Manning can't throw to his left (1 Viewer)

[Bracie Smathers]

Once again I am a big Manning fan. Heck being a Giants fan and loving Eli it makes it easy to love the whole Manning clan. I think that Manning is the best QB of this era. The Colts could very well be 4 and 3 with Manning leading the way this year, but there was way too much to gamble on with Manning as opposed to what the Colts did with drafting Luck. Even the Manning of old one of the greatest QB's to ever play the game was 1 for 14 in winning SB's as a member of the Colts. Having a gun to your head..... Would you take your chances that Luck arguably the greatest QB prospect to come out since Elway would be best for your franchise and give you the best possible chance of succeeding and getting you back to winning a SB in the near future OR gamble with a guy who was coming off 4 neck surgeries and had sat out for a year and was also 1 for 14 with his prime obviously past him?The closest situation that this relates to is what Thompson was faced with in Green Bay. Bracie, do you think that letting Favre go and going with Rodgers was a mistake? Favre still had some left in the tank as he himself also made it back to the SB with Minny a couple of years later but it was Rodgers who got there and won it and allows the Packers the best opportunity to continue to get there going forward now.

No one is putting a gun to my head or your head or the Colts GM head either so instead of taking it to that extreme lets put it into a more realistic light.This isn't an Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning proposition where Andrew Luck is built up as the can't miss sure-fire young stud ubermensch and Peyton Manning is diminished as an old broken down nerve degenerated feeble geriatric in a wheel chair wheesing just to make it accross the room.The decision of the Colts was based on two things. One was a lack of faith in Peyton Manning's health, both short term and long term. Two, their belief in Andrew Luck.I have stated the decision isn't either/or Luck/Manning because its not. I saw the decision as the short-term return on Manning PLUS the long-term return on trading away the rights to Luck VS NOTHING for Peyton and Andrew Luck.One side = ZERO from Peyton Manning + Andrew LuckOther side = Peyton Manning (any play nearing equal to his historic high level of play) + the draft picks from dealing the rights to Andrew Luck and we know for cetain what was on the table:- 4th pick used to select RB Trent Richardson- 22nd pick used to select QB Brandon Weeden- 37th pick used to select ORT Mitchell SchwartzAll of the above, including Luck, have played well.So on one side is: QB Andrew LuckOn the other side: Peyton Manning, Trent Richardson, Brandon Weeden, Mitchell Schwartz PLUS Cleveland's first round pick in 2013I have stated I would have made the deal back in February to trade the rights to Luck long before Peyton Manning made his successful comeback and I'd definitely still make the deal today.

You are ignoring the money part of it. Denver is paying Manning ~$20M per year. Indy is paying Luck ~$5.5M per year.But even setting that aside, I'd take Luck over Manning, Richardson, Weeden, Schwartz, and another 1st rounder without hesitation. It's hard to put a price on getting an All Pro caliber QB for 15 years.Imagine if a similar scenario faced the Colts when Manning came out, and they traded him to another team and ended up missing out on the career he had in Indy for a few years of a top veteran HOF QB, a great RB, and a couple other really good players. It would not have been worth it, unless one or more of the players other than the HOF QB were also future HOFers.

I am a huge QB pimp and Peyton Manning is playing at a far higher caliber than any rookie including Andrew Luck right now. If Luck is 'lucky' enough to play fifteen years then it is very simple to subtract the years he would not be playing at the current high caliber that Peyton is playing right now so if Manning's play surpasses Luck for Andrews first couple of years then the remaining years would be held up against what Trent Richardson and Brandon Weeden and Mitchell Schwartz and whatever player is taken in next year's draft would produce.Right now its not even close. Peyton Manning alone is producing better than Luck even before adding in Richardson and Weeden and Schwartz plus a first round pick in next year's draft. No one knows how things will turn out but having four high picks plus a high performing Peyton Manning right now isn't a no-brain slam dunk win for Andrew Luck. I think its quite the opposite right now. How it eventually turns out is far from a slam dunk IMHO as well.I'm a huge QB pimp but a QB can't win it all. A Super Bowl team is typically a great QB and great coaching and many players in their prime coming together at once. Luck may never have a RB of the caliber of T-Rich in his entire career so having a stud RB and a solid ORT and a Brandon Weeden or whoever the Colts would have taken if Peyton were still in the fold PLUS a first round pick next year would give any team a great chance to win immediately and I would not discount the possibliity the Colts would have target a QB either in this past year's draft or in next year's draft as they competed and used Peyton, still playing at a high level, as a bridge till the young QB was up to speed.

 

[Tau837]

Once again I am a big Manning fan. Heck being a Giants fan and loving Eli it makes it easy to love the whole Manning clan. I think that Manning is the best QB of this era. The Colts could very well be 4 and 3 with Manning leading the way this year, but there was way too much to gamble on with Manning as opposed to what the Colts did with drafting Luck. Even the Manning of old one of the greatest QB's to ever play the game was 1 for 14 in winning SB's as a member of the Colts. Having a gun to your head..... Would you take your chances that Luck arguably the greatest QB prospect to come out since Elway would be best for your franchise and give you the best possible chance of succeeding and getting you back to winning a SB in the near future OR gamble with a guy who was coming off 4 neck surgeries and had sat out for a year and was also 1 for 14 with his prime obviously past him?The closest situation that this relates to is what Thompson was faced with in Green Bay. Bracie, do you think that letting Favre go and going with Rodgers was a mistake? Favre still had some left in the tank as he himself also made it back to the SB with Minny a couple of years later but it was Rodgers who got there and won it and allows the Packers the best opportunity to continue to get there going forward now.

No one is putting a gun to my head or your head or the Colts GM head either so instead of taking it to that extreme lets put it into a more realistic light.This isn't an Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning proposition where Andrew Luck is built up as the can't miss sure-fire young stud ubermensch and Peyton Manning is diminished as an old broken down nerve degenerated feeble geriatric in a wheel chair wheesing just to make it accross the room.The decision of the Colts was based on two things. One was a lack of faith in Peyton Manning's health, both short term and long term. Two, their belief in Andrew Luck.I have stated the decision isn't either/or Luck/Manning because its not. I saw the decision as the short-term return on Manning PLUS the long-term return on trading away the rights to Luck VS NOTHING for Peyton and Andrew Luck.One side = ZERO from Peyton Manning + Andrew LuckOther side = Peyton Manning (any play nearing equal to his historic high level of play) + the draft picks from dealing the rights to Andrew Luck and we know for cetain what was on the table:- 4th pick used to select RB Trent Richardson- 22nd pick used to select QB Brandon Weeden- 37th pick used to select ORT Mitchell SchwartzAll of the above, including Luck, have played well.So on one side is: QB Andrew LuckOn the other side: Peyton Manning, Trent Richardson, Brandon Weeden, Mitchell Schwartz PLUS Cleveland's first round pick in 2013I have stated I would have made the deal back in February to trade the rights to Luck long before Peyton Manning made his successful comeback and I'd definitely still make the deal today.

