Which QB?

[NavyDave]

I picked RG3, no not Rex Grossman - 3 turnovers a game.

If the shannys trade up and draft RG3 they get a pass for the next 2 years.

If they grab an Orton or Peyton its playoffs of bust for 2012

 

[Goaldeje]

You know, ND, that's an interesting point I hadn't thought of. I wonder how much perceived expectations play into Shanny's decision? In other words, if he gets RGIII, Snyder's expectations for the team have to be lower than if he gets Peyton, right? Shanahan (as most coaches do) naturally wants to win now, which would mean getting Manning, imo. I'm not even sure if just making the playoffs would be enough if we got Manning. I'm thinking Conference Title game might be the bar.

Does he want to risk it?

 

[NavyDave]

You know, ND, that's an interesting point I hadn't thought of. I wonder how much perceived expectations play into Shanny's decision? In other words, if he gets RGIII, Snyder's expectations for the team have to be lower than if he gets Peyton, right? Shanahan (as most coaches do) naturally wants to win now, which would mean getting Manning, imo. I'm not even sure if just making the playoffs would be enough if we got Manning. I'm thinking Conference Title game might be the bar.

Does he want to risk it?

I had set the bar that high too. What fan wouldn't have it that high when you consider the defense even with holes at several positions kept us in several games and it came down to turnovers at the QB position?

 

[Skinsfan76]

I think for the most part our Defense played to the championship level last year. The issue is if Peyton Manning is our QB in 2012 then we have to get some more pieces on offense. Probably two more O lineman and a solid #1receiver.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Ax]

I think for the most part our Defense played to the championship level last year. The issue is if Peyton Manning is our QB in 2012 then we have to get some more pieces on offense. Probably two more O lineman and a solid #1receiver.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

Two more O-line starters, and a solid #1 receiver are needed whether Manning is the QB, or not.

 

[Skinsfan76]

Two more O-line starters, and a solid #1 receiver are needed whether Manning is the QB, or not.

Excellent point!
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[China]

I've grown to expect crap so I'll say they'll get Orton and then draft a project in the later rounds.

 

[redskins76]

I've grown to expect crap so I'll say they'll get Orton and then draft a project in the later rounds.

x2 my thoughts also !

 

[Neophyte]

Two more O-line starters, and a solid #1 receiver are needed whether Manning is the QB, or not.

Why? Our current line got two rookies over 100 yards rushing our last 5 games and we consistently had receivers running open that Rex and Bex couldn't find.

I've been saying it all year and I stand by it, this team is a Top 10 QB away from being a serious threat in the playoffs. Every team in the league has holes. That is just a fact of the salary cap/free agency era. We can't fix it all.

By the end of the year, we were showing more depth than anyone on this board would have given this team credit for. Would better pieces be nice? Sure. Are they absolutely necessary? Nope, not of the guy under center is special.

 

[Ax]

Why? Our current line got two rookies over 100 yards rushing our last 5 games and we consistently had receivers running open that Rex and Bex couldn't find.

I've been saying it all year and I stand by it, this team is a Top 10 QB away from being a serious threat in the playoffs. Every team in the league has holes. That is just a fact of the salary cap/free agency era. We can't fix it all.

By the end of the year, we were showing more depth than anyone on this board would have given this team credit for. Would better pieces be nice? Sure. Are they absolutely necessary? Nope, not of the guy under center is special.

I was as pleased as anyone at the way our backups performed on the Oline. And, the two new starters I desire might be among them. But you can count me as one who would like to see better/more consistent play from every position on the line. Left to right. Trent "Lugnut" Williams salary makes him more of a fixture than his performance does. I didn't miss him that much. We could stand an upgrade anywhere along the Oline, which would then automatically upgrade the depth. Isn't that always a goal worth looking in to?

At WR, we need a guy D-coordinators lose sleep over. Maybe Hankerson can become that guy. Maybe he can't. We need one.

No question that improved QB play will make us vastly better. Hell, even Dumb & Dumber (Davis & Williams) can see that. But improved QB play, along with improved Oline play, along with improved WR play, will put us over the top.

Am I wrong to want these things?

 

[Skinsfan76]

I was as pleased as anyone at the way our backups performed on the Oline. And, the two new starters I desire might be among them. But you can count me as one who would like to see better/more consistent play from every position on the line. Left to right. Trent "Lugnut" Williams salary makes him more of a fixture than his performance does. I didn't miss him that much. We could stand an upgrade anywhere along the Oline, which would then automatically upgrade the depth. Isn't that always a goal worth looking in to?

At WR, we need a guy D-coordinators lose sleep over. Maybe Hankerson can become that guy. Maybe he can't. We need one.

No question that improved QB play will make us vastly better. Hell, even Dumb & Dumber (Davis & Williams) can see that. But improved QB play, along with improved Oline play, along with improved WR play, will put us over the top.

Am I wrong to want these things?

