peyton manning coming to washington

[aswas71788]

I agree with everything you just wrote frankcal. Even so, would you really be that surprised if you wake up one morning in March and hear that Manning is on his way to DC? I would never put it past the Redskins to defy all logic and common sense and make something like this happen. hah.

If Cerrato was still the manager, I would bet on Manning coming here but with Shanahan and Allen, I do not think there is a chance, real or imaginary. I would be in total shock if he did.

[Mississippiskinsfan2]

If I had to choose between the two, RG3 makes the most sense and will cost less $.

Why do you have to choose? We could get both if we want to.

We can't afford to use that much cap space in one position. If you draft RG3 at 2, he's your starter. You don't bench the #2 pick.

Rookies don't cost so much any more. And you aren't benching the #2 pick, you're letting him develop behind one of the great QBs of all time.

For what we would have to give up to get him he better be the starter or why give up so much for him.

[Irn-Bru]

If I had to choose between the two, RG3 makes the most sense and will cost less $.

Why do you have to choose? We could get both if we want to.

We can't afford to use that much cap space in one position. If you draft RG3 at 2, he's your starter. You don't bench the #2 pick.

Cam Newton was the number 1 pick in last year's draft, and he made less money this year than Carolina's mediocre kicker. Cap space is not the problem.

Besides, Peyton Manning would be a 1-2 year solution at quarterback. Sitting behind one of the greatest ever to play for two years is no insult to a rookie playing in the game's toughest position.

[Irn-Bru]

The "system" argument is totally overblown and more often than not is just an excuse for quarterbacks who are failing to perform for some other reason. In today's NFL offenses really don't vary that much from team to team. Terminology is probably the biggest part of the learning curve.

That's not even to mention the fact that Peyton Manning is one of the most intelligent quarterbacks ever to play the game with years and years of experience under his belt. If Manning came here, "the new system" would not be what holds him back, if anything.

[Irn-Bru]

For what we would have to give up to get him he better be the starter or why give up so much for him.

Because he can learn the ropes for a couple of years and then be a starter for 10+ seasons after that?

[CanesSkins26]

If course you can debate my points but just the compensation alone required to get him will keep us out of the running. As for PM changing his system, I don't see it happening.

Changing offenses is linked to learning a new language. I'm a fairly smart guy (well, one step above stupid) but you put me in Russia and I'm screwed. It's going to take me some time to figure things out. Even if I start learning the language now, I won't be able to hold my own for a while. That's the same for PM. He won't be ready to play in a new system until year 2 at best. I look at DMac as an example and he came to us healthy. Also, you can't say PM's skills have not diminished because we don't know. We also don't even know if he's physically able to play next year.

I'm not in favor of bringing in Manning (at all), but the system thing is overblown. McNabb failed because he didn't put in the time to learn the system, and that likely wouldn't be an issue with Manning. As an example, when Brees went from San Diego to New Orleans, in his first year with the Saints he had a qb rating of 92.6 and threw 26 tds and 11 ints.

I'd stay away from Manning because of his age and injury, not because of the money or the system issue.

McNabb failed here because he was expected to orchestrate a successful offense from day 1, with an offensive line that couldn't run or pass block, and a coach who's immaturity mixed with genetic arrogance caused him dismiss the need to develop a working relationship with his new QB, or even try to alter his approach to take advantage of McNabb's skill set, and football experience.

That's not to say McNabb is faultless, but there's more to the story than "McNabb was lazy".

And yes, even Manning would need time to digest a new offensive system even if he were inclined to such an effort. Going from having cart blanche in an offense he knows better than his coaches, to being instructed how to play Shanahan Football by Kyle would likely not be very appealing to Manning.

If McNabb had just failed in DC I would buy that, but he went to Minnesota and sucked just as bad as he did here. When Kyle Orton was put on waivers, three teams put in claims. Not a single NFL team put a waiver request in on McNabb when the Vikings released him.

[The Hogster]

What's the identity of this site? Is it a place for fan banter? Or a place for intelligent football talk? If the answer is neither, then ...well

[Hooligan]

Going from having cart blanche in an offense he knows better than his coaches, to being instructed how to play Shanahan Football by Kyle would likely not be very appealing to Manning.

