So Here Is A What If For You

[GoColts8818]

Say we had traded the Manning pick for more picks like some people want us to do now.

That would have left us with Jim Harbaugh at QB and my guess is that we would have targetted either Andre Wadsworth (third over all pick) or Grant Wistrim (6th) overall pick by trading back to get us a pass rushing end to improve our defense because we really had a hole there at the time.

We would have also stuck with Jim Harbaugh at QB who played four more years (and never had a season remotely close to the year he had in 1995). So that probably means we would have targetted a QB in probably the 2002 draft in which the top two picks were David Carr and Joey Harrington at the QB poistion. Perhaps the best QB to come out of that draft was David Garrard.

Knowing what we know now it seems like the smart move was to just take the guy that many felt was the best player in the draft Peyton Manning and not trading back. Just something to think about for those saying we should trade back. There is no promise that the picks we would get in return wont be busts themselves and that they would be better than the guy you would be passing on to move back and that when it's time to take a QB that the QBs who are going to be there are going to be as good as the guy you are passing on now.

Just a different way to look at this. It sounds like this is all a moute point if the reports about the Colts maybe looking into signing Luck early are true this is a done deal.

[The Fish]

Oh how I like, let me count the ways. Nice.

[Rebelknight]

Manning wasn't the consensus 1st overall pick in 98. There were alot,I mean alot of people on the Ryan Leaf bus....to go #1...

What if we listened to Kiper and we drafted Leaf...We still would have drafted James in 99 but after that it would have been very ugly...

A bigger what if is "What if " we are offered a saint type trade deal we turn it down and it turns out people with the "Suck for Luck" signs had it backward..

I worry when a QB has this much hype I have flashback of Todd Maranovich or to some extent Tony Mandorich ( even though he was serviceable for us )

[UndecidedFrog]

I worry when a QB has this much hype I have flashback of Todd Maranovich or to some extent Tony Mandorich ( even though he was serviceable for us )

You are right to worry if the hype has no evidence to support it.

That is not so in the case of Luck. There is plenty of footage of his game play, both positive and negative. Professional scouts have reviewed this footage and have a consensus opinion that he is the best QB prospect in this upcoming draft.

I agree with you that Luck is over-hyped. However, even so, I think he may be under-rated.

[JWF]

I worry when a QB has this much hype I have flashback of Todd Maranovich or to some extent Tony Mandorich ( even though he was serviceable for us )

I understand the concern just because of the pressure included with the hype but what happened to Marinovich (who wasnt the #1 overall pick btw and showed alot of inconsistency in college and had drug problems too) is completely irrelevant to what will happen with Luck.

Luck has alot on his side that past busts didnt (consistency, maturity and coming into a good organization).

[The Fish]

Andrew Luck has a Stanford degree in Architecture, I dunno how to measure that in terms of 40 yard dash. Luck has every imaginable intangible, NFL pedigree, off the charts smarts, character, physical tools for his postition that are coveted. I don't think Peyton with anything short of complete health is going to be able to beat out this kid in a honest competition for the starting job.

[GoColts8818]

Manning wasn't the consensus 1st overall pick in 98. There were alot,I mean alot of people on the Ryan Leaf bus....to go #1...

and there aren't people saying RG3 shouldn't go number one now? I would agree that that it's not as close between Luck and RG3 as it was between Manning and Leaf but there is still a debate none the less. Also that doesn't have much to do with this what if. I am talking about if we traded the Manning pick like some are wanting us to do now not if we took Leaf over Manning.

What if we listened to Kiper and we drafted Leaf...We still would have drafted James in 99 but after that it would have been very ugly...

Again not the what if I am talking about. I am talking about if we had traded the pick like people are saying now.

A bigger what if is "What if " we are offered a saint type trade deal we turn it down and it turns out people with the "Suck for Luck" signs had it backward..

