Why Cant Manning & Luck Co-Exist?

[supremecoltsfan300]

Speaking only for myself, the 2 more years figure comes because usually when a contract is structured the way Manning's is, it's because those last to years were never inteneded to be played under and were only added as window dressing.

Keep in mind, he'd be 38 after those two years. So it's entirely reasonable to mark that as a potential retirement date.

What isn't reasonable (IMO) are these ideas that he's going to play into his 40s. I just don't see that happening, and if it does, it almost certainly would not be at the same level we're accustomed to (which is the other reason I don't see it happeneing, because I can't see Manning playing at anything less than his best)

I don't see why Peyton would suddenly drop off. I agree with that playing into his 40s is a little unreasonable, mainly because i don't think he wants to play that long. But Manning wants to play till he's 40, so i think he will. Peyton's best ability is his mind, and that isn't going to go away. Elway, Warner played some of their best football at an old age. So did farve that one year. If peyton's o-line protects him then he should be fine. The o-line should only get better by the time he is 39 and 40. And if peyton's skill does drop off slightly, then what are we talking about? just 28 td passes and only 4100 yards? Manning and Irsay i would think, want manning to become the all time leader in the passing stats. If peyton just drops down to say an Eli level of play then i think we're still in good shape.

At this point though, I'll just settle for a healthy manning playing next year.

[jonesy567]

We need to draft a QB this year, it is the best chance we will get to replace Peyton and replacement will learn from the greatest of them all! It's a no-brainer!

[Flash7]

I just dont buy the money argument...most can agree that if Peyton were playing this year we would have 7 or 8 wins now and/or be in the thick of the AFC playoff picture. Thus if the QB postion is THE reason for the chance at a playoff or a SB run than why wouldn't you pay anything for having not 1 but 2 options?

Well, let's put the money issue aside... Would you agree that if the Colts had the Steeler's defense and the Colt's offense the past 10 years, Manning would have a lot more Super Bowl victories? If Big Ben could win, then for sure Manning and the Colt's would've been a dynasty, right?

My point is that in order to have a solid team both offensively and defensively, you would need to have talent all around. Moving forward, the Colts have the great fortune of having the number 1 pick, and having Manning. In order to build a great team, they can use either Manning or Luck as leverage. So taking money out of the picture, and looking at it from the stand point of building the best team, I think they should explore either of the two options.

Since only 1 of the 2 QB's will be the starter and on the field, it would be a better use of the opportunity to build around either QB. We can still look for a competent back-up either through FA or the draft.

[Jaric]

I don't see why Peyton would suddenly drop off. I agree with that playing into his 40s is a little unreasonable, mainly because i don't think he wants to play that long. But Manning wants to play till he's 40, so i think he will. Peyton's best ability is his mind, and that isn't going to go away. Elway, Warner played some of their best football at an old age. So did farve that one year. If peyton's o-line protects him then he should be fine. The o-line should only get better by the time he is 39 and 40. And if peyton's skill does drop off slightly, then what are we talking about? just 28 td passes and only 4100 yards? Manning and Irsay i would think, want manning to become the all time leader in the passing stats. If peyton just drops down to say an Eli level of play then i think we're still in good shape.

At this point though, I'll just settle for a healthy manning playing next year.

Well, age catches up to everyone eventually. Manning is no different. As to playing till he's 40, has he actually said anything about that or are you just trying to read the tea leaves? (Which I admit is all I'm doing)

Agree 100% with you on just being happy seeing him play next year.

[supremecoltsfan300]

Well, let's put the money issue aside... Would you agree that if the Colts had the Steeler's defense and the Colt's offense the past 10 years, Manning would have a lot more Super Bowl victories? If Big Ben could win, then for sure Manning and the Colt's would've been a dynasty, right?

My point is that in order to have a solid team both offensively and defensively, you would need to have talent all around. Moving forward, the Colts have the great fortune of having the number 1 pick, and having Manning. In order to build a great team, they can use either Manning or Luck as leverage. So taking money out of the picture, and looking at it from the stand point of building the best team, I think they should explore either of the two options.

Since only 1 of the 2 QB's will be the starter and on the field, it would be a better use of the opportunity to build around either QB. We can still look for a competent back-up either through FA or the draft.