You are ignoring the money part of it. Denver is paying Manning ~$20M per year. Indy is paying Luck ~$5.5M per year.But even setting that aside, I'd take Luck over Manning, Richardson, Weeden, Schwartz, and another 1st rounder without hesitation. It's hard to put a price on getting an All Pro caliber QB for 15 years.Imagine if a similar scenario faced the Colts when Manning came out, and they traded him to another team and ended up missing out on the career he had in Indy for a few years of a top veteran HOF QB, a great RB, and a couple other really good players. It would not have been worth it, unless one or more of the players other than the HOF QB were also future HOFers.

I am a huge QB pimp and Peyton Manning is playing at a far higher caliber than any rookie including Andrew Luck right now. If Luck is 'lucky' enough to play fifteen years then it is very simple to subtract the years he would not be playing at the current high caliber that Peyton is playing right now so if Manning's play surpasses Luck for Andrews first couple of years then the remaining years would be held up against what Trent Richardson and Brandon Weeden and Mitchell Schwartz and whatever player is taken in next year's draft would produce.Right now its not even close. Peyton Manning alone is producing better than Luck even before adding in Richardson and Weeden and Schwartz plus a first round pick in next year's draft. No one knows how things will turn out but having four high picks plus a high performing Peyton Manning right now isn't a no-brain slam dunk win for Andrew Luck. I think its quite the opposite right now. How it eventually turns out is far from a slam dunk IMHO as well.I'm a huge QB pimp but a QB can't win it all. A Super Bowl team is typically a great QB and great coaching and many players in their prime coming together at once. Luck may never have a RB of the caliber of T-Rich in his entire career so having a stud RB and a solid ORT and a Brandon Weeden or whoever the Colts would have taken if Peyton were still in the fold PLUS a first round pick next year would give any team a great chance to win immediately and I would not discount the possibliity the Colts would have target a QB either in this past year's draft or in next year's draft as they competed and used Peyton, still playing at a high level, as a bridge till the young QB was up to speed.

You are comparing apples and oranges. The Colts made their decision for the long term, not the short term. Denver made its decision for the short term, not the long term. Given that the Colts needed to rebuild, it was an easy call.I'm going to just agree to disagree at this point, since it's clear you already have your mind made up.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

You are comparing apples and oranges. The Colts made their decision for the long term, not the short term. Denver made its decision for the short term, not the long term. Given that the Colts needed to rebuild, it was an easy call.I'm going to just agree to disagree at this point, since it's clear you already have your mind made up.

If I'm comparing apples to oranges then you are comparing apples to cumquats.I never said anything about what Denver signed Peyton Manning for, you did.Indianapolis got nothing from letting Peyton walk. Its about what Indianapolis did not do and that is they passed up the chance to acquire EXTRA draft picks which equals extra YOUNG players IN ADDITION to having the twilight years of Peyton Manning and right now his twilight is better than Andrew Luck's rookie year and likely will be better than Luck's intial first couple of season in the league. Also their is absolutely no guarantee that Andrew Luck will turn into Peyton Manning and its highly likely he will never equal the HOF career of Peyton so I'd take Peyton and extras right now and I'd also take that deal for the long term as well.

 

[flapgreen]

Lol

 

[Tau837]

You are comparing apples and oranges. The Colts made their decision for the long term, not the short term. Denver made its decision for the short term, not the long term. Given that the Colts needed to rebuild, it was an easy call.I'm going to just agree to disagree at this point, since it's clear you already have your mind made up.

If I'm comparing apples to oranges then you are comparing apples to cumquats.I never said anything about what Denver signed Peyton Manning for, you did.Indianapolis got nothing from letting Peyton walk. Its about what Indianapolis did not do and that is they passed up the chance to acquire EXTRA draft picks which equals extra YOUNG players IN ADDITION to having the twilight years of Peyton Manning and right now his twilight is better than Andrew Luck's rookie year and likely will be better than Luck's intial first couple of season in the league. Also their is absolutely no guarantee that Andrew Luck will turn into Peyton Manning and its highly likely he will never equal the HOF career of Peyton so I'd take Peyton and extras right now and I'd also take that deal for the long term as well.

Indy signing Manning and trading the #1 pick would have been a decision favoring the short term. Indy letting Manning walk and drafting Luck was a decision that favors the long term. Apparently, you disagree with that, which I find hard to believe.

 

[SSOG]

You ever seen a team in a dynasty league that was years away from contending, but held on to an aging stud anyway, and by the time they had enough talent around that stud to make a run, the stud had fallen off the cliff? Because I have. They tend to stay bad for a long, long time.

Indy's window is closed. Their window will not be open in the next three years. Any of Manning's prodigious production during that span would be wasted. If Andrew Luck is worth more than the packages being offered for him (and Indy and Cleveland both thought he was, and I agree), then it makes no sense to sell him for less than he's worth on the chance that they can upgrade the rest of their roster from atrocious to great before Manning retires or gets hurt again.

If Indy really wanted to keep Manning, the real play would be to keep him AND draft Luck, ensuring a Favre-to-Rodgers-like succession.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

You are comparing apples and oranges. The Colts made their decision for the long term, not the short term. Denver made its decision for the short term, not the long term. Given that the Colts needed to rebuild, it was an easy call.I'm going to just agree to disagree at this point, since it's clear you already have your mind made up.

If I'm comparing apples to oranges then you are comparing apples to cumquats.I never said anything about what Denver signed Peyton Manning for, you did.Indianapolis got nothing from letting Peyton walk. Its about what Indianapolis did not do and that is they passed up the chance to acquire EXTRA draft picks which equals extra YOUNG players IN ADDITION to having the twilight years of Peyton Manning and right now his twilight is better than Andrew Luck's rookie year and likely will be better than Luck's intial first couple of season in the league. Also their is absolutely no guarantee that Andrew Luck will turn into Peyton Manning and its highly likely he will never equal the HOF career of Peyton so I'd take Peyton and extras right now and I'd also take that deal for the long term as well.

Indy signing Manning and trading the #1 pick would have been a decision favoring the short term. Indy letting Manning walk and drafting Luck was a decision that favors the long term. Apparently, you disagree with that, which I find hard to believe.

I'd refer you to Herm Edwards or better yet, your nick here, 'Just Win Baby'. Indianapolis with Peyton Manning and T-Rich and they probably would not have taken Weeden or Schwartz but they likely would have gotten two additional young players so if the point is to 'Win the Game' as Herm would say or to 'Just Win Baby' then you actually do try to win it all and Peyton Manning plus a stud young RB and extras could be seen as short-term but getting four young kids is also a long term winning strategy. The odds of winning a Super Bowl are long for anyone so landing a HOF QB or in the case of Indy, just re-signing the one you had plus adding three first round young players would give a better shot to win it all even if it took a year or two of mixing in the youth.It may take five-ten or maybe Luck will never sniff a SB or win one. It took Peyton years before he won and he certainly is a sure-fire HOF QB.