I worry when a QB has this much hype I have flashback of Todd Maranovich or to some extent Tony Mandorich ( even though he was serviceable for us )

Of course Luck could be a bust, my point is ANY player in the draft could be a bust. There is no promise that if we make the trade that the players we are going to get in the draft aren't going to be busts themselves which is what I laid out here. There is a real case to be made that had we traded the Manning pick we wouldn't have gotten the better end of the deal just because we would have had more picks. The same could very well be true now. People seem to talk about trading the pick because Luck could be a bust but yet some how there is no way we could miss with the picks we get back in return for the top pick and I think here is just as much risk if not more that those picks will turn out to be a bust than if we take Luck.

The other point I was making is that at some point we are going to have to take a QB out of need and that's coming sooner rather than later even if Manning comes back 100% healthy. There is no promise when it's time to take a QB that the prospects in that draft are going to be as good as Luck is believed to be. There also isn't a promise that we are going to be in poistion to get a really good QB when it's time again. If Manning comes back and plays like Manning I really doubt when he retires that we are going to be holding the top pick in the draft again.

Also say we had traded the pick how many of us would have loved watching Manning playing for someone else knowing full well we traded him not because he didn't want to be here but because we got greedy and wanted more picks. Meanwhile watching a guy like Wadsworth or Wistrom be a bust and Harbaugh play like he did frankly most of his career outside of 95 and the early part of 96? Polian would have been run out of town faster than the Colts would have been.

[GoColts8818]

I understand the concern just because of the pressure included with the hype but what happened to Marinovich (who wasnt the #1 overall pick btw and showed alot of inconsistency in college and had drug problems too) is completely irrelevant to what will happen with Luck.

Luck has alot on his side that past busts didnt (consistency, maturity and coming into a good organization).

What also doesn't get talked about with Marinovich is that he had attitude problems in college and a major drug problem. You hear nothing but love for Luck from his coaches and teammates in college and there no seems to be no hint of a drug problem with him. I'd say Luck is heck of a lot closer to Peyton Manning than Todd Marinovich when comparing a kid's backgrounds coming out of college.

[number28]

Say we had traded the Manning pick for more picks like some people want us to do now.

That would have left us with Jim Harbaugh at QB

Jim Harbaugh was an average NFL QB.

Peyton Manning became a legendary HOF NFL QB.

If we had an average NFL QB now, then by all means take Luck. I won't debate that at all.

This is where your argument ends.

[Warhorse]

It amazes me to see the never ending comparison of QB's without respect given to the offensive lines that protect them....and inversely, the defensive lines they have faced. Last year, in the college game, it is arguable that Alabama had the best defensive line and Stanford had the best offensive line. We have seen a few USC QB's get taken highly that were actually helped significantly by big time offensive lines. No, I am not declaring Luck as a product of his line, but I am saying that to assume that he can learn to execute a 1.75 to 3 second release (cuz that is likely all the time he is going to have next season if he starts for us) consistently and under pressure, is a major jump. Peyton learned it in one season. He is the proverbial needle in the haystack.

Again, Andrew has all the tools. I hear it all the time.... but he is about to face pressure that he has NOT seen yet. The nastiest defensive pressure, blitz packages, disguised fronts that he faced in college ever, are going to be in his face every week, only worse. In that department, he has yet to earn the right to even carry PM's helmet.

[GoColts8818]

Jim Harbaugh was an average NFL QB.

Peyton Manning became a legendary HOF NFL QB.

If we had an average NFL QB now, then by all means take Luck. I won't debate that at all.

This is where your argument ends.

It was not an arguement it was a what if question. Clearly it can't be an arguement since I can't go back and make us trade the Peyton Manning pick (and nor would I if I even could just for the record).

Clearly Harbaugh never had as much talent as Peyton Manning and that was never my point. However in 98 you could have made a case for what people are doing now, trade the pick and retool team a that was one play away from a Super Bowl a couple of years ago and try to take one last run with Harbaugh. That's what I am getting at what would have happened had we traded the pick in 1998? I don't think it would have turned out well. I don't think we would have gotten anything close back ot fair value for Peyton. It's just something to look at as we go towards this draft as people are throwing out what ifs.

Clearly if we trade the Luck pick it could work the other way, maybe Luck does beome a bust and we just nail every pick we got for it and build another dynasty. I don't think that is very likely though.