^^^ I think this sums it up nicely. Why would Peyton go to a struggling team with an unstable O-line where the offensive coordinator is the HC's son and a control freak? It sounds like punishment.

[Redskin in Canada]

Ahhhhhhhh!!! The favourite time in life for a Redskins fan!!!!!!!

The post-season is our THING. What would we do without one? We can speculate on anything and everything.

By the way, it is NOT a surprise anymore, actually it is a very tired argument, that when a player or an agent looks for a juicy retirement contract the name of the REDSKINS always pops up.

I wonder why? Would you blame an agent or a player for doing so? Of course not. There is no substance to the firts article at the head of the thread at all. It is just SPECULATION.

I only know one thing: if Peyton comes here, it would be a sign of desperation by the FO. Hopefully Dan has NOTHING to say about this decision.

[ATX_Skins]

This thread is ridiculous. Manning is not coming to DC.

By all means though keep talking about it.

[riggofan]

This thread is ridiculous. Manning is not coming to DC.

By all means though keep talking about it.

I heard them Lavar and Dukes do at least an hour on the topic yesterday. Like we have anything better to talk about!

[RayNAustin]

If course you can debate my points but just the compensation alone required to get him will keep us out of the running. As for PM changing his system, I don't see it happening.

Changing offenses is linked to learning a new language. I'm a fairly smart guy (well, one step above stupid) but you put me in Russia and I'm screwed. It's going to take me some time to figure things out. Even if I start learning the language now, I won't be able to hold my own for a while. That's the same for PM. He won't be ready to play in a new system until year 2 at best. I look at DMac as an example and he came to us healthy. Also, you can't say PM's skills have not diminished because we don't know. We also don't even know if he's physically able to play next year.

I'm not in favor of bringing in Manning (at all), but the system thing is overblown. McNabb failed because he didn't put in the time to learn the system, and that likely wouldn't be an issue with Manning. As an example, when Brees went from San Diego to New Orleans, in his first year with the Saints he had a qb rating of 92.6 and threw 26 tds and 11 ints.

I'd stay away from Manning because of his age and injury, not because of the money or the system issue.

McNabb failed here because he was expected to orchestrate a successful offense from day 1, with an offensive line that couldn't run or pass block, and a coach who's immaturity mixed with genetic arrogance caused him dismiss the need to develop a working relationship with his new QB, or even try to alter his approach to take advantage of McNabb's skill set, and football experience.

That's not to say McNabb is faultless, but there's more to the story than "McNabb was lazy".

And yes, even Manning would need time to digest a new offensive system even if he were inclined to such an effort. Going from having cart blanche in an offense he knows better than his coaches, to being instructed how to play Shanahan Football by Kyle would likely not be very appealing to Manning.

If McNabb had just failed in DC I would buy that, but he went to Minnesota and sucked just as bad as he did here. When Kyle Orton was put on waivers, three teams put in claims. Not a single NFL team put a waiver request in on McNabb when the Vikings released him.

This is like asking someone "why do you beat your wife" ... with the assumption that they actually do.

In case you didn't get my drift, I don't think McNabb's "failure" here was all on him, but could be attributed to a lot of things that aren't conducive to success. Ya know, stuff like a brand new coaching staff ... an entire offensive personnel group learning a new offense (not just the QB) ... an offensive line learning an entirely new blocking scheme that really struggled in both pass pro and run blocking, and what was apparently very early tension between McNabb and his coach who seemed more critical than he should have been, and more interested in establishing control rather than success. So overall, I think when you look back objectively, you really can't lay all of that in McNabb's lap.

As for the Vikings, he really didn't play that badly ... aside from the first game, after that, he made the most of what he had to work with. You probably aren't familiar with the details, but the Vikings had major half time leads in those first 3 games, 17-7, 17-0, 20-0, and the defense collapsed giving up 10 points, 14 points and 13 points in the 4th quarters to lose all of those games. McNabb doesn't play defense.

So, he went 1-5 (instead of 4-1) .... and was pulled in the 6th game when Chicago was blowing them out, replaced by Ponder. And Ponder played well and they still lost 8 of the final 10 games (1 win against the Redskins).

