Would you trade Andrew Luck for Aaron Rodgers or any other QB right now?

[House]

6 years of certainty or 10 years of "potential"?

Replace the 6 with 3-4 and that's the logic that went in to letting Peyton go.

I stick by it personally.

[ConBro]

Trent Dilfer. Final offer.

[oldunclemark]

Permit me to flip the script...

 

For the 2013 season only (with the provision that you can reverse the trade prior to the 2014 season) would you trade Andrew Luck to Denver for Peyton Manning?

 

Did I say that?

 

 

The answer from me is absolutely not....Curious what other people have to say on this topic as I've been bashed for saying he is elite right now...

[Qwiz]

Replace the 6 with 3-4 and that's the logic that went in to letting Peyton go.

I stick by it personally.

I think it had more to do with his neck and the money but that's just me. I would still take Rodgers.

[House]

I think it had more to do with his neck and the money but that's just me. I would still take Rodgers.

I too think ultimately it came down to the uncertainty of if he would ever play again, and if he did would it be at a high level.

But the idea of trading 4 years of a known guy for 10-14 (if he stays healthy and actually turns into a good QB) was definitely part of the discussions.

[jshipp23]

Permit me to flip the script...

 

For the 2013 season only (with the provision that you can reverse the trade prior to the 2014 season) would you trade Andrew Luck to Denver for Peyton Manning?

 

Did I say that?

I think we can be like the young Rodgers led Packers team and win the Super Bowl this year, so no , I wouldn't do that trade for 1 year...I'd take Luck in the PLAYOFFS over Peyton...

[Qwiz]

I think we can be like the young Rodgers led Packers team and win the Super Bowl this year, so no , I wouldn't do that trade for 1 year...I'd take Luck in the PLAYOFFS over Peyton...

Manning has more playoff wins, so I don't understand your reasoning.

[Superman]

Manning has more playoff wins, so I don't understand your reasoning.

 

You mistake his comment for "reasoning."

[shecolt]

Thank you this is great stuff. The writer that I quoted said the average was about 20 percent but he did not say that was an average of the last three years so perhaps he is looking at a larger frame of time. But the more important fact here is that Peyton is 8th in the league in deep ball passes the last three years and only played in two of them as you note. So he is one of the top 10 deep throw passers which makes perfect sense.

 

My point was not about the entire season as he did throw plenty deep during the regular season but the playoff game against the Ravens. The writer said he only attempted a couple of passes of more than 15 yards during the game in which he threw the ball 40+ times. I have seen Manning attempt to throw the ball15 yards more than twice in just one possession much less an entire game. Now someone else said that he had watched the first half of the game and Manning attempted at least three throws of more than 15 yards according to his estimation. I am also too lazy and tired to watch the whole game to decipher this.

 

Manning himself said during his press conference that he did not attempt to go deep in the second half because of the coverage of the Ravens. I still maintain that his arm did weakened in that playoff game because of the elements and he did not throw deep because he knew he could not get it there with enough zip. And you certainly do not try Ed Reed in that situation. :-)

 

Peyton wasn't 8th in the league in deep ball pass attempts.  He didn't even make the top ten.

 

Peyton wasn't 8th in the league in successful deep ball attempts resulting in the most yardage.  Again, he didn't even make the top ten.

 

And, Peyton wasn't 8th in the league in accuracy of deep ball passes.  Once again, he didn't even make the list. 

 

Peyton was 8th in the league in successful deep ball attempts that resulted in touchdowns. 

 

All that tells me is that during that two-year period, Peyton didn't throw a lot of deep balls; but when he did, it was probably because he was capitalizing on what the defense was giving him with a wide-open receiver. 

 

So, if you want to believe that Peyton didn't throw deep in that second half due to his arm, that is your prerogative; but I think that it is also just as likely that Peyton was telling the truth.

[jshipp23]

Manning has more playoff wins, so I don't understand your reasoning

My reasoning is it won't take Luck nearly as many failures before he wins big in the Playoffs much like Rodgers and Roethlisberger, and it was only 1 season...I think he will win a playoff game or more this year and year 3 we will be THE  team...I'm not counting him out of doing it this year though...

[amfootball]

Peyton wasn't 8th in the league in deep ball pass attempts.  He didn't even make the top ten.

 

Peyton wasn't 8th in the league in successful deep ball attempts resulting in the most yardage.  Again, he didn't even make the top ten.

 

And, Peyton wasn't 8th in the league in accuracy of deep ball passes.  Once again, he didn't even make the list. 

 

Peyton was 8th in the league in successful deep ball attempts that resulted in touchdowns. 

 

All that tells me is that during that two-year period, Peyton didn't throw a lot of deep balls; but when he did, it was probably because he was capitalizing on what the defense was giving him with a wide-open receiver. 

 

So, if you want to believe that Peyton didn't throw deep in that second half due to his arm, that is your prerogative; but I think that it is also just as likely that Peyton was telling the truth.

I am aware of of what the stat represented. Thank you.

 

Peyton is not a small ball QB. Never has been. He is not dink and dunk. The fact that he is 8th for TDs on deep ball attempts in the last three years when he did not even play one of the years indicates that.

 

In terms of the playoff game there are other factors that would indicate his arm weakened as the game went along in addition to the fact that he threw very few to almost no passes over 15 yards in the second half. The fact that Fox had him take a knee with 31 seconds to go and Peyton was in agreement with in on the sideline according to Eric Decker, http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/17/decker-says-peyton-was-on-board-with-taking-a-knee/

tells you that neither of them believed he could successfully complete the multiple deep balls that would have been needed in that situation to get the Broncs in FG range for the win. Also, his last throw of the game, the pick across his body had absolutely nothing on it. Because he was throwing across his body it was all arm, no legs so right there you could see where his arm was at at that point in the game.

[Superman]

I am aware of of what the stat represented. Thank you.

 

Peyton is not a small ball QB. Never has been. He is not dink and dunk. The fact that he is 8th for TDs on deep ball attempts in the last three years when he did not even play one of the years indicates that.

 

Manning isn't dink and dunk, but the long ball isn't and never has been a big part of his game. And it wasn't throughout the 2012 season. It's looking more and more like the way Manning was throwing the ball against the Ravens is right in line with how he was throwing the ball all season long, even when his arm appeared to be getting stronger.

 

There's just really not a lot of evidence to suggest that Manning was unable to throw downfield against the Ravens, at any point in the game. The lack of deep attempts in the second half probably has more to do with the increased pressure from the Ravens front combined with them putting a little more attention on not giving up big plays.

 

And even if it is true that Manning's arm was suffering in the second half and overtime, he was still able to help deliver a one touchdown lead late in the fourth quarter. And the Broncos still should have won. The game was never about Manning's health.

[amfootball]

Manning isn't dink and dunk, but the long ball isn't and never has been a big part of his game. And it wasn't throughout the 2012 season. It's looking more and more like the way Manning was throwing the ball against the Ravens is right in line with how he was throwing the ball all season long, even when his arm appeared to be getting stronger.