 

[Tau837]

You ever seen a team in a dynasty league that was years away from contending, but held on to an aging stud anyway, and by the time they had enough talent around that stud to make a run, the stud had fallen off the cliff? Because I have. They tend to stay bad for a long, long time. Indy's window is closed. Their window will not be open in the next three years. Any of Manning's prodigious production during that span would be wasted. If Andrew Luck is worth more than the packages being offered for him (and Indy and Cleveland both thought he was, and I agree), then it makes no sense to sell him for less than he's worth on the chance that they can upgrade the rest of their roster from atrocious to great before Manning retires or gets hurt again.

 

[Tau837]

Poll: Indy's Manning vs. Luck Decision, Did they do the right thing?

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Another way to look at it.

Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.

Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.

Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.

I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

 

[SSOG]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

 

[SSOG]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Daily lurker but infrequent poster here.

I am a doctor who just happened to have the exact same problem as manning, at the same cervical level, had the same surgery, and it unfortunately also affected my dominant arm.

My tricep strength is still screwed up and even my handwriting is different (fine motor skills) and it's been three years, and I even had a rhizotomy on top of what manning has had.

I've followed the story closely and i think, although i havent examined him and every patient is different (and I can't stress these disclaimers enough), there is enough public info out there for me to form a reasonably educated opinion.

He's done.

Stick a fork in him.

 

[MCguidance]

Daily lurker but infrequent poster here.I am a doctor who just happened to have the exact same problem as manning, at the same cervical level, had the same surgery, and it unfortunately also affected my dominant arm.My tricep strength is still screwed up and even my handwriting is different (fine motor skills) and it's been three years, and I even had a rhizotomy on top of what manning has had. I've followed the story closely and i think, although i havent examined him and every patient is different (and I can't stress these disclaimers enough), there is enough public info out there for me to form a reasonably educated opinion. He's done.

How's your arm?

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

Um, Brian Griese was a Pro Bowler and when he left Denver he owned the highest QB Passer rating in Denver Bronco history. Yes, even higher than Elroy. Griese left Tampa Bay after tearing his ACL and when he left Tampa Bay guess who owned the highest QB Passer rating in Tampa Bay history? Yup, Brian Griese. Marc Bulger was named Pro Bowl MVP in 2004, he QB's the Rams to the post season. Greise was a third round pick and Bulger was a sixth round pick who got cut by a few teams before he was signed as a free agent so he didn't even cost the Rams a pick at all.My take all along was that Peyton would come back and play at a high level so my thought was always for the Colts to keep Peyton Manning and then trading the rights to Luck and drafting talent to increase the over-all talent on the Cotls and THEN draft a young QB prospect with one or even a compbination of the three-first round draft picks plus the high second round pick that we know the Rams got when they traded the rights to RG III. The Colts created a hole on the team when they let Peyton go. They filled the hole with a rookie QB. Net increase in talent to the team, zero or even negative considering the high level of play that Peyton is currently playing at and the fact that the Cotls got NOTHING, ZERO, NADDA, EL-ZIPPO when they let Peyton walk.They could have kept Peyton, thus not creating a hole, then ADDED TALENT around Peyton Manning, like a stud RB in Trent Richardon or a stud OLT in Matt Kalil plus whoever they would have drafted with the 22nd pick in the first round and the 37th pick in the second round AND a high first round pick in next year's draft. The Colts would be better off in the short run and they would be positioned to draft a young rookie QB and groom him behind Peyton. That is a HIGH FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICK not a third round guy like Brian Griese or a street free agent sixth round pick who was cut like Marc Bulger but both of those guys were better than your recollection.

 

[Tau837]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

Um, Brian Griese was a Pro Bowler and when he left Denver he owned the highest QB Passer rating in Denver Bronco history. Yes, even higher than Elroy. Griese left Tampa Bay after tearing his ACL and when he left Tampa Bay guess who owned the highest QB Passer rating in Tampa Bay history? Yup, Brian Griese. Marc Bulger was named Pro Bowl MVP in 2004, he QB's the Rams to the post season. Greise was a third round pick and Bulger was a sixth round pick who got cut by a few teams before he was signed as a free agent so he didn't even cost the Rams a pick at all.My take all along was that Peyton would come back and play at a high level so my thought was always for the Colts to keep Peyton Manning and then trading the rights to Luck and drafting talent to increase the over-all talent on the Cotls and THEN draft a young QB prospect with one or even a compbination of the three-first round draft picks plus the high second round pick that we know the Rams got when they traded the rights to RG III. The Colts created a hole on the team when they let Peyton go. They filled the hole with a rookie QB. Net increase in talent to the team, zero or even negative considering the high level of play that Peyton is currently playing at and the fact that the Cotls got NOTHING, ZERO, NADDA, EL-ZIPPO when they let Peyton walk.They could have kept Peyton, thus not creating a hole, then ADDED TALENT around Peyton Manning, like a stud RB in Trent Richardon or a stud OLT in Matt Kalil plus whoever they would have drafted with the 22nd pick in the first round and the 37th pick in the second round AND a high first round pick in next year's draft. The Colts would be better off in the short run and they would be positioned to draft a young rookie QB and groom him behind Peyton. That is a HIGH FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICK not a third round guy like Brian Griese or a street free agent sixth round pick who was cut like Marc Bulger but both of those guys were better than your recollection.

You've already posted this same stuff in this thread and argued it out several times. We know where you stand. I posted a poll about it, and 90% of the voters are against you. But don't let any of that stop you from

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

Um, Brian Griese was a Pro Bowler and when he left Denver he owned the highest QB Passer rating in Denver Bronco history. Yes, even higher than Elroy. Griese left Tampa Bay after tearing his ACL and when he left Tampa Bay guess who owned the highest QB Passer rating in Tampa Bay history? Yup, Brian Griese. Marc Bulger was named Pro Bowl MVP in 2004, he QB's the Rams to the post season. Greise was a third round pick and Bulger was a sixth round pick who got cut by a few teams before he was signed as a free agent so he didn't even cost the Rams a pick at all.My take all along was that Peyton would come back and play at a high level so my thought was always for the Colts to keep Peyton Manning and then trading the rights to Luck and drafting talent to increase the over-all talent on the Cotls and THEN draft a young QB prospect with one or even a compbination of the three-first round draft picks plus the high second round pick that we know the Rams got when they traded the rights to RG III. The Colts created a hole on the team when they let Peyton go. They filled the hole with a rookie QB. Net increase in talent to the team, zero or even negative considering the high level of play that Peyton is currently playing at and the fact that the Cotls got NOTHING, ZERO, NADDA, EL-ZIPPO when they let Peyton walk.They could have kept Peyton, thus not creating a hole, then ADDED TALENT around Peyton Manning, like a stud RB in Trent Richardon or a stud OLT in Matt Kalil plus whoever they would have drafted with the 22nd pick in the first round and the 37th pick in the second round AND a high first round pick in next year's draft. The Colts would be better off in the short run and they would be positioned to draft a young rookie QB and groom him behind Peyton. That is a HIGH FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICK not a third round guy like Brian Griese or a street free agent sixth round pick who was cut like Marc Bulger but both of those guys were better than your recollection.