[number28]

So basically allowing Peyton to play for a couple of years while Andrew Luck watches and learns is out of the question?

Young learned from Montana. Why can't Luck learn from Peyton?

[GoColts8818]

So basically allowing Peyton to play for a couple of years while Andrew Luck watches and learns is out of the question?

Young learned from Montana. Why can't Luck learn from Peyton?

When did i ever say that?

I want that but it doesn't look too likly at this point. There are many threads that will debate that with you if you want though, not the point of this thread.

[ruksak]

Jim Harbaugh was an average NFL QB.

Peyton Manning became a legendary HOF NFL QB.

If we had an average NFL QB now, then by all means take Luck. I won't debate that at all.

This is where your argument ends.

.....and it's where this thread should end.

I appreciate hypotheticals as much as the next guy, but I'm going to be laughing at many of you when Manning leads us into the playoffs this coming season and all this talk about the distant future prospect of success with Luck take a back seat.

[GoColts8818]

.....and it's where this thread should end.

I appreciate hypotheticals as much as the next guy, but I'm going to be laughing at many of you when Manning leads us into the playoffs this coming season and all this talk about the distant future prospect of success with Luck take a back seat.

read some of my posts and you quckly see I am NOT pulling for Peyton Manning to go any place...

[ruksak]

read some of my posts and you quckly see I am NOT pulling for Peyton Manning to go any place...

Oh I know, GC.

Way ahead of ya on that. I just don't want people to follow down the wrong path of thought on this issue. There are just way too many people giving in to fear and ready to poke Manning right off the plank, so to speak.

Trading the Luck pick would be foolish in the long term. Releasing Manning would be equally as foolish in the short term. This thing is gonna work out just fine.

BTW: The Rams are the ones that need to trade their pick, and from the way things look, they could procure a kings ransom for that #2 because of Griffin.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

It was not an arguement it was a what if question. Clearly it can't be an arguement since I can't go back and make us trade the Peyton Manning pick (and nor would I if I even could just for the record).

Clearly Harbaugh never had as much talent as Peyton Manning and that was never my point. However in 98 you could have made a case for what people are doing now, trade the pick and retool team a that was one play away from a Super Bowl a couple of years ago and try to take one last run with Harbaugh. That's what I am getting at what would have happened had we traded the pick in 1998? I don't think it would have turned out well. I don't think we would have gotten anything close back ot fair value for Peyton. It's just something to look at as we go towards this draft as people are throwing out what ifs.

Clearly if we trade the Luck pick it could work the other way, maybe Luck does beome a bust and we just nail every pick we got for it and build another dynasty. I don't think that is very likely though.

Of course it WOULD NOT HAVE WORKED OUT WELL! How can passing up on a all-time great QB be benificial for your Franchise unless you think you already have a young excellent QB like the Rams have now. The Rams can trade their pick to rebuild,the 1998 & 2012 Colts CAN NOT.

[Malakai432]

Who is this Andrew Luck guy people keep speaking of? Was he the guy who directed the Titanic?

[jskinnz]

Say we had traded the Manning pick for more picks like some people want us to do now.

That would have left us with Jim Harbaugh at QB and my guess is that we would have targetted either Andre Wadsworth (third over all pick) or Grant Wistrim (6th) overall pick by trading back to get us a pass rushing end to improve our defense because we really had a hole there at the time.

We would have also stuck with Jim Harbaugh at QB who played four more years (and never had a season remotely close to the year he had in 1995). So that probably means we would have targetted a QB in probably the 2002 draft in which the top two picks were David Carr and Joey Harrington at the QB poistion. Perhaps the best QB to come out of that draft was David Garrard.

Knowing what we know now it seems like the smart move was to just take the guy that many felt was the best player in the draft Peyton Manning and not trading back. Just something to think about for those saying we should trade back. There is no promise that the picks we would get in return wont be busts themselves and that they would be better than the guy you would be passing on to move back and that when it's time to take a QB that the QBs who are going to be there are going to be as good as the guy you are passing on now.

