Peyton Manning Washed Up

[The Old Crow]

It's easy to say that now, we didn't know how he was going to heal.

That was another factor why you have to give the benefit of the doubt to Irsay. That being said, if anyone could overcome an injury like that, it would be Manning.

[Superman]

He wouldn't have even close to the same team around him that is here now

 

Right. Out of Mathis, Freeney and Reggie, two of the three would have been gone. Probably no Cory Redding. And so on...

[amfootball]

Right. Out of Mathis, Freeney and Reggie, two of the three would have been gone. Probably no Cory Redding. And so on...

So are you saying if Manning stayed, he would have missed the playoffs the last two seasons with the Colts?

[Superman]

So are you saying if Manning stayed, he would have missed the playoffs the last two seasons with the Colts?

No. Can't know that. But the team would have been much, MUCH different.

[JoKeR]

That was another factor why you have to give the benefit of the doubt to Irsay. That being said, if anyone could overcome an injury like that, it would be Manning.

It's about impossible to say who could heal well from his surgeries because it's about the severity of the injury but certainly Manning went the distance in rehab where others might have given up.

[amfootball]

No. Can't know that. But the team would have been much, MUCH different.

For sure. But the question was whether he would have been as successful or more successful than Luck the last two years. I think that is hard to say given the changes to the team but I think Manning gets them to the post-season the last two years. He took a poor Denver team in 2012 to 13 wins and the number one seed.

[Superman]

For sure. But the question was whether he would have been as successful or more successful than Luck the last two years. I think that is hard to say given the changes to the team but I think Manning gets them to the post-season the last two years. He took a poor Denver team in 2012 to 13 wins and the number one seed.

 

Yeah, I disagree about "poor Denver team." That team got to the playoffs and won a playoff game with Tim Tebow at QB. They had a strong running game and a defense that made a lot of big plays. They had two really good, young receivers. I think Manning helped them break through the 8-8 ceiling they probably had. But they weren't exactly the Jaguars or Raiders in 2011.

 

And I'm not sure the question is whether he would have been as successful as Luck in Indy. The statement you responded to was that the situation wouldn't have been good for Peyton, that the 2013 Colts wouldn't have been in the Super Bowl like the Broncos were. We can't rewrite history, with all the variables, but we do know that the Colts had some major issues even without Manning's cap hit, so fixing those issues around him would have been more difficult. I've already illustrated how him staying probably would have cost us three or four of our best players. So while there's no way to tell for sure, I don't think it's likely that the Colts would have been in the Super Bowl last year. Playoffs, probably. I'm not so sure about 2012, because Manning didn't start out so hot, but it's possible.

 

The one thing that might have changed drastically is that we could have traded the #1 for a huge haul, and maybe some of those picks would have contributed right away. Still a tall order to find this team winning deep in the playoffs in that situation. 

[SOMDColtsfan]

No. Can't know that. But the team would have been much, MUCH different.

I`ve often wondered what the Colts would look like had they traded the #1 overall pick with Luck coming out of college. Its all hypothetical now but what/who could they have gotten and what direction would the Colts be heading up vs down? Good stuff lol

[amfootball]

Yeah, I disagree about "poor Denver team." That team got to the playoffs and won a playoff game with Tim Tebow at QB. They had a strong running game and a defense that made a lot of big plays. They had two really good, young receivers. I think Manning helped them break through the 8-8 ceiling they probably had. But they weren't exactly the Jaguars or Raiders in 2011.

 

And I'm not sure the question is whether he would have been as successful as Luck in Indy. The statement you responded to was that the situation wouldn't have been good for Peyton, that the 2013 Colts wouldn't have been in the Super Bowl like the Broncos were. We can't rewrite history, with all the variables, but we do know that the Colts had some major issues even without Manning's cap hit, so fixing those issues around him would have been more difficult. I've already illustrated how him staying probably would have cost us three or four of our best players. So while there's no way to tell for sure, I don't think it's likely that the Colts would have been in the Super Bowl last year. Playoffs, probably. I'm not so sure about 2012, because Manning didn't start out so hot, but it's possible.

 

The one thing that might have changed drastically is that we could have traded the #1 for a huge haul, and maybe some of those picks would have contributed right away. Still a tall order to find this team winning deep in the playoffs in that situation. 