You've already posted this same stuff in this thread and argued it out several times. We know where you stand. I posted a poll about it, and 90% of the voters are against you. But don't let any of that stop you from

You posted a poll?Well that is the answer to every NFL question, vox populi.If you posted a poll in February and asked everyone whether or not Peyton Manning would come back and play so-well that he'd be starting and performing at the same high level he was at before his surgery and he'd have his team in first place. Do you think that you'd only have 90% saying NO or more?This thread has the answer even if it doesn't agree with your poll.

 

[SWC]

if he cant throw to his left he must be pretty good at throwing to his right because holy smokes amigos he is tearing it up out there and the broncos schedulefrom here on out looks a lot like what you would get if you lined up a lot of pastries and sugary confections along a sidewalk and then took a stroll that is right brohans i am talking about a cake walk so grab those goodies while you can and get that cheese cause the real manning is back in town and he is the sheriff take that to the bank bromigos from down under

 

[Shane Falco]

I wish my QB couldn't throw to his left

 

[letter_j]

if he cant throw to his left he must be pretty good at throwing to his right because holy smokes amigos he is tearing it up out there and the broncos schedulefrom here on out looks a lot like what you would get if you lined up a lot of pastries and sugary confections along a sidewalk and then took a stroll that is right brohans i am talking about a cake walk so grab those goodies while you can and get that cheese cause the real manning is back in town and he is the sheriff take that to the bank bromigos from down under

 

[Tau837]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

Um, Brian Griese was a Pro Bowler and when he left Denver he owned the highest QB Passer rating in Denver Bronco history. Yes, even higher than Elroy. Griese left Tampa Bay after tearing his ACL and when he left Tampa Bay guess who owned the highest QB Passer rating in Tampa Bay history? Yup, Brian Griese. Marc Bulger was named Pro Bowl MVP in 2004, he QB's the Rams to the post season. Greise was a third round pick and Bulger was a sixth round pick who got cut by a few teams before he was signed as a free agent so he didn't even cost the Rams a pick at all.My take all along was that Peyton would come back and play at a high level so my thought was always for the Colts to keep Peyton Manning and then trading the rights to Luck and drafting talent to increase the over-all talent on the Cotls and THEN draft a young QB prospect with one or even a compbination of the three-first round draft picks plus the high second round pick that we know the Rams got when they traded the rights to RG III. The Colts created a hole on the team when they let Peyton go. They filled the hole with a rookie QB. Net increase in talent to the team, zero or even negative considering the high level of play that Peyton is currently playing at and the fact that the Cotls got NOTHING, ZERO, NADDA, EL-ZIPPO when they let Peyton walk.They could have kept Peyton, thus not creating a hole, then ADDED TALENT around Peyton Manning, like a stud RB in Trent Richardon or a stud OLT in Matt Kalil plus whoever they would have drafted with the 22nd pick in the first round and the 37th pick in the second round AND a high first round pick in next year's draft. The Colts would be better off in the short run and they would be positioned to draft a young rookie QB and groom him behind Peyton. That is a HIGH FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICK not a third round guy like Brian Griese or a street free agent sixth round pick who was cut like Marc Bulger but both of those guys were better than your recollection.

You've already posted this same stuff in this thread and argued it out several times. We know where you stand. I posted a poll about it, and 90% of the voters are against you. But don't let any of that stop you from

You posted a poll?Well that is the answer to every NFL question, vox populi.If you posted a poll in February and asked everyone whether or not Peyton Manning would come back and play so-well that he'd be starting and performing at the same high level he was at before his surgery and he'd have his team in first place. Do you think that you'd only have 90% saying NO or more?This thread has the answer even if it doesn't agree with your poll.

You're wrong, and you can't see it.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Was this thread Waterloo for JohnnyU?

Last Active: User is offline Sep 04 2012 10:11 AM

Shamed him right out of the pool. Alias check?

 

[SacramentoBob]

Was this thread Waterloo for JohnnyU?

Last Active: User is offline Sep 04 2012 10:11 AM

Shamed him right out of the pool. Alias check?

Even his Hoss_Cartwright alias is inactive.

 

[identikit]

Was this thread Waterloo for JohnnyU?

Last Active: User is offline Sep 04 2012 10:11 AM

Shamed him right out of the pool. Alias check?

Even his Hoss_Cartwright alias is inactive.

Moonlight Graham is another alias for him.

 

[cobalt_27]

Daily lurker but infrequent poster here.

I am a doctor who just happened to have the exact same problem as manning, at the same cervical level, had the same surgery, and it unfortunately also affected my dominant arm.

My tricep strength is still screwed up and even my handwriting is different (fine motor skills) and it's been three years, and I even had a rhizotomy on top of what manning has had.

I've followed the story closely and i think, although i havent examined him and every patient is different (and I can't stress these disclaimers enough), there is enough public info out there for me to form a reasonably educated opinion.

He's done.

Stick a fork in him.

It's over. On good authority according to a reasonably educated opinion, as opposed to the rest of us who were unreasonably educated.

 

[Eminence]

Daily lurker but infrequent poster here.

I am a doctor who just happened to have the exact same problem as manning, at the same cervical level, had the same surgery, and it unfortunately also affected my dominant arm.

My tricep strength is still screwed up and even my handwriting is different (fine motor skills) and it's been three years, and I even had a rhizotomy on top of what manning has had.

I've followed the story closely and i think, although i havent examined him and every patient is different (and I can't stress these disclaimers enough), there is enough public info out there for me to form a reasonably educated opinion.

He's done.

Stick a fork in him.

It's over. On good authority according to a reasonably educated opinion, as opposed to the rest of us who were unreasonably educated.

Everyone learn a lesson here. Don't listen to people speculating online. The moment the Broncos gave this guy a contract was the moment EVERYONE should have known Peyton could still play.

 

[flapgreen]

I love this thread title.

 

[Uncle Leo]

MVP

 

[Proteus]

Daily lurker but infrequent poster here.

I am a doctor who just happened to have the exact same problem as manning, at the same cervical level, had the same surgery, and it unfortunately also affected my dominant arm.

My tricep strength is still screwed up and even my handwriting is different (fine motor skills) and it's been three years, and I even had a rhizotomy on top of what manning has had.

I've followed the story closely and i think, although i havent examined him and every patient is different (and I can't stress these disclaimers enough), there is enough public info out there for me to form a reasonably educated opinion.

He's done.

Stick a fork in him.

