Page 5 of 18
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:28 pm
by Deadskins
markshark84 wrote:Deadskins wrote:markshark84 wrote:The entire thought of getting Peyton is plain stupid. It was my impression that the intent of our front office was to "re-build" the team. Signing or trading for a 37 yr old, injured QB doesn't exactly fit that description. We need to get YOUNGER.
Peyton very much still believes he can compete and play in this league. The issue is that peyton and the skins do not make a good combo. We don't have the adequate OL support to an aging, injury riddled QB. The NYJs are obviously the best fit for Peyton. And Peyton is much too old to build around.
Peyton would merely be a band-aid -- and we need surgery.
Why does everyone seem to automatically think we would be signing Peyton to be the new franchise QB? Obviously they know about the injury issues, and would have a backup plan in case he get's reinjured. If they signed PM, it's not like they would abandon the idea of drafting our future QB. It would only mean we might get some high-level QB play while the future QB learns the game.
First, because PM is not the type of QB that is going to go into a situation knowing that he is not "the man" or the guy. That is the entire reason why he most likely will be out of INDY for Luck -- it's not the contract, which they could restructure. Second, if INDY doesn't cut him, it will cost us picks to get him -- and based on where everything stands injury wise and being out of the league for a year -- anything above a 5th rounder is too deep for me.
Also, I agree with Canes that I am not sure what their backup plan is. As it currently looks, the skins are on the outside looking in. Miami basically signed a HC to get Flynn, CLE has the top pick to get RGIII. PM is just not a good idea. I am not sure if they even have a choice to have a plan.
First, there's no way Indy doesn't cut Peyton. He's due a $28 million bonus in March if he's still on the roster. Second, any team that signs Peyton as a FA is not realistically expecting to have him for more than two seasons. So your two objections have no validity. As long as we stick to the plan to draft a QB (hopefully moving up to get RGIII), signing PM is win-win for us.
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:43 pm
by CanesSkins26
KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Last time I checked there was a draft before last season.
And...
And...they could have addressed quarterback in last year's draft instead of going with the fantastically successful combination of Beck/Grossman.
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 6:50 pm
by CanesSkins26
Manning cleared...
Peyton Manning has been medically cleared by two doctors, including Dr. Robert Watkins, who performed the most recent surgery on the Indianapolis Colts quarterback's neck, to resume his NFL career, sources told ESPN senior NFL analyst Chris Mortensen and ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.
The sources said Watkins examined Manning recently in Los Angeles and concluded the stability in his neck would have allowed the quarterback to play this Sunday if the nerves in his arm had regenerated to a satisfactory performance level.
Watson also instructed the quarterback to continue an aggressive rehabilitation path that provides an optimistic outlook for Manning to play in 2012. Watkins performed Manning's spinal fusion on Sept. 8, and on Dec. 1 declared that the fusion had achieved "firm fixation."
Watkins, according to the sources, joined Colts neurosurgeon Dr. Hank Feuer in clearing Manning to play. One source said that Feuer recently told Manning, "If you were my own son, I'd tell (you) to go play."
In addition to Manning's optimistic words expressed in an interview with ESPN on Tuesday, in which he indicated he plans to resume his playing career, the medical clearance by his two doctors, the sources said, will bolster his determination to play in 2012.
What remains in question is the timeline in which Manning's nerve regeneration to his triceps will improve to the point where he is throwing passes in the manner that helped him win four MVP awards during his 13-year career.
According to one source familiar with Manning's medical review, "It's not a safety issue; it's a performance issue." This source added that Manning is "making progress."
The source said Manning had a throwing session Tuesday with two of his Colts receivers -- Anthony Gonzalez and Blair White -- at an undisclosed location and that Manning has spent numerous recent days throwing to at least one wide receiver, aiming to regain as much strength as possible in his arm.