I agree. I think we should keep manning and draft a back-up. i really like kellen moore, and he would just be a 4th round pick. he studys film almost as much peyton and they could have good discussions on football. i think people sometimes forget the back-up qb talks with the starter and they discuss different things they seen on film.

[Coltsagent]

Flash...I think comparing Pitt vs. Indy is getting into a debate about football philosophies or even trends. What does it take to win a SB? Is there 1 blue print to follow? I don’t think there is, I believe there are different paths to meet the same ends. I like the path we have chosen for the past 10 years and don’t want to see that changed. I have really seen this game change over the past 10 years and believe it will continue to do so. I don’t believe in defenses winning championships, they only give you the opportunity to win, you still have to be able to score.

[Superman]

He's a rookie getting drafted not a free agent. He has no say in the matter. Again, if he wants to play hardball and sit out, fine. Sit out. All he'll have accomplished is wasting a year of his career watching daytime television and have nothing to show for it.

Every year guys get drafted to teams they'd probably rather not go to. Pulling an Elway is the exception.

New holdout rule states if you don't report 30 days before the first regular season game, you don't accrue a year of service time. Rookie holdouts have been pretty well neutered, I think.

[Flash7]

Flash...I think comparing Pitt vs. Indy is getting into a debate about football philosophies or even trends. What does it take to win a SB? Is there 1 blue print to follow? I don’t think there is, I believe there are different paths to meet the same ends. I like the path we have chosen for the past 10 years and don’t want to see that changed. I have really seen this game change over the past 10 years and believe it will continue to do so. I don’t believe in defenses winning championships, they only give you the opportunity to win, you still have to be able to score.

I couldn't agree with you more about defenses only giving you a chance to win. I never believed in the "defense wins championships" motto. I always believe that its the best TEAM that wins the superBowl. What I was hoping for is for you to envision the Colts with a solid defense, like the ones that the Steelers have had, and the same old Colt's high scoring offense, thus making for a great team. I feel that it would be possible for this to happen if we play this situation right.

[Coltsagent]

Flash...agree 100% on the team quote...all I see right now is a team with NO confidence...they cant count on the offense. I really dont have that many issues with our D. I believe our D feeds off our O and without that we are stuck. I also believe our D plays with different levels of energy and by having a MUCH better O our D plays better. Would I like to see some upgrades on the D sure, but I prefer having an elite QB anyday and twice on Sundays.

[HungarianColtsFan]

There were several issues on both sides (keeping Manning, drafting Luck and trading Manning drafting Luck).

I would rather join those, who say we should keep Manning and draft Luck to be tutored by Manning.

A rookie QB would be equal to suicide, as no rookies are ready to play in NFL, they need to get used to the atmosphere, speed of game etc.

If we drafted Luck, he could be educated in hands of Manning, what could help him to improve his abilities further.

[supremecoltsfan300]

Flash...agree 100% on the team quote...all I see right now is a team with NO confidence...they cant count on the offense. I really dont have that many issues with our D. I believe our D feeds off our O and without that we are stuck. I also believe our D plays with different levels of energy and by having a MUCH better O our D plays better. Would I like to see some upgrades on the D sure, but I prefer having an elite QB anyday and twice on Sundays.

no problems with our d?? We cant cover anyone and we cant stop the run. We have massive problems on d. I agree with u that our d feeds on our o. But our d in the past was really just hanging on for dear life because we were putting up points. Aboutnour o....we have no o without peyton

[deedub75]

There were several issues on both sides (keeping Manning, drafting Luck and trading Manning drafting Luck).

I would rather join those, who say we should keep Manning and draft Luck to be tutored by Manning.

A rookie QB would be equal to suicide, as no rookies are ready to play in NFL, they need to get used to the atmosphere, speed of game etc.

If we drafted Luck, he could be educated in hands of Manning, what could help him to improve his abilities further.

Why does everyone continue to think that Manning will tutor Luck? He wants to win more Super Bowls and I'm sure he could care less about a rookie QB. Ask Rodgers how much help Favre was to him. Manning will take all of the practice reps and when he isn't able to play up to his standards, he will retire and Luck would be on his own. I still say that if Manning is healthy then we trade that first pick for veteran help and/or more draft picks and take advantage of this deep QB class.

[Superman]

Why does everyone continue to think that Manning will tutor Luck? He wants to win more Super Bowls and I'm sure he could care less about a rookie QB. Ask Rodgers how much help Favre was to him. Manning will take all of the practice reps and when he isn't able to play up to his standards, he will retire and Luck would be on his own. I still say that if Manning is healthy then we trade that first pick for veteran help and/or more draft picks and take advantage of this deep QB class.