Good points. I do think Denver mgmt. has done a better job building their team than Indy has. What is your honest opinion of Grigson at this point? Pagano? I just don't see greatness there. I think with Polian you had a guy that had the track record and of course knew how to put the right pieces around Manning to where the team were perennial Super Bowl contenders. I know Polian had his flaws and don't want to rehash any of that. But how confident are you in this FO and coaching team to be able to build a contender around Luck?

[thedude]

Manning is not "washed up", but he is dangerously close to being one sack away from being sent to IR.

[Superman]

Good points. I do think Denver mgmt. has done a better job building their team than Indy has. What is your honest opinion of Grigson at this point? Pagano? I just don't see greatness there. I think with Polian you had a guy that had the track record and of course knew how to put the right pieces around Manning to where the team were perennial Super Bowl contenders. I know Polian had his flaws and don't want to rehash any of that. But how confident are you in this FO and coaching team to be able to build a contender around Luck?

 

It's not that Polian had flaws. It's that his team eroded. I think every GM has flaws, but if your flaws lead to your talent level dipping and you having perilously little depth, that's when you are a problem. A lot of people were shocked by 2011, and we really should have been better than 2-14 even without Manning, but that roster had serious issues, and the coaching staff didn't have the goods either.

 

I know you said you don't want to discuss Polian. I only mention the above because it provides perspective on Grigson. At this point, the Colts are at least a year ahead of schedule, probably two. No one expected the Colts in the playoffs in 2012. Most people said they'd falter in 2013. Instead, we've won 22 regular season games, and a playoff game. Reasonable projections had the Colts competing for the division in 2014, at the soonest. At this point, it appears they have a stranglehold on it as they look to repeat. So the results are there.

 

Our roster has some issues, to be sure. But every roster has issues, right? It's only the very elite -- Seahawks, Pats, Broncos, maybe the Saints -- that look like they are stacked everywhere, and have depth everywhere. The Colts have beaten two of the three of those that they've played (plus the Niners last year, who were in this category before injuries and suspensions). We're not terribly far behind those teams, IMO. Our questions are about our young guys performing on the offensive line, and our secondary staying healthy. If that happens, I think we can beat anyone in the league, any given week.

 

So I'm fine with Grigson. I have taken issue with some of his decisions, but I like his approach, I appreciate his patient methods, and I think they will work. And if they don't, he's set up a roster management profile that will allow us to fill some holes in free agency, when necessary, while keeping our best guys.

 

Pagano has a great way about him. I don't think anyone would question that. My questions about him are strictly about his game management, like 4th down decisions, timeout usage, etc. I've seen good, and I've seen bad. At least after the Pats game last year, he acknowledged mishandling a situation, so I have hope that he'll get better there. He's only been a head coach for 22 games. The jury is still out, but I think the positives far outweigh the negatives with Pagano. 

 

IMO, greatness is determined over a considerable period of time, not two seasons. Beginning of 2012, no one was pegging the Seahawks for greatness. A lot of people still considered Pete Carroll to be a "college coach" who couldn't win anything in the pros. He hadn't even had a winning season yet. He and John Schneider were having "issues," reportedly butting heads, etc. They made a bunch of bad moves. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000053158/article/pete-carrolls-seattle-seahawks-are-nfls-most-fascinating-team At that point, the Seahawks were two years into their rebuild, just like the Colts are now. Now, they're considered the cream of the crop. There are notable differences, main one being that our QB isn't Tarvaris Jackson, but my point is that two years isn't a good sample size to determine whether your coach and GM are "great" or not.

 

But I do like them, and I am confident in their ability to build this team around Luck. They are relentless. Whether they have the foresight and ability to engineer a championship team is yet to be seen, but I expect it to come together. 

[amfootball]

It's not that Polian had flaws. It's that his team eroded. I think every GM has flaws, but if your flaws lead to your talent level dipping and you having perilously little depth, that's when you are a problem. A lot of people were shocked by 2011, and we really should have been better than 2-14 even without Manning, but that roster had serious issues, and the coaching staff didn't have the goods either.

 

I know you said you don't want to discuss Polian. I only mention the above because it provides perspective on Grigson. At this point, the Colts are at least a year ahead of schedule, probably two. No one expected the Colts in the playoffs in 2012. Most people said they'd falter in 2013. Instead, we've won 22 regular season games, and a playoff game. Reasonable projections had the Colts competing for the division in 2014, at the soonest. At this point, it appears they have a stranglehold on it as they look to repeat. So the results are there.