The fact is considering we had below average QB play I think we looked like a real offense sometimes during the season. I see four holes on this football team that I feel must be addressed if we are going to be a threat in the NFC. One is QB, not exactly a news flash there. Also we need to do something at RT. If Shanny wants to move Williams over there and take Reilly Reiff then okay but RT is a certainly a weakness. I so think as AX said we need that playmaking WR that defenses have to prepare for. The problem is getting one of those guys is almost hard as getting a franchise QB. The forth position is a true #1corner. With Nicks, Cruz, Austin, Bryant,Jackson and Maclin in our division we need a solid cover corner. As several of us have mentioned everyone has holes and building a good football team is a constant process. I will agree with the idea that we are not as far away as the rest of the NFL seems to think.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Ax]

The forth position is a true #1corner. With Nicks, Cruz, Austin, Bryant,Jackson and Maclin in our division we need a solid cover corner.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

And yet, we swept Nicks and Cruz, at least split with Dallas (save our worthless kicker giving them one game) and handed the eagles 4 turnovers, and likely that game.

Now, as Neo points out, better QB play alone, quite possibly could have had us sweep dallas, as well as the giants, and likely a split with the eagles. With the CB's we have now. Don't get me wrong, we can use an upgrade damn near anywhere on this team. But I would put safety & LB need ahead of CB need. I have a feeling Raheem is gonna get better play from the CB's we have.

And all of them would come behind, 2 QB's, 1 Fear of God WR, and at least 1, if not 2 better Olinemen. With RG-RT-C being the order of choice.

The great part is, between FA and the draft, we can address most of all these issues. Note that I didn't say fix them, I said, address them. Only time will tell if we fixed them.

And along Neo's point, if we were only able to fix one position on this team, QB is without question the place where we get the biggest bang for our buck. Because it CAN fix more things than any other move we make.

 

[Bulldog]

If it were just a case of do I want Peyton Manning or RG3, my answer would be RG3.

But the reality is we can have RG3 or Peyton Manning along with two saved first round draft choices.

That makes this less of a contest.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[Boone]

Only if you're looking at right now. Suckers choice in my opinion. It's not about what's the 'better deal' right now. It's about what's the right choice for the long haul.

And the answer in that context is equally clear.

 

[Neophyte]

Only if you're looking at right now. Suckers choice in my opinion. It's not about what's the 'better deal' right now. It's about what's the right choice for the long haul.

And the answer in that context is equally clear.

Even if signing Peyton now would guarantee a Super Bowl in the next two years?

Granted, no one can guarantee anything, and I know that, but for the sake of argument humor me.

 

[Boone]

If it's 'either/or', then I don't think it's worth it. I want to win a Super Bowl with a QB we developed and grew, not with a hired gun. I know most will violently disagree with that, but it would mean so much more to be a perennial playoff contender with a QB we drafted and grew with.

I have had enough of trying to win with other team's stars.

And although I don't think we're anywhere near as bad a team as our record might indicate, I think the 'we're almost there' argument (that might support a 'get Manning' strategy) is a little optimistic. I think our O-line is still somewhat of a mess. Yeah, they got better as the year progressed, but part of that is teams underperforming against a team they come in expecting to suck. When teams wanted to pressure Beck and Grossman, they had their way with us the vast majority of the season. If we are shooting for a dominating O-Line, we are far, far away from that goal.

 

[Ax]

If it's 'either/or', then I don't think it's worth it. I want to win a Super Bowl with a QB we developed and grew, not with a hired gun. I know most will violently disagree with that, but it would mean so much more to be a perennial playoff contender with a QB we drafted and grew with.

Violently disagree? No, not at all. But allow me to daydream for a little bit.

If, and this appears to be the $64,000 question, but if Peyton can still play at a high level. And we could get 2 good years out of him, with the 2nd one culminating in Trophy#4. After which he would certainly retire, handing the ball over to say, Tannehill, or some other 2nd-3rd round pick from this draft, who would hit the ground running with 2 years of learning the system under his belt, and be "Our own" for the next 10-12 years. Where's the problem?

Besides...:new_idea:
1st SB win, Joey T. For all intents and purposes, our guy.
2nd SB win, Doug Williams. Hired gun.
3rd SB win, Mark Rypien. Our guy.
4th SB win, Hired Gun?
5th SB win, Our own.

 

[Boone]

I think, generally speaking, the days when you can win it all with a marginal QB are history. I know there are exceptions, but the rule says you need a franchise QB to consistently get to the playoffs and win the big one. I might sign off on your scenario if it were Tannehill. I'm not sure he'll even be available if we pass on a QB at pick 6. Anyone else, I wouldn't support getting a second or third tier guy. And as you acknowledged, there are way too many questions about what kind of QB Manning can be, even for the next 2 years, or if he can even hold up, to have him as our primary short-term plan.

 

[Ax]

I guess if I could script the story, I would have Peyton Manning returning to 100% health and ability, signed to a two year, incentive laden contract. Then on draft day, hope someone is available at #6 that another team wants bad enough to trade up, giving us more picks. We then use those picks to either take a Tannehill at our new 1st round slot, depending on where that is. Or, package some of the extra picks to move into position to do it.

However it happens though, someone besides Grossman needs to take the opening day snap.

 

[Skinsfan76]

I just don't see any scenario were we sign Peyton Manning and then use a first round pick on a QB. If we get Manning then the 1st round pick would be either someone to protect him or someone for him to throw to.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device