 

There's just really not a lot of evidence to suggest that Manning was unable to throw downfield against the Ravens, at any point in the game. The lack of deep attempts in the second half probably has more to do with the increased pressure from the Ravens front combined with them putting a little more attention on not giving up big plays.

 

And even if it is true that Manning's arm was suffering in the second half and overtime, he was still able to help deliver a one touchdown lead late in the fourth quarter. And the Broncos still should have won. The game was never about Manning's health.

He was asked during his press conference more than once why he did not go deep more especially in the second half so even if he statistically is not considered a deep ball guy, the media did want to know why he did not take more shots. I mean he does have two pretty good studs on the outside and Flacco was firing deep at will all game. Manning did say it had to do with the cover two that the ravens were playing which they did not play in the first half.

 

Like I said, I don't think it was all one or the other but his arm strength seemed to weaken to me at least in the second half and especially in the fourth quarter and OT.

 

You are right the game was not about Manning's health but it was brought up because the Broncos owe Manning $40 mil guaranteed now for the next two seasons. And a poster had said that maybe the next playoff game he plays will be 60's and not windy to which I said that would be true if he went to the niners. That is kind of where the discussion about how effective he will be come playoff time came into topic.

[Superman]

He was asked during his press conference more than once why he did not go deep more especially in the second half so even if he statistically is not considered a deep ball guy, the media did want to know why he did not take more shots. I mean he does have two pretty good studs on the outside and Flacco was firing deep at will all game. Manning did say it had to do with the cover two that the ravens were playing which they did not play in the first half.

 

Like I said, I don't think it was all one or the other but his arm strength seemed to weaken to me at least in the second half and especially in the fourth quarter and OT.

 

You are right the game was not about Manning's health but it was brought up because the Broncos owe Manning $40 mil guaranteed now for the next two seasons. And a poster had said that maybe the next playoff game he plays will be 60's and not windy to which I said that would be true if he went to the niners. That is kind of where the discussion about how effective he will be come playoff time came into topic.

 

All that's well and good. We've probably churned out several pages on all that already. I'm just saying, like I said a while ago, the deep ball issue is a red herring. Manning doesn't rely on the deep ball, and never has. So even if his deep ball is compromised -- and I don't know that it necessarily is -- he's still able to be effective. Second best statistical season last year, while playing himself back into shape.

 

And specifically as it pertains to the Ravens game, even if the cold got to him, and even if he was experienced numbness or weakness, they still should have won.

 

So, assuming the Broncos medical staff did their due diligence before management decided to pick up the $40m option, I think they are at peace with their decision.

[amfootball]

All that's well and good. We've probably churned out several pages on all that already. I'm just saying, like I said a while ago, the deep ball issue is a red herring. Manning doesn't rely on the deep ball, and never has. So even if his deep ball is compromised -- and I don't know that it necessarily is -- he's still able to be effective. Second best statistical season last year, while playing himself back into shape.

 

And specifically as it pertains to the Ravens game, even if the cold got to him, and even if he was experienced numbness or weakness, they still should have won.

 

So, assuming the Broncos medical staff did their due diligence before management decided to pick up the $40m option, I think they are at peace with their decision.

I think next season will tell us more. Manning has already come out and said that he is still rehabbing so I assume that means his arm and hand are not all the way there. He also will not have the same cupcake schedule at least how it looks on paper now.

 

I don't think Denver's mgmt has a choice. They gave him a physical and have to hope he can duplicate last year while he turns another year older. A tall order with a ton of $$ on the line.

[Superman]

I think next season will tell us more. Manning has already come out and said that he is still rehabbing so I assume that means his arm and hand are not all the way there. He also will not have the same cupcake schedule at least how it looks on paper now.

 

I don't think Denver's mgmt has a choice. They gave him a physical and have to hope he can duplicate last year while he turns another year older. A tall order with a ton of $$ on the line.

 

That's the thing: No one has ever suggested that Manning's arm and hand were all the way there. It was clear all last season that he wasn't quite the same.

 

The Broncos could have asked Manning to take a pay cut. We all saw how hard a line they took with Dumervil, and that was over considerably less money. They just guaranteed Manning $40m over the next two years, and they did so as if it were a routine decision that they didn't even have to think twice about. They structured the contract so that this would be a clean, easy decision point if they wanted to move on. No dead money, no cap penalty, just a clean release if they didn't like the physical. And the most I've heard about Manning's $40m guaranteed is on this board, from you.

 

I don't think the Broncos are dummies. I think they understand the risk, and they are willing to take that risk at this point, given the results of Manning's physical and the way he performed last season. Nothing else is really pertinent, not his deep ball, not his condition against the Ravens, not whether he or Brock Osweiler was going to throw the hail mary against the Falcons ... none of it. They felt good about his play, and they felt good about the physical. Otherwise, I can't imagine that they would have simply picked up the option the way they did.

 

Anything outside of that is speculation. And without very much basis.

[jshipp23]

Manning isn't dink and dunk, but the long ball isn't and never has been a big part of his game. And it wasn't throughout the 2012 season. It's looking more and more like the way Manning was throwing the ball against the Ravens is right in line with how he was throwing the ball all season long, even when his arm appeared to be getting stronger.

 

There's just really not a lot of evidence to suggest that Manning was unable to throw downfield against the Ravens, at any point in the game. The lack of deep attempts in the second half probably has more to do with the increased pressure from the Ravens front combined with them putting a little more attention on not giving up big plays.

 

And even if it is true that Manning's arm was suffering in the second half and overtime, he was still able to help deliver a one touchdown lead late in the fourth quarter. And the Broncos still should have won. The game was never about Manning's health.

Good thing they signed Trindon Holliday during the season or this game would have been a comfortable win for the Ravens and all this discussion would be moot, the failure would have been obvious.

[Superman]

Good thing they signed Trindon Holliday during the season or this game would have been a comfortable win for the Ravens and all this discussion would be moot, the failure would have been obvious.

 

And it would have been Manning's fault that the defense gave up 35 points...

[jshipp23]

And it would have been Manning's fault that the defense gave up 35 points...

Was it Flacco's fault the Ravens D and special teams gave up 35??? No...He did what he had to do and made the plays to win despite the pressure and circumstances...He didn't throw a pick to end the game.

[amfootball]

That's the thing: No one has ever suggested that Manning's arm and hand were all the way there. It was clear all last season that he wasn't quite the same.

 

The Broncos could have asked Manning to take a pay cut. We all saw how hard a line they took with Dumervil, and that was over considerably less money. They just guaranteed Manning $40m over the next two years, and they did so as if it were a routine decision that they didn't even have to think twice about. They structured the contract so that this would be a clean, easy decision point if they wanted to move on. No dead money, no cap penalty, just a clean release if they didn't like the physical. And the most I've heard about Manning's $40m guaranteed is on this board, from you.

