Homer: Please just say no to Peyton Manning

[TotalRecall]

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.

I don't see how getting Peyton would keep us from picking players in the draft. If we were to trade for Peyton (like the Raiders did for Carson Palmer), then I would agree with you. I think getting Peyton, paid mainly with incentive bonuses, would keep us on the course of picking players in the draft.

[terpfan44]

There is a discussion on SI about Manning to Houston....which was my first thought...what move could Peyton make that would add the maximum drama..to the mix?...to me...that was to Houston

only other thing I see is Miami...and Indy is already on their schedule to visit...when things like this happen there seems to always be an ex coach coaching against his former team...or superstar playing back where he began...

what about Schaub to DC?

[KDawg]

There is a discussion on SI about Manning to Houston....which was my first thought...what move could Peyton make that would add the maximum drama..to the mix?...to me...that was to Houston

only other thing I see is Miami...and Indy is already on their schedule to visit...when things like this happen there seems to always be an ex coach coaching against his former team...or superstar playing back where he began...

what about Schaub to DC?

I see Arizona being an incredible landing place for Manning. Schematically and personnel wise.

[Hitman21ST]

what about Schaub to DC?

Just stop.

Schaub isn't leaving Houston. They won't get rid of their franchise QB for the next 7 or 8 years just to run with Manning for the next 3 or 4. The players know and like Schaub. Houston came close to the Super Bowl with Yates as a QB, they very well could have been in it had Schaub not gotten injured.

[MattFancy]

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.

Could be right.

This has certainly been a good debate. Like I've said from the beginning, I've got no problem with RG3 coming here, I'm just not sure if we should go "all-in" to get him. If we did, I certainly wouldn't be upset, but I might not agree with it.

[TotalRecall]

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.:

I have always said that getting Peyton would allow us to fill holes in other areas via the 2012 draft. Hopefully, when 2013 comes around, all we would need is the future franchise QB. By picking RG3, you are putting all your chips on him and hoping to find some hidden gems in the later rounds of the 2012 & 2013 drafts. If by some chance Peyton is a bust, then we probably wouldn't need to trade for a top-QB next year, but we would already have a loaded team in the other positions, in case if we needed to trade-up.

[themurf]

I don't see that how getting Peyton would keep us from picking players in the draft. If we were to trade for Peyton (like the Raiders did for Carson Palmer), then I would agree with you. I think getting Peyton, paid mainly with incentive bonuses, would keep us on the course of picking players in the draft.

Go back and read my post earlier about rookie contracts under the new collective bargaining agreement. Sitting a player for three or four years is much tougher now when contracts are significantly shorter and rookie deals are so much more cap friendly.

[Skinsinparadise]

I don't see that how getting Peyton would keep us from picking players in the draft. If we were to trade for Peyton (like the Raiders did for Carson Palmer), then I would agree with you. I think getting Peyton, paid mainly with incentive bonuses, would keep us on the course of picking players in the draft.

Exactly. I am not even on the Peyton bandwagon, I want RG III but I can understand at least the Peyton argument. Last off season, we traded down and ended up with 12 picks even though we started without our 3rd and 4th rounder. This time we have a full draft plus an extra 4th rounder, and higher picks than what we had last year, and a rookie salary cap to make trading easier -- Shanny can do a trade down frenzy and load up the team with even more young talent than he did the previous off season. Thus, I can get the idea as counter intuitive as it may seem, Shanny can argue that getting a veteran free agent versus trading up in the draft for a QB -- actually represents a LARGER commitment to going young. This DOESN'T IMO represent business as usual far from it.

We can go with a Plan C which is go for the 3th, 4th or 5th best Qb in the draft -- but as it has been well documented that is a big crap shoot. And a crap shoot, we've tried along with many other teams and failed with Ramsey and JC. There is a much better chance that a guy like Foles for example becomes another Patrick Ramsey as opposed to the next Drew Brees. What is the hit rate on 2nd round QB's, if I recall it was something like 7%? And this would be business as usual for us IMO.

We don't usually reach for the top Qb in the draft -- we've been going on the lets reach lower route and see if we can find that diamond in the rough: JC, Ramsey, Brennan, Daniels, Jordan Palmer, Hamden, Rosenfels -- who is going to be the next savior, Tannehill, Foles, Moore? You never know but i am not betting on success if that's the case.

[PorkSkins]

What's Washington without a QB controversy? I'm all for signing Peyton if he can pass a physical. I think Shanny all along wanted Barkley because we weren't going to get Luck. Therefore we may wait another year to sell the farm. Sign Peyton, Wayne, Bowe or Jackson, and draft an OL. I don't care about spending the money, just don't give up more picks for a first round guy that has too many questions.

