Peyton Manning (NFL American Football)

[Acert93]

I thought I would create a silly thread, so why not one about Peyton Manning. I know there are a couple NFL fans here so I am sure we can find something to argue about here

1. Where do you think Manning will land? Why? Will it work out (I would define that as at least one conference championship game.)

2. Is he healthy / worth the gamble?

3. Would you want your favorite team to sign him at over $15M-per-year?

4. Make a case for why Manning should pick your team.

5. Peyton or Eli?

6. Are you sick of hearing about Manning yet?

 

[Acert93]

1. Where do you think Manning will land? Why? Will it work out (I would define that as at least one conference championship game.)

I am conflicted about where he will land as there are quite a few options. It sounds like the Jets extended Sanchez and the Redskins realized he was not coming there and appear to have traded up to the #2 pick for RGIII. St. Louis is probably pretty committed to Bradford. It sounds like the primary contenders are the Broncos, Texans, Chiefs, 49ers, Cardinals, Dolphins, and Seahawks.

It is said Manning supposedly prefers the AFC (he knows the conference and he also would not have to compete against Eli). He obviously wants to win and wants a stable situation. Looking at each team...

Broncos. Solid, but not great, Defense that seems to play up to competition (24th in points allowed and 20th in yards allowed). I personally think their Offense is a mess though. First, without Tebow, I am not convinced they have a rushing attack that has a good 3 year outlook. They let their best receiver (Brandon Loyd) go. Their team has had quite a few off season issues and sub-planting Tebow would probably not go over well with the fans. They have great fans, but in this situation I am not sure Manning wants to be the guy that chased Tebow out of town.

Chiefs. I know a lot of prognosticators like them, and they are in an up and down division, but I look at them as more glass half empty. A couple injuries to core players really tanked their season. There is no guarantee Charles comes back healthy and strong. Bowe is a good target though. 21st in points allowed and 22nd in yards allowed doesn't look like a huge selling point. Great fans but I don't see the appeal here for getting to a championship game.

Cardinals. Their defense, again, is just average at 17th in pts. and 18th in yards. Weak division is a plus (could get 4 free wins against the Hawks and Rams). The OL appears in shambles but Wells is a serviceable back. The big perk here, aside from weather and a weak division, is Fitz. It could be a scary good combo. I personally think the Colts as a team have always been overrated due to Manning. I think their Defenses have always been poorly constructed (supposedly to have the speed to protect leads which in the end I think cost the Colts a few SB opportunities), have always had poor rushing attacks (Edge was good but not great imo), and Manning has a history of making receivers much better on the stat line than they are compared to similar performing players elsewhere. Manning has never had a target like Fitz and I think it would be a game changer. But I think big picture wise...

Dolphins. If Manning was enamored by a large, fast #1 receiver Marshall, while no Fitz, is worth kicking the tires on. He may be immature but he can catch the ball. He would also get Bush out of the backfield, although that must be concerning for a running game. They have a solid Defense, 6th in pts allows and 15th in yards. He has a house in Miami and it is warm. The problem I see is they have to play the Pats and Jets 2x a year each. I don't think the Dolphins have the talent to compete with such yet.

Seahawks. They have a surprisingly good defense for their record (7th pts, 9th yards). I think Seattle is the dark horse, but as a Seahawk fan I am biased. Great fans, quiet but nice city, weak division (if they get Manning they get 4 free wins from the Cards and Rams). Solid ownership and a commitment to win. The big concern really needs to be the OL. Their rookie Right Side looked poor. RT (Carpenter) looked plain slow and RG Moffit didn't look much better early in the season. Gallery (LG) is pro-bowl caliber but injury prone. The LT (Okung) is improving but also has had injury problems. You could argue that no OTAs last year while getting a new line coach (Cable), new philosophy (zone blocking), having rookies on the line, and the injuries held them back. But if I am Manning this is a concern. A big one. On the flip side having zero passing game with Jackson (who holds the ball far too long) makes the issues worse than need be.