 

I don't think the Broncos are dummies. I think they understand the risk, and they are willing to take that risk at this point, given the results of Manning's physical and the way he performed last season. Nothing else is really pertinent, not his deep ball, not his condition against the Ravens, not whether he or Brock Osweiler was going to throw the hail mary against the Falcons ... none of it. They felt good about his play, and they felt good about the physical. Otherwise, I can't imagine that they would have simply picked up the option the way they did.

 

Anything outside of that is speculation. And without very much basis.

Yet when I suggested that he was not the same Manning that I have seen since 1998 you said that the stats showed he was the same QB. Clearly he is not. Is it good enough? He went one and done again for the eighth time in his career so you can talk about his stats all you want but his performance was not vey good against the Ravens. That really is not disputable. Three TOs, one scoring drive the entire second half and two OTs, inability to get the ball down field. If the Broncos think a QB that does that at home as the number one seed is worth $40 mil guaranteed at ages 37 and 38 than perhaps they are dummies. Like I said before, I believe they signed Manning to get out from under Tebow. No way Elway would have been able to not start Tebow unless he signed Manning.

[Dustin]

Like I said before, I believe they signed Manning to get out from under Tebow. No way Elway would have been able to not start Tebow unless he signed Manning.

[Superman]

Yet when I suggested that he was not the same Manning that I have seen since 1998 you said that the stats showed he was the same QB. Clearly he is not. Is it good enough? He went one and done again for the eighth time in his career so you can talk about his stats all you want but his performance was not vey good against the Ravens. That really is not disputable. Three TOs, one scoring drive the entire second half and two OTs, inability to get the ball down field. If the Broncos think a QB that does that at home as the number one seed is worth $40 mil guaranteed at ages 37 and 38 than perhaps they are dummies. Like I said before, I believe they signed Manning to get out from under Tebow. No way Elway would have been able to not start Tebow unless he signed Manning.

 

No, I did NOT. I said the stats show he was good enough.

 

And against the Ravens, he was good enough. The pick was bad, he didn't have a great second half, and the Broncos did go one and done, but he helped deliver a one touchdown lead that held up until less than a minute in the fourth quarter. Which is why he didn't go one and done; the team did. And that includes him.

 

And it's amazing that you contend the Broncos just picked up a $40m option on a 37 year old quarterback with a pretty significant injury in the past, one that you claim can't throw downfield, all in the name of getting rid of Tim Tebow. You give the Broncos management no credit, you give Broncos fans no credit, and you give Manning no credit. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but this stance is just so beyond the pale that I can't believe you're really serious.

 

If the Broncos weren't happy with Manning -- and they're on the record as being happy with Manning, even after the playoff loss -- they would have done something different than quietly picking up a $40m guaranteed option.

[amfootball]

No, I did NOT. I said the stats show he was good enough.

 

And against the Ravens, he was good enough. The pick was bad, he didn't have a great second half, and the Broncos did go one and done, but he helped deliver a one touchdown lead that held up until less than a minute in the fourth quarter. Which is why he didn't go one and done; the team did. And that includes him.

 

And it's amazing that you contend the Broncos just picked up a $40m option on a 37 year old quarterback with a pretty significant injury in the past, one that you claim can't throw downfield, all in the name of getting rid of Tim Tebow. You give the Broncos management no credit, you give Broncos fans no credit, and you give Manning no credit. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but this stance is just so beyond the pale that I can't believe you're really serious.

 

If the Broncos weren't happy with Manning -- and they're on the record as being happy with Manning, even after the playoff loss -- they would have done something different than quietly picking up a $40m guaranteed option.

Manning was significantly outplayed by Joe Flacco to the tune of three TO's to one TO and three scoring drives to Joe's five. You somehow think the Ravens loss is on the D because they let up the tying score at the end when Manning hand delivered them 7 points on his pick in the first quarter and then another 10 points on his other two TOs. Why on earth you think this was a good game by Manning or good enough is stunning to be honest. if not for his special teams delivering 14 points he is not even in the game in the fourth.

 

I never said Denver was not happy with signing Manning. I am questioning their contract on signing a player entering his late 30's with four neck surgeries that has left his arm and hand numb. Why you think it is odd that I would be questioning a two year guarantee at $40 mil is your own private issue. A year to year contract would seem to be more reasonable and safe.

 

And don't pretend getting rid of Tebow did not factor into Elway's pursuit of Manning. During the entire 2011 season Elway continuingly had to answer questions on Tebow and he always hedged his bets. There is no way had he not signed Manning that he would have been able to sit Tebow. And remember Tebow has won a playoff game for Denver. Something Manning still has yet to do.

[Qwiz]

Manning was significantly outplayed by Joe Flacco to the tune of three TO's to one TO and three scoring drives to Joe's five. You somehow think the Ravens loss is on the D because they let up the tying score at the end when Manning hand delivered them 7 points on his pick in the first quarter and then another 10 points on his other two TOs. Why on earth you think this was a good game by Manning or good enough is stunning to be honest. if not for his special teams delivering 14 points he is not even in the game in the fourth.

I never said Denver was not happy with signing Manning. I am questioning their contract on signing a player entering his late 30's with four neck surgeries that has left his arm and hand numb. Why you think it is odd that I would be questioning a two year guarantee at $40 mil is your own private issue. A year to year contract would seem to be more reasonable and safe.

And don't pretend getting rid of Tebow did not factor into Elway's pursuit of Manning. During the entire 2011 season Elway continuingly had to answer questions on Tebow and he always hedged his bets. There is no way had he not signed Manning that he would have been able to sit Tebow. And remember Tebow has won a playoff game for Denver. Something Manning still has yet to do.

Yeah I have no doubt Tebow factored into the equation.

[Superman]

Manning was significantly outplayed by Joe Flacco to the tune of three TO's to one TO and three scoring drives to Joe's five. You somehow think the Ravens loss is on the D because they let up the tying score at the end when Manning hand delivered them 7 points on his pick in the first quarter and then another 10 points on his other two TOs. Why on earth you think this was a good game by Manning or good enough is stunning to be honest. if not for his special teams delivering 14 points he is not even in the game in the fourth.

 

I don't know if you're being willfully obtuse, or if you just have a memory problem. I've said several times that I don't blame the loss entirely on the defense. I've said several times that Manning himself deserves blame in the loss. I never called it a good game by Manning. That you keep attributing these beliefs to me -- despite my clearly stating otherwise -- is confounding.

 

End of the game, the defense blew their coverage and gave up the tying touchdown. The points the Ravens scored off of touchdowns to that point are a part of the equation, but even still, the Broncos had a one touchdown lead with less than a minute left. The special teams touchdowns are a part of the equation, but still, the Broncos had a one touchdown lead with less than a minute left, courtesy of Manning's arm. Routine deep coverage by a professional defense ends the game in regulation, and the Broncos win. But the defense gave up a bomb on an inexplicable mistake by the secondary. 

 

That mistake by the Broncos defense is why I can say that Manning played well enough for his team to win. He did. They should have won, despite his mistakes.