 

Our roster has some issues, to be sure. But every roster has issues, right? It's only the very elite -- Seahawks, Pats, Broncos, maybe the Saints -- that look like they are stacked everywhere, and have depth everywhere. The Colts have beaten two of the three of those that they've played (plus the Niners last year, who were in this category before injuries and suspensions). We're not terribly far behind those teams, IMO. Our questions are about our young guys performing on the offensive line, and our secondary staying healthy. If that happens, I think we can beat anyone in the league, any given week.

 

So I'm fine with Grigson. I have taken issue with some of his decisions, but I like his approach, I appreciate his patient methods, and I think they will work. And if they don't, he's set up a roster management profile that will allow us to fill some holes in free agency, when necessary, while keeping our best guys.

 

Pagano has a great way about him. I don't think anyone would question that. My questions about him are strictly about his game management, like 4th down decisions, timeout usage, etc. I've seen good, and I've seen bad. At least after the Pats game last year, he acknowledged mishandling a situation, so I have hope that he'll get better there. He's only been a head coach for 22 games. The jury is still out, but I think the positives far outweigh the negatives with Pagano. 

 

IMO, greatness is determined over a considerable period of time, not two seasons. Beginning of 2012, no one was pegging the Seahawks for greatness. A lot of people still considered Pete Carroll to be a "college coach" who couldn't win anything in the pros. He hadn't even had a winning season yet. He and John Schneider were having "issues," reportedly butting heads, etc. They made a bunch of bad moves. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000053158/article/pete-carrolls-seattle-seahawks-are-nfls-most-fascinating-team At that point, the Seahawks were two years into their rebuild, just like the Colts are now. Now, they're considered the cream of the crop. There are notable differences, main one being that our QB isn't Tarvaris Jackson, but my point is that two years isn't a good sample size to determine whether your coach and GM are "great" or not.

 

But I do like them, and I am confident in their ability to build this team around Luck. They are relentless. Whether they have the foresight and ability to engineer a championship team is yet to be seen, but I expect it to come together. 

I appreciate you taking the time to put that all down. You are right. Greatness is not determined in two years but you have to admit that you got ahead of schedule mostly due to Luck being as good as advertised. He has covered up much for your team and of course you have benefited from the Texans, in particular Matt Schaub, falling apart which allowed you to take the division back last year and put you in the drivers seat this year in the weakest division in the AFC, maybe in all of football. We'll see.

In terms of Grigson, I see some recklessness there. The Richardson trade was a disaster. Your lines still don't look good to me. Again, Luck covers some of that at least on the offensive side. And while you did beat some to the top teams last year, you were absolutely torched by teams like the Rams and Cards. And this is where my criticism of Pagano comes in. At times your team does not look prepared to play. If I was a fan of your team, I would be driven mad by beating the likes of Seattle and Denver and then not showing up for the Rams, Cards. Like you said, his management in game is questionable as well but in fairness he is still learning as a first time HC.

 

All that being said, your points about Seattle are valid. I was not a Pete Carroll fan at all and would have never suspected him to be able to field the best team in football with a ring and poised for a potential repeat. But Pete had previous NFL coaching experience with the Jets and Pats. He made a lot of mistakes in his first couple of go arounds which he says prepared him to do things right in Seattle. Perhaps Grigson and Pagano get there in their first go around but it is rare. Time will tell and they do have the most important piece in place - the QB.

 

 

[Superman]

I appreciate you taking the time to put that all down. You are right. Greatness is not determined in two years but you have to admit that you got ahead of schedule mostly due to Luck being as good as advertised. He has covered up much for your team and of course you have benefited from the Texans, in particular Matt Schaub, falling apart which allowed you to take the division back last year and put you in the drivers seat this year in the weakest division in the AFC, maybe in all of football. We'll see.

In terms of Grigson, I see some recklessness there. The Richardson trade was a disaster. Your lines still don't look good to me. Again, Luck covers some of that at least on the offensive side. And while you did beat some to the top teams last year, you were absolutely torched by teams like the Rams and Cards. And this is where my criticism of Pagano comes in. At times your team does not look prepared to play. If I was a fan of your team, I would be driven mad by beating the likes of Seattle and Denver and then not showing up for the Rams, Cards. Like you said, his management in game is questionable as well but in fairness he is still learning as a first time HC.

