Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

The Manning Decision Now vs. Then


jskinnz
 Share

Recommended Posts

First off, this is not meant to be an inflammatory Manning vs. Luck debate. That is not the intent.

What I am curious about is if seeing Luck in these first two games, granted only preseason games, has changed anyone's mind about the decision to release 18. Do you still think Manning should be playing in Indy? If you think they made the right decision, did you come to that conclusion in the last week or did you think it was the right thing to do in March?

Personally I think they made the right call back then. But it does help now to see that Luck appears to be the real deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 91
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It was the correct decision. Had Manning been 100% fit and healthy, with zero concern on his neck etc, then trading the 1st pick and keeping him would have been the way to go. Unfortunately that was not the position Irsay was in. He had no choice.

I agree. It was a no fault amicable split brought on by the perfect storm. Ask Dolphins fans if they wish they'd have had access to the same scenario when Marino was in the twilight of his career? 17 starting QB's later they are banking on developing Tannehill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was the correct decision. Had Manning been 100% fit and healthy, with zero concern on his neck etc, then trading the 1st pick and keeping him would have been the way to go. Unfortunately that was not the position Irsay was in. He had no choice.

It might have been the right decision even if Manning was healthy IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was the correct decision. Had Manning been 100% fit and healthy, with zero concern on his neck etc, then trading the 1st pick and keeping him would have been the way to go. Unfortunately that was not the position Irsay was in. He had no choice.

I agree as well, but my emotions on the topic will fluctuate as we see both perform over the coming year or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time was always going to be the best healer for the decision and this situation is no different.

The only thing that could have been different is some indifference shown towards Peyton treating him like a hired hand that could have been avoided though it was just a handful that may have done that.

Some of us also felt that Irsay could have handled it differently in terms of modus operandi as to how the whole thing played out, not the decision itself.

Again, in the end, time and a little bit of "luck" (pun intended) will help us all settle down and reconcile with the decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We still have yet to see Luck in a full speed/contact game, but I think he atleast eventually will be a very good QB. Besides the Luck drafting, it was the right decision, because now the Colts can have depth and build an all around good team, not just the offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

emotionally... i donno still wish i could have my cake and eat it too. (keep manning and draft luck) however thinking with my head instead of my heart. it does seem to be best for all parties involved. except i think manning would have a better shot at a SB with the 49ers instead of denver, either way wish him the best of luck (no pun intended)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck's performance changes nothing - he is simply "as advertised". This is what we all expected, and thank goodness for it actually. The problem would be if he did NOT perform as advertised. I - for one - would be furious if the FO screwed this one up. Been there, done that. Art Schlicter, John Elway, Jeff George. I can remember how the frustration tasted all too well, and I've had enough of it. If you make a bold move like this you'd darn well better get it right.

I understand why Manning was released and expressed acceptance of it at the time. I thought that it was in Peyton's best interests to move on as well. I would have preferred to see him stay regardless of the consequences, but the Colts saw an opportunity and grabbed it. I understand it completely and I'm OK with it - honest. I "got over" it in April.

This is as good a time as any to say that in my opinion, acceptance of Manning's release hasn't been the problem on this site. The two camps are more about the fact that some people (like myself) think that it is appropriate to openly respect what we had. Manning didn't make an obscene gesture and leave us for more money, he was ripped away - and cried about it. It is as if we are going through a grieving process, and want to mix in regret for what we lost along with the optimism for the future. A long, slow, sad, process. The other camp wants to rip the bandaid off and cauterize the wound with fire. They seem threatened by the mere mention of Manning's name, and try to bully those who bring him up in any context. Some put Luck on a pedestal that he hasn't had time to earn, while trying to knock Peyton off the one that he richly deserves. They treat him as if he is now "the enemy", instead of a favorite son who has been forcibly ostracized. I just don't get it. THEY make it very hard for me to enjoy my new team, not Irsay or the staff. Frankly if I wasn't reading this site I would be enjoying the rebuilding process a lot more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I argued till I was blue in the face that it was the right decision then and I certainly haven't changed my mind. It was absolutely the only logical conclusion to make for Irsay and the franchise as a whole. Of course, I have never let myself get emotionaly attached to professional athlete's that couldn't care less about me. Players come and players go, it's just the way it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After watching Manning in his first two pre-season outings I am not convinced he will ever be able to play at an elite level. It is early and he hasn't played in such a long time there is bound to be a great deal of rust. I just hope he never gets any hard hits as he could be back in the same posiiton. I was and still am very please with the decision that was made. I enjoyed our many succesful years with Manning and am now looking forward to the future with Luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I argued till I was blue in the face that it was the right decision then and I certainly haven't changed my mind. It was absolutely the only logical conclusion to make for Irsay and the franchise as a whole. Of course, I have never let myself get emotionaly attached to professional athlete's that couldn't care less about me. Players come and players go, it's just the way it is.