Just a different way to look at this. It sounds like this is all a moute point if the reports about the Colts maybe looking into signing Luck early are true this is a done deal.

Thank you. Was debating this in another thread. The trade the pick lot is just simply wrong. The value of a franchise QB is virtually incalculable and if said QB turns out to be what many are proclaiming, you have almost no chance to get equal value back in return.

[Blue Horseshoe]

Say we had traded the Manning pick for more picks like some people want us to do now.

That would have left us with Jim Harbaugh at QB and my guess is that we would have targetted either Andre Wadsworth (third over all pick) or Grant Wistrim (6th) overall pick by trading back to get us a pass rushing end to improve our defense because we really had a hole there at the time.

We would have also stuck with Jim Harbaugh at QB who played four more years (and never had a season remotely close to the year he had in 1995). So that probably means we would have targetted a QB in probably the 2002 draft in which the top two picks were David Carr and Joey Harrington at the QB poistion. Perhaps the best QB to come out of that draft was David Garrard.

Knowing what we know now it seems like the smart move was to just take the guy that many felt was the best player in the draft Peyton Manning and not trading back. Just something to think about for those saying we should trade back. There is no promise that the picks we would get in return wont be busts themselves and that they would be better than the guy you would be passing on to move back and that when it's time to take a QB that the QBs who are going to be there are going to be as good as the guy you are passing on now.

Just a different way to look at this. It sounds like this is all a moute point if the reports about the Colts maybe looking into signing Luck early are true this is a done deal.

Luck is not Manning and Manning is not Harbaugh. The analogy is meaningless.

[doogansquest]

The difference is, we didn't have Peyton Manning on our team while facing the first overall pick (who is also a QB).

Cute, but poor example.

[bayone]

Say we had traded the Manning pick for more picks like some people want us to do now.

That would have left us with Jim Harbaugh at QB and my guess is that we would have targetted either Andre Wadsworth (third over all pick) or Grant Wistrim (6th) overall pick by trading back to get us a pass rushing end to improve our defense because we really had a hole there at the time.

We would have also stuck with Jim Harbaugh at QB who played four more years (and never had a season remotely close to the year he had in 1995). So that probably means we would have targetted a QB in probably the 2002 draft in which the top two picks were David Carr and Joey Harrington at the QB poistion. Perhaps the best QB to come out of that draft was David Garrard.

Knowing what we know now it seems like the smart move was to just take the guy that many felt was the best player in the draft Peyton Manning and not trading back. Just something to think about for those saying we should trade back. There is no promise that the picks we would get in return wont be busts themselves and that they would be better than the guy you would be passing on to move back and that when it's time to take a QB that the QBs who are going to be there are going to be as good as the guy you are passing on now.

Just a different way to look at this. It sounds like this is all a moute point if the reports about the Colts maybe looking into signing Luck early are true this is a done deal.

DEVILS ADVOCATE REPORT

History shows vast majority of QB's picked # 1 dont become franchise QB's

NOTE : a FanPost on but not by

stampede blue, its from a site member there , just like one of us, THERE CHART IS BETTER IN ARTICLE

Is an article to go along with stats

See below:

