The Peyton Manning discussion

[Boone]

I wish the Redskins had just gone with Brennan for a year or two. To take a kid (WAC or not) who was an all-time college great and never give him a significant chance - I think it was a mistake. Brennan was one of those unconventional QBs that was a 'gamer' - and I've never been convinced he couldn't have been successful if he'd had a reasonable shot at developing.

 

[Henry]

I'm not going to argue that top down leadership has been lacking in DC but a franchise QB would have changed everything. A team might have a down year here and there but if you have THAT guy at QB you will be in the playoff mix year after year.

Top Five QBs by statistics are all have their teams in playoff mix: Brees, Brady, Manning, Rogers and Stafford.

First of all, you don't need a top five QB to be good. If that were the case there would only be five good teams a year. The Redskins haven't just been "not good." They've been downright awful. Seven losing seasons over the past ten years. Five with 10 or more losses (six if we lose another game this year.)

That's not because we haven't had a QB. It's because this team has been run terribly.

Second of all, we did have a franchise QB on this team. His name was Trent Green. Because the front office was in a state of flux he got away. Could you imagine having had a +3500-yard passer until 2005? Well, we didn't have one, not because the team didn't find him but because they couldn't keep him.

A competent front office will go a long ways towards correcting mistakes like that.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

the reason why Boise St never gets respect is because of their cupcake schedule. when they have to play real SEC type teams they suck.

Im all for RG III and seeing what happens with him. Hes not a "what if" and Im pretty much tired of "what if we...." and having it blow up in our faces like Wile E Coyote.

Completely agree.

Mike, I agree that their schedule can be considered lacking, but they did beat Georgia opening week this season, and rather convincingly (35-21). In 2010, they beat Virginia Tech 33-30 opening weekend at FedEx, and beat Oregon State pretty good 37-24 (not a great team, but ended the season in the top 25 I believe). You are right though, they definitely don't climb the rankings like an SEC or even Big East team would because of their schedule. But when they've got their shot at big name teams, they've beaten them.

Also, I know it was Zabransky at QB, but they beat Oklahoma in one of the more memorable Fiesta Bowls in 2007.

 

[Hog Fever]

First of all, you don't need a top five QB to be good. If that were the case there would only be five good teams a year. The Redskins haven't just been "not good." They've been downright awful. Seven losing seasons over the past ten years. Five with 10 or more losses (six if we lose another game this year.)

That's not because we haven't had a QB. It's because this team has been run terribly.

Second of all, we did have a franchise QB on this team. His name was Trent Green. Because the front office was in a state of flux he got away. Could you imagine having had a +3500-yard passer until 2005? Well, we didn't have one, not because the team didn't find him but because they couldn't keep him.

A competent front office will go a long ways towards correcting mistakes like that.

You aren't going to get an argument that the organization has been run poorly, it absolutely has. The greatest failing of the organization is that they have been unable to find a franchise QB. So i don't think we disagree here.

Like it or not having a franchise QB and then adding other pieces is the model that leads to consistent success in the NFL. Yes, we all know Gibbs did it with three different QBs and that makes those teams and the man that much more remarkable. To paraphrase Rick Patino, The 91' redskins aren't walking through the door. You simply can't build a team like that in the salary cap NFL.

The Trent Green thing was JKC's fault for not making sure the team was given to his son properly and leaving the operation of the team to the trustees. I doubt it was his intention, but that's the way it was. Your example proves my point. How much better would we have been in that stretch with Green at QB? How many organizational mistakes would that have made up for? My guess is quite a few.

What's more unforgivable is that we haven't put the type of effort needed into finding "the guy" at QB in all these years.

 

[Henry]

The Trent Green thing was JKC's fault for not making sure the team was given to his son properly and leaving the operation of the team to the trustees. I doubt it was his intention, but that's the way it was. Your example proves my point. How much better would we have been in that stretch with Green at QB? How many organizational mistakes would that have made up for? My guess is quite a few.

What's more unforgivable is that we haven't put the type of effort needed into finding "the guy" at QB in all these years.

Of course we have. We tried with Heath Shuler (and then Gus Frerotte). Then we found (and lost) Green. Then we brought in Brad Johnson. Then we drafted Patrick Ramsey. Then we drafted Jason Campbell. Then we traded for Donovan McNabb. Hell you could even throw in Brunell for good measure.

This team has tried just about everything. High picks, Low picks, trading for established vets, trading up in the draft, trading down in the draft ... you name it. We've tried it. We just haven't succeeded.

One big reason is because our front office sucks. We pick the wrong guy and the wrong coach (Shuler, Frerotte, Johnson) or we turn the coaches over so fast we don't have time to build a team around any of our QBs (Johnson, Ramsey, Campbell) or a new coach just makes a bad call (Brunell, McNabb.)

And I'll tell ya. That's not going to change if our front office hasn't changed. If we fire Shanahan after next year and hire some new guy who runs a completely different offense and give him two years and then he quits in disgust (or whatever) and we hire a new guy who runs a completely different offense ... neither Luck nor Griffin nor Tim Tebow Himself is going to save us. I can almost promise you that.