So the real question is why would you blame McNabb, when it was clear that the Vikings issues went far beyond blaming the QB? After all, the guy who replaced him didn't fair any better! And in hind sight, of the three Redskin QB's ... tell me which one had such better success? Last time I checked, the Redskins did worse this year than last year, with better talent on offense, and better defense.

The bottom line here is that although McNabb never was Tom Brady, he has been among the top tier QB's in the league for a dozen years .... 6 Pro Bowls, 5 NFC Championship appearances and 1 trip to the Super Bowl. And his last Pro Bowl was in 2009. So he didn't just forget how to play football in the off season and become a bum overnight. There is a lot more to that story.

I'd say McNabb was a victim of his own success in Philly ... first the Redskins expected him to single handedly carry the offense .... then the Vikings brought him in as a stop gap measure until Ponder was ready. After the 1-5 start, they decided to let their number 1 pick QB take over and gain some experience for the future, so I don't see his release in Minnesota as anything more than what it was ... a decision to play their first round draft pick to evaluate him and get him some stick time for next year.

It's very shallow surface analysis to simply say that McNabb failed in Washington and Minnesota as if there were no mitigating circimstances.

[ArlingtonSkinsFan]

Ahhhhhhhh!!! The favourite time in life for a Redskins fan!!!!!!!

The post-season is our THING. What would we do without one? We can speculate on anything and everything.

By the way, it is NOT a surprise anymore, actually it is a very tired argument, that when a player or an agent looks for a juicy retirement contract the name of the REDSKINS always pops up.

I wonder why? Would you blame an agent or a player for doing so? Of course not. There is no substance to the firts article at the head of the thread at all. It is just SPECULATION.

I only know one thing: if Peyton comes here, it would be a sign of desperation by the FO. Hopefully Dan has NOTHING to say about this decision.

I wish the postseason was our thing, unfortunately what you meant is that the OFFseason is our thing.

[jmooney]

Ahhhhhhhh!!! The favourite time in life for a Redskins fan!!!!!!!

The post-season is our THING. What would we do without one? We can speculate on anything and everything.

By the way, it is NOT a surprise anymore, actually it is a very tired argument, that when a player or an agent looks for a juicy retirement contract the name of the REDSKINS always pops up.

I wonder why? Would you blame an agent or a player for doing so? Of course not. There is no substance to the firts article at the head of the thread at all. It is just SPECULATION.

I only know one thing: if Peyton comes here, it would be a sign of desperation by the FO. Hopefully Dan has NOTHING to say about this decision.

I wish the postseason was our thing, unfortunately what you meant is that the OFFseason is our thing.

Unfortunately, here in Washington, postseason and offseason are the same.

I cant figure Manning coming here either. Arizona is a better fit as a team, especially when you throw in the climate and a dome. I dont see Peyton at 36, being real giddy about playing home games outdoors in Dec. and Jan.

[Deadskins]

I dont see Peyton at 36, being real giddy about playing home games outdoors in Dec. and Jan.

I'd bet that doesn't figure into his thinking at all.

[PAPDOG67]

Ahhhhhhhh!!! The favourite time in life for a Redskins fan!!!!!!!

The post-season is our THING. What would we do without one? We can speculate on anything and everything.

By the way, it is NOT a surprise anymore, actually it is a very tired argument, that when a player or an agent looks for a juicy retirement contract the name of the REDSKINS always pops up.

I wonder why? Would you blame an agent or a player for doing so? Of course not. There is no substance to the firts article at the head of the thread at all. It is just SPECULATION.

I only know one thing: if Peyton comes here, it would be a sign of desperation by the FO. Hopefully Dan has NOTHING to say about this decision.

Amen brother. Well said.

[Deadskins]

I only know one thing: if Peyton comes here, it would be a sign of desperation by the FO.

I don't agree with that at all. It's not like they'd be expecting him to be a franchise QB. There's absolutely no harm done signing PM as a FA. And it could actually be a boon if we draft a QB who could sit behind him for a year or so.

[PAPDOG67]

That is the only scenario I'm ok with. I don't want Manning at all, but if we do go after him, we better not be giving up any picks for his services. If we do get a guy like Tannehill or Osweiler, it wouldn't be a bad thing to have them sit and learn from Mr. Manning for a season or two.