But there are positives. The biggest is SEA has a good TEs in Zach Miller (remember him from OAK? Yeah, he had to block all last year). Manning likes a good TE and Miller fits that bill. FB Michael Robinson was a pro-bowler. At RB they have Lynch. While not a top tier RB he is arguably a 2nd tier back. The big thing with Lynch is he runs hard. Manning is the best play action QB in the NFL and having a RB who hits the hole hard and fast means opposing DEF will have to stay home on play action. Leon Washington is also a great special teams player and dangerous as a scat back. WR is better than face value. Rice is injury prone but has a lot of upside (look at how well he played with Farve in MN). I wouldn't count on Mike Williams but Doug Baldwin (rookie last year) led the team in receiving and was a steal in the draft. Golden Tate has the measurables but has lacked the discipline a QB like Manning would demand. If Manning liked Seattle but wasn't sold on their receiving corps he could push for Wayne to be signed, but I think that he is on the decline and the draft (Seattle has the #12 pick) would be a better place to look. Seattle had like 5 Pro-Bowlers as a team and almost double that in alternates. They are young (2nd youngest in the league) and seem to be moving forward as a team. I think Manning puts them over the top and they would get better each year for 3 years with Manning.

Texans. A really good defense (4th pts 2nd yards) and a team that is ready NOW for a SB. You have one of the top 5 RBs in Foster and maybe the best WR in Johnson. They are in a weak division where the Jags (5-11) and Colts (2-14) are a mess and I think the Titans (9-7) will transition from Hasselbeck to Locker this year. Yes, the Texans have a top-15 QB in Schaub but I think you pull the trigger for this reason: the gap between the tier 1 QBs (Manning, Rodgers, Brady, Brees) and the rest is pretty big. And after those tier 1 guys and the next group of the Rivers and 'Berger and the Schaubs of the world is yet another couple big steps. The Texans are winners NOW. Throwing in an elite QB only makes everyone else better. And Manning would get to stay in the division, let alone conference, and hit the road running.

49ers. A really good defense (2th pts 4nd yards) and younger. Weak division--if they got Manning count 6 wins now against the 'Hawks, Cards, and Rams. The offense I think over performs; I like Gore but he is getting older (29 next year) and has taken a LOT of punishment. They lose him I am not sure that offense has much gas. On the plus side Vernon Davis is a monster, easily one of the top handful of TEs in the league, and Manning would just abuse other teams with him. They really do need a deep threat at WR though to get Crabtree some space. They were the beneficiaries of having a really weak schedule in 2011 so things are going to be tougher with a #1 schedule but I think that in the NFC a healthy Manning on the 49ers makes them a viable SB contender.

So my prediction? Since barely anyone is talking about the Texans I will predict he goes there--just to stick it to Isray 2x a year and take advantage of the weak division. If I were Manning I would be looking at the Texans and 49ers the hardest with an eye toward the 'Hawks if they present a plan to shore up the OL.

2. Is he healthy / worth the gamble?

I think he is getting healthy, but who knows? As for worth the gamble... if I am a GM and I see how throwing well and a commitment to play and I am one of those teams with a desperate QB situation I pull the trigger. Most of those teams with bad QB situations are a year or more away from finding a QB solution so why not? It would make the team relevant and generate money so it is a solid gamble.

3. Would you want your favorite team to sign him at over $15M-per-year?

Yes (Seahawks).

4. Make a case for why Manning should pick your team.

See above under Seahawks.

5. Peyton or Eli?

Peyton every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Football is a team sport and I think too much praise/blame gets put on QBs. That said they make a MAJOR impact on the field and I think Peyton's track record is a pretty good indication he has pulled a lot of sub-500 teams up to playoff level.

6. Are you sick of hearing about Manning yet?

Nah, this has to be the most interesting NFL off-season in years. It isn't just Manning but a ton of stuff is going on. But it doesn't hurt having a future HOF player still in the "can perform" years of his career (if healthy), hitting the free agent market. Not trades needed to tank your team. It is funny seeing all the team scramble.

 

[Grall]

Don't wanna threadcrap or anything (coz not only is that incredibly impolite, but also inconsiderate considering the big importance this topic obviously has to you, seeing your monstrous second post up there...), but american football isn't...well, maybe not the best subject for an arguing-type thread, because only you americans even know the rules, much less the players and teams. ...And B3D is a pretty international gang of people, so the rest of us are invariably going to feel excluded and not to mention, somewhat puzzled by the whole discussion.