 

[Goaldeje]

How dare you blaspheme The name of Tebow! HOW DARE YOU?!?

One serious point of (slight) contention, Henry. I don't think Brunell was that bad of a trade. He took us to the playoffs, and if Stone-Hands had caught... nevermind. my therapist says I can't talk about that Seattle game.

Anyway, Brunell was a pretty decent trade. But the rest of your post is spot on, imo.

 

[Henry]

How dare you blaspheme The name of Tebow! HOW DARE YOU?!?

One serious point of (slight) contention, Henry. I don't think Brunell was that bad of a trade. He took us to the playoffs, and if Stone-Hands had caught... nevermind. my therapist says I can't talk about that Seattle game.

Anyway, Brunell was a pretty decent trade. But the rest of your post is spot on, imo.

Oh I don't think it was that bad a trade. A third rounder for a playoff-worthy season seems like a deal-and-a-half these days.

But as a franchise QB he wasn't close. After his one good year he was done. That's what I meant.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

One serious point of (slight) contention, Henry. I don't think Brunell was that bad of a trade. He took us to the playoffs, and if Stone-Hands had caught... nevermind. my therapist says I can't talk about that Seattle game.

Speaking of things that had been erased from memory...

 

[Goaldeje]

Speaking of things that had been erased from memory...

Right? I have a 9ers fan-friend and he was asking when we played them why were so eager to get rid of stone-hands, and I explained I thought it really went back to that game. Skins fans don't forget, unfortunetly.

 

[Neophyte]

One serious point of (slight) contention, Henry. I don't think Brunell was that bad of a trade. He took us to the playoffs, and if Stone-Hands had caught... nevermind. my therapist says I can't talk about that Seattle game.

Anyway, Brunell was a pretty decent trade. But the rest of your post is spot on, imo.

Actually, I have to say it was a horrible trade. Besides the fact that Brunell was pretty much done, we could have had him for free as Jacksonville was going to release him and everyone knew it. No one else was going to offer him a starting role either and everyone knew that. We gave away a 2004 3rd for him only to have to later trade a 2005 2nd round pick to NO to get back into the 3rd and take Cooley.

The Brunell trade hurt us bad.

 

[Hog Fever]

Of course we have. We tried with Heath Shuler (and then Gus Frerotte). Then we found (and lost) Green. Then we brought in Brad Johnson. Then we drafted Patrick Ramsey. Then we drafted Jason Campbell. Then we traded for Donovan McNabb. Hell you could even throw in Brunell for good measure.

This team has tried just about everything. High picks, Low picks, trading for established vets, trading up in the draft, trading down in the draft ... you name it. We've tried it. We just haven't succeeded.

One big reason is because our front office sucks. We pick the wrong guy and the wrong coach (Shuler, Frerotte, Johnson) or we turn the coaches over so fast we don't have time to build a team around any of our QBs (Johnson, Ramsey, Campbell) or a new coach just makes a bad call (Brunell, McNabb.)

And I'll tell ya. That's not going to change if our front office hasn't changed. If we fire Shanahan after next year and hire some new guy who runs a completely different offense and give him two years and then he quits in disgust (or whatever) and we hire a new guy who runs a completely different offense ... neither Luck nor Griffin nor Tim Tebow Himself is going to save us. I can almost promise you that.

I agree with almost everything you’re saying but we disagree on the QB issue.

I think the effort to solve our QB issue has been half-assed. Heath Shuler was 17 years ago, it didn’t work out. Haven’t we spent enough time dwelling on that debacle? Have we attempted to draft a QB in the top ten since then? How about the top 20? Have we moved up? Why the hell not? So we can address our need at Safety? Gimmie a break. This can certainly be blamed on a poor front office IMO.

My idea of addressing our QB situation isn’t bringing in a retread like Brunell or McNabb or counting on a 5th or 6th round surprise like Ferrotte. You can argue that an attempt was made when we brought in Ramsey and Campbell, but neither were true blue chip "can't miss" prospects. neither worked out. That doesn't mean we should just stop looking.

I understand that drafting a QB high does not guarantee success, but going into the season with Beck and Grossman as your options almost certainly guarantees failure. Finding a QB in the draft who can run this offense is the most important thing we can do for this team for the next 10 years. Everything else is secondary.

 

[Goaldeje]

Actually, I have to say it was a horrible trade. Besides the fact that Brunell was pretty much done, we could have had him for free as Jacksonville was going to release him and everyone knew it. No one else was going to offer him a starting role either and everyone knew that. We gave away a 2004 3rd for him only to have to later trade a 2005 2nd round pick to NO to get back into the 3rd and take Cooley.

The Brunell trade hurt us bad.

Eh, agree to disagree. (in other words, you're wrong ) I don't think for a second that Ramsey would have taken us anywhere near as far as Brunell did that year. I may be romaticizing things in my memory, but I remember that dropped INT as a real turning point in that game, and something that had Rogers hung onto, might have given us the W. We got a nice ride out of Brunell, and draft picks are fickle. I'd do that trade again, personally.

 

[Neophyte]

As a general rule HF, I think you can argue that we haven't moved up because we couldn't move up. In the last 10 years we have rarely had the fire power to move up in the draft.