 

This is really not rocket science.

 

I never said Denver was not happy with signing Manning. I am questioning their contract on signing a player entering his late 30's with four neck surgeries that has left his arm and hand numb. Why you think it is odd that I would be questioning a two year guarantee at $40 mil is your own private issue. A year to year contract would seem to be more reasonable and safe.

 

:: sigh ::

 

The Broncos had an opportunity to renegotiate Manning's terms, or decline the two year option. A year to year contract would be safer for the team, but their doctors examined Manning, and the team came to the conclusion that it was worth it for them to pick up the option as it was constructed. I'm sure Broncos management had concerns, but those concerns didn't keep them from guaranteeing $40m for Manning for the next two years.

 

And the Broncos management has a lot more information about Manning's condition now and during the Ravens game than you or I do. So you can continue promoting the idea that Manning couldn't throw downfield, that the cold rendered him ineffective, or whatever. But the Broncos have all the pertinent information, and still picked up his option without blinking. Their actions speak much louder than your words.

 

 

And don't pretend getting rid of Tebow did not factor into Elway's pursuit of Manning. During the entire 2011 season Elway continuingly had to answer questions on Tebow and he always hedged his bets. There is no way had he not signed Manning that he would have been able to sit Tebow. And remember Tebow has won a playoff game for Denver. Something Manning still has yet to do.

 

A perfect example of why playoff wins aren't not a sole determining factor for how good a quarterback is. You throwing that in there is weak.

 

I never suggested that getting rid of Tebow didn't have anything to do with Elway's pursuit of Manning. I think he pursued Manning specifically because he didn't want Tebow as his quarterback. That seems plainly obvious.

 

I did, however, say that Tebow has nothing to do with the Broncos picking up the $40m option this offseason. Tebow is already gone. If they didn't think Manning was worth the risk, the Broncos would have either declined the option, making Manning a free agent, or they would have tried to renegotiate the contract. They determined that Manning at $40m over the next two years is a better bet than the alternatives, and they did that without even making an issue of the $40m guarantee.

 

Like I said, this is not that difficult. The Broncos are standing behind Manning without any fuss. Whether he was 100% or not in 2012, whether he was dealing with numbness or soreness or arm weakness against the Ravens or not, they are all-in for the next two years.

[amfootball]

 

I don't know if you're being willfully obtuse, or if you just have a memory problem. I've said several times that I don't blame the loss entirely on the defense. I've said several times that Manning himself deserves blame in the loss. I never called it a good game by Manning. That you keep attributing these beliefs to me -- despite my clearly stating otherwise -- is confounding.

 

End of the game, the defense blew their coverage and gave up the tying touchdown. The points the Ravens scored off of touchdowns to that point are a part of the equation, but even still, the Broncos had a one touchdown lead with less than a minute left. The special teams touchdowns are a part of the equation, but still, the Broncos had a one touchdown lead with less than a minute left, courtesy of Manning's arm. Routine deep coverage by a professional defense ends the game in regulation, and the Broncos win. But the defense gave up a bomb on an inexplicable mistake by the secondary. 

 

That mistake by the Broncos defense is why I can say that Manning played well enough for his team to win. He did. They should have won, despite his mistakes.

 

This is really not rocket science.

 

 

:: sigh ::

 

The Broncos had an opportunity to renegotiate Manning's terms, or decline the two year option. A year to year contract would be safer for the team, but their doctors examined Manning, and the team came to the conclusion that it was worth it for them to pick up the option as it was constructed. I'm sure Broncos management had concerns, but those concerns didn't keep them from guaranteeing $40m for Manning for the next two years.

 

And the Broncos management has a lot more information about Manning's condition now and during the Ravens game than you or I do. So you can continue promoting the idea that Manning couldn't throw downfield, that the cold rendered him ineffective, or whatever. But the Broncos have all the pertinent information, and still picked up his option without blinking. Their actions speak much louder than your words.

 

 

 

A perfect example of why playoff wins aren't not a sole determining factor for how good a quarterback is. You throwing that in there is weak.

 

I never suggested that getting rid of Tebow didn't have anything to do with Elway's pursuit of Manning. I think he pursued Manning specifically because he didn't want Tebow as his quarterback. That seems plainly obvious.

 

I did, however, say that Tebow has nothing to do with the Broncos picking up the $40m option this offseason. Tebow is already gone. If they didn't think Manning was worth the risk, the Broncos would have either declined the option, making Manning a free agent, or they would have tried to renegotiate the contract. They determined that Manning at $40m over the next two years is a better bet than the alternatives, and they did that without even making an issue of the $40m guarantee.

 

Like I said, this is not that difficult. The Broncos are standing behind Manning without any fuss. Whether he was 100% or not in 2012, whether he was dealing with numbness or soreness or arm weakness against the Ravens or not, they are all-in for the next two years.

 

Who is being obtuse? You just said it again that you believe Manning played well enough to win. The only reason the game was even tied when he had the ball in the fourth is because of the special team’s scores. The team was in position to win in spite of him not because he played well enough. The Pats lost 28-13. I can assure if Brady had received two special teams TDs in that game, he would have been in position to win at the end too and may well have won but that does not mean he would have played well enough to win, not with two picks and three total scoring drives.

 

I agree about the Broncos evaluating Manning and going all in. My point continues to be that it is a huge risk to guarantee him that type of money for two years when he just came out and said he is still rehabbing. That is the part I am questioning and so should every Bronco fan. He will be 37 and 38 during those years with all those surgeries and rehabbing at least for this season and possibly indefinitely. That is a huge risk. Most healthy QBs don’t continue to put up MVPs seasons in their late 30’s and like I said before, the schedule will not be nearly as friendly to him as it was last year.

 

In terms of Tebow, never said he had anything to do with Manning’s contract just that the Broncos got Manning to get rid of him. And you saying that bringing up Tebow’s playoff win is not indicative of how good a QB is, is not only weak but woefully ignorant. The guy went 7 of 8 with countless fourth QB comebacks on an absolutely horrible team. For a guy that can’t throw, he was the biggest reason why they beat the Steelers with his 316 yards passing and his NFL record of three throws of 50+ yards in a single playoff game. Ironically, his defense blew the lead he built late and then he stepped back in OT and delivered the winning 80 yard TD not the fatal pick. Never has a QB that came in and basically saved a team, won the division, and a playoff game against the #1 defense, been shown the door. The only reason Manning even considered Denver is because they actually looked like a decent team because of what Tebow did.

[Superman]

Who is being obtuse? You just said it again that you believe Manning played well enough to win. The only reason the game was even tied when he had the ball in the fourth is because of the special team’s scores. The team was in position to win in spite of him not because he played well enough. The Pats lost 28-13. I can assure if Brady had received two special teams TDs in that game, he would have been in position to win at the end too and may well have won but that does not mean he would have played well enough to win, not with two picks and three total scoring drives.