It's over. On good authority according to a reasonably educated opinion, as opposed to the rest of us who were unreasonably educated.

Everyone learn a lesson here. Don't listen to people speculating online. The moment the Broncos gave this guy a contract was the moment EVERYONE should have known Peyton could still play.

I honestly thought Elway was taking his chances on the most potent Tebowcide available, despite the bloated price.

 

[growlers]

Daily lurker but infrequent poster here.

I am a doctor who just happened to have the exact same problem as manning, at the same cervical level, had the same surgery, and it unfortunately also affected my dominant arm.

My tricep strength is still screwed up and even my handwriting is different (fine motor skills) and it's been three years, and I even had a rhizotomy on top of what manning has had.

I've followed the story closely and i think, although i havent examined him and every patient is different (and I can't stress these disclaimers enough), there is enough public info out there for me to form a reasonably educated opinion.

He's done.

How's your arm?

Terrible. I got much worse and was essentially forced to have another urgent cervical fusion surgery about a month after I posted this,at the level above my prior fusion, and the metal hardware removed at the prior fusion level.

Postoperatively, my dominant hand was almost useless after the surgery, i had severe neuropathic pain, and I'm still not back at work despite 2 more procedures and many months of physical therapy. I hope to make it back part time after the new year.

It pretty much destroyed my professional life, and has come close to destroying my personal life.

I'm not so much shocked Manning is back so quickly, as I am that he made the decision to come back at all.

I involuntarily cringe every time he takes a hit.

I understand the internet "gotcha" nature of your post, but I'll stand by my statements as being the best opinion I could give at the time with the public information available.

With that said:

His recovery is amazing, on par with AP's unprecedented ACL tear recovery, but the difference is that Manning is taking a risk as far as his life after football. It is a medical fact that your risk of injury at adjacent levels increases after even an uncomplicated cervical fusion (which his wasn't, since he had multiple procedures). He apparently made an informed personal/medical decision that he wanted to come back despite this risk. My opinion that "he's done" was a guess that he would make a different choice.

I wish him and his family well.

When they report there is no risk of him getting "permanently injured" I think they are referring to the fact that his bones successfully fused, which is the case for 99% of one level anterior cervical fusions (including mine).

What they aren't reporting is that his radicular symptoms (which are the root of his problems now) can get worse at any time. You get facet disease at the level of the fusion.

They also dont mention you have an increased risk of blowing out the disc above or below becaused the fused bones act as a fulcrum - that is what happened to me exercising 2years after my fusion, I blew out the disc above.

He's done. And if he's not, he should come visit my reality and I bet I could convince him!!!! He's being foolish if he goes back. He should take the oc job.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

Um, Brian Griese was a Pro Bowler and when he left Denver he owned the highest QB Passer rating in Denver Bronco history. Yes, even higher than Elroy. Griese left Tampa Bay after tearing his ACL and when he left Tampa Bay guess who owned the highest QB Passer rating in Tampa Bay history? Yup, Brian Griese. Marc Bulger was named Pro Bowl MVP in 2004, he QB's the Rams to the post season. Greise was a third round pick and Bulger was a sixth round pick who got cut by a few teams before he was signed as a free agent so he didn't even cost the Rams a pick at all.My take all along was that Peyton would come back and play at a high level so my thought was always for the Colts to keep Peyton Manning and then trading the rights to Luck and drafting talent to increase the over-all talent on the Cotls and THEN draft a young QB prospect with one or even a compbination of the three-first round draft picks plus the high second round pick that we know the Rams got when they traded the rights to RG III. The Colts created a hole on the team when they let Peyton go. They filled the hole with a rookie QB. Net increase in talent to the team, zero or even negative considering the high level of play that Peyton is currently playing at and the fact that the Cotls got NOTHING, ZERO, NADDA, EL-ZIPPO when they let Peyton walk.They could have kept Peyton, thus not creating a hole, then ADDED TALENT around Peyton Manning, like a stud RB in Trent Richardon or a stud OLT in Matt Kalil plus whoever they would have drafted with the 22nd pick in the first round and the 37th pick in the second round AND a high first round pick in next year's draft. The Colts would be better off in the short run and they would be positioned to draft a young rookie QB and groom him behind Peyton. That is a HIGH FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICK not a third round guy like Brian Griese or a street free agent sixth round pick who was cut like Marc Bulger but both of those guys were better than your recollection.

You've already posted this same stuff in this thread and argued it out several times. We know where you stand. I posted a poll about it, and 90% of the voters are against you. But don't let any of that stop you from

You posted a poll?Well that is the answer to every NFL question, vox populi.If you posted a poll in February and asked everyone whether or not Peyton Manning would come back and play so-well that he'd be starting and performing at the same high level he was at before his surgery and he'd have his team in first place. Do you think that you'd only have 90% saying NO or more?This thread has the answer even if it doesn't agree with your poll.

You're wrong, and you can't see it.

Not agreeing with you doesn't make a person wrong even or especially if they make up a poll and think that if the majority of people agree on something that the majority is right. The people who didn't feel Peyton was done back in February when the majority of people thought it a forgone conclusion that they were right and anyone who dared to have an opinion that differed from them was wrong were absolutely and utterly wrong and the minority were right.You feel that you are right based on the comfort of being in the majority mind-think. Didn't work out very well for those who felt Peyton Manning was done back in February before they were proven wrong and that is the base of my opinion that disagrees with your stance.The value of Peyton Manning that was completely discounted back in February is the reason why I disagree with you and apparently the majority of people. They somehow still completely dismiss the NFL leader in Quarterback Passer Rating and favor the kid who currently ranks fourth from the bottom. That is your perogative and its mine to favor the league leader and a hot shot rookie RB and two high young draft choices and a high draft pick in next year's draft. But you have your poll and the comfort that the majority of people agree with your opinion which is absolutely wrong, lol.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

 

[SWC]

he will not be the mvp because if the pack gets to the playoffs how can it not be discount double check half the team has lupus or otherwise injured and he is still willing them to wins take that to the bank brohans even though i admittedly a huge homer for rodgers

 

[habsfan]

Another way to look at it.Colts had a HOF QB. They let him walk creating a hole at the QB position.Colts filled the hole that they created, they did not improve but take a short-term hit in terms of veteran ability-leadership-savvy etc. No improvement and short term set back.Colts could have kept the HOF QB AND added three first round draft picks and a high second round draft selection.I don't do polls but my vote is keep Peyton Manning and give me three first round draft picks plus a high second round draft pick. I do not create a hole on my team and then do a PR blitz to try and sell the move to my fanbase but that just me.

Another way to look at it: Peyton is a HoF QB with 3-5 years left. The Colts thought that Luck was a HoF QB with 15 years left. The question then becomes whether the package they could have gotten for Luck was worth 12 extra years worth of a HoF QB. The Colts judged it was not. I think they judged correctly. And this is completely ignoring the whole championship aspect. The goal is to win titles. By the time Indy was in a position to compete for titles, Manning would be ready to retire and would be unable to help them achieve their goal. Despite their record so far, that roster has more holes than could be patched with a couple highly drafted rookies. Manning could make that team interesting and dangerous, but he couldn't make them champions. Maybe, several years from now, Luck can.