Year

--------------- Player

------------------------------------------------------- Franchise QB

1970

---------------- Bradshaw

----------------------------------------------------------- YES

1971

-------------- Jim Pluckett, cut by 49rs before winning at Raiders

-------------------------------------------------------------------- NO

1975

------------ Steve Bartkowski

---------------------------------------------------------------NO

1983

--------------------------John Elway

-----------------------------------------------------------------YES

1987

-----------------------VInny Testaverde

-------------------------------------------------------------------NO

1989

-----------------------Troy Aikman

------------------------------------------------------------------YES

1990

-------------------------Jeff George

-------------------------------------------------------------NO – Bust

1993

-----------------------Drew Bledsoe

--------------------------------------------------------------------NO

1998

----------------------Peyton Manning

------------------------------------------------------------------YES

1999

-----------------------------Tim Couch

------------------------------------------------------------------NO – Bust

2001

----------------------------Michael Vick

-----------------------------------------------------------------------NO

2002

--------------------------David Carr

------------------------------------------------------------------NO – Bust

2003

-----------------------Carson Palmer

-------------------------------------------------------------------------NO

2004

----------------------------Eli Manning

-----------------------------------------------------------------------YES

2005

------------------------------Alex Smith

--------------------------------------------------------------------------NO

2007

----------------------JaMarcus Russell

-------------------------------------------------------------------NO – BUST

2009

-----------------------Matthew Stafford

-------------------------------------------------------------------N/A , too new

2010

------------------------ Sam Bradford

------------------------------------------------------------------N/A , too new

2011

-----------------------Cam Newton

-----------------------------------------------------------------N/A , too new

So, of the 19 QBs taken first overall, a grand total of 5 have become Franchise QB’s (Bradshaw, Elway, Aikman, Peyton and Eli)

( I dont neseasrily agree with all these, some not QBs fault , Palmer started stellar , then Bengal legal issues and injury )

http://www.stampedeblue.com/2012/2/16/2802271/stats-history-prove-i...

[jskinnz]

Luck is not Manning and Manning is not Harbaugh. The analogy is meaningless.

Not meaningless if you understand the point.

[jskinnz]

The difference is, we didn't have Peyton Manning on our team while facing the first overall pick (who is also a QB).

Cute, but poor example.

I know you can't fathom the possibility, but what are you going to do when 18 is playing for another team next year?

[Blue Horseshoe]

Not meaningless if you understand the point.

The point is that Luck is going to be a great quarterback who is replacing a fairly average one ending his career.

I think the exact opposite is true in this case. A fairly average quarterback replacing a great one.

Therefore, the analogy is meaningless

[jskinnz]

The point is that Luck is going to be a great quarterback who is replacing a fairly average one ending his career.

I think the exact opposite is true in this case. A fairly average quarterback replacing a great one.

Therefore, the analogy is meaningless

Nope - fairly you missed his point again.

[Smonroe]

I know you can't fathom the possibility, but what are you going to do when 18 is playing for another team next year?

I'm going to be a little sick everytime I see it, but I'm going to wish him well.

(I'm still holding out hope that he remains a Colt)

[Blue Horseshoe]

Nope - fairly you missed his point again.

Oh do pray tell. Please educate me.

(and please do so without any of the nonsensical hype surrounding this rookie)

[jskinnz]

I'm going to be a little sick everytime I see it, but I'm going to wish him well.

(I'm still holding out hope that he remains a Colt)

I won't like it either but the writing is on the wall.

[jskinnz]

Oh do pray tell. Please educate me.

(and please do so without any of the nonsensical hype surrounding this rookie)

See post # 19.

This is not a Luck v. Manning thread.

[Blue Horseshoe]

See post # 19.

This is not a Luck v. Manning thread.

I did see your post. Your assumption is that Luck is a franchise quarterback worth far more than you could ever get in trade. That remains to be seen but frankly I am extremely skeptical.

[schwamm]

I did see your post. Your assumption is that Luck is a franchise quarterback worth far more than you could ever get in trade. That remains to be seen but frankly I am extremely skeptical.

I think what he is saying is that the odds of Luck being a franchise QB outweighs the risk that he might not. Likewise, there is the distinct possibility that trading the #1 for a bounty of other picks could come back to haunt us. Ever play poker? Every decision the team makes has a degree of risk to it, and effective owners and GMs do everything they can to mitigate those risks, but there is NO POSSIBLE WAY to find a risk free choice. I think the OP was showing a situation where a "keep the hand we were dealt" philosophy might well have kept the franchise from any of the success we saw over the past decade.

I'm also not a big fan of this arguement that a '12 Manning (as far as we know today) is 100% guaranteed better that a '98 Harbaugh. I absolutely hope he is back to his old form, and retires as a Colt, but to omit the enormous looming question marks surrounding his current abilities seems short sighted. Likewise, I think you are being myopic to argue that Luck is definitely NOT going to be a franchise quarterback, just because he MIGHT be a bust, or MIGHT get injured, or whatever.

