Dungy: "i Meant Trade Luck, Not Manning."

[KyFan18]

Sorry if someone else posted this. Just clears up what Tony said on the Dan Patrick Show.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/10/tony-dungy-peyton-manning-andrew-luck-draft/1

[Balzer40]

Spin control.

[KyFan18]

Okay, first it's the media type telling Dungy to say it, now the media trying to act like that's not what he said?

[Gonzo]

It makes ALOT more sense. Manning is more valuable to us then other teams right now due to his age and time in what amounts to his own personalized system. Luck is valuable to any team that needs a QB right now.

Play him if Manning is done, otherwise hold him hostage to the highest bidder.

[wallieump99]

It's not spin control....read the actual quote -

"I would see [Peyton] competing and playing as long as he wanted. And if it gets to the point to where, hey, he comes back and it looks like he's gonna play three or four more years, and you say, 'We've got Andrew Luck, we've got an asset, we trade [Peyton]. I think that asset is too much to pass up, even if your quarterback wasn't all that happy about it."

Dungy didn't say "Peyton" he said "him". We've got him, we've got an asset, we trade him. Him is Andrew Luck.

[Balzer40]

It's not spin control....read the actual quote -

Dungy didn't say "Peyton" he said "him". We've got him, we've got an asset, we trade him. Him is Andrew Luck.

It is spin control and I did read the quote. It contridicts the original quote, so yes, its spin control.

[tonychen]

It is spin control and I did read the quote. It contridicts the original quote, so yes, its spin control.

I agree as well. As the idea sounds too crazy from a former coach and Dungy just doesn't want to be hated by his old fans, as far as he realized this he found a way out for himself.

[mouthofsouth]

I heard Dungy say this on Sunday night also. I definitely understood him at that time to mean draft Andrew Luck and then trade him. Sunday night he added that he could back up Manning for several years and learn from him.

[JoKeR]

I read the article and this isn't spin control. They basically put words in his mouth or elaborated for him. The end of the quote was."....you trade"(Manning)

The article added (Manning). Dungy only said "...you trade"

If you ever read the newspaper, they do this all the time. They will elaborate a quote with ( words) but usually they know what they're talking about.

I think that article was trying to manufacture some buzz.

[Smitto]

wow well that was a big error, took him a while to clear up his comment though.

[JoKeR]

I agree as well. As the idea sounds too crazy from a former coach and Dungy just doesn't want to be hated by his old fans, as far as he realized this he found a way out for himself.

Sorry but that's wrong. Read my post above. Articles often elaborate for the reader with, for example (Manning).

The article wrote "....you trade(Manning)"

Which is very different than"...you trade Manning"

The latter is a word for word quote while the first is a elaboration on "....you trade" the author decided that was too open ended and put words in his mouth.

IMO Dungy left it open ended because its not his decision to make such a choice.

I think its cool we(me and Dungy) think alike on this matter.

See what I did there?

[JCPatriot]

I read the article and this isn't spin control. They basically put words in his mouth or elaborated for him. The end of the quote was."....you trade"(Manning)

The article added (Manning). Dungy only said "...you trade"

If you ever read the newspaper, they do this all the time. They will elaborate a quote with ( words) but usually they know what they're talking about.

I think that article was trying to manufacture some buzz.

This is often done to clarify a quote that is taken out of context. When you take a few sentences out of a larger statement, as journalists often do to make it more concise, oftentimes the pronouns do not make obvious sense. The journalist will often replace the pronouns in the quote with more specific nouns enclosed in []s to clarify. Unscrupulous journalists will sometimes abuse this. Always be wary when you read a quote that contains words enclosed in []s. Those []s mean that the person being quoted didn't actually say those specific words. Also watch out for ...s. The ... means that there were additional words here that aren't being printed. If this is done by a good journalist, the words are omitted for editorial reasons to make it more concise. If it is done by an unscrupulous journalist, they could be deliberately taking the quote out of context to misrepresent the meaning.

[Yehoodi]

wow well that was a big error, took him a while to clear up his comment though.

I agree it seems like too big a gaff to not have clear it up earlier . . . i do not see SNF, what was his position then . . .

Also, if you have Luck, then presumably you would of had the #1 overal pick, doesn't it make more sense to have said "you trade the draft pick" if TD was meaning to talk about Luck as opposed to Manning being traded . . .

[21isSuperman]

Makes much more sense now. Though I still wouldn't be in favour of trading Luck if we get him. With that said, according to some, "Luck's draft rights could reap two full years of a team's picks" and we do need a lot of help at many positions. There are so many different scenarios, I'm just going to wait and see.

[BOTT]

who cares what dungy has to say?? well, other than "sorry indy for nominating jim "radio" caldwell to replace me." nice parting gift. but hey, at least he doesn't curse.

[Soultrain8]

Makes much more sense now. Though I still wouldn't be in favour of trading Luck if we get him. With that said, according to some, "Luck's draft rights could reap two full years of a team's picks" and we do need a lot of help at many positions. There are so many different scenarios, I'm just going to wait and see.

Exactly, its more than just Peyton that we need. I say trade him for whoever wants him and at least this years pick(meaning switch with the team with 3rd overall pick) to select a back up to a returning manning. Then use the other picks to fill the major holes that Peyton's absence has exposed. also i like the cat from boise state. i think he would be a could pick up and take advantage of the serious demand for luck.

[husker61]

who cares what dungy has to say?? well, other than "sorry indy for nominating jim "radio" caldwell to replace me." nice parting gift. but hey, at least he doesn't curse.

LOL

[Andy]

Oh WOW!!!! Because Tony Dungy said that, we have to listen to him. I don't care if he said trade both, I still wouldn't listen to him. He has as much of an opinion as anyone on this forum. I just don't care. Love him but don't care. Don't care (thought I should make that clear).

[oldunclemark]

Exactly, its more than just Peyton that we need. I say trade him for whoever wants him and at least this years pick(meaning switch with the team with 3rd overall pick) to select a back up to a returning manning. Then use the other picks to fill the major holes that Peyton's absence has exposed. also i like the cat from boise state. i think he would be a could pick up and take advantage of the serious demand for luck.

We can get 2 1st round picks for the No,.1 overall picks..

Since we draft 1st in the 2nd round, too..that gives us 3 of the first 33 picks...

I like Kellen Moore of Boise, too...We can take him and two of the top defensive players

..or just 3 defensive players

[bluefan]

When I read the quote originally I actually thought the media might be jumping to conclusions that the "he" was Peyton and not Luck. I guess my gut feeling was right. Dungy would never say that.