Thats right.Question.If Indianapolis had three extra first round draft picks and a high second round draft pick, could they draft a QB or not? The reason I ask because I'm thinking they do have the option of using one or two of those picks an/or future picks to draft a QB and that if they still had Peyton and took a young developmental QB that by the time Peyton was ready to hang em up they'd have a better supporting cast for the young QB who was groomed and ready to go.I'm pretty sure its been done, Aaron Rodgers playing behind Farve or Steve Young behind Montana. So few teams have the luxury of additional high extra draft picks to load the deck behind their HOF QB but so few HOF QBs sit out a year ALA Peyton where their team takes a nose dive to the point they hold the top pick and can make a blockbuster deal like that.Rare opportunity, probably the only time its ever happened but will never know but we can follow the picks and Peyton and Drew and see how it pans out. I'm done but carry on.

Just because they sit behind Peyton doesn't mean they're destined for greatness. It didn't help Brian Griese or Jay Fiedler. Marc Bulger was good, but Indy'd be disappointed if they passed on a prospect like Luck to end up with a QB like Bulger. Sitting behind a HoF QB does not magically make someone a fantastic QB. If you want a fantastic QB, draft one- don't draft a mediocre QB and let him watch your current fantastic QB waste his final years playing for a dead-end team.

Um, Brian Griese was a Pro Bowler and when he left Denver he owned the highest QB Passer rating in Denver Bronco history. Yes, even higher than Elroy. Griese left Tampa Bay after tearing his ACL and when he left Tampa Bay guess who owned the highest QB Passer rating in Tampa Bay history? Yup, Brian Griese. Marc Bulger was named Pro Bowl MVP in 2004, he QB's the Rams to the post season. Greise was a third round pick and Bulger was a sixth round pick who got cut by a few teams before he was signed as a free agent so he didn't even cost the Rams a pick at all.My take all along was that Peyton would come back and play at a high level so my thought was always for the Colts to keep Peyton Manning and then trading the rights to Luck and drafting talent to increase the over-all talent on the Cotls and THEN draft a young QB prospect with one or even a compbination of the three-first round draft picks plus the high second round pick that we know the Rams got when they traded the rights to RG III. The Colts created a hole on the team when they let Peyton go. They filled the hole with a rookie QB. Net increase in talent to the team, zero or even negative considering the high level of play that Peyton is currently playing at and the fact that the Cotls got NOTHING, ZERO, NADDA, EL-ZIPPO when they let Peyton walk.They could have kept Peyton, thus not creating a hole, then ADDED TALENT around Peyton Manning, like a stud RB in Trent Richardon or a stud OLT in Matt Kalil plus whoever they would have drafted with the 22nd pick in the first round and the 37th pick in the second round AND a high first round pick in next year's draft. The Colts would be better off in the short run and they would be positioned to draft a young rookie QB and groom him behind Peyton. That is a HIGH FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICK not a third round guy like Brian Griese or a street free agent sixth round pick who was cut like Marc Bulger but both of those guys were better than your recollection.

You've already posted this same stuff in this thread and argued it out several times. We know where you stand. I posted a poll about it, and 90% of the voters are against you. But don't let any of that stop you from

You posted a poll?Well that is the answer to every NFL question, vox populi.If you posted a poll in February and asked everyone whether or not Peyton Manning would come back and play so-well that he'd be starting and performing at the same high level he was at before his surgery and he'd have his team in first place. Do you think that you'd only have 90% saying NO or more?This thread has the answer even if it doesn't agree with your poll.

You're wrong, and you can't see it.

Not agreeing with you doesn't make a person wrong even or especially if they make up a poll and think that if the majority of people agree on something that the majority is right. The people who didn't feel Peyton was done back in February when the majority of people thought it a forgone conclusion that they were right and anyone who dared to have an opinion that differed from them was wrong were absolutely and utterly wrong and the minority were right.You feel that you are right based on the comfort of being in the majority mind-think. Didn't work out very well for those who felt Peyton Manning was done back in February before they were proven wrong and that is the base of my opinion that disagrees with your stance.The value of Peyton Manning that was completely discounted back in February is the reason why I disagree with you and apparently the majority of people. They somehow still completely dismiss the NFL leader in Quarterback Passer Rating and favor the kid who currently ranks fourth from the bottom. That is your perogative and its mine to favor the league leader and a hot shot rookie RB and two high young draft choices and a high draft pick in next year's draft. But you have your poll and the comfort that the majority of people agree with your opinion which is absolutely wrong, lol.

I've read as much of this as I can manage and what I extract from it is that your version of "right" means I might let you manage my money at the casino but I would never let you manage my investments. Player salary is likely the least of the money that rides on these decisions. A decade or better of a franchise rides on their risk assessment and most people believe Indy made the best assessment there. TRich has been great but percentages say that Luck will play long enough to see three TRichs come and go...

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I've read as much of this as I can manage and what I extract from it is that your version of "right" means I might let you manage my money at the casino but I would never let you manage my investments. Player salary is likely the least of the money that rides on these decisions. A decade or better of a franchise rides on their risk assessment and most people believe Indy made the best assessment there. TRich has been great but percentages say that Luck will play long enough to see three TRichs come and go...

Most people wrote off Peyton Manning, they were wrong. The goal of every NFL team is to win the Super Bowl and that should be the goal of every NFL GM. The Colt GM made the call to let Peyton Walk. He faced a difficult decision but instead of maximizing his hand he let a Hall of Fame QB go and got nothing in return. If he would have traded the rights of Luck away he would have gotten a significant return and he could have added the treasure of three number-one draft picks and a high second round pick to a Hall of Fame QB instead of subtracting a HOF QB and subtracting a rookie stud RB and two other YOUNG high drafted players this year AND a high number-one draft pick next year.

Right now one decision is obviously better than the other and it is obvious that right now Peyton Manning and a Trent Richardson and high picks to fill holes on the Colts is better than only Andrew Luck.

Long term can go any number of ways but four young high-drafted rookies is significant and extremely beneficial for any long-term improvements to a team and significantly decreases injury risk since it is spread out over four young players as apposed to only one. Also for as long as Peyton is playing at his high caliber of play, the decision that was not made by the Colts GM to keep Peyton AND get a bounty of high picks favors Peyton PLUS blue-chip rookies.

John Elway got Peyton and didn't have to relinquish a single draft pick to land him.

Elway didn't get Peyton AND four EXTRA HIGH DRAFT PICKS. He only got Peyton Manning and Peyton ALONE has made a significant impact. Just think if he got Peyton Manning plua four high draft picks?