 

 

Manning did play well enough for the team to win, as evidenced by the team having the lead with less than a minute to go. I like how the positive contributions he did have just go out the window. He didn't throw three touchdowns, nor did he have 290 yards. So using your reasoning, if Manning hadn't thrown three touchdowns, the Ravens would have blown the Broncos out. It's also illogical to assume that just because the Broncos scored on special teams that the offense wouldn't have scored on that same possession. That's impossible to discern. Special teams makes the job easier, but there's no reason it should be a mark against the offense.

 

I never called it a great game by Manning, nor did I even call it a good game. But his contributions helped them to a seven point lead. And it's reasonable to conclude that, if the Broncos secondary hadn't blown a routine coverage, the team would have won. 

 

 

I agree about the Broncos evaluating Manning and going all in. My point continues to be that it is a huge risk to guarantee him that type of money for two years when he just came out and said he is still rehabbing. That is the part I am questioning and so should every Bronco fan. He will be 37 and 38 during those years with all those surgeries and rehabbing at least for this season and possibly indefinitely. That is a huge risk. Most healthy QBs don’t continue to put up MVPs seasons in their late 30’s and like I said before, the schedule will not be nearly as friendly to him as it was last year.

 

Like I said a long time ago, the alternatives were a) renegotiate (and there's no evidence the Broncos even considered this), b) decline the option and replace Manning. 

 

He was rehabbing last offseason. No one knew whether he could withstand the rigors of an NFL season. And he did, with his second best statistical season. And everyone knows that he wasn't physically 100%. It is a risk, but given the way last season went, given the way he performed, and making the simple assumption that he won't somehow be worse this season from a physical standpoint, the Broncos felt confident in standing behind him. 

 

 

 

In terms of Tebow, never said he had anything to do with Manning’s contract just that the Broncos got Manning to get rid of him. And you saying that bringing up Tebow’s playoff win is not indicative of how good a QB is, is not only weak but woefully ignorant. The guy went 7 of 8 with countless fourth QB comebacks on an absolutely horrible team. For a guy that can’t throw, he was the biggest reason why they beat the Steelers with his 316 yards passing and his NFL record of three throws of 50+ yards in a single playoff game. Ironically, his defense blew the lead he built late and then he stepped back in OT and delivered the winning 80 yard TD not the fatal pick. Never has a QB that came in and basically saved a team, won the division, and a playoff game against the #1 defense, been shown the door. The only reason Manning even considered Denver is because they actually looked like a decent team because of what Tebow did.

 

 

 

 

Again, your agenda is obvious. If you are really going to argue that Tebow is a good quarterback on the basis of their 2011 season, then I can tell you right now that I'm not interested. Like you said, he is a guy that can't throw. The Jets wouldn't even start him over Mark Sanchez. They wouldn't start him over Greg McIlroy. Tebow isn't at issue. 

 

It's also laughable that you'd suggest that the Broncos were absolutely horrible. They had one of the best defenses in the NFL in 2011. So either they were horrible and Manning turned them into a 13 win team, or they weren't all that horrible, and Manning just helped make them a little better. Can't have it both ways.

 

I agree that Elway didn't want Tebow. But he's already gone, and not pertinent to whether the Broncos should have picked up Manning's option for 2013 and 2014.

[amfootball]

 

Manning did play well enough for the team to win, as evidenced by the team having the lead with less than a minute to go. I like how the positive contributions he did have just go out the window. He didn't throw three touchdowns, nor did he have 290 yards. So using your reasoning, if Manning hadn't thrown three touchdowns, the Ravens would have blown the Broncos out. It's also illogical to assume that just because the Broncos scored on special teams that the offense wouldn't have scored on that same possession. That's impossible to discern. Special teams makes the job easier, but there's no reason it should be a mark against the offense.

 

I never called it a great game by Manning, nor did I even call it a good game. But his contributions helped them to a seven point lead. And it's reasonable to conclude that, if the Broncos secondary hadn't blown a routine coverage, the team would have won. 

 

 

 

Like I said a long time ago, the alternatives were a) renegotiate (and there's no evidence the Broncos even considered this), b) decline the option and replace Manning. 

 

He was rehabbing last offseason. No one knew whether he could withstand the rigors of an NFL season. And he did, with his second best statistical season. And everyone knows that he wasn't physically 100%. It is a risk, but given the way last season went, given the way he performed, and making the simple assumption that he won't somehow be worse this season from a physical standpoint, the Broncos felt confident in standing behind him. 

 

 

 

 

Again, your agenda is obvious. If you are really going to argue that Tebow is a good quarterback on the basis of their 2011 season, then I can tell you right now that I'm not interested. Like you said, he is a guy that can't throw. The Jets wouldn't even start him over Mark Sanchez. They wouldn't start him over Greg McIlroy. Tebow isn't at issue. 

 

It's also laughable that you'd suggest that the Broncos were absolutely horrible. They had one of the best defenses in the NFL in 2011. So either they were horrible and Manning turned them into a 13 win team, or they weren't all that horrible, and Manning just helped make them a little better. Can't have it both ways.

 

I agree that Elway didn't want Tebow. But he's already gone, and not pertinent to whether the Broncos should have picked up Manning's option for 2013 and 2014.

 

If you agree it was not a great game or even a good game by Manning than logically that would mean he did not do enough for them to win. He scored 21 points and his three TOs that led to 17 points by the Ravens so he basically is at a +4 for the game. That is a terrible game. He also scored on 3 of 10 possessions so the percentages would indicate that had the Broncos special teams not scored those TDs, he would not have scored either. But again, those are all hypotheticals. He did in fact get 14 free points and had he not had the TOs than the Broncos win in a blowout similar to what they did to the Ravens during the regular season game.

 

Again, Manning is the $19 mil dollar player and has been argued by some here to be the greatest QB of all time. He needs to play a whole lot better than that in the playoffs if the Broncos are going to win a ring. He deserves the lion share of the blame just like Brady for his performance against the Ravens. Elite QBs need to play elite in the playoffs. Look at Flacco. Significantly outplayed both Brady and Manning at their place. That is what it takes not three TO’s.

 

I agree about the contract which is why when they first signed him they should have made the money guaranteed year to year. He is still injured and a year older and likely will not have the same season again given the schedule. They did make their bed and now they have to lie in it.

 

I have no agenda but for you to summarily dismiss Tebow as not a good QB is ludicrous. He took over a 1-4 Broncos team that had the worst regular season record over the past two prior seasons combined. Quite frankly they were a mess. Once Fox announced Tebow as the starter, they traded away his best receiver in Brandon Lloyd. Not only did he step in and win 7 of his first 8 with a pathetic team, he also led the number one rushing attack in the league. His completion percentage was 46 percent, 8 points lower than Luck at 54 and he had less than a third of the TOs Luck had. I love Luck because his intangibles are off the chart just like Tebow. Both had great QBRs in the fourth quarter which is money time. Both made their teams play above their talent level. To deny this about Tebow is football ignorance.  