 

All that being said, your points about Seattle are valid. I was not a Pete Carroll fan at all and would have never suspected him to be able to field the best team in football with a ring and poised for a potential repeat. But Pete had previous NFL coaching experience with the Jets and Pats. He made a lot of mistakes in his first couple of go arounds which he says prepared him to do things right in Seattle. Perhaps Grigson and Pagano get there in their first go around but it is rare. Time will tell and they do have the most important piece in place - the QB.

 

I think Luck is exceptional, but when you look at his stats, there are warts. He's started 35 games, so he's got a lot of improvement to make. The Colts don't win the games they've won without Luck being able to perform when called upon, but the team isn't just Luck and no one else. He's covered up some issues, but the team has pulled him out of the fire at times as well. He hasn't been so good that he's able to lead a group of losers to 11-5 two years in a row. And yeah, the Texans fell apart, but we didn't win the division at 7-9, either. And we beat the best teams on the schedule last season, outside the division.

 

The Richardson trade was bad. (So was Seattle's trade for Charlie Whitehurt. And I think they gave up too much for Percy Harvin, given his injury history.) The offensive line is young and has to play to get better; we'll see how that goes. I'm satisfied with the defensive line, and I think it's one of the deepest positions on the team (after being the weakest spot in 2011, aside from QB). Grigson's "recklessness" can pretty much be summed up in the Richardson trade. His other gambles, like Vontae Davis, have paid off.

 

And yeah, it irritates me that we lost like we did to the Rams and Cards (two teams we should have played better against, but they have proven capable of beating good teams as well). But it goes back to us being ahead of schedule. Young team, for the most part, missing the heart of the team in Reggie Wayne, not able to run the ball, with a split personality on offense. That's where I hope we improve this season, in being more consistent from week to week, rather than having these drastic swings between great and terrible. Minimize the lows, maximize the highs. 

 

And while some might look at those losses as a knock against Pagano, I think you can point to the fact that this team had the fewest penalties and the fewest turnovers in the league all last season as a testament to good coaching. 

 

I think everyone is looking at the Seahawks for ways to duplicate their success. But what I understand from looking at them is that you never bat 1.000, even when things are going great. Their 2013 draft hasn't produced anything for them yet. They struggle in pass protection. And this is the sixth year of their regime. The Ravens had a really good foundation when Harbaugh took over. And Ozzie was GM for 12 years before they even got back to the Super Bowl, in Harbaugh's fifth season. First go round for them as well. First go round for Mickey Loomis and Sean Payton in New Orleans. Loomis has been GM since 2002. They took til 2009, Payton's 4th year, to get to the Super Bowl, and they won with a great, proven QB (and a dirty defense, but that's another story).

 

It's critical to allow your staff to experience growing pains and make mistakes, without chopping their legs off, or kicking them out the door. Sometimes fans are looking for greatness after two seasons, and that greatness hasn't been achieved yet. Mistakes are frustrating, but they are to be expected. Learn from them, avoid them in the future, and get better from them. That's what I hope our staff is doing now, but going into Year 3, it's hard to really gauge how good the team is. All we really know is that this team is a lot further along than we thought we'd be two years ago.

[thedude]

If I was a Broncos fan, I'd be concerned about him finishing the season. He's a great QB, but his fragile frame has to be a huge concern.

[amfootball]

I think Luck is exceptional, but when you look at his stats, there are warts. He's started 35 games, so he's got a lot of improvement to make. The Colts don't win the games they've won without Luck being able to perform when called upon, but the team isn't just Luck and no one else. He's covered up some issues, but the team has pulled him out of the fire at times as well. He hasn't been so good that he's able to lead a group of losers to 11-5 two years in a row. And yeah, the Texans fell apart, but we didn't win the division at 7-9, either. And we beat the best teams on the schedule last season, outside the division.

 

The Richardson trade was bad. (So was Seattle's trade for Charlie Whitehurt. And I think they gave up too much for Percy Harvin, given his injury history.) The offensive line is young and has to play to get better; we'll see how that goes. I'm satisfied with the defensive line, and I think it's one of the deepest positions on the team (after being the weakest spot in 2011, aside from QB). Grigson's "recklessness" can pretty much be summed up in the Richardson trade. His other gambles, like Vontae Davis, have paid off.

