The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Not being traded....will be released instead.

That means, Colts will take LUCK....!!!

According to ESPN's Chris Mortensen, Colts owner Jim Irsay "will never trade" Peyton Manning.
Mort also reports both Irsay and Manning have emphatically denied discussing pushing back the March 8 due date for Manning's $28 million option bonus. The duo will "jointly determine" Manning's future, and the matter of Manning's potential release remains a "medical issue" for the time being. Our best guess remains that Manning will be released just before or on March 8

That makes a lot of sense. Why get something for him, rather than just cutting him? That Irsay's a genius!

Deadskins wrote:That makes a lot of sense. Why get something for him, rather than just cutting him? That Irsay's a genius!

I think we should give a hard look at Manning.

It's still Mortensen guessing... GUESSING. Nothing to get excited about quite yet...



None the less, there's room for only one OC on the Redskins. Kyle has demonstrated that he knows everything that there ever was of Football.
Manning would just get in the way.
...true fact. Would I lie to you?


Manning, otoh, has, in fact, demonstrated that he is the rare individual who can not only understand what defenses are trying to do, but also ad lib the solution, while on the field... assuming his neck still works.

Countertrey wrote:There's room for only one OC on the Redskins.

There's room for one of the best QBs of all time.

I'm not sure I would classify him as one of the best. More like probably the best...

Regardless, Kyle's ego is massive. I don't see him permitting Manning to be Manning... which means allowing him to run the offense, with nothing more than the occasional suggestion permitted from Kyle.

Nope... just don't see it. There's no point in having the best quarterback in football today, if you are not going to take advantage of his strength... which is his mind, and his ability to analyse defenses on the fly.


If I'm Mike Shanahan, however, and all I need to do is use the bosses money to out offer the rest of the league... it's a no brainer. "Kyle... Peyton Manning is coming... shut up, and do as he says."

Deadskins wrote:That makes a lot of sense. Why get something for him, rather than just cutting him? That Irsay's a genius!

Without commenting on the "genius" of Irsay, I think there are just times when you simply do the right thing.

If Peyton Manning is not in the future of the Colts... releasing him outright is simply the right thing to do. It would, quite simply, be a class act.

Countertrey wrote:

Deadskins wrote:That makes a lot of sense. Why get something for him, rather than just cutting him? That Irsay's a genius!

Without commenting on the "genius" of Irsay, I think there are just times when you simply do the right thing.

If Peyton Manning is not in the future of the Colts... releasing him outright is simply the right thing to do. It would, quite simply, be a class act.

I agree.

Countertrey wrote:

Deadskins wrote:That makes a lot of sense. Why get something for him, rather than just cutting him? That Irsay's a genius!

Without commenting on the "genius" of Irsay, I think there are just times when you simply do the right thing.

If Peyton Manning is not in the future of the Colts... releasing him outright is simply the right thing to do. It would, quite simply, be a class act.

Not sure why. It's not like it woould hurt Peyton to have his contract honored through a trade. Why is it the right thing to do to not get value for him? Maybe you're saying just don't trade him to a sucky team, let him choose where he wants to go? I'm good with that. Let Peyton and his agent work out the deal, but I still say it would be stupid to just release him. Unless of coures, it helps your cap numbers to do so.

Countertrey wrote:

Deadskins wrote:That makes a lot of sense. Why get something for him, rather than just cutting him? That Irsay's a genius!

Without commenting on the "genius" of Irsay, I think there are just times when you simply do the right thing.

If Peyton Manning is not in the future of the Colts... releasing him outright is simply the right thing to do. It would, quite simply, be a class act.

If he doesn't get his option bonus he becomes a free agent, so technically in the end Irsay can say he didn't cut him.

If we signed Manning we would be changing our entire offense. Keep in mind that he's been calling his own plays for years.

frankcal20 wrote:If we signed Manning we would be changing our entire offense. Keep in mind that he's been calling his own plays for years.

Yeah, but I don't think he designed the plays. He calls plays from the playbook, it's not like's he's making them up at the line of scrimmage. He could call his own plays from Kyle's playbook just as easily.

Also, he's been in the same offense for 17 years. Don't you think that he's going to want to play in the same system instead of learning a new one?

frankcal20 wrote:Also, he's been in the same offense for 17 years. Don't you think that he's going to want to play in the same system instead of learning a new one?

So you're saying whatever team he goes to is going to have to adopt the Colts playbook?

I still think that Manning stays with the Colts and the Colts get Andrew Luck

Manning could just transition to the Colts coaching staff with the offense

hell, with the amount of money he has he could become a partner

Whether we should or shouldn't sign him (if he's released) is probably an academic point. No WAY would Peyton Manning sign with the Redskins. No Way, No How, No Chance. Manning is a thinker ... and whatever cons we might see in a deal like that, you can bet he sees them and more we haven't even considered.