 

Something else to consider, Luck, RG, and Wilson all have teams built around their strengths. In fact, Luck is getting his old OC to come aboard. Tebow had none of that. He had a coach who was forced to start him and an owner who loathed him. He also got to begin his NFL career being handed a 1-4 record and still won the division and a playoff game. I would have loved to see both Luck and RG start at 1-4 with the team Tebow had and win the division and a playoff game against the number one defense in the league. You can say all you want he can’t throw just like the OiBU guy can chirp all day long about Luck’s lousy stats. The fact is Tebow was and is a winner. And to look at his Jets stint as any reflection on him as a player is a joke. Ryan never had any intentions of starting him and the team was designed around Sanchez. A pity really as had the Jets gone all in the way the Skins have with RG and the Colts with Luck, Tebow would have been successful.

[Superman]

If you agree it was not a great game or even a good game by Manning than logically that would mean he did not do enough for them to win. He scored 21 points and his three TOs that led to 17 points by the Ravens so he basically is at a +4 for the game. That is a terrible game. He also scored on 3 of 10 possessions so the percentages would indicate that had the Broncos special teams not scored those TDs, he would not have scored either. But again, those are all hypotheticals. He did in fact get 14 free points and had he not had the TOs than the Broncos win in a blowout similar to what they did to the Ravens during the regular season game.

 

Again, Manning is the $19 mil dollar player and has been argued by some here to be the greatest QB of all time. He needs to play a whole lot better than that in the playoffs if the Broncos are going to win a ring. He deserves the lion share of the blame just like Brady for his performance against the Ravens. Elite QBs need to play elite in the playoffs. Look at Flacco. Significantly outplayed both Brady and Manning at their place. That is what it takes not three TO’s.

 

I agree about the contract which is why when they first signed him they should have made the money guaranteed year to year. He is still injured and a year older and likely will not have the same season again given the schedule. They did make their bed and now they have to lie in it.

 

I have no agenda but for you to summarily dismiss Tebow as not a good QB is ludicrous. He took over a 1-4 Broncos team that had the worst regular season record over the past two prior seasons combined. Quite frankly they were a mess. Once Fox announced Tebow as the starter, they traded away his best receiver in Brandon Lloyd. Not only did he step in and win 7 of his first 8 with a pathetic team, he also led the number one rushing attack in the league. His completion percentage was 46 percent, 8 points lower than Luck at 54 and he had less than a third of the TOs Luck had. I love Luck because his intangibles are off the chart just like Tebow. Both had great QBRs in the fourth quarter which is money time. Both made their teams play above their talent level. To deny this about Tebow is football ignorance.  

 

Something else to consider, Luck, RG, and Wilson all have teams built around their strengths. In fact, Luck is getting his old OC to come aboard. Tebow had none of that. He had a coach who was forced to start him and an owner who loathed him. He also got to begin his NFL career being handed a 1-4 record and still won the division and a playoff game. I would have loved to see both Luck and RG start at 1-4 with the team Tebow had and win the division and a playoff game against the number one defense in the league. You can say all you want he can’t throw just like the OiBU guy can chirp all day long about Luck’s lousy stats. The fact is Tebow was and is a winner. And to look at his Jets stint as any reflection on him as a player is a joke. Ryan never had any intentions of starting him and the team was designed around Sanchez. A pity really as had the Jets gone all in the way the Skins have with RG and the Colts with Luck, Tebow would have been successful.

 

Calling Tebow "a winner" is subjective, and it necessarily ignores the fact that football is the ultimate team sport, that Tebow was helped tremendously by his defense, special teams, and stupid mistakes by opposing teams, that he even came out on the winning side in a game where he was 2/8 with 69 yards, that the Broncos had two wins where they scored 38 and 35 points with Tebow completing only 10 passes in each game... I could go on. I'm not interested in arguing about Tim Tebow and whether he's a good quarterback or not. If you feel that his record as a starter is proof that he is, then enjoy yourself in that version of reality.

 

Going back to Manning and the Broncos, they made their bed. I'm pretty sure they're comfortable in that bed, because they had an opportunity to address it before picking up the option, but they didn't. They are going to roll with the punches, and given how last season went, I can understand why they're okay with that. They had a 37 year old quarterback coming off a major injury who had his second best statistical season. All indications are that his condition is stable. Their doctors checked him out. Then they smiled and picked up the option, guaranteeing that quarterback $40m over the next two years. Again, without so much as a complaint.

Contrast that with the way they handled Dumervil. They didn't feel he was worth the money, and over a matter of $4m, they released him. And they handled that negotiation very publicly. That we didn't hear anything about Manning's contract is telling. They have the details, and their actions speak very loudly in this regard.

 

I'm sure Broncos fans appreciate your concern, though. They'll probably nod and say "yeah, I hope Manning can survive for the next two years," and then they'll cheer for him every time he steps out on the field. And whether he's physically 100% or not, if he can perform the way he did last season, I'm sure they'll appreciate what he does for their team. I bet Tim Tebow is as far from their minds as Drew Bledsoe is from yours.

[oldunclemark]

I have not watched the entire game in awhile so you may be right and the writer may be off. I did listen to Manning's press conference and he said the Ravens changed to a two man deep zone in the second half making it difficult for him to throw deep. He said Reed and Pollard were lurking back there so he had to change from what he did in the first half. You will also see that the corners came up and started to pinch on the inside guys to try to force Manning to throw deep so the safeties could pick him off. So I think perhaps the deep ball thing was a combo of the defense the Ravens played in the second half in particular and also the cold weather and Manning's arm strength which weakened noticeably by the fourth quarter.

Am.....with respect......

 

I watch this game all the time...and the 4th quarter was good to Peyton Manning.

 

He led a 70-yard drive that culminated in what should have been a game-winning pass to Demariyus Thomas..giving his side a 35-28 lead...

 

I thought he had trouble gripping the ball..not with arm strength...you can see that on the debatable 'tuck' fumble

 

28 of 43, 276, 3 TDs.. 2 interceptions vs. a good defensive team in bad weather.

 

You'd have to agree.....that's a strong game....especially withthe cliutch drive in the 4th quarter

 

Joe Flacco was 18 of 34 for 324..but 70 came on the busted play in the final minute

 

If Flacco came up big as so many have said..Manning was just as good

[Le Neon]

Manning was significantly outplayed by Joe Flacco to the tune of three TO's to one TO and three scoring drives to Joe's five. You somehow think the Ravens loss is on the D because they let up the tying score at the end when Manning hand delivered them 7 points on his pick in the first quarter and then another 10 points on his other two TOs. Why on earth you think this was a good game by Manning or good enough is stunning to be honest. if not for his special teams delivering 14 points he is not even in the game in the fourth.

 

I never said Denver was not happy with signing Manning. I am questioning their contract on signing a player entering his late 30's with four neck surgeries that has left his arm and hand numb. Why you think it is odd that I would be questioning a two year guarantee at $40 mil is your own private issue. A year to year contract would seem to be more reasonable and safe.