I think the team is in full-on risk assessment mode, attempting to determine as many possible options, and attempting to weigh all risks/rewards for each option. My guess is the decisions they ultimately make will be calculated to provide the best possible chance at success this next season, AND for the future, even if it is sans Manning. Hindsight is always 20/20, but the OP is illustrating a point that the franchise was at a similar (note: not the same) crossroads, and that the decision made then turned out better than possible alternatives.

[jskinnz]

I did see your post. Your assumption is that Luck is a franchise quarterback worth far more than you could ever get in trade. That remains to be seen but frankly I am extremely skeptical.

I am not projecting or assuming anything as I am not a scout. I did not even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. But if after the interviews, film study, background checks, etc. all lead the Colts in the direction that Luck can ultimately be a franchise level QB, then trading the pick is beyond foolish.

[WSO]

For those saying you can't compare Manning to Harbaugh

Manning isn't 100% and his past accomplishments will not affect how fast he heals or even fully heals at all. . so yes this analogy does make some sense. How else are we going to have the #1 pick? If Manning was 100% I personally believe the Colts would not take Luck.

You're judging Manning based off of being a HOF QB pre-surgery. . not in his current state. In his current state he's a huge question mark. At least with Harbaugh the Colts knew what they were getting.

[UndecidedFrog]

When did i ever say that?

I want that but it doesn't look too likly at this point. There are many threads that will debate that with you if you want though, not the point of this thread.

GoColts8818,

You will not be successful with your analogy because some fans refuse to see its applicability to the current situation. These fans refuse to see it, because it goes against their vested interest in keeping Peyton at all costs, including (even at this time, with what we know) paying the $28MM option bonus due March 8.

They will refuse to see your analogy, and try to bring in unrelated points to argue against it in an attempt to divert attention away from your apt analogy. They do not want to consider what you are asking them to consider. It engenders too much cognitive dissonance.

I see you point clearly. The Colts did not continue with Harbaugh, even after a close SB run, and reloaded afresh with a #1 draft pick who was highly-rated QB, but still was an unknown and untested, and MIGHT have been a bust. The Colts are in a similar situation now, with a #1 draft pick that can be used for a highly-rated QB, but still an unknown and untested, and MIGHT be a bust.

IMO, trading the #1 pick would be foolish with an available Luck.

For me, it is quite clear what the comparison is:

What is the least risky for the long term interests of the Colts?

1) risk associated with a 100% healthy (no nerve regeneration issue) 23-year-old Luck

2) risk associated with a health uncertain (nerve regeneration issue) 36-year-old Manning

[DILLIGAFER]

For those saying you can't compare Manning to Harbaugh

Manning isn't 100% and his past accomplishments will not affect how fast he heals or even fully heals at all. . so yes this analogy does make some sense. How else are we going to have the #1 pick? If Manning was 100% I personally believe the Colts would not take Luck.

You're judging Manning based off of being a HOF QB pre-surgery. . not in his current state. In his current state he's a huge question mark. At least with Harbaugh the Colts knew what they were getting.

Omg, if Manning was 100% WE WOULDNT BE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION!

And leave it to the luck lover to bring the surgery argument into this and it has no value here in this thread.

[HGRekks]

I think the fundamental difference here is that we don't know what we have now. We just don't. Is this the HoF Peyton? Is it going to be a worse, but still upper tier Peyton? How long until his arm strength comes back? I think pretending Peyton is still going to be Peyton is as foolish as pretending he absolutely won't be.

Not to mention that we're using the looking glass of hindsight. Of course in hindsight we'll look back and say "Good thing we didn't trade back." But San Diego doesn't regret trading back from Vick to Tomlinson. Trading back from the #1 pick can payoff, so it's foolish to base it off of our last chance to do so. Hindsight is a better judge, but we can't ever approach a situation looking at it in hindsight. We can only judge but 'at this time'. Basing one possible outcome off of an arbitrary other makes no sense. You can just as easily say "Look at would happen here" as I can say "Look at how well it turned out for San Diego." The difference is that we're not talking about Vick and Tomlinson, NFL veterans. We're talking about probably Luck and someone that we can't name right now, NFL Rookies-to-be. All different players with different dynamics.