However, the source said Manning still cannot pinpoint a date when his performance will reach an acceptable level to him. The source alluded that it might take to the one-year anniversary of Manning's May 23rd, 2011 surgery on a bulging disk in his neck.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7534274/sources-peyton-manning-medically-cleared-resume-nfl-career
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:32 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
CanesSkins26 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Last time I checked there was a draft before last season.
And...
And...they could have addressed quarterback in last year's draft instead of going with the fantastically successful combination of Beck/Grossman.
OBVIOUSLY I was asking you to be more specific. "There was a draft" is lame...even for you. What move should they have made that was retarded. I mean duh. Stop playing dumb.
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 9:44 pm
by CanesSkins26
KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Last time I checked there was a draft before last season.
And...
And...they could have addressed quarterback in last year's draft instead of going with the fantastically successful combination of Beck/Grossman.
OBVIOUSLY I was asking you to be more specific. "There was a draft" is lame...even for you. What move should they have made that was retarded. I mean duh. Stop playing dumb.
Specifically,I think that we should have drafted Ryan Mallett. We kept trading back but could have had Mallett late in the second round.
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:47 pm
by DarthMonk
CanesSkins26 wrote:Specifically,I think that we should have drafted Ryan Mallett. We kept trading back but could have had Mallett late in the second round.
Agreed. Actually could've had him mid-third. I feel like we traded down one too many times and started losing some value.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:36 am
by The Hogster
Jim Irsay just Tweeted that Manning has not been cleared by Colts doctors, nor has he taken a physical.
Manning is playing Chess with Irsay during Superbowl Week. This could get good. Manning Watch
https://twitter.com/#!/JimIrsay
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 10:55 am
by StorminMormon86
KazooSkinsFan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:I thought the Shanaplan was to "rebuild" this team? Why all of a sudden are there murmurs of the Shanahans doing the same damn thing that his plagued this team for so long in going out and signing a "sure bet veteran". The Manning move would be riskier than drafting a rookie and hoping he doesn't turn into a bust, IMO.
So you are knocking Shannahan without knowing the terms of a deal he hasn't made...
I suggest you read a reply before making a snarky response. I was knocking the murmurs and the idea that Shanahan was even thinking about getting Manning. Come on now!
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:11 am
by KazooSkinsFan
StorminMormon86 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:I thought the Shanaplan was to "rebuild" this team? Why all of a sudden are there murmurs of the Shanahans doing the same damn thing that his plagued this team for so long in going out and signing a "sure bet veteran". The Manning move would be riskier than drafting a rookie and hoping he doesn't turn into a bust, IMO.
So you are knocking Shannahan without knowing the terms of a deal he hasn't made...
I suggest you read a reply before making a snarky response. I was knocking the murmurs and the idea that Shanahan was even thinking about getting Manning. Come on now!
Your post was clear. You didn't say if they did it, you said the bolded above.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:17 am
by KazooSkinsFan
CanesSkins26 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Last time I checked there was a draft before last season.
And...
And...they could have addressed quarterback in last year's draft instead of going with the fantastically successful combination of Beck/Grossman.
OBVIOUSLY I was asking you to be more specific. "There was a draft" is lame...even for you. What move should they have made that was retarded. I mean duh. Stop playing dumb.
Specifically,I think that we should have drafted Ryan Mallett. We kept trading back but could have had Mallett late in the second round.
If Mallet had been a no brainer 31 other teams wouldn't have passed on him in the second round. Do we need another character issue? Maybe. but he's no sure thing even if the Patriots do like him so far in practice. We've had players who tore it up in practice and never produced in a game. That we went into the season with Grossman and Beck, but not Mallett, is not exactly slam dunk indictment of Shannahan's incompetence.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:18 am
by StorminMormon86
KazooSkinsFan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:I thought the Shanaplan was to "rebuild" this team? Why all of a sudden are there murmurs of the Shanahans doing the same damn thing that his plagued this team for so long in going out and signing a "sure bet veteran". The Manning move would be riskier than drafting a rookie and hoping he doesn't turn into a bust, IMO.
So you are knocking Shannahan without knowing the terms of a deal he hasn't made...