 

And don't pretend getting rid of Tebow did not factor into Elway's pursuit of Manning. During the entire 2011 season Elway continuingly had to answer questions on Tebow and he always hedged his bets. There is no way had he not signed Manning that he would have been able to sit Tebow. And remember Tebow has won a playoff game for Denver. Something Manning still has yet to do.

 

How can you not understand the terms of the contract he signed at this point?  It's been repeated over and over again, Broncos could have cut him for nothing, washed their hands of the whole affair and owed him nothing.  Sounds like they got a pretty sweet deal to take a free look at one of the greatest QBs in league history.  

 

He produced for them at a hall of fame level, so they picked up the option.

 

Tebow     Denver couldn't get rid of him fast enough once his value had peaked, and they fleeced some picks out of the Jets for him.  Now the Jets are caught holding the bag and will probably cut him for nothing.  Not sure where he'll go next, I don't think he's accurate enough for Arena Football.  Maybe he can pull a Doug Flutie up in Canada?

[Superman]

How can you not understand the terms of the contract he signed at this point?  It's been repeated over and over again, Broncos could have cut him for nothing, washed their hands of the whole affair and owed him nothing.  Sounds like they got a pretty sweet deal to take a free look at one of the greatest QBs in league history.  

 

He produced for them at a hall of fame level, so they picked up the option.

 

 

 

Not exactly a free look. It's a $40m look, with no out for the next two years.

 

But the point stands: they didn't have to pick up the option.

[Le Neon]

Not exactly a free look. It's a $40m look, with no out for the next two years.

 

But the point stands: they didn't have to pick up the option.

 

My fault, I think I was unclear.  I meant that last year was a 'free' look (re: risk to future salary cap structure).  Now that they've had a chance to assess the risk they didn't appear to blink an eye at picking up the option.  I think we are in agreement.

[Superman]

My fault, I think I was unclear.  I meant that last year was a 'free' look (re: risk to future salary cap structure).  Now that they've had a chance to assess the risk they didn't appear to blink an eye at picking up the option.  I think we are in agreement.

 

In that case, yup, we're on the same page.

[amfootball]

Calling Tebow "a winner" is subjective, and it necessarily ignores the fact that football is the ultimate team sport, that Tebow was helped tremendously by his defense, special teams, and stupid mistakes by opposing teams, that he even came out on the winning side in a game where he was 2/8 with 69 yards, that the Broncos had two wins where they scored 38 and 35 points with Tebow completing only 10 passes in each game... I could go on. I'm not interested in arguing about Tim Tebow and whether he's a good quarterback or not. If you feel that his record as a starter is proof that he is, then enjoy yourself in that version of reality.

 

Going back to Manning and the Broncos, they made their bed. I'm pretty sure they're comfortable in that bed, because they had an opportunity to address it before picking up the option, but they didn't. They are going to roll with the punches, and given how last season went, I can understand why they're okay with that. They had a 37 year old quarterback coming off a major injury who had his second best statistical season. All indications are that his condition is stable. Their doctors checked him out. Then they smiled and picked up the option, guaranteeing that quarterback $40m over the next two years. Again, without so much as a complaint.

Contrast that with the way they handled Dumervil. They didn't feel he was worth the money, and over a matter of $4m, they released him. And they handled that negotiation very publicly. That we didn't hear anything about Manning's contract is telling. They have the details, and their actions speak very loudly in this regard.

 

I'm sure Broncos fans appreciate your concern, though. They'll probably nod and say "yeah, I hope Manning can survive for the next two years," and then they'll cheer for him every time he steps out on the field. And whether he's physically 100% or not, if he can perform the way he did last season, I'm sure they'll appreciate what he does for their team. I bet Tim Tebow is as far from their minds as Drew Bledsoe is from yours.

I am not sure why you think Tebow was helped by his defense. His defense was ranked 24 in points allowed in 2011. They were horrible as I said. The team was 1-4 when he took over and going nowhere. While I do agree football is a team sport, the QB is the one player that controls the game the most. You want to harp on Tebow’s passing stats but ignore his rushing attack which was first in the league and helped his D in terms of time of possession. The game where he threw two passes, one of them was for the game winner to Decker. So again, stats tell half the story. Just like with Luck who was among the bottom of the league in QBR, passing completion percentage and second to last in turnovers, yet when you watched him play, you saw him make THE plays to win. That is what I saw with Tebow. I am by no means a Tebowite or think he is better than Manning or any other elite QB. I just wished he got the chance to have a team built around him and his strengths just like Luck, RG, Wilson, etc. The guy has been a winner his whole life so not sure why you think that is my version of reality. But whatever, I am not here to argue Tebow.

 

In terms of the Manning contract, my issue is the $40 mil guaranteed on a rehabbing QB in his late 30’s. I will say this if there is any QB that can continue to play at a high level injured, it is Manning. I have always admired his work ethic, love of football, and overall command of the offense.  I do think he was helped last year but a very soft schedule so we shall see what happens this season.

 

Your Dumerville comparison is pretty weak. The Broncos did think Dumerville was worth it (they were going to pay him $8 mil/year) just not the ridiculous contract he was signed to by McDaniels. It became public because they asked him to take a significant pay cut which he agreed too but then had the fax fiasco and the rest is history. I think he is a key loss for them on D which was the side of the ball they needed to get better on. I think you agree with this given how much you have harped on the D for the loss to the Ravens.

[Superman]

I am not sure why you think Tebow was helped by his defense. His defense was ranked 24 in points allowed in 2011. They were horrible as I said. The team was 1-4 when he took over and going nowhere. While I do agree football is a team sport, the QB is the one player that controls the game the most. You want to harp on Tebow’s passing stats but ignore his rushing attack which was first in the league and helped his D in terms of time of possession. The game where he threw two passes, one of them was for the game winner to Decker. So again, stats tell half the story. Just like with Luck who was among the bottom of the league in QBR, passing completion percentage and second to last in turnovers, yet when you watched him play, you saw him make THE plays to win. That is what I saw with Tebow. I am by no means a Tebowite or think he is better than Manning or any other elite QB. I just wished he got the chance to have a team built around him and his strengths just like Luck, RG, Wilson, etc. The guy has been a winner his whole life so not sure why you think that is my version of reality. But whatever, I am not here to argue Tebow.

 

 

Okay, fine, you think Tebow is a winner. I'm not impressed with him as a quarterback. His stats are a part of the picture, because they highlight how limited he is. You can build a team around him, but that doesn't make him a good quarterback.

 

Moving on.

 

 

 

In terms of the Manning contract, my issue is the $40 mil guaranteed on a rehabbing QB in his late 30’s. I will say this if there is any QB that can continue to play at a high level injured, it is Manning. I have always admired his work ethic, love of football, and overall command of the offense.  I do think he was helped last year but a very soft schedule so we shall see what happens this season.

 

 

Manning was a rehabbing quarterback in his late 30s last season. It worked out okay. If they get what they got last season for the next two, I think the Broncos will consider it a good decision.