My link

... The centerpiece of the turnaround, of course, was the signing of Peyton Manning.

A decision that seemed, to some, like a risk when Elway made it is looking better with each game. And while ol' No. 7 refuses to look too far ahead, he does concede that, yes, things are going well — and that he knows he put his reputation on the line when signing a 36-year-old quarterback with a surgically repaired neck.

"By no means was it a slam dunk," Elway said in an interview with The Associated Press. "But we knew after we did our homework and looked at the situation, it was the best thing for us. We were willing to take that risk. There's always risk to it, but we liked our chances."

The Broncos carry a four-game winning streak into Sunday's game against San Diego. They are 6-3 and a win away from taking a three-game lead in the AFC West. Manning is on pace for a 4,800-yard, 37-touchdown season, though it's the strength of the supporting cast Elway helped put in place that made the quarterback-turned-executive feel good about going after a future Hall of Fame quarterback on the back end of his career.

One of Elway's most memorable quotes from the day the Broncos made it official with Manning was that he didn't have a "Plan B" if Manning got hurt or didn't return to his former effectiveness. The issue, the only issue, as Elway sees things, is to win Super Bowls, and the possibility of Manning at 100 percent could get the Broncos there quickest.

... Now, with Manning, the coaching staff has re-created itself again. They are building around Manning, who has paid back the favor by becoming the NFL's top-rated quarterback through nine games.

"Everyone wants to look at the strength of his arm, but one thing they sometimes overlook is that he's tremendously accurate," Elway said. "He throws a very catchable ball. The accuracy part is not given enough credit."

Much has been made of the intrinsic quarterback-to-quarterback connection between Elway, the last quarterback to bring a Super Bowl to the Broncos, and Manning, who was brought to Denver to be the next one.

Elway says there were never any questions about Manning's work ethic and, at least from the Broncos perspective, the health issue was resolved.

"But there was, no question, a down side. It wasn't unanimous" around the league, Elway said. "I guess because I was the one sitting in the chair who had to openly make that decision, it was going to fall in my lap. I knew that. And I knew there were a lot of people out there who said 'No way,' who have probably changed their mind by now."

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I'd love to see Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos VS Andrew Luck and the Indianapolis Colts in the playoffs.

Its interesting to speculate what Manning would have done on the Colts with those draft picks that St. Louis got where he'd have some stud young players like Trent Richardson or Matt Kahlil or Justin Blackmon and likely still have Peirre Garcon and another high second round draft pick.

Also what do people think of the trade that St. Louis took from Washington over the same deal that Cleveland had on the table? St. Louis would have gotten TWO first round draft picks last year (#6 and #21 along with Cleveland's high second round pick and would be sitting on the Browns top pick next year, currently #7). Looks like St. Louis blew a better deal if they would have allowed the Browns to counter the deal that Washington put on the table. The Browns also were interested in trading for QB Sam Bradford so the Rams could have taken RG III and gotten a couple of first round picks last year to boot.

Luck looks like he will be a stud, RG III already looks like a stud. Indy won't be criticized but I felt they blew it because they let Peyton Manning walk which opened a hole at QB on their team. Losing Peyton and opening a hole is bad enough but losing Peyton and getting virtually NOTHING in return is terrible. Andrew Luck is young and has a long NFL life ahead of him but keeping Peyton and getting THREE FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICKS and a HIGH SECOND ROUND DRAFT PICK is better than losing Peyton and closing the chance to get those extra picks.

The Rams blew it because they could have gotten a higher first round pick since the Browns held the 6th pick and the Skins held a lower first round pick. Also the Browns had an extra first round pick in last year's talent-heavy draft and hold a higher first round pick next year. They also could have traded Bradford and taken RG III AND gotten at least two first round draft picks for Bradford.

Last year many said Peyton would never come back and play at the torrid pace he currently is playing.

If Indy knew or even suspected he'd play this good they should have traded the rights to Luck and kept Peyton. Also the Rams shouldn't have jumped the gun and taken the deal with Washington. They should have either traded the Rights to RG III or outright traded Bradford and kept RG III plus at least two first round draft picks. They did ok but they left a better deal on the table.

 

[JohnnyU]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is. However, I will admit that we were all wrong with Peyton Manning impending doom. With the they way a lot of people were talking in the media about Manning, it's easy to see why so many (me included) thought he was done. As a Peyton Manning fan I am so glad that wasn't the case and would love to see him win the Super Bowl. What a great story that would be.

 

[identikit]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is. However, I will admit that we were all wrong with Peyton Manning impending doom. With the they way a lot of people were talking in the media about Manning, it's easy to see why so many (me included) thought he was done. As a Peyton Manning fan I am so glad that wasn't the case and would love to see him win the Super Bowl. What a great story that would be.

Not everyone was wrong.

 

[SSOG]

I'd love to see Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos VS Andrew Luck and the Indianapolis Colts in the playoffs.

As a Broncos fan, I would, too. It'd be like getting two bye weeks, and it'd mean we'd only have to face one of Houston/New England on our way to the Super Bowl.

If Indy knew or even suspected he'd play this good they should have traded the rights to Luck and kept Peyton. Also the Rams shouldn't have jumped the gun and taken the deal with Washington. They should have either traded the Rights to RG III or outright traded Bradford and kept RG III plus at least two first round draft picks. They did ok but they left a better deal on the table.

If Indy had known Peyton would be this good, they should have... done exactly what they did. Don't let the record fool you- this is a bad Colts team. There's no way they're winning any titles in the next couple of years, so Manning would have been wasting his last good years on a team going nowhere, and when he finally hung up his cleats, there's no way Indy could get someone the caliber of Luck to replace him. And it's not like they could have traded him with the contract he had. Indy really only had one good option, and they took it.

 

[pizzatyme]

As a Colts fan, I was in favor of trading the pick. Mine was emotionally driven. As an organization, the Colts felt otherwise.

I disagree that the Colts couldn't have gotten a different player later on that matches the caliber of Luck. Maybe not the hype, but definitely the caliber. Hell, there are 3-5 really good Rookie QBs just this year. What could those other picks hae amounted to?!

I love Luck. He's a good person or so it appears.

But I know Manning is a good guy. He has done so much for our community. Irsay did what he felt was right. We move on.

 

[Sea Duck]

I'd love to see Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos VS Andrew Luck and the Indianapolis Colts in the playoffs.

As a Broncos fan, I would, too. It'd be like getting two bye weeks, and it'd mean we'd only have to face one of Houston/New England on our way to the Super Bowl.

If Indy knew or even suspected he'd play this good they should have traded the rights to Luck and kept Peyton. Also the Rams shouldn't have jumped the gun and taken the deal with Washington. They should have either traded the Rights to RG III or outright traded Bradford and kept RG III plus at least two first round draft picks. They did ok but they left a better deal on the table.