1) We don't need Manning to tutor Luck. Luck will be a good quarterback with or without tutoring from Manning.

2) If Luck has the opportunity to learn from watching Manning, he'll be even better. That's without any particular "lessons" from Manning. That's just the experience of watching Manning break down film, being in the gameplan meetings, watching how he prepares, etc.

3) Manning isn't Favre. He'll give Luck some help. He's run a passing academy for however many years. He likes helping young quarterbacks. I wouldn't expect him to tutor him: "This is how you throw a fade pass." No. But he'll give him some help. And that will be worth it right there.

I get the argument of trading the rights to Luck for more picks. I don't get the argument that the two quarterbacks can't be on the same roster, not the money angle, not the "Luck doesn't want to sit behind Manning" angle, not the "Manning doesn't want us to draft Luck" angle... None of that. Bottom line, if you value Luck high enough to say "he's our guy for the next decade," and you think having that kind of quarterback is more important than adding draft picks in the next two drafts, you take him, and you never look back.

But if you want to take the next three or four years and put all your chips on Manning being healthy and being able to lead this team the way he has, and you're just going to make sure he doesn't have to do it all (he'll still have to do a lot, and would still be the most important player in the NFL), then you trade down, add players with those extra draft picks, and worry about the next quarterback once there's no more Manning.

To me, there's no right and wrong here. We don't know what Manning will be moving forward. We don't know what Luck will be moving forward. We don't know what a gaggle of picks will be, because draft picks aren't any guarantee. But whatever decision you make, you better be ready to do all you can to make that decision work. If you're going to move ahead with Manning, you better doggone well make sure the offensive line is up to snuff, get that defense firmly in the top half of the league, give him a playmaker at receiver, and go all-out to win another Super Bowl. You better be ready for another terrible season after Manning leaves, because there's no sacrificing today for tomorrow if you go that route.

[deedub75]

1) We don't need Manning to tutor Luck. Luck will be a good quarterback with or without tutoring from Manning.

2) If Luck has the opportunity to learn from watching Manning, he'll be even better. That's without any particular "lessons" from Manning. That's just the experience of watching Manning break down film, being in the gameplan meetings, watching how he prepares, etc.

3) Manning isn't Favre. He'll give Luck some help. He's run a passing academy for however many years. He likes helping young quarterbacks. I wouldn't expect him to tutor him: "This is how you throw a fade pass." No. But he'll give him some help. And that will be worth it right there.

I get the argument of trading the rights to Luck for more picks. I don't get the argument that the two quarterbacks can't be on the same roster, not the money angle, not the "Luck doesn't want to sit behind Manning" angle, not the "Manning doesn't want us to draft Luck" angle... None of that. Bottom line, if you value Luck high enough to say "he's our guy for the next decade," and you think having that kind of quarterback is more important than adding draft picks in the next two drafts, you take him, and you never look back.

But if you want to take the next three or four years and put all your chips on Manning being healthy and being able to lead this team the way he has, and you're just going to make sure he doesn't have to do it all (he'll still have to do a lot, and would still be the most important player in the NFL), then you trade down, add players with those extra draft picks, and worry about the next quarterback once there's no more Manning.

To me, there's no right and wrong here. We don't know what Manning will be moving forward. We don't know what Luck will be moving forward. We don't know what a gaggle of picks will be, because draft picks aren't any guarantee. But whatever decision you make, you better be ready to do all you can to make that decision work. If you're going to move ahead with Manning, you better doggone well make sure the offensive line is up to snuff, get that defense firmly in the top half of the league, give him a playmaker at receiver, and go all-out to win another Super Bowl. You better be ready for another terrible season after Manning leaves, because there's no sacrificing today for tomorrow if you go that route.

This the NFL, not a passing academy.

Manning is competitive and wants to win now so he could care less about helping his heir. You can say he is not Favre but he is just as competitive, if not more than Favre. I don't blame Favre for not helping Rodgers. Why would anyone want to help train a replacement when you're not read to leave?