 

Your Dumerville comparison is pretty weak. The Broncos did think Dumerville was worth it (they were going to pay him $8 mil/year) just not the ridiculous contract he was signed to by McDaniels. It became public because they asked him to take a significant pay cut which he agreed too but then had the fax fiasco and the rest is history. I think he is a key loss for them on D which was the side of the ball they needed to get better on. I think you agree with this given how much you have harped on the D for the loss to the Ravens.

 

The Broncos went public with their Dumervil ultimatum well before the fax deal. And it was over a matter of $4m. Everyone knew that the Broncos wanted Dumervil to take a pay cut, and everyone knew that they were willing to release him if he didn't. This really amped up right before the deadline, but the posturing had been going on for several days already.

 

The point is that the Broncos identified a player that they didn't think was worth the guaranteed money he was due, and released him over a matter of just $4m. And they weren't secretive about it; Elway publicly stated that Dumervil's contract was "out of whack," and that something would have to be done.

 

So if they had any reservations about Manning's $40m (ten times the amount they wanted to save on Dumervil, five times the amount they were willing to pay him), why didn't they say or do anything about it? Why didn't Elway say "we really want Manning to be here, but he's gonna be 37, and he has this injury issue that still isn't all the way where he wants it to be; we're willing to guarantee him for 2013, but we don't want to guarantee 2014"? Why didn't they even try to renegotiate the guaranteed structure of the contract?

 

Keep in mind, this is after the physical. This after the cold weather game in Baltimore, where Manning supposedly couldn't throw downfield and his hand was numb and he couldn't grip the football. If the Broncos front office had any concerns about Manning's physical condition, wouldn't they have tried to renegotiate the terms of his contract?

[amfootball]

Okay, fine, you think Tebow is a winner. I'm not impressed with him as a quarterback. His stats are a part of the picture, because they highlight how limited he is. You can build a team around him, but that doesn't make him a good quarterback.

 

Moving on.

 

 

Manning was a rehabbing quarterback in his late 30s last season. It worked out okay. If they get what they got last season for the next two, I think the Broncos will consider it a good decision.

 

 

The Broncos went public with their Dumervil ultimatum well before the fax deal. And it was over a matter of $4m. Everyone knew that the Broncos wanted Dumervil to take a pay cut, and everyone knew that they were willing to release him if he didn't. This really amped up right before the deadline, but the posturing had been going on for several days already.

 

The point is that the Broncos identified a player that they didn't think was worth the guaranteed money he was due, and released him over a matter of just $4m. And they weren't secretive about it; Elway publicly stated that Dumervil's contract was "out of whack," and that something would have to be done.

 

So if they had any reservations about Manning's $40m (ten times the amount they wanted to save on Dumervil, five times the amount they were willing to pay him), why didn't they say or do anything about it? Why didn't Elway say "we really want Manning to be here, but he's gonna be 37, and he has this injury issue that still isn't all the way where he wants it to be; we're willing to guarantee him for 2013, but we don't want to guarantee 2014"? Why didn't they even try to renegotiate the guaranteed structure of the contract?

 

Keep in mind, this is after the physical. This after the cold weather game in Baltimore, where Manning supposedly couldn't throw downfield and his hand was numb and he couldn't grip the football. If the Broncos front office had any concerns about Manning's physical condition, wouldn't they have tried to renegotiate the terms of his contract?

Being a winner and being impressive don't have to necessarrily go together. In the end, I like winners. Always have. Probably because I got so tired of the Brady/Bledsoe debate that went on for years.

 

I think the "out of whack" comment is my favorite Elway comment all time. I mean how couldn't Dumerville feel the love? lol.

 

And I never questioned Denver/Elway wanting Manning at the $40 mil guaranteed. They obviously feel good about it. I am questioning them for the contract which is a huge risk for a QB in his late 30s still rehabbing. It is the contract itself that I have an issue with not Denver's intent.

[amfootball]

Being a winner and being impressive don't have to necessarrily go together. In the end, I like winners. Always have. Probably because I got so tired of the Brady/Bledsoe debate that went on for years.

 

I think the "out of whack" comment is my favorite Elway comment all time. I mean how couldn't Dumerville feel the love? lol.

 

And I never questioned Denver/Elway wanting Manning at the $40 mil guaranteed. They obviously feel good about it. I am questioning them for the contract which is a huge risk for a QB in his late 30s still rehabbing. It is the contract itself that I have an issue with not Denver's intent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

quoted myself by mistake. Ignore.

[amfootball]

Okay, fine, you think Tebow is a winner. I'm not impressed with him as a quarterback. His stats are a part of the picture, because they highlight how limited he is. You can build a team around him, but that doesn't make him a good quarterback.

 

Moving on.

 

 

Manning was a rehabbing quarterback in his late 30s last season. It worked out okay. If they get what they got last season for the next two, I think the Broncos will consider it a good decision.

 

 

The Broncos went public with their Dumervil ultimatum well before the fax deal. And it was over a matter of $4m. Everyone knew that the Broncos wanted Dumervil to take a pay cut, and everyone knew that they were willing to release him if he didn't. This really amped up right before the deadline, but the posturing had been going on for several days already.

 

The point is that the Broncos identified a player that they didn't think was worth the guaranteed money he was due, and released him over a matter of just $4m. And they weren't secretive about it; Elway publicly stated that Dumervil's contract was "out of whack," and that something would have to be done.

 

So if they had any reservations about Manning's $40m (ten times the amount they wanted to save on Dumervil, five times the amount they were willing to pay him), why didn't they say or do anything about it? Why didn't Elway say "we really want Manning to be here, but he's gonna be 37, and he has this injury issue that still isn't all the way where he wants it to be; we're willing to guarantee him for 2013, but we don't want to guarantee 2014"? Why didn't they even try to renegotiate the guaranteed structure of the contract?

 

Keep in mind, this is after the physical. This after the cold weather game in Baltimore, where Manning supposedly couldn't throw downfield and his hand was numb and he couldn't grip the football. If the Broncos front office had any concerns about Manning's physical condition, wouldn't they have tried to renegotiate the terms of his contract?

Just curious on your thoughts on Luck. His stats were pretty awful last year. Do you not think he is a very good QB?

[Le Neon]

Just curious on your thoughts on Luck. His stats were pretty awful last year. Do you not think he is a very good QB?

 

Forgot this thread was about Andrew Luck.  He still has the rookie excuse.  Luck had a pretty mediocre year compared to veteran QBs, no doubt.  On the other hand Luck appears to have the tools to run a pro offense and coaches seem eager to work with him.  His arrow is pointed up.  If he doesn't improve he won't be considered a very good QB.  Most people think that he will improve.

 

Tebow has only had limited success running a very limited playbook.  Not a good thing for a veteran QB.  He couldn't gain a starting role in a pretty weak lineup.  He's on a team with no QB and still the Jets appear to want to get rid of him.  He may figure it out one day but he doesn't appear capable of running an NFL offense right now.