Besides, we're assuming that the Colts would have a.)traded back to a position to still pick those guys up, and b.) that the Colts would have taken them. Do we know what Polian's board looked like? Did Polian always draft for the most evident need? (the argument that he drafted for need itself makes some sense, however.) Maybe he would have taken Charles Woodson to challenge previous Polian first round DBs Poole and Jeff Burris. Besides, any team trading for the #1 would have taken Manning or Leaf, and one could easily argue no team between #2 and #6 would have made the trade, leaving the draft much the same way as it actually happened.

Basically, I'd need to see the hypothetical partner before I could make the hypothetical leap.

[Thewholefnshow28]

With the way the league has become a QB drive league it is almost unthinkable to pass on a guy who is arguably the best QB prospect to come out in years when you have a 36 year old QB who is coming off of four procedures on his neck.

Yes the best case scenario is that Manning is perfectly healthy and we go all in for the next three years, but the worst case scenario is he is done and flops and we lose out on one of the best prospects to come out in years.

It is better to get rid of a guy one year early then to get rid of him one year to late.

Luck could potentially give us another 10 years of high QB play.

[DILLIGAFER]

GoColts8818,

You will not be successful with your analogy because some fans refuse to see its applicability to the current situation. These fans refuse to see it, because it goes against their vested interest in keeping Peyton at all costs, including (even at this time, with what we know) paying the $28MM option bonus due March 8.

They will refuse to see your analogy, and try to bring in unrelated points to argue against it in an attempt to divert attention away from your apt analogy. They do not want to consider what you are asking them to consider. It engenders too much cognitive dissonance.

I see you point clearly. The Colts did not continue with Harbaugh, even after a close SB run, and reloaded afresh with a #1 draft pick who was highly-rated QB, but still was an unknown and untested, and MIGHT have been a bust. The Colts are in a similar situation now, with a #1 draft pick that can be used for a highly-rated QB, but still an unknown and untested, and MIGHT be a bust.

IMO, trading the #1 pick would be foolish with an available Luck.

For me, it is quite clear what the comparison is:

What is the least risky for the long term interests of the Colts?

1) risk associated with a 100% healthy (no nerve regeneration issue) 23-year-old Luck

2) risk associated with a health uncertain (nerve regeneration issue) 36-year-old Manning

Arg.. no. Good grief.

So Luck has no injuries? I seem to recall a knee issue..

1) future HOF QB that has proven himself neck issue

2) college QB with uncertine future with knee issues

Im just stating you cant compare apples to oranges. Trading the first round pick would be idotic. However when making the argument on why, compairing it to the Harbaugh situation isnt the best example. Imo.

[braveheartcolt]

I think what he is saying is that the odds of Luck being a franchise QB outweighs the risk that he might not. Likewise, there is the distinct possibility that trading the #1 for a bounty of other picks could come back to haunt us. Ever play poker? Every decision the team makes has a degree of risk to it, and effective owners and GMs do everything they can to mitigate those risks, but there is NO POSSIBLE WAY to find a risk free choice. I think the OP was showing a situation where a "keep the hand we were dealt" philosophy might well have kept the franchise from any of the success we saw over the past decade.

I'm also not a big fan of this arguement that a '12 Manning (as far as we know today) is 100% guaranteed better that a '98 Harbaugh. I absolutely hope he is back to his old form, and retires as a Colt, but to omit the enormous looming question marks surrounding his current abilities seems short sighted. Likewise, I think you are being myopic to argue that Luck is definitely NOT going to be a franchise quarterback, just because he MIGHT be a bust, or MIGHT get injured, or whatever.

I think the team is in full-on risk assessment mode, attempting to determine as many possible options, and attempting to weigh all risks/rewards for each option. My guess is the decisions they ultimately make will be calculated to provide the best possible chance at success this next season, AND for the future, even if it is sans Manning. Hindsight is always 20/20, but the OP is illustrating a point that the franchise was at a similar (note: not the same) crossroads, and that the decision made then turned out better than possible alternatives.

I did a double take there. Thought you were suggesting he change careers!