I wouldn't be surprised if Manning didn't want Luck or any QB to be drafted with the #1 pick. I'm sure he would rather that pick be used to get more talent on the team so he can win more Super Bowls with the few years he has left. People need to quit assuming that Manning is so altruistic. He knows he only has a very limited number of chances to win. This the perfect time in his career to be selfish and I wouldn't blame him one bit.

[mr. football]

Well, age catches up to everyone eventually. Manning is no different. As to playing till he's 40, has he actually said anything about that or are you just trying to read the tea leaves? (Which I admit is all I'm doing)

Agree 100% with you on just being happy seeing him play next year.

i believe in the past age has caught up to alot of famous quarterbacks...montana, marino, elway, etc. but there has been huge advancements in knowledge of the body, medicines, and fitness since those guys played. besides that, i dont think the nfl has ever known a qb as driven as manning. i believe peyton could play at a high level longer than we have been accustomed to seeing quarterbacks play in the past. of course, this is only if his injury totally heals and he becomes healthy. but if it does (imo) i think his motivation and drive will keep him playing as long as HE wants to play. (atleast into his early 40's)

[Basilmi]

If Peyton is healthy and not with this team next year, I will have to turn in my fan card. If it's between Peyton 2 more years OR drafting his replacement, I take Peyton for 2 good years every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Him not playing this year made me realize, even though I did appreciate him, I didn't appreciate him enough.

[mr. football]

If Peyton is healthy and not with this team next year, I will have to turn in my fan card. If it's between Peyton 2 more years OR drafting his replacement, I take Peyton for 2 good years every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Him not playing this year made me realize, even though I did appreciate him, I didn't appreciate him enough.

well put! i gotta say i feel the same way bro.

[noah larson]

And i think its safe to mention.. Ryan Leaf had more hype than peyton yet BP went with Peyton.... maybe the colts will pull that and go with matt barkley.. in that case they would be able to keep manning and have a pretty good QB to back him up.... there's so many options.

How dare you talk about drafting any other QB besides Luck!! This whole forum will destroy you now!! lol jk i kinda agree with you.

[jskinnz]

Well, let's put the money issue aside... Would you agree that if the Colts had the Steeler's defense and the Colt's offense the past 10 years, Manning would have a lot more Super Bowl victories? If Big Ben could win, then for sure Manning and the Colt's would've been a dynasty, right?

My point is that in order to have a solid team both offensively and defensively, you would need to have talent all around. Moving forward, the Colts have the great fortune of having the number 1 pick, and having Manning. In order to build a great team, they can use either Manning or Luck as leverage. So taking money out of the picture, and looking at it from the stand point of building the best team, I think they should explore either of the two options.

Since only 1 of the 2 QB's will be the starter and on the field, it would be a better use of the opportunity to build around either QB. We can still look for a competent back-up either through FA or the draft.

So far, you are winning this thread.

[scorp722]

I keep hearing Kravitz spout off (http://www.indystar....nnot-work-Colts) about how its either Manning or Luck, its impossible to do both. The ONLY reason cited is money…I just don’t get it. Since when is Kravitz a cap expert? Besides you really believe Irsay would let this opportunity slip thru his fingers over freaking money? Why is Kravitz so insentient on driving this wedge?

only thing about Luck and Manning is Manning is going to play and Luck thinks he should,if they draft Luck Manning will Opt out in Feb. and go elsewere IMO

[Bleedin Blue]

Here's the rub. With both Barkley and Griffin playing as good as they have, the three teams that have needed quarterbacks the most will be set without having to give up a lot in trade. Unless we take Luck, there will be three VERY promising quarterbacks for the three teams that need them:

Luck - Miami

Griffin III - Washington

Barkley - Seattle

I would be surprised if we get more than a 2nd round this year and a 1st round in 2013. If we think one extra 2nd round pick this year will make the difference then I guess it makes sense to not draft Luck, but with so much uncertainty around the health of Peyton...and what might happen to his fused vertebrae should he take a bad hit...I'm not sure that we would be served by trading down. Now drafting Luck and then trading to a team for both players and picks might be worth it. Again, who knows...maybe a team will give up their 2012 draft for Luck...I doubt it though.