That's not even mentioning the fact that american football isn't even played with the feet...

 

[Mariner]

Pffft. Rugby without the skill or excitement.

Just kidding.

But Grall is correct that few outside of the US are interested in Gridiron. I've tried to watch the odd game from time to time but it is just too stop-start for my English eyes. We prefer games which have an almost non-stop ebb and flow over here, as does most of Europe and the rest of the world.

 

[Mize]

Eli over Peyton every day! How can you not love a Super Bowl winning QB who looks like a kicker?

 

[Sxotty]

I think Peyton should hang it up. Of course I thought the same about Favre and he went to a championship still. Is that why you picked that as your metric for successful? Though it is a good enough metric anyway since getting to and winning super bowls is challenging.

PS sorry for all you elsewhere that have no feeling for gridiron.


Since my favorite team is the Steelers no I don't want him here (feel free to take Wallace off our hands someone).

Eli because he is younger.

Yes I am sick of hearing about it for now.

 

[willardjuice]

I guess not redskins since they just overpaid for RG III!

Seahawks are a long shot. Denver seems like a good place (strong defense, weak division, etc.) save for the awful weather. Cardinals wouldn't be bad either. Miami is a tough sell (poor offensive line, playing the Patriots twice a year, etc.). It'll probably come down to money though. Whoever coughs up the most dough will probably win.

And you would pick an old (and potentially unhealthy) qb over a younger 2-time super bowl mvp who's never missed a game in his career!?! Long term the answer is definitely Eli. Even if he's 100% healthy, Peyton has 3-4 years left at most.

Considering I'm a Giants fan, no I don't get tired from hearing about Manning.

 

[Acert93]

I left the Peyton/Eli question open ended so looking at it from "who you take today?" is a valid interpretation in which case Eli makes a lot more sense. In my mind I was thinking historically and I think there is little argument for the older Manning.

As for the Redskins and RGIII.... wow, did the Redskins NOT get the memo that with a rookie salary cap that 1st round picks are more valuable than ever? And with them almost certain to be a top-10 the next couple years those are costly picks. Ouch.

 

[willardjuice]

To be fair to the Redskins, most people thought the Giants overpaid to get Eli, but history has shown that's worked out pretty well for them. I think it will come down to the Redskins' ability to effectively address their other needs through free agency (they sure have the cap room to do it). The Redskins can definitely make this work (and if they do, it will pay big dividends for a long time), but it's still a huge risk. If RGIII isn't hall of fame worthy or if they are unable to address their other needs, they will be sunk (and for a long time).

I think the more interesting question in the Peyton vs Eli debate is who would you rather be? I think I would rather be Eli (and not because he plays for the Giants!). To me, the euphoric feeling one gets from winning it all trumps everything else (records, HoF, etc.). And to do it twice is something really extraordinary. I think the first time probably feels like "WE FINALLY DID IT!!!!!!!!!1111". The second time though might be more meaningful as it allows the individual to put things into perspective. They know just how rare and how hard it is to win in this league (let alone twice). They can understand what teammates (who've never won it all before) are going through and can be immensely happy for them. I assume there's just so much more reflection the second time. I mean can you imagine being Marino? He had so much talent and worked so hard, but none of it mattered. He will never know that feeling. I know one can counter "I'm sure he's crying all the way to bank", but you know there's a sense of regret and disappointment there. I bet only a few feel sorrier for Marino than Eli.

 

[Acert93]

Marino is a good example of why Football is the ultimate team sport. Big picture Marino had the talent and work ethic and was very clutch. I think Marino is much like Peyton: too good, too young, which handicaps the development of the team because you are stuck drafting the back 3rd and you pretty much float some mediocre management and coaches (how many years did Peyton have to suffer Mora???!) In the totally abstract world of getting to pick say an Eli or a Marino to me there is no time to even blink about it (MARINO!) but as you say Eli has the hardware and, to his credit, he really has proven to be the kind of QB you can win with. You cannot say that about many. He doesn't have the pretty stats and to be quite frank you look at the last 5 years and he really is up and down (like of like an upgraded Dave Krieg) but he has rode the hot hand two times now to SB wins. That counts for something.