 

And yeah, it irritates me that we lost like we did to the Rams and Cards (two teams we should have played better against, but they have proven capable of beating good teams as well). But it goes back to us being ahead of schedule. Young team, for the most part, missing the heart of the team in Reggie Wayne, not able to run the ball, with a split personality on offense. That's where I hope we improve this season, in being more consistent from week to week, rather than having these drastic swings between great and terrible. Minimize the lows, maximize the highs. 

 

And while some might look at those losses as a knock against Pagano, I think you can point to the fact that this team had the fewest penalties and the fewest turnovers in the league all last season as a testament to good coaching. 

 

I think everyone is looking at the Seahawks for ways to duplicate their success. But what I understand from looking at them is that you never bat 1.000, even when things are going great. Their 2013 draft hasn't produced anything for them yet. They struggle in pass protection. And this is the sixth year of their regime. The Ravens had a really good foundation when Harbaugh took over. And Ozzie was GM for 12 years before they even got back to the Super Bowl, in Harbaugh's fifth season. First go round for them as well. First go round for Mickey Loomis and Sean Payton in New Orleans. Loomis has been GM since 2002. They took til 2009, Payton's 4th year, to get to the Super Bowl, and they won with a great, proven QB (and a dirty defense, but that's another story).

 

It's critical to allow your staff to experience growing pains and make mistakes, without chopping their legs off, or kicking them out the door. Sometimes fans are looking for greatness after two seasons, and that greatness hasn't been achieved yet. Mistakes are frustrating, but they are to be expected. Learn from them, avoid them in the future, and get better from them. That's what I hope our staff is doing now, but going into Year 3, it's hard to really gauge how good the team is. All we really know is that this team is a lot further along than we thought we'd be two years ago.

I hope you know that I am not trying to bust your chops about the Colts at all. I just wanted to offer an outsider's opinion on the team as I see it anyways, for whatever that is worth. ;)

 

I think we all fall prey to championships as the ultimate benchmark of success. Try living in NE where making three straight AFC championship games and a SB appearance is sill not good enough. lol. But you are right. With a young team there is a maturation process of both the staff and players. And let's face it. It is hard to win the Super Bowl. Denver IMO was the best team in football last year and they were roasted in the SB.

 

I think Seattle caught a little magic in the bottle with both Wilson (third round pick) and Sherman (fifth round pick). They are not just good players, they are great. Of course the same happened for the Pats with Brady. And to some extent, Peyton's neck issues landed you Luck. So there is always some of that involved too.

 

And I by no means do I think the Colts should kick Grigson or Pagano out the door. Your OC, Pep is a different story. Too conservative and not taking advantage enough of everything a guy like Luck brings to the table. Using Seattle as the example as we have been in this discussion, their OC utilizes every aspect of Wilson's game from his quick decision making to his feet to his great ball skills faking hand offs and such. I think Pep should look at that and figure out to do some of that stuff with Luck to make the Colts offense more unpredictable and lethal. He has much more to work with at the skill positions as well than Seattle does.

 

Is your basis for saying the Colts are ahead of schedule just based on the win/loss record or do you believe the team is ahead on its personnel as well?

[amfootball]

If I was a Broncos fan, I'd be concerned about him finishing the season. He's a great QB, but his fragile frame has to be a huge concern.

Fragile frame? The only time he has ever missed was 2011 from the neck surgeries. He played on severely sprained ankles for most of the season last year and still put up 55 TDs. Manning is as tough as they come.

[Nadine]

If I was a Broncos fan, I'd be concerned about him finishing the season. He's a great QB, but his fragile frame has to be a huge concern.

he's pretty much the definition of durable

[Dustin]

Manning is not "washed up", but he is dangerously close to being one sack away from being sent to IR.

Sounds like every QB in the NFL.

[thedude]

Sounds like every QB in the NFL.

Manning is more fragile than any QB in the NFL and you know that.

[Dustin]

Manning is more fragile than any QB in the NFL and you know that.

wat?

[thedude]

Protecting manning is absolutely critical. Everyone knows he's one sack away from a critical career ending injury.

[Fx Stryker]

Protecting manning is absolutely critical. Everyone knows he's one sack away from a critical career ending injury.

Manning's neck is structurally more sound than others. He just doesn't have the same degree of rotation as an unfused neck.

Every player is one bad hit away from injury. Not just Manning.

Manning is the iron man of the NFL. He hasn't turned into some injury prone player.