[scorp722]

If Peyton is healthy and not with this team next year, I will have to turn in my fan card. If it's between Peyton 2 more years OR drafting his replacement, I take Peyton for 2 good years every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Him not playing this year made me realize, even though I did appreciate him, I didn't appreciate him enough.

very well said

[Corndog]

Here's the rub. With both Barkley and Griffin playing as good as they have, the three teams that have needed quarterbacks the most will be set without having to give up a lot in trade. Unless we take Luck, there will be three VERY promising quarterbacks for the three teams that need them:

Luck - Miami

Griffin III - Washington

Barkley - Seattle

I would be surprised if we get more than a 2nd round this year and a 1st round in 2013. If we think one extra 2nd round pick this year will make the difference then I guess it makes sense to not draft Luck, but with so much uncertainty around the health of Peyton...and what might happen to his fused vertebrae should he take a bad hit...I'm not sure that we would be served by trading down. Now drafting Luck and then trading to a team for both players and picks might be worth it. Again, who knows...maybe a team will give up their 2012 draft for Luck...I doubt it though.

That is something I was thinking about, what would we get for trading Luck? Regardless of Manning's health this team has to draft a QB, his future will still be uncertain and clearly we don't have anything close to a serviceable back up. Luckily, this is a very good draft for QBs and I wouldn't be disappointed at all to trade Luck for picks and maybe a player too. We might have to settle for RGIII or Keenum instead, but it might be worth it. Does any team have two first round picks? I would love to get Landry Jones and get a less sought after QB.

[hawkeyes]

BECAUSE this team needs more than a QB!!!!! IF Peyton had been 100% this season we would be lucky to be .500 right now! This team needs a lot of help in a lot of areas!

[GoColts8818]

They can Manning just has to be open to it and Luck has to be okay with sitting. If those two things happen (and Manning is healthy) then it can and probably will hapen. This has happened before, Steve Young with the 49ers sat, Aaron Rodgers sat, and even Carson Palmer sat for a year with the Bengals, even Eli Manning sat the start of his career all be it he was starting by the end of his rookie year.

The best example would be Rodgers, I think the Colts are going to look at the Favre/Rodgers situation in Green Bay and try to do something like it if Luck will sit all be it with a cleaner ending than the Packers had.

Polian keeps saying it has to be the right guy what I think that means is that it has be a guy who is okay with sitting. I think the Colts aren't too worried about Peyton he has a five year contract and doesn't strike me as the type of guy who would hold out over something like this so Manning is sorta stuck no matter what the Colts do. He can ask for a relase or a trade but the Colts don't have to give him either if he doesn't want it. Luck on the other hand can just not sign a contract and play hardball if he doesn't want to sit.

[GoColts8818]

That is something I was thinking about, what would we get for trading Luck? Regardless of Manning's health this team has to draft a QB, his future will still be uncertain and clearly we don't have anything close to a serviceable back up. Luckily, this is a very good draft for QBs and I wouldn't be disappointed at all to trade Luck for picks and maybe a player too. We might have to settle for RGIII or Keenum instead, but it might be worth it. Does any team have two first round picks? I would love to get Landry Jones and get a less sought after QB.

I don't want Jones, I think he's a product of being on a team loaded with talent. I've seen several reports that he has not looked great this year vs. other sub par teams and he hasn't thrown a TD in a game since his star WR went down. If we are going to move back and pass on Luck I would rather have Barkley.

[GoColts8818]

BECAUSE this team needs more than a QB!!!!! IF Peyton had been 100% this season we would be lucky to be .500 right now! This team needs a lot of help in a lot of areas!

It's their biggest area of need no question. You think the Colts would be 5-5 at best without Manning let's look at these games:

Week 1: Texans: Probably a loss although i think it would be have been a different game since I think Manning takes Bullitt's opening drive INT at mid field and puts in the endzone and makes the Texans play from behind but for sake of arguement I'll say a L

Week 2: Browns: Without question our biggest issue was QB play give us Manning we win that game.

Week 3: Steelers: We nearly beat the Steelers without a QB doing anyhing all game long till Painter came in at the end and lead a great drive what is forgotten is that it was his huge fumble that really put us behind the 8 ball and I doubt Manning does that and I think if we have Manning all game we get a W.

Week 4: Bucs: It was a shoot out Painter nearly beat Freeman you don't think Manning could? W

Week 5: Chiefs: Painter got off to a good start but did nothing in the second half when the game got a way from the Colts, some how I doubt Manning has that bad of a second half. W

Week 6: Bengals: Close game all day long but it was big mistakes by Painter at the end that cost us and I doubt Manning makes those. W

Week 7: Saints: We lose but it wouldn't have been as bad as it was

Week 8: Titans: Again we were in it without our QB doing anything most of the way, give us Manning and have him do anything we get a W.