As for trading places... I dunno, watching Peyton is impressive. How he dissects teams and just controls the game. I am sure there is some ribbing for 1 SB win but for body of work I look at Peyton and how he really did master the QB skill and took it to new levels. It is like Farve in his prime--watching them perform at that high of a level is something that really isn't "measurable." In the team concept it doesn't matter because it is how a team performs... but then again a new team is champ every year and the lack of a teams greatness doesn't negate the mastery some of the greats have shown. I am sure Marino would trade some records or trade a sub-par season for a SB win but then again Marino did things in games, seasons, and a career that a lot of SB winners cannot even begin to approach. Not to mention I think football savvy fans when you talk about the greats and someone you would want to build a fantasy team around have Marino easily up in the top 10. There are a lot of SB champion QBs that you cannot say that about.

On the Peyton front and my Seahawks... while renting a HOF for a couple years gives them a legit chance at a conference championship game due to "parity" in the league (you got 13-3 on a soft schedule, get a bye, win your home field game and ta da) and I like Peyton I think Seattle should kick the Matt Flynn tires. Hasselbeck turned out pretty nice for Seattle. I am not over-impressed with 2 good games, but at least that is 2 good games more than a rookie who can be totally hit/miss. He is NFL seasoned and since no draft picks are involved I think you do a Kevin Kolb style contract. Yeah you have to dole out a $10M signing bonus and another good 7-10 first year monies. But what people missed is Kolb has like a $7M year 2 roster bonus. If Flynn tanks in year 1 you basically eat $17-$20M test driving a QB. Ouch. But that is a lot better than being married to a albatross contract for 3-4 years. If it works you got a QB for the next 5-10 years. If it doesn't you walk away and go back to the draft (next year has a lot of quality QBs again) or free agency.

Oddly, if the Cards get Manning Kolb should be a free agent. If the Titans get Manning Schaub will be a free agent. If the 49ers get Manning Smith will be a free agent (meh). If the Chiefs get Manning Cassel will be a free agent. So from Seattle's perspective unless the Fins or Broncos get Manning the market should be Flynn + 1. I like Jackson, just not as our QB

 

[Davros]

Make a case for why Manning should pick your team.

why would you want a player picking the team, thats the managers job

 

[Malo]

Don't wanna threadcrap or anything (coz not only is that incredibly impolite, but also inconsiderate considering the big importance this topic obviously has to you, seeing your monstrous second post up there...), but american football isn't...well, maybe not the best subject for an arguing-type thread, because only you americans even know the rules, much less the players and teams. ...And B3D is a pretty international gang of people, so the rest of us are invariably going to feel excluded and not to mention, somewhat puzzled by the whole discussion.

That's not even mentioning the fact that american football isn't even played with the feet...

Gridiron is something you really have to understand in terms of all the types of player positions and the structure of each play, why they do what they do each and every play. I'm Australian (live in the US now) and once my friends (who actually played gridirion back in Oz) explained everything to me I started viewing gridiron for what it is, a game of chess with huge guys in armor. It is by far the most in-depth strategic sport around in every way.

The Madden games were very helpful in understanding the sport.

We prefer games which have an almost non-stop ebb and flow over here, as does most of Europe and the rest of the world.

For non-stop ebb and flow the Americans have ice hockey and basketball.

 

[Sxotty]

Gridiron is something you really have to understand in terms of all the types of player positions and the structure of each play, why they do what they do each and every play. I'm Australian (live in the US now) and once my friends (who actually played gridirion back in Oz) explained everything to me I started viewing gridiron for what it is, a game of chess with huge guys in armor. It is by far the most in-depth strategic sport around in every way.

The Madden games were very helpful in understanding the sport.



For non-stop ebb and flow the Americans have ice hockey and basketball.

Soccer/Football is also becoming slightly more popular here. Maybe in the future sometime it will be viable here. Maybe if the percent of Hispanics keeps increasing