Heck it took that Washington hit 6 years to take him out.

[thedude]

Manning's neck is structurally more sound than others.

C'mon. Everyone has to agree ..... That's funny.

[Superman]

Sounds like every QB in the NFL.

 

Replace "sack" with "hit" and it's every player in the NFL.

[Superman]

I hope you know that I am not trying to bust your chops about the Colts at all. I just wanted to offer an outsider's opinion on the team as I see it anyways, for whatever that is worth. ;)

 

I think we all fall prey to championships as the ultimate benchmark of success. Try living in NE where making three straight AFC championship games and a SB appearance is sill not good enough. lol. But you are right. With a young team there is a maturation process of both the staff and players. And let's face it. It is hard to win the Super Bowl. Denver IMO was the best team in football last year and they were roasted in the SB.

 

I think Seattle caught a little magic in the bottle with both Wilson (third round pick) and Sherman (fifth round pick). They are not just good players, they are great. Of course the same happened for the Pats with Brady. And to some extent, Peyton's neck issues landed you Luck. So there is always some of that involved too.

 

And I by no means do I think the Colts should kick Grigson or Pagano out the door. Your OC, Pep is a different story. Too conservative and not taking advantage enough of everything a guy like Luck brings to the table. Using Seattle as the example as we have been in this discussion, their OC utilizes every aspect of Wilson's game from his quick decision making to his feet to his great ball skills faking hand offs and such. I think Pep should look at that and figure out to do some of that stuff with Luck to make the Colts offense more unpredictable and lethal. He has much more to work with at the skill positions as well than Seattle does.

 

Is your basis for saying the Colts are ahead of schedule just based on the win/loss record or do you believe the team is ahead on its personnel as well?

 

Agreed mostly all the way around. The Pats are an excellent example of why it's a bad idea to hold yourself prisoner to that "championship or bust" mentality. I want the staff thinking that way, but as fans, it's not realistic. 

 

I think there's reason for hope with Pep. Our offense was different at the end of the season last year, and based on preseason, the changes kept. I hope they stick with the new mode of play calling, but we'll see. We ran a read option in the playoffs against the Chiefs on 4th down, so the creativity is there. We installed some pistol packages this preseason, so the willingness to include new stuff is there. But we can't go back to what we were doing in the middle of the season, which is a big reason we were down so quickly to teams like the Cardinals and Rams. 

 

To answer your question, it's based on the fact that the Colts have already done what people didn't expect them to have a chance at doing until this season. So, results. I think our roster/personnel is about where you'd expect it to be after only two years. Still have some work to do, some injuries have set us back in certain areas, and we have to fix some mistakes as well. 

[thedude]

Replace "sack" with "hit" and it's every player in the NFL.

Not to the degree of Manning though. Recognize the common sense of this..... Please.

[Superman]

Not to the degree of Manning though. Recognize the common sense of this..... Please.

 

Does "recognize the common sense" mean "ignore the doctors who said his neck is stronger than before"?

[thedude]

he's pretty much the definition of durable

As long as he doesn't get hit.

[thedude]

Does "recognize the common sense" mean "ignore the doctors who said his neck is stronger than before"?

Now, use common sense here. How could a persons neck be stronger than before when he has had surgery which resulted in decreased mobility.

Plenty of other doctors have said he should not risk playing any longer because of his neck issue. Those doctors don't have any bias though.

[Superman]

Now, use common sense here. How could a persons neck be stronger than before when he has had surgery which resulted in decreased mobility.

Plenty of other doctors have said he should not risk playing any longer because of his neck issue. Those doctors don't have any bias though.

 

I'm sorry that you're misinformed. You can base your opinion on what you think is common sense, or you can base it on what the people who know what they're talking about have said. It's up to you.

 

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/story/2012-03-08/doctors-upbeat-on-manning-health/53424974/1

[thedude]

I guess people in Indy still have a man crush on Manning. I can understand that.

[Myles]

I don't think so. Irsay knew it would not have been fair to Peyton or Andrew to have them both at the same time, so even if Peyton took a paycut, Irsay would have still made the decision for the long term which was the right one.

 

Although Luck is just in his 3rd year, looking how far the team that has exceeded expectations has come along, that was the right long term move. Plus, if we let go of the others and kept Peyton behind that sorry O-line for Luck's first 2 years, Peyton might be out of this league by now, I feel.