Week 9: Falcons: There was a point in this game where the Falcons were trying to let us back in the game but Painter again couldn't do anything. Still I'll say this was one we don't come back in and say it would have been a loss

Week 10: Jags: Again offense did NOTHING all day, give us Manning and win this game. W

Week 11: Panthers: We were a drive at the end of the game away from winning this game with Curtis Painter doing nothing till the last drive, give us Manning we have our way with them. W.

So that's 8-3, A little better than .500 like you said.

QB without question is our biggest need, we fix that problem and most of these other problems go back to being things that the Colts can live with although you would like to see them improve them.

[Jason_]

He's a rookie getting drafted not a free agent. He has no say in the matter. Again, if he wants to play hardball and sit out, fine. Sit out. All he'll have accomplished is wasting a year of his career watching daytime television and have nothing to show for it.

Every year guys get drafted to teams they'd probably rather not go to. Pulling an Elway is the exception.

Way to try to make a point and then contradict it in the same post. ;) You say Luck has no say in the matter but then you say pulling an Elway is the exception....if it is the exception then it's still a possibility. If Luck has no say in the matter then Elway would have had no say in the matter and Elway would have been a Colt. Elway did have say in the matter though because he did get what he wanted by getting traded.

No one has said that Luck is likely to refuse to sign or that he's going to refuse to sign...simply that he could refuse to sign. He does have some say in the matter. You say that if Luck decides to play hardball then fine he can sit out for a year and have nothing to show for it so that's a risk he's taking. However if that were the case then the Colts would also be taking a huge risk. What if he does stick to his guns and doesn't sign? Then the Colts would have completely wasted the #1 pick by not getting any player at all. Why would they take that risk? Just to make the people who say we have no chance at any kind of success without drafting Luck happy? I guarantee they don't buy into that crap. If Luck is the "right guy" and they feel the QB need is that great then I'm sure they'll draft him. If he's not then they'll either draft another player at the #1 position or trade the pick.

[GoColts8818]

Way to try to make a point and then contradict it in the same post. ;) You say Luck has no say in the matter but then you say pulling an Elway is the exception....if it is the exception then it's still a possibility. If Luck has no say in the matter then Elway would have had no say in the matter and Elway would have been a Colt. Elway did have say in the matter though because he did get what he wanted by getting traded.

No one has said that Luck is likely to refuse to sign or that he's going to refuse to sign...simply that he could refuse to sign. He does have some say in the matter. You say that if Luck decides to play hardball then fine he can sit out for a year and have nothing to show for it so that's a risk he's taking. However if that were the case then the Colts would also be taking a huge risk. What if he does stick to his guns and doesn't sign? Then the Colts would have completely wasted the #1 pick by not getting any player at all. Why would they take that risk? Just to make the people who say we have no chance at any kind of success without drafting Luck happy? I guarantee they don't buy into that crap. If Luck is the "right guy" and they feel the QB need is that great then I'm sure they'll draft him. If he's not then they'll either draft another player at the #1 position or trade the pick.

Yeah but Elway could go play baseball Luck can't. The better arguement is Eli Manning. If the Colts really wanted to play hard ball though I can see the arguement that Luck doesn't have a say in it but frankly that would be Bill Irsay dumb on the Colts front.

[OLD FAN MAN]

i believe in the past age has caught up to alot of famous quarterbacks...montana, marino, elway, etc. but there has been huge advancements in knowledge of the body, medicines, and fitness since those guys played. besides that, i dont think the nfl has ever known a qb as driven as manning. i believe peyton could play at a high level longer than we have been accustomed to seeing quarterbacks play in the past. of course, this is only if his injury totally heals and he becomes healthy. but if it does (imo) i think his motivation and drive will keep him playing as long as HE wants to play. (atleast into his early 40's)

if we can get an o-line to protect peyton he will play a long time, without an upgrade in the o-line luck would need neck surgery his first year

[GoColts8818]

if we can get an o-line to protect peyton he will play a long time, without an upgrade in the o-line luck would need neck surgery his first year

The o-line is improving. We just used our first two picks on tackles, one of which is on IR and the other is learning. Reitz who looks to be a keeper has also been out. Add to that Diem and other injury issues it's safe to say this has been a make shift line. The Colts do have two hard choices to make in Diem and Saturday. Even if they keep them though they are not long term answers. Pollack seems to be an answer for one of them but that still leaves us with one hole to fill.