[Irn-Bru]

I wouldn't mind the Manning + rookie QB scenario. People would just have to temper their expectations a fair bit, as Manning isn't going to be in 2007 form here in DC. But he would be a vast improvement over virtually any of our other options at this point: our current depth chart, those other QBs available in FA, and those realistically available in the draft.

[riggofan]

It's very shallow surface analysis to simply say that McNabb failed in Washington and Minnesota as if there were no mitigating circimstances.

Then why not just say that the Redskins and Vikings weren't the Eagles, and neither team was a good situation for a past-his-prime QB like McNabb? I think most people can agree with that. Instead you've made this lengthy post blaming freaking Kyle Shanahan for McNabb's lack of success. You're complaining about "shallow surface analysis" while you're engaging in pure speculation and fantasy.

[CanesSkins26]

This Manning talk is insane. Why would he want to come to a 5-11 team at age 36? If he leaves the Colts and doesn't retire, he is going to try and go to a team that is close to making a playoff run, like the Jets. He's not going to want to be part of a rebuilding process like what is going on in DC.

[Deadskins]

This Manning talk is insane. Why would he want to come to a 5-11 team at age 36? If he leaves the Colts and doesn't retire, he is going to try and go to a team that is close to making a playoff run, like the Jets. He's not going to want to be part of a rebuilding process like what is going on in DC.

So you don't think that with better play from the QB position this year, that PM would bring, this team would not have made a playoff run? I think that's insane. There were so many games this season that we would have won without the horrible QB play we got from Rexy and Becksy.

[CanesSkins26]

This Manning talk is insane. Why would he want to come to a 5-11 team at age 36? If he leaves the Colts and doesn't retire, he is going to try and go to a team that is close to making a playoff run, like the Jets. He's not going to want to be part of a rebuilding process like what is going on in DC.

So you don't think that with better play from the QB position this year, that PM would bring, this team would not have made a playoff run? I think that's insane. There were so many games this season that we would have won without the horrible QB play we got from Rexy and Becksy.

Would we have been better, sure? A Super Bowl contender? No chance in hell. If Manning leaves the Colts he's not going to go to a rebuilding franchise that's been one of the worst teams in the NFL over the past 15 years.

[KazooSkinsFan]

This Manning talk is insane. Why would he want to come to a 5-11 team at age 36? If he leaves the Colts and doesn't retire, he is going to try and go to a team that is close to making a playoff run, like the Jets. He's not going to want to be part of a rebuilding process like what is going on in DC.

So you don't think that with better play from the QB position this year, that PM would bring, this team would not have made a playoff run? I think that's insane. There were so many games this season that we would have won without the horrible QB play we got from Rexy and Becksy.

Would we have been better, sure? A Super Bowl contender? No chance in hell. If Manning leaves the Colts he's not going to go to a rebuilding franchise that's been one of the worst teams in the NFL over the past 15 years.

The Redskins just haven't had the problem getting elite players to come here that some "fans" want us to have had. With our D's improvement and some emerging targets to throw to, he could be enough to give it a shot. I think the #1 question is the O-line. Even manning can't throw with a guy in his face unblocked. The issue for me is I don't want to sign him and pay cap hell for years to come to do it. But if we can do it without that, it's worth finding out what it would take to get him

[Deadskins]

This Manning talk is insane. Why would he want to come to a 5-11 team at age 36? If he leaves the Colts and doesn't retire, he is going to try and go to a team that is close to making a playoff run, like the Jets. He's not going to want to be part of a rebuilding process like what is going on in DC.

So you don't think that with better play from the QB position this year, that PM would bring, this team would not have made a playoff run? I think that's insane. There were so many games this season that we would have won without the horrible QB play we got from Rexy and Becksy.

Would we have been better, sure? A Super Bowl contender? No chance in hell.

First you said make a playoff run, now you are talking SuperBowl contender. Well, the G-strings are a SuperBowl contender, aren't they? We beat them twice with Sexy Rexy at the helm. I'm convinced we would have won the division with better QB play, so I don't see how you can make the claim there is not a chance in hell we could be in the same spot as the G-strings right now.