I suggest you read a reply before making a snarky response. I was knocking the murmurs and the idea that Shanahan was even thinking about getting Manning. Come on now!
Your post was clear. You didn't say if they did it, you said the bolded above.
I didn't say anything about the Shanahan's doing anything. I simply asked "why are there murmurs" of them getting an injured vet if their intent was to rebuild? Murmurs from the talking heads, fans, etc. NOTHING from the Shanahan's. There should be no Peyton Manning talk.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:23 am
by CanesSkins26
KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Last time I checked there was a draft before last season.
And...
And...they could have addressed quarterback in last year's draft instead of going with the fantastically successful combination of Beck/Grossman.
OBVIOUSLY I was asking you to be more specific. "There was a draft" is lame...even for you. What move should they have made that was retarded. I mean duh. Stop playing dumb.
Specifically,I think that we should have drafted Ryan Mallett. We kept trading back but could have had Mallett late in the second round.
If Mallet had been a no brainer 31 other teams wouldn't have passed on him in the second round. Do we need another character issue? Maybe. but he's no sure thing even if the Patriots do like him so far in practice. We've had players who tore it up in practice and never produced in a game. That we went into the season with Grossman and Beck, but not Mallett, is not exactly slam dunk indictment of Shannahan's incompetence.
You could say the same about any player that wasn't taken by 32 teams in the first round. Who said he was a sure thing? It's not about him being a sure thing. It's about the front office choosing to stick with Rex/Beck and not bringing in a young qb to compete with them. They had a chance to grab a high-upside guy and didn't do it. And as a result we're now faced with a pretty mediocre qb draft class in the third year of this front office. So far they've given us McNabb (fail), Beck (fail), and Rex (fail).
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 11:52 am
by Chris Luva Luva
CanesSkins26 wrote:It's about the front office choosing to stick with Rex/Beck and not bringing in a young qb to compete with them.
Or it's about the FO choosing to address other areas of need and valued those players higher. And that's what they did.
CanesSkins26 wrote:They had a chance to grab a high-upside guy and didn't do it.
They did grab a high-upside guy in Leonard Hankerson. Who was a steal at that spot.
CanesSkins26 wrote:And as a result we're now faced with a pretty mediocre qb draft class in the third year of this front office. So far they've given us McNabb (fail), Beck (fail), and Rex (fail).
Fine. And it'll be addressed this year. It didn't happen when you wanted, get over it.
And if they had drafted Mallet and he was a bust, you'd rip them for that too. So I'm glad that they're flipping the fans the bird and sticking to THEIR plan.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 12:26 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
StorminMormon86 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:StorminMormon86 wrote:I thought the Shanaplan was to "rebuild" this team? Why all of a sudden are there murmurs of the Shanahans doing the same damn thing that his plagued this team for so long in going out and signing a "sure bet veteran". The Manning move would be riskier than drafting a rookie and hoping he doesn't turn into a bust, IMO.
So you are knocking Shannahan without knowing the terms of a deal he hasn't made...
I suggest you read a reply before making a snarky response. I was knocking the murmurs and the idea that Shanahan was even thinking about getting Manning. Come on now!
Your post was clear. You didn't say if they did it, you said the bolded above.
I didn't say anything about the Shanahan's doing anything. I simply asked "why are there murmurs" of them getting an injured vet if their intent was to rebuild? Murmurs from the talking heads, fans, etc. NOTHING from the Shanahan's. There should be no Peyton Manning talk.
How can the Shannanans stop there being rumors? Asking "why" implies they are doing something. If you didn't mean it that way, say I didn't mean it that way. Don't deny clear meanings in the English language. I'm done with this silly argument.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 12:26 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
Chris Luva Luva wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:It's about the front office choosing to stick with Rex/Beck and not bringing in a young qb to compete with them.
Or it's about the FO choosing to address other areas of need and valued those players higher. And that's what they did.
CanesSkins26 wrote:They had a chance to grab a high-upside guy and didn't do it.