If Indy had known Peyton would be this good, they should have... done exactly what they did. Don't let the record fool you- this is a bad Colts team. There's no way they're winning any titles in the next couple of years, so Manning would have been wasting his last good years on a team going nowhere

Never double-down on a bad prediction. Anyway, you're completely ignoring the fact that the Colts could have used the #1 pick to surround Manning with multiple impact players. If you subtract Luck and add Manning plus a couple extra blue-chip players, then the Colts are easily a 12 win team this year -- and absolutely a title contender this year and beyond.

 

[SSOG]

I'd love to see Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos VS Andrew Luck and the Indianapolis Colts in the playoffs.

As a Broncos fan, I would, too. It'd be like getting two bye weeks, and it'd mean we'd only have to face one of Houston/New England on our way to the Super Bowl.

If Indy knew or even suspected he'd play this good they should have traded the rights to Luck and kept Peyton. Also the Rams shouldn't have jumped the gun and taken the deal with Washington. They should have either traded the Rights to RG III or outright traded Bradford and kept RG III plus at least two first round draft picks. They did ok but they left a better deal on the table.

If Indy had known Peyton would be this good, they should have... done exactly what they did. Don't let the record fool you- this is a bad Colts team. There's no way they're winning any titles in the next couple of years, so Manning would have been wasting his last good years on a team going nowhere

Never double-down on a bad prediction. Anyway, you're completely ignoring the fact that the Colts could have used the #1 pick to surround Manning with multiple impact players. If you subtract Luck and add Manning plus a couple extra blue-chip players, then the Colts are easily a 12 win team this year -- and absolutely a title contender this year and beyond.

The Colts are more than a couple of pieces away from title contention. They played the easiest schedule in the league and still put up a -42 point differential. SRS (which is margin of victory + strength of schedule) rates them as the 26th best team in the league. Brian Burke at Advanced NFL stats has them 27th. Football Outsiders has them 28th. Peyton Manning and an extra rookie or two wouldn't be enough to get that team competitive with the real title contenders. Just look at their schedule and results. They lost by 55 combined to the Bears and Pats, 12 to a reeling Texans squad, and also threw up a home loss to the 2-13 Jaguars and a 26 point drubbing by the Jets. Meanwhile, who have they beaten? A 3 point win against Minny is a solid (if unspectacular) win, and the 3 point win against Green Bay is an awesome win, but both of those were at home and the latter was the infamous Chuckstrong game. They beat a bad Browns squad by 4, got taken to overtime by a bad Tennessee squad, beat an average Dolphins squad by 3 at home, touchdown wins against the Bills and Chiefs, a 2 point win against the reeling Lions, and a 4 point win against the Titans. The one (1) game Indy has win by more than a TD all season long was a 17 point win against the post-MJD Jags (with whom Indy split the season series). They just became the first team in half a decade to give up 350 rushing yards, to the worst team in the league no less, as they almost choked away a chance to clinch a playoff berth. Ignore the record and look at the games. What about any of these games suggests Indy is a good team?

 

[BRONG]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is.

Sorry for starting another Manning thread, but the other one has run its course and not being able to throw to his left is a big deal IMO.

I just can't see him playing this year. I don't see him making any real progress.

SO, since you didn't say it first...your very wrong opinion becomes invalidated. Sweet!

 

[JohnnyU]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is.

Sorry for starting another Manning thread, but the other one has run its course and not being able to throw to his left is a big deal IMO.

I just can't see him playing this year. I don't see him making any real progress.

SO, since you didn't say it first...your very wrong opinion becomes invalidated. Sweet!

It wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about someone's health. What about you, have you ever been wrong about a player's health? Hell, I'm wrong about a lot of things, LOL.

 

[BRONG]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is.

Sorry for starting another Manning thread, but the other one has run its course and not being able to throw to his left is a big deal IMO.

I just can't see him playing this year. I don't see him making any real progress.

SO, since you didn't say it first...your very wrong opinion becomes invalidated. Sweet!

It wouldn't be the first time I was wrong about someone's health. What about you, have you ever been wrong about a player's health? Hell, I'm wrong about a lot of things, LOL.

Of course I have, a million times. I just thought it was funny to point to Lombardi all of a sudden ("or whatever his name is") with your, "it wasn't me that said it!". Yet you were totally onboard; you clearly stated it was a big deal. Now, since it all ended up very wrong, you want it "to be clear" that it wasn't you that said it (um, originally). Shoulda just said you were wrong...then it wouldn't be a "big deal" IMO.

 

[KellysHeroes]

all I can say is thankfully no one in my league gave anything for him because I might of taken a low ball offer last off-season

 

[cobalt_27]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is. However, I will admit that we were all wrong with Peyton Manning impending doom. With the they way a lot of people were talking in the media about Manning, it's easy to see why so many (me included) thought he was done. As a Peyton Manning fan I am so glad that wasn't the case and would love to see him win the Super Bowl. What a great story that would be.

Not everyone was wrong.

And even those who were wrong weren't so dramatic in their "Hey look at me, I'm not a doctor but he can't throw to his left" about it.

 

[JohnnyU]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is. However, I will admit that we were all wrong with Peyton Manning impending doom. With the they way a lot of people were talking in the media about Manning, it's easy to see why so many (me included) thought he was done. As a Peyton Manning fan I am so glad that wasn't the case and would love to see him win the Super Bowl. What a great story that would be.

Not everyone was wrong.

And even those who were wrong weren't so dramatic in their "Hey look at me, I'm not a doctor but he can't throw to his left" about it.

You act as if I'm the only one that thought Manning was high risk and possibly done. I'm very happy that he's playing and playing well. There aren't too many who like Peyton Manning more than I do. So keep piling on if you want to, but in the OP I posted what Mike Lombardi said and I also agreed there could be something to it. I'm not alone in this thinking.

 

[cobalt_27]

I love this thread title.

My pee sometimes goes to the left after sex.

Just to be clear, it wasn't me saying he couldn't throw to his left, I was just quoting Mike Lombardi, or whatever his name is. However, I will admit that we were all wrong with Peyton Manning impending doom. With the they way a lot of people were talking in the media about Manning, it's easy to see why so many (me included) thought he was done. As a Peyton Manning fan I am so glad that wasn't the case and would love to see him win the Super Bowl. What a great story that would be.

Not everyone was wrong.

And even those who were wrong weren't so dramatic in their "Hey look at me, I'm not a doctor but he can't throw to his left" about it.

You act as if I'm the only one that thought Manning was high risk and possibly done. I'm very happy that he's playing and playing well. There aren't too many who like Peyton Manning more than I do. So keep piling on if you want to, but in the OP I posted what Mike Lombardi said and I also agreed there could be something to it. I'm not alone in this thinking.

Here's a tip, JU: When you're wrong, just say that you were wrong. That's it. Don't add on to qualify that everyone else was wrong, too. Don't say "Don't shoot the messenger, Mike Lombardi told me to post this over on FBGs." This is just a life axiom, when you're wrong, say "my bad" and move on.