[skinny21]

As one of the longtime members here, I definitely respect your take. I just think that a decade and a half of bad free agent signings shows that the Redskins need to stop trying to take shortcuts and quick fixes. The days of buying fading superstars should be a thing of the past and Shanahan should continue to build off of last offseason and focus on the draft to build this franchise back to respectability.

Is it really easier to build depth by giving away multiple high-end draft picks? I get that RG could mean we don't have to spend a pick on QB for years, but I'm a little concerned about what we might have to give up.

This is the main reason I'm not as opposed to bringing in Manning as some. He's not my first option, but he gives us a bit more leeway. Even if we use one of our high picks on a developmental QB to sit behind Manning, we could still end up with 2-4 more picks if we go with Manning over RGIII. Not ideal, but not a terrible thing IMO.

I'm worried for the sanity of those that seem to feel that the only move for us is RG. If that doesn't pan out are we going to lose them as fans?

[themurf]

Is it really easier to build depth by giving away multiple high-end draft picks? I get that RG could mean we don't have to spend a pick on QB for years, but I'm a little concerned about what we might have to give up.

This is the main reason I'm not as opposed to bringing in Manning as some. He's not my first option, but he gives us a bit more leeway. Even if we use one of our high picks on a developmental QB to sit behind Manning, we could still end up with 2-4 more picks if we go with Manning over RGIII. Not ideal, but not a terrible thing IMO.

I'm worried for the sanity of those that seem to feel that the only move for us is RG. If that doesn't pan out are we going to lose them as fans?

If the current regime believes Robert Griffin III is the best fit for this system, then by all means they should make it happen -- even if the price tag is steep. Better to get the right guy rather than settling on a lesser player who doesn't fit as well just because you could get him a round or two later. Quarterback is the most vital position in football. If they have a chance to solidify the position for the foreseeable future, they've gotta make it happen. Everything else is secondary.

[MartinC]

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.

You might not shed a tear but Shanny might. I'm not sure he can survive another 5 or 6 win year.

[Horatio]

At least, that’s the mindset the front office had until Mike Shanahan got involved.

Once the two-time Super Bowl winning head coach took over, mercifully it was time for the Redskins to start acting like they belonged at the grown-up table.

Yes, he too tried to take a short cut by trading for Donovan McNabb. Even though he talked about being here for at least the five years on his contract and spoke about trying to build a consistent winner, Shanahan fell into the trap and bought into the believe that McNabb was the missing link in Washington.

And once again, Washington’s splashy offseason acquisition was a colossal failure once it was time to step onto the football field.

If the Skins go out and get Peyton (or any other big-name free agent available) at the expense of draft picks, then it will just be further proof of what some believe is true: that Dan Snyder's invisible hands are making these choices. The McNabb deal was an indicator that Shanahan was NOT the one truly in charge, and I highly doubt this team is capable of going TWO WHOLE YEARS without some kind of 'big splash' in free agency to sell tickets.

My belief is that Snyder is STILL running this show, and that all these coaches signed confidentiality clauses and tell the media that he's not meddling at all. If you see Peyton Manning line up in burgundy and gold in September, then that will be the proof in the pudding.

[KCClybun]

If the Skins go out and get Peyton (or any other big-name free agent available) at the expense of draft picks, then it will just be further proof of what some believe is true: that Dan Snyder's invisible hands are making these choices. The McNabb deal was an indicator that Shanahan was NOT the one truly in charge, and I highly doubt this team is capable of going TWO WHOLE YEARS without some kind of 'big splash' in free agency to sell tickets.

My belief is that Snyder is STILL running this show, and that all these coaches signed confidentiality clauses and tell the media that he's not meddling at all. If you see Peyton Manning line up in burgundy and gold in September, then that will be the proof in the pudding.

[TotalRecall]

Go back and read my post earlier about rookie contracts under the new collective bargaining agreement. Sitting a player for three or four years is much tougher now when contracts are significantly shorter and rookie deals are so much more cap friendly.

For instance, and ideally, if we sign Peyton to a 3-year deal, then we could draft a QB in 2013. The 2013 QB draft pick sits for 2 seasons behind Peyton. The 2013 QB will have 2 years, with an optional 3rd-year, left on his contract. I think we would be ok with that. Two years should be enough to evaluate if he's worthy to sign to a pricey 5th year. Four years with RG3 wouldn't be a great deal of difference since rookie contracts are cap friendly.

