Peyton Manning or RGIII your choice

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Its a wrap folks. PFT says the fans of Washington don't want P.Manning.
There’s a lot anti-Manning sentiment in Washington | ProFootballTalk

However some of you say we shouldn't listen to PFT with their hack writers. How funny he fails to list the commontators who are for having P.Manning here in Washington. Well the good news is PFT is only speaking for Washington, the very not bright people who would re-elect Mayor Berry after his "I accidently smoked from the crack pipe" incident. I'm so glad he didn't talk about the hooker he had bring it to his motel.

Maybe the writer should see what VA and MD thinks about P.Manning coming to the Skins.

The point about Mike showing no ability to evaluate/develop QB talent so far in Washington is insightful, accurate, and a challenge to the RGIII club. Who's 100% confident Mike and Kyle can turn potential into Peyton?? Really?

...thought so.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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 biffle

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.

And to this point, this line of thinking could not possibly be more shortsighted. You cannot make a QB decision like this in a vacuum. The fact of the matter is that you're not just talking about Griffin vs Manning, as someone else pointed out way earlier in this thread, you're talking about:

Manning + retaining 6 overall + retaining whatever other picks it would take to trade up for Griffin + the ability to spend 3 years finding a QB of the future

vs

Griffin

Again, I'm leaving cap room out of the equation because we're nowhere near the limit. It's not even a constraint for the Redskins.

If you ignore the downstream impact of making each move then you're not really managing the team, it's more of a fantasy football approach.

[biffle]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

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.

I really can't think of a top QB who came into the draft with anything close to Griffin's character, work ethic and production who didn't work out. But again, people apparently want to cling to this notion that all QBs in the draft come out as some kind of dice roll, so I guess these are the "odds" we are supposed to make all our decisions by.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

And to this point, this line of thinking could not possibly be more shortsighted. You cannot make a QB decision like this in a vacuum.

Frankly, yes you can. There is no single facet that comes anywhere close to predicting a team's success than the quality of their QB. In most divisions, you can rank the QBs and then go to the standings and find that you just ranked where they finished the season. If you can find a franchise QB for the next decade plus, you do it. To bypass it to draft a RT and MLB (to use the example of earlier) while farting around with the twilight of Peyton Manning's career would be the epitome of shortsightedness.

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Again, I'm leaving cap room out of the equation because we're nowhere near the limit. It's not even a constraint for the Redskins.

And again, that is just hogwash. There are always ways to spend your cap dollars. Just because that disputes your argument doesn't mean you can wish it away.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by biffle

I really can't think of a top QB who came into the draft with anything close to Griffin's character, work ethic and production who didn't work out. But again, people apparently want to cling to this notion that all QBs in the draft come out as some kind of dice roll, so I guess these are the "odds" we are supposed to make all our decisions by.




Frankly, yes you can. There is no single facet that comes anywhere close to predicting a team's success than the quality of their QB. In most divisions, you can rank the QBs and then go to the standings and find that you just ranked where they finished the season. If you can find a franchise QB for the next decade plus, you do it. To bypass it to draft a RT and MLB (to use the example of earlier) while farting around with the twilight of Peyton Manning's career would be the epitome of shortsightedness.



And again, that is just hogwash. There are always ways to spend your cap dollars. Just because that disputes your argument doesn't mean you can wish it away.

Yeah I think your first problem is that you seem to think Robert Griffin is God's gift. I don't see that. I see that in Luck, but not Griffin. You also seem to think Peyton is in some sort of decline. That's the biggest source of disagreement between the two of us.

As for cap space, no, not even close. There are not THAT many good ways to spend $35 - $45 friggin million in cap space. Nobody makes that many free agent acquisitions and lives to tell the tale. See: Cerrato, Vinny.

And yes, in the end Griffin is a dice roll. People have thought extremely highly of a lot of quarterbacks. Mark Sanchez and Matt Ryan were both extremely productive, highly regarded, and high character guys. One can't muster anything better than mediocre production, and the other disappears in road games and come playoff time. You just don't know.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

And to this point, this line of thinking could not possibly be more shortsighted. You cannot make a QB decision like this in a vacuum. The fact of the matter is that you're not just talking about Griffin vs Manning, as someone else pointed out way earlier in this thread, you're talking about:

Manning + retaining 6 overall + retaining whatever other picks it would take to trade up for Griffin + the ability to spend 3 years finding a QB of the future

vs

Griffin

Again, I'm leaving cap room out of the equation because we're nowhere near the limit. It's not even a constraint for the Redskins.

If you ignore the downstream impact of making each move then you're not really managing the team, it's more of a fantasy football approach.

This is kind of how I'm thinking. Sure, I wish somehow we magically have RGIII fall to us, but if it doesn't happen, we can keep years of draft picks and still be competitive. I think too many people want to just tank for years in the interest of getting younger. I'd LOVE to have RGIII or Luck, but there have been some "sure things" in the past that really destroyed high picks (and future picks).

I've said in another thread that on the surface we seem like a patient fan base but we surely would run Shanahan out of town if we drafted some young QB and went 6-10 (while showing promise).

Then the cycle begins all over again with a new coach, who might want defense to go back to the 4-3, might want a QB better for "their" system and around and around we go.

I'd love to get RGIII or Luck, but I'm totally fine with Manning as an option for a couple of years if he's healthy.

[skinsfaninok]

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.

I agree, great post. Manning would instantly make us a good team and a contender as long as we give him some help at WR which we can do. I'm all for RG3. But not if it's between him and Manning

[NYCskinfan82]

Unlike Indy if we get PM we will be grooming a younger QB behind him.

[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.