[super8todd]

You cannot trade Peyton Manning....He's a $28 million 36-year-old player who has missed the entire year with injury.. No one will trade for an injured Manning... ..and why would we trade a healthy one?

You keep making this argument and its flawed. Risk/Reward... Everyone is worth something in this league. Heck, GM's even pay an unsteady unproven continued success like Chris Johnson just for past performance, what do you then think Manning would be worth?

[coltsblue1844]

You keep making this argument and its flawed. Risk/Reward... Everyone is worth something in this league. Heck, GM's even pay an unsteady unproven continued success like Chris Johnson just for past performance, what do you then think Manning would be worth?

Personally, i think a healthy Manning for 4yrs is better than 10yrs of Luck

[Superman]

only thing about Luck and Manning is Manning is going to play and Luck thinks he should,if they draft Luck Manning will Opt out in Feb. and go elsewere IMO

As far as I understand, Manning doesn't have a player option. The Colts have a team option.

[Jaric]

Way to try to make a point and then contradict it in the same post. ;) You say Luck has no say in the matter but then you say pulling an Elway is the exception....if it is the exception then it's still a possibility. If Luck has no say in the matter then Elway would have had no say in the matter and Elway would have been a Colt. Elway did have say in the matter though because he did get what he wanted by getting traded.

No one has said that Luck is likely to refuse to sign or that he's going to refuse to sign...simply that he could refuse to sign. He does have some say in the matter. You say that if Luck decides to play hardball then fine he can sit out for a year and have nothing to show for it so that's a risk he's taking. However if that were the case then the Colts would also be taking a huge risk. What if he does stick to his guns and doesn't sign? Then the Colts would have completely wasted the #1 pick by not getting any player at all. Why would they take that risk? Just to make the people who say we have no chance at any kind of success without drafting Luck happy? I guarantee they don't buy into that crap. If Luck is the "right guy" and they feel the QB need is that great then I'm sure they'll draft him. If he's not then they'll either draft another player at the #1 position or trade the pick.

Superman already covered this.

New holdout rule states if you don't report 30 days before the first regular season game, you don't accrue a year of service time. Rookie holdouts have been pretty well neutered, I think.

Luck has zero leverage in the matter. Even when players did have some semblance of leverage, it was still the exception rather than the rule.

In other words, this is all much ado about nothing.

If the Indianapolis Colts draft Andrew Luck, Andrew Luck will be a member of the Indianapolis Colts. It's just that simple.

[Jaric]

As far as I understand, Manning doesn't have a player option. The Colts have a team option.

This.

[Robin]

i'd stop thinking about this as no one knows what will happen... One think I know is I will always love COLTS!!!!!!

[Superman]

This the NFL, not a passing academy.

Manning is competitive and wants to win now so he could care less about helping his heir. You can say he is not Favre but he is just as competitive, if not more than Favre. I don't blame Favre for not helping Rodgers. Why would anyone want to help train a replacement when you're not read to leave?

I wouldn't be surprised if Manning didn't want Luck or any QB to be drafted with the #1 pick. I'm sure he would rather that pick be used to get more talent on the team so he can win more Super Bowls with the few years he has left. People need to quit assuming that Manning is so altruistic. He knows he only has a very limited number of chances to win. This the perfect time in his career to be selfish and I wouldn't blame him one bit.

He can be selfish all he wants. I for one don't think he would shun a young quarterback, even if he felt threatened. Let's say he does, it doesn't matter. A guy with the talent Luck has will be successful regardless, just like Rodgers is.

The Colts can't make decisions like this on the basis of what Manning wants. They have to do what they think is best for the franchise. And if you value having a future franchise qb to transition to, this is the best opportunity you'll have to draft one. If its more important to spend the next couple of years trying to squeeze everything you can out of Manning, then you go the other route. I don't think either way is wrong. I think what's more important is what you do to support either decision. Stop drafting running backs in the first round, and so.

[Aaron Smith]

http://fantasticalsportsblog.blogspot.com/

[Susie Q]

http://fantasticalsp...g.blogspot.com/

Sorry Aaron don't buy into your blog or theory. JMO of course. Nice good first post and welcome to the Colt's Forum.