[pjfootballer]

If the Skins go out and get Peyton (or any other big-name free agent available) at the expense of draft picks, then it will just be further proof of what some believe is true: that Dan Snyder's invisible hands are making these choices. The McNabb deal was an indicator that Shanahan was NOT the one truly in charge, and I highly doubt this team is capable of going TWO WHOLE YEARS without some kind of 'big splash' in free agency to sell tickets.

My belief is that Snyder is STILL running this show, and that all these coaches signed confidentiality clauses and tell the media that he's not meddling at all. If you see Peyton Manning line up in burgundy and gold in September, then that will be the proof in the pudding.

Per your sig, you are just a Snyder hater and have no basis for any of these claims. Your case would be better made in this thread without your anti Snyder agenda.

[Hitman21ST]

If the Skins go out and get Peyton (or any other big-name free agent available) at the expense of draft picks, then it will just be further proof of what some believe is true: that Dan Snyder's invisible hands are making these choices. The McNabb deal was an indicator that Shanahan was NOT the one truly in charge, and I highly doubt this team is capable of going TWO WHOLE YEARS without some kind of 'big splash' in free agency to sell tickets.

My belief is that Snyder is STILL running this show, and that all these coaches signed confidentiality clauses and tell the media that he's not meddling at all. If you see Peyton Manning line up in burgundy and gold in September, then that will be the proof in the pudding.

[themurf]

For instance, and ideally, if we sign Peyton to a 3-year deal, then we could draft a QB in 2013. The 2013 QB draft pick sits for 2 seasons behind Peyton. The 2013 QB will have 2 years, with an optional 3rd-year, left on his contract. I think we would be ok with that. Two years should be enough to evaluate if he's worthy to sign to a pricey 5th year. Four years with RG3 wouldn't be a great deal of difference since rookie contracts are cap friendly.

And if Peyton Manning's neck doesn't hold up and he's out of action by Week 8, then you've got yet another wasted season and the Redskins are right back where they are now. Which is why I say pass on Peyton and identify the rookie who can begin the process of turning this mediocre franchise around.

[Skinsinparadise]

If the Skins go out and get Peyton (or any other big-name free agent available) at the expense of draft picks, then it will just be further proof of what some believe is true: that Dan Snyder's invisible hands are making these choices. The McNabb deal was an indicator that Shanahan was NOT the one truly in charge, and I highly doubt this team is capable of going TWO WHOLE YEARS without some kind of 'big splash' in free agency to sell tickets.

My belief is that Snyder is STILL running this show, and that all these coaches signed confidentiality clauses and tell the media that he's not meddling at all. If you see Peyton Manning line up in burgundy and gold in September, then that will be the proof in the pudding.

From all the reporters covering the team, none who seem to be fans of Danny, they say Shanny is totally in charge. Shanny himself talked up why he traded for McNabb, ultimately sounds like they didn't anticipate he would struggle to pick up the offense and apparently not work that hard. Shanny had other options when the Skins hired him, hard for me to believe he took a job with the idea that Danny would be making the call for the most important position on the team or just grin and bear it when it happened. I like Shanny as much as anybody but he isn't the first personnel guy in the NFL to be infallible. And he didn't exactly shut down his critics when he swore by Rex and Beck. He made mistakes in Denver, he will make mistakes here too. And that's OK. IMO, its about getting most of your decisions right, not all of them. But for the Qb position specifically he's arguably on the spot now.

IMO this goes well beyond a theoretical debate but its a very specific player based one. Is Orton, Manning, Flynn, the goods in free agency where they can buy the team some time to load the roster up with a young supporting cast and then ultimately find that young Qb too? Is RG 3 by a mile the 2nd best QB in the draft and the only legitimate franchise guy available or not? Will one of those lower tier guys like Tannehill, Foles, Cousins, etc defy the odds and likely become a franchise QB or at least a good one? And then you make a decision accordingly.

There are potential pluses and minus from each one of those decisions that IMO Shanny should be able to evaluate in a way that we can't even approach in our thought process aside from not having Shanny's offense expertise, we don't have the internal scouting reports on those guys. and heck it looks like based on last year Morocco Brown and Scott Campbell are talented evaluators.

[MartinC]

If the Skins go out and get Peyton (or any other big-name free agent available) at the expense of draft picks,

I think you have your argument backwards. Manning will be a free agent and will not cost us any draft picks to sign. Drafting RGIII will almost certainly require us to trade up to the #2 spot which WILL cost us multiple draft picks.

I'm not saying that it would be wrong to trade up to get RGIII but at least lets get the facts right.