They did grab a high-upside guy in Leonard Hankerson. Who was a steal at that spot.
CanesSkins26 wrote:And as a result we're now faced with a pretty mediocre qb draft class in the third year of this front office. So far they've given us McNabb (fail), Beck (fail), and Rex (fail).
Fine. And it'll be addressed this year. It didn't happen when you wanted, get over it.
And if they had drafted Mallet and he was a bust, you'd rip them for that too. So I'm glad that they're flipping the fans the bird and sticking to THEIR plan.
Exactly
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:03 pm
by CanesSkins26
They did grab a high-upside guy in Leonard Hankerson. Who was a steal at that spot.
Look, I'm a big U fan and obviously a big Hankerson fan. But if I had a choice of a high-upside qb or a wr with upside, I'd take the qb every single time, especially when the alternative is Rex/Beck with no legit young player to groom.
And as for sticking to their plan, do you really think that when they started their plan was to go into their third offseason with Rex/Beck as the quarterbacks? So far they have failed quite miserably with the qb position. The acquisitions, three bums.
As for not drafting a qb when I wanted them to, that has nothing to do with it. Smart franchises understand the value of having not only a good starter, but good young backups to groom as well. Which is why a team like the Patriots, despite having Tom Brady, has drafted a qb in three of the past five drafts.
And Mallett is just one example. We could've drafted Yates in the fifth round, as another example. There were opportunities in last year's draft to at least bring in a young qb to compete with the two rejects that we have on the roster. The front office chose not to, we saw the results, and now they've put themselves in a real tough spot. Brilliant.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:13 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
CanesSkins26 wrote:Look, I'm a big U fan and obviously a big Hankerson fan. But if I had a choice of a high-upside qb or a wr with upside, I'd take the qb every single time, especially when the alternative is Rex/Beck with no legit young player to groom.
That's your opinion and your entitled to it. But obviously they felt different and grabbed a quality player at a great price. You can't fault them for having a different opinion when they what they did was still productive and benefited the team.
CanesSkins26 wrote:And as for sticking to their plan, do you really think that when they started their plan was to go into their third offseason with Rex/Beck as the quarterbacks? So far they have failed quite miserably with the qb position. The acquisitions, three bums.
And they've succeeded elsewhere. Ur asking for perfection and that's unrealistic and unfair. If they grabbed a QB, you'd be complaining about youth at WR. You'd complain about youth at DE (Jenkins). You'd complain about youth at safety (Gomes). You'd complain about youth at RB (Helu, Royster).
CanesSkins26 wrote:As for not drafting a qb when I wanted them to, that has nothing to do with it. Smart franchises understand the value of having not only a good starter, but good young backups to groom as well. Which is why a team like the Patriots, despite having Tom Brady, has drafted a qb in three of the past five drafts.
Stop comparing them to us. They're in a totally different position. This team has many more needs. A lot less depth. And better players overall. So, you cannot compare them. Sorry.
CanesSkins26 wrote:The front office chose not to, we saw the results, and now they've put themselves in a real tough spot. Brilliant.
You'd complain regardless, sorry dude. They've made progress. They could have drafted someone in the 5th round and they completely sucked and would still be in this position. U took who they felt made sense. They drafted efficiently, they made smart decisions and filled holes and created depth.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 1:56 pm
by The Hogster
I think what this regime has shown is two fold.
On the negative side they've shown that:
(i) they are not great evaluators of QB talent. That is evident with their decision to trade for McDone & the decision to roll with Rex & Beck as the two QBS competing to lead this team. (To their credit, there weren't very many alternatives after the McNabb debacle)
The troubling part of this is that they don't seem to be the kind of regime that will identify a good QB outside of the consensus talents.
(ii) They have shown an over-confidence/borderline arrogance with regard to the "scheme." Almost believing that it's a plug and play, fail-proof system, which it aint.
On the positive side:
(i) This regime has shown the willingness to cut bait when necessary. The hubris doesn't extend beyond reason.