One point being the disrespectful and underhanded manner in which the Shanahans dealt with McNabb. Don't think for a second that that fiasco wouldn't enter Manning's consideration. And regardless of the nature of the disconnect between Shanahan and McNabb, no one can honestly say that he was dealt with properly and respectfully.

Of course, the issue of control is a valid point too. Manning has probably forgotten more about football than Kyle has learned so far in his young career ... so Manning isn't going to come here and be "coached" by Mike's son.

Forget it .... never going to happen.

RayNAustin wrote:
One point being the disrespectful and underhanded manner in which the Shanahans dealt with McNabb. Don't think for a second that that fiasco wouldn't enter Manning's consideration. And regardless of the nature of the disconnect between Shanahan and McNabb, no one can honestly say that he was dealt with properly and respectfully.

I agree, it was wrong to bench him then give him a raise and the starting job back only to bench him again an then trade him. Minnesota was much more respectful by benching him and then cutting him.

Shanny should have just sat him down and said "look Donnie... you're nothing like what we thought you would be, we made a mistake thinking you are the QB to lead this team. Donnie the truth is you're a bum and we're better of with that guy my idiot son likes"

RayNAustin wrote:Forget it .... never going to happen.

I agree with this too

1niksder wrote:

RayNAustin wrote:
One point being the disrespectful and underhanded manner in which the Shanahans dealt with McNabb. Don't think for a second that that fiasco wouldn't enter Manning's consideration. And regardless of the nature of the disconnect between Shanahan and McNabb, no one can honestly say that he was dealt with properly and respectfully.

I agree, it was wrong to bench him then give him a raise and the starting job back only to bench him again an then trade him. Minnesota was much more respectful by benching him and then cutting him.

Shanny should have just sat him down and said "look Donnie... you're nothing like what we thought you would be, we made a mistake thinking you are the QB to lead this team. Donnie the truth is you're a bum and we're better of with that guy my idiot son likes"

RayNAustin wrote:Forget it .... never going to happen.

I agree with this too

The only reason they signed McNabb to a new deal was to lock up their control of him and their ability to trade him, rather than simply release him so that he could go wherever was the best situation for him. Surely, they inked McNabb under false pretenses, because he never would have signed that deal if he knew they were planning to bench him permanently?

Leading up to that benching and afterward were lies and distortions ... the "Cardiovascular conditioning" issue that was as lame as "the dog ate my homework".

Just in case memory is failing

Recent odds:

Arizona Cardinals +200
Washington Redskins +250
Miami Dolphins +300
New York Jets +350
Indianapolis Colts +700

I say we drop out of the Manning sweepstakes, hope the Dolphins get him, and trade our 1 and 2 to the Browns to move into the 4 slot - after the Rams use their 1 on Blackmon and the Vikings take Kalil.

DarthMonk wrote:Recent odds:

Arizona Cardinals +200
Washington Redskins +250
Miami Dolphins +300
New York Jets +350
Indianapolis Colts +700

I say we drop out of the Manning sweepstakes, hope the Dolphins get him, and trade our 1 and 2 to the Browns to move into the 4 slot - after the Rams use their 1 on Blackmon and the Vikings take Kalil.

That'd work for us and the Browns, they'd then have 4 picks in the top 40! But I don't think the Rams would settle for Blackmon if someone offererd them more picks in exchange for their #2, they have plenty of needs after all...

I believe that if WE don't trade to 2 to get RGIII... someone else will.

Countertrey wrote:I believe that if WE don't trade to 2 to get RGIII... someone else will.

Yep. If Cleveland wants him, I doubt they are planning to wait to #4 either much less us at #6.

Countertrey wrote:I believe that if WE don't trade to 2 to get RGIII... someone else will.

Yeah, he's just too good to pass up. The more I watch of him the more convinced I am we have to go for him.

I mean be honest, if we added RGIII, two or three quality players through free agency / trading (say for example OL, WR, CB) and picked up some young under-the-radar talent with our two picks in the 4th round onwards, that would be a significant improvement, wouldn't it...?

If we don't have a pcik in next years 1st round I can live with that as the team is a young team and will be even younger by the start of next season. We wont have past it veterens in need of replacement, apart from maybe ey and maybe Fletcher.

I don't see what we've got to lose by going for RGIII, and if it means offering #1,2,3 this year and #1 next year, so be it!

I thought KC would be a good fit and just ran into this:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... n-manning/

DarthMonk

I mean if you think about, Kansas City is a great fit for Peyton.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
At least it ain't,t Dallas