viable starter available in free agency after the draft who is much if any of an upgrade from Rex.

I don't care that free agency comes after the draft. If we pass up on Manning and have to sign a guy like Orton, I won't shed a tear. It's just another year in the rebuild, and hey, as much as I want this team to win as much as possible, if we do lose, at the very least we'll be in position to get a quarterback. We take our lumps, trade down in the 2012 draft, and keep rebuilding.

I'd say we could draft Weeden in the second or third round; he'll 29 when the season starts, but I feel like he's the one guy in the class besides RGIII and Luck who could start day one, and hey, if he pans out and does well, on the higher side of things he'll probably have ten years in him and we will have filled the hole for the foreseeable future.

Of course indications are that we're not extremely high on Weeden, so who knows. But I don't subscribe to the theory that things are all over if we don't sign Manning.