(ii) They appreciate the need to get a Franchise caliber QB and now realize that a winning QB is not on the roster.
As a fan, all we can be is cautiously optimistic. Given our QB situation, hopefully it can't get much worse. Let's hope whatever move we make is a good one. It will have lasting implications.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:15 pm
by riggofan
The Hogster wrote:I think what this regime has shown is two fold.
On the negative side they've shown that:
(i) they are not great evaluators of QB talent. That is evident with their decision to trade for McDone & the decision to roll with Rex & Beck as the two QBS competing to lead this team. (To their credit, there weren't very many alternatives after the McNabb debacle)
I think this is such an exaggeration. Mike was a good enough evaluator of QB talent to have success with guys like Jay Cutler, Jake Plummer and even Brian Griese to an extent. What you should say is that like every other coach in this league they've shown that they're not INFALLIBLE evaluators of QB talent.
Even at that, I'm pretty sure they've known for a long time what they have in Grossman. Beck seems to be one of those guys who shows promise but hasn't been able to deliver in games. There's really only one way to find that out.
I'm curious if we somehow land RGIII will the Shanahans suddenly be hailed once again as quarterback gurus or whatever by the fans.
Anyway, I don't mean to pick your statement apart. Personally I would just like to see Mike draft a QB for the team at some point and be judged by that selection. What he's done picking through the scraps of available free agents doesn't seem like a completely fair way to judge the man's football intelligence.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:16 pm
by frankcal20
no thanks to Peyton. I want an young QB
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:20 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
The Hogster wrote:(ii) They have shown an over-confidence/borderline arrogance with regard to the "scheme." Almost believing that it's a plug and play, fail-proof system, which it aint.
IMO, I think they just say stuff to shut people up. They put out a lot of misinformation because they've said things to completely contradict that stance.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 2:22 pm
by CanesSkins26
riggofan wrote:The Hogster wrote:I think what this regime has shown is two fold.
On the negative side they've shown that:
(i) they are not great evaluators of QB talent. That is evident with their decision to trade for McDone & the decision to roll with Rex & Beck as the two QBS competing to lead this team. (To their credit, there weren't very many alternatives after the McNabb debacle)
I think this is such an exaggeration. Mike was a good enough evaluator of QB talent to have success with guys like Jay Cutler, Jake Plummer and even Brian Griese to an extent. What you should say is that like every other coach in this league they've shown that they're not INFALLIBLE evaluators of QB talent.
Even at that, I'm pretty sure they've known for a long time what they have in Grossman. Beck seems to be one of those guys who shows promise but hasn't been able to deliver in games. There's really only one way to find that out.
I'm curious if we somehow land RGIII will the Shanahans suddenly be hailed once again as quarterback gurus or whatever by the fans.
Anyway, I don't mean to pick your statement apart. Personally I would just like to see Mike draft a QB for the team at some point and be judged by that selection. What he's done picking through the scraps of available free agents doesn't seem like a completely fair way to judge the man's football intelligence.
Go back and look at Mike Shanahan's history with drafting/trading for/signing qbs. Other than Cutler, he's had little success in the draft, and even Cutler hasn't really lived up to his draft position. His FA/trade moves have all been short-term fixes.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:25 pm
by KazooSkinsFan
frankcal20 wrote:no thanks to Peyton. I want an young QB
You make that sound like a mutually exclusive choice.
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:29 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
KazooSkinsFan wrote:frankcal20 wrote:no thanks to Peyton. I want an young QB
You make that sound like a mutually exclusive choice.
They could grab Peyton and still get RGIII. People would lose their minds if they did that...
Posted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:31 pm
by CanesSkins26
Chris Luva Luva wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:frankcal20 wrote:no thanks to Peyton. I want an young QB
You make that sound like a mutually exclusive choice.
They could grab Peyton and still get RGIII. People would lose their minds if they did that...
If Peyton doesn't want to be in that type of situation in Indy, why would he want that here?