[Skinsinparadise]

I think you have your argument backwards. Manning will be a free agent and will not cost us any draft picks to sign. Drafting RGIII will almost certainly require us to trade up to the #2 spot which WILL cost us multiple draft picks.

I'm not saying that it would be wrong to trade up to get RGIII but at least lets get the facts right.

The thing about RG III and I am on board with the idea of trading up for him, is what if we get outbid by somebody like Cleveland. Lets say you skip free agency in the hope of landing RG III. And what if you don't like the next guys in the draft behind him, Tannehill, Foles, etc? Aren't we stuck then?

For example lets say the Rams a few years ago didn't have the #1 pick, wanted Bradford but couldn't get him -- so plan B was ok, that means Jimmy Clausen has to be our franchise Qb now? Obviously that would not have worked out for them.

if Shanny thinks the drop off from RG III to lets say Tannehill is dramatic, which is certainly feasible then what? How does this relate to Peyton? I am just thinking they have a fairly complicated decision when it comes to free agency if they aren't sure they can trade up for RG 3, and don't like the guys in the draft after him. They can come out of all of this without a guy period or a long shot project.

[MartinC]

The thing about RG III and I am on board with the idea of trading up for him, is what if we get outbid by somebody like Cleveland. Lets say you skip free agency in the hope of landing RG III. And what if you don't like the next guys in the draft behind him, Tannehill, Foles, etc? Aren't we stuck then?

For example lets say the Rams a few years ago didn't have the #1 pick, wanted Bradford but couldn't get him -- so plan B was ok, that means Jimmy Clausen has to be our franchise Qb now? Obviously that would not have worked out for them.

if Shanny thinks the drop off from RG III to lets say Tannehill is dramatic, which is certainly feasible then what? How does this relate to Peyton? I am just thinking they have a fairly complicated decision when it comes to free agency if they aren't sure they can trade up for RG 3, and don't like the guys in the draft after him. They can come out of all of this without a guy period or a long shot project.

Your preaching to the choir here with the arguments above - I have been saying the same thing myself. If we dont sign a QB in free agency who is a credible NFL starter and we crap out in trying to trade up for RGIII we are screwed at the QB position for another year and looking at another year at .500 or worse.

[LD0506]

The thing about RG III and I am on board with the idea of trading up for him, is what if we get outbid by somebody like Cleveland. Lets say you skip free agency in the hope of landing RG III. And what if you don't like the next guys in the draft behind him, Tannehill, Foles, etc? Aren't we stuck then?

No, then they go to Plan B, or C or X if necessary, because they are not going to bet the farm on landing RGIII and then slit their wrists if they can't do it, but they will get credit for having tried. Then we suck it up, start someone else this year (FA stopgap?), work the draft for all the upgrades we can get and look to the next draft. Wouldn't break my heart to see them work trades for picks next year, specifically to load up and make a move then.

There is always the possibility that things don't break our way but you do the best you can.

[GibbsFactor]

And if Peyton Manning's neck doesn't hold up and he's out of action by Week 8, then you've got yet another wasted season and the Redskins are right back where they are now. Which is why I say pass on Peyton and identify the rookie who can begin the process of turning this mediocre franchise around.

That's just a fear tactic. His neck isn't the issue, linebackers have had this surgery before and played. Once his nerves regenerate than the question becomes how close to '10 Peyton is he. Again, still a lot of question marks but if he's ready to play, I don't think anyone should be too worried about his neck going out or something along those lines.

[skinny21]

If the current regime believes Robert Griffin III is the best fit for this system, then by all means they should make it happen -- even if the price tag is steep. Better to get the right guy rather than settling on a lesser player who doesn't fit as well just because you could get him a round or two later. Quarterback is the most vital position in football. If they have a chance to solidify the position for the foreseeable future, they've gotta make it happen. Everything else is secondary.

I actually agree with you. I'm just wondering if trading away a (potentially) ton of high picks is really sticking to what the regime has been doing. They've been valuing their draft picks, so losing a bunch of them for one player seems to go against the grain.

If they feel RG is their guy, then by all means give up whatever they need to. Arguing they should keep doing as they have been doesn't lend itself to giving up the chance to get several good prospects.

To be clear, I think RG would be the best thing for Shanny, the franchise, and the fanbase. I can certainly see the other side of the argument though. Those picks could fill a lot of our holes, including starters for the future. We're finally committed to building our depth, is maximizing this that bad? I guess I'm just open to the possibilities, as opposed to feeling there is only one road we should go down (and the rest lead to doom as some suggest).