I'm not sure about that.   I thought the Colts should have traded the top pick.   There were teams willing to give up their entire draft and a first in the next year for Luck.   It could have been similar to the Hershal walker trade Dallas made which brought them a few championships.  Manning took crappy Colts teams to 12 or 13 wins consistently, I can only imagine if they had double the picks in each round to build around him for the following 3-4 years.

 

But the choice they made wasn't bad with Luck either.

[thedude]

Manning looked confused and completely out of synch in the second half last night. Denver will not have nearly as potent of an offense this year. Their defense will only be marginally better. If they make it to the Super Bowl again, the result will be the same, no matter which NFC team they play.

[Myles]

Manning looked confused and completely out of synch in the second half last night. Denver will not have nearly as potent of an offense this year. Their defense will only be marginally better. If they make it to the Super Bowl again, the result will be the same, no matter which NFC team they play.

Well, they are 2-0.    Great start.   I think they will be fine.

[dgambill]

Manning looked confused and completely out of synch in the second half last night. Denver will not have nearly as potent of an offense this year. Their defense will only be marginally better. If they make it to the Super Bowl again, the result will be the same, no matter which NFC team they play.

I don't think MANNING looked out of sorts. His teammates are playing with their heads up their butts. Dropping balls, running wrong routes, and making STUPID penalties. From shoving a qb long after a play is over to give the team a first down when your assured to get the ball back to dumb dumb holding penalties on running plays. Honestly....why in the world with Peyton Manning as your QB would you hold on a run play? Say the running back gets stuffed for a no gain or a yard or something. That is still VERY managable for Peyton and the passing game....push them back to first and 20...now the defense can play downhill. If they just eliminate the bad penalties and careless drops...they would have been putting up 35-40pts. They are shooting themselves in the foot. Can't do that next week against the best defense in football. Bad down and distance and Peyton will be in for a rough night. But Peyton confused and out of sync??? I mean he was 21-25 (thats over 80% for you math majors and 3 perfectly thrown tds)...I'd hate to see him insync if I was the opposing team. I do think Seattle presents matchup problems for Denver....but the rest of the NFC...not so much.

[sweetsurrender]

Manning looked confused and completely out of synch in the second half last night. Denver will not have nearly as potent of an offense this year. Their defense will only be marginally better. If they make it to the Super Bowl again, the result will be the same, no matter which NFC team they play.

Seattle suddenly looks vulnerable. Next week should be a close game IMO. Denver will have fire in their eyes for this one. And Seattle will want to right the ship I am sure.

[Jason_]

Now, use common sense here. How could a persons neck be stronger than before when he has had surgery which resulted in decreased mobility.

Plenty of other doctors have said he should not risk playing any longer because of his neck issue. Those doctors don't have any bias though.

 

I'm sure it would not be at all difficult to find multiple quotes from Doctors who examined Manning that confirmed that he is in no more danger post-recovery than he was prior to the injury.  

 

Can you per chance provide any links to these "other doctors" that said he shouldn't risk playing any longer?  Did any of these "other doctors" actually examine Manning themselves prior to making their recommendation?  I'm relatively certain I already know the answers to both questions so I won't exactly be holding my breath for any type of worthwhile response.  If you can actually provide one though, I will be pleasantly surprised.

[Blue Horseshoe]

Manning looked confused and completely out of synch in the second half last night. Denver will not have nearly as potent of an offense this year. Their defense will only be marginally better. If they make it to the Super Bowl again, the result will be the same, no matter which NFC team they play.

 

You do realize that he has the highest passer rating in the league and leads it in touchdown passes don't you?

As for the offense they are 4th in scoring despite basically only playing half of each game so far.  Do you honestly believe that that cannot be fixed so that they play at consistently high level for the entire game?

[Shane Bond]

You do realize that he has the highest passer rating in the league and leads it in touchdown passes don't you?

As for the offense they are 4th in scoring despite basically only playing half of each game so far.  Do you honestly believe that that cannot be fixed so that they play at consistently high level for the entire game?

Imagine the passer ratings without the 5 or 6 dropped passes already in 2 games.

[jvan1973]

Now, use common sense here. How could a persons neck be stronger than before when he has had surgery which resulted in decreased mobility.

Plenty of other doctors have said he should not risk playing any longer because of his neck issue. Those doctors don't have any bias though.

Yeah, this isn't correct