Now if you want to ask why we took Taylor at #5 and not Rothlesburger, that is a valid argument and I do think he would be a great fit for a Gibbs style, single back - play action offense. Although, you can argue that Taylor was too good a talent to pass up and that were he still alive he would be the best in the league at what he did.

There really wasn't a "can't miss" QB to take the year we grabbed Landry at #7 although you can certainly argue that we could have used the pick better (Darrell Revis anyone?).

In my mind, the big one that got away was Drew Brees. He was a Free Agent when he signed with New Orleans in 2006. We could have gotten him for free as far as compensation went. Why not go sign him? The staff had to know by that point that Campbell either wasn't all they thought he was or was going to need several years to be ready to start. Brees was a clear upgrade over Brunell and even with questions about his shoulder he was a good risk.

 

[Neophyte]

Eh, agree to disagree. (in other words, you're wrong ) I don't think for a second that Ramsey would have taken us anywhere near as far as Brunell did that year. I may be romaticizing things in my memory, but I remember that dropped INT as a real turning point in that game, and something that had Rogers hung onto, might have given us the W. We got a nice ride out of Brunell, and draft picks are fickle. I'd do that trade again, personally.

The point of my post Goal is that we could have had Brunell without the trade. I'm not saying that picking him up was bad (although there were better guys available) but rather that we gave up a 3rd to a team that was going to release him outright in just a few days.

And no where did I say we would have gone anywhere with Ramsey.

 

[Goaldeje]

That's fair, I can see that. I've always wished we could have gotten him for a lower pick; I don't mind taking a guy off the FA market for a draft pick if you know that's your guy, but I agree a 3rd was a little high.

 

[Henry]

I agree with almost everything you’re saying but we disagree on the QB issue.

I think the effort to solve our QB issue has been half-assed. Heath Shuler was 17 years ago, it didn’t work out. Haven’t we spent enough time dwelling on that debacle? Have we attempted to draft a QB in the top ten since then? How about the top 20? Have we moved up? Why the hell not? So we can address our need at Safety? Gimmie a break. This can certainly be blamed on a poor front office IMO.

My idea of addressing our QB situation isn’t bringing in a retread like Brunell or McNabb or counting on a 5th or 6th round surprise like Ferrotte. You can argue that an attempt was made when we brought in Ramsey and Campbell, but neither were true blue chip "can't miss" prospects. neither worked out. That doesn't mean we should just stop looking.

I understand that drafting a QB high does not guarantee success, but going into the season with Beck and Grossman as your options almost certainly guarantees failure. Finding a QB in the draft who can run this offense is the most important thing we can do for this team for the next 10 years. Everything else is secondary.

Basically what you’re saying is that we haven’t drafted a QB really really high in the draft in a long time. That’s certainly true, but it’s not the same thing as ignoring the position or taking a half-assed approach to it. Of your 'top five QBs which all have their teams in the playoff mix’ list, only two of them were high draft picks. Unless you want to suggest the Saints, Patriots and Packers ignored or half-assed their attempt to find a QB, I don’t think you can claim we’ve done that either. Over the dark expanse of Redskin suckage that has been the past two decades, we’ve tried everything. That includes spending a third overall pick on a QB. I’m not saying we should never try that again, but it’s not The Answer. It’s not some obvious solution that we’ve simply been ignoring all these years.

I agree we need a QB. And I agree that we should get a top prospect this year. I guess where I don’t agree is that I think that’s the one thing that will suddenly make everything all better. There is a LOT that’s been wrong with this team for a long time. QB is only a small part of it. More than worrying about any specific piece, I’d like to continue to see us approach the entire puzzle properly. That’s far more important, in my opinion.

 

[Neophyte]

See, I would argue that while we are missing a lot of pieces, the lack of a solid to great QB is the largest piece by far and with that piece this team is dangerous.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Goaldeje]

Well, Mort just tweeted this little nugget:

mortreportChris Mortensen
Filed to ESPN: Irsay cleans house, including Bill and Chris Polian, per league source


Not sure what it means, though I suppose a new GM is not going to have any ties to Manning at all, meaning this could mean he may be on the move. Of course, all just speculation right now.

 

[Skinsfan76]

I think the owner has been really vocal about his devotion to Peyton Manning. Basically saying as long as he is healthy he will be a Colt.

It sucks to say this but I am starting to believe that both Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck will be in Indie next year.

 

[Oldfan]

...In my mind, the big one that got away was Drew Brees. He was a Free Agent when he signed with New Orleans in 2006. We could have gotten him for free as far as compensation went. Why not go sign him? The staff had to know by that point that Campbell either wasn't all they thought he was or was going to need several years to be ready to start. Brees was a clear upgrade over Brunell and even with questions about his shoulder he was a good risk.

2006 was Campbell's first year as a starter.

Drew Brees had not played great in San Diego and was coming off surgery for a serious shoulder injury. Only Miami and the Saints were interested.

Brees would not have performed as well here as he did with the Saints. We didn't have the compatible scheme and the supporting cast he has had in New Orleans.