I was there with you. To me, Irsay made incredibly tough decisions (to sever ties with a Colt hero and to blow up the team and staff) in the face of scorn from a large percentage of the fanbase, many of which were ready to burn him in effegy, and have since come back around. I've said it elsewhere, but Irsay has some serious stones, and must have amazing confidence in his vision for this club.

As for the OP, my only frustration is that people want to tie success going forward with whether the decisions were right or not. IMO, the decisions were the right ones regardless of the outcome. You can make intelligent, informed decisions and still end up having things turn out wrong.

I tend to look at it like this:

Good decisions and good results = well done... do this repeatedly for consistent results

Good decisions and bad results = bad luck... if at first you don't succeed, try, try again

Spotty decisions and bad results = serves you right... try to learn from your mistakes

Spotty decisions and good results = lucky break... you won't likely be so lucky next time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, it was the right decision, but not because of Manning's neck. It's primarily because of the structure of his contract. In a way, his insistence on an option clause for the team's sake kind of solidified his end here. Had the contract simply been five years, $90 million, with a $25 million signing bonus, I think we could have restructured the deal in a way that made it possible to keep him and Luck, or trade the #1 pick for a bunch of other picks and make a last 3-5 year run with Manning. Would have had more options. But with the $28 million option bonus as an additional burden, given his health status, it would have been incredibly difficult to put good pieces around him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was shocked, when Manning was gone, but when I looked at the roster in its ruins, and historic high dead cap hit, I had to admit, that this was the only logical step to take.

Yes. Luck is awesome and perhaps we have an other future HOF QB, but at the time, at 8th march Irsay made the only call, that could lead Colts into the future.

We could have sticked with Manning, and likely he would lead us to playoffs, but we had now chance for an other SB.

Parting ways was the only right call for both Manning and the Colts. It was hard to take that time, but Luck makes it a easier now.

At 8.03.2012 we took the first step toward the future, but there is still a long way to go.

Go Colts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hated the decision for the first couple weeks. I had convinced myself that trading the pick would be a good idea, and I really believed we'd stock up and give P the help needed to win the next 4 SBs. When he was let go, I was madder than heck. It took about two weeks for me to come around and see that Andrew Luck really is going to lead this franchise the way we've been accustomed to. I've never had much doubt about P's health, but his cap hit would have been too much to do a whole lot other than what we'd been doing......forcing Peyton to single-handedly win 12 games a year so we can go one-and-done in the *.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem would be if he did NOT perform as advertised. I - for one - would be furious if the FO screwed this one up. Been there, done that. Art Schlicter, John Elway, Jeff George. I can remember how the frustration tasted all too well, and I've had enough of it. If you make a bold move like this you'd darn well better get it right.

i agree with almost everything you said. but to be furious if luck didn't pan out would be unfortunate for you. all you can ask of your team is to see the writing on the wall and act accordingly. there are no guarantees in this business. luck could go down with a career ending injury tomorrow, or die in a car crash. i'd be extremely sad & disappointed, but i wouldn't be angry

now if they released manning for a guy with jeff george's known character flaws, i'd understand being a little peeved. but that's why it was the right decision. luck has all the pedigree of a winner no matter what he does with his life

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always supported the decision to go with Luck. Besides based on what we have seen so far (and yes it is only pre-season and offseason activities) does Luck look like he needed to sit on the bench? No.

More news is coming out lately too that Manning is not "all there" yet.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000053026/article/peyton-manning-struggling-with-throws-to-right-side?module=HP11_headline_stack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree with almost everything you said. but to be furious if luck didn't pan out would be unfortunate for you. all you can ask of your team is to see the writing on the wall and act accordingly. there are no guarantees in this business. luck could go down with a career ending injury tomorrow, or die in a car crash. i'd be extremely sad & disappointed, but i wouldn't be angry

now if they released manning for a guy with jeff george's known character flaws, i'd understand being a little peeved. but that's why it was the right decision. luck has all the pedigree of a winner no matter what he does with his life

But that's precisely my point. I've seen plenty of bad decisions, and Irsay was there for most of them. Just because Manning was the right decision doesn't mean that Irsay has now been "cured" - particularly with him dumping his GM and coaches and replacing them with rookies. I've been a bit concerned that his primary goal has been to re-establish more influence over the team, and I have no reason to believe that said influence would be for the better. It would feel like the 1980's all over again if they had flubbed this decision, and that would make me angry. To this point I'm mostly relieved.

What would actually be "unfortunate for me" at that point would have been choosing to be a Colts fan for 45 years - most of which involved being subjected to one of the most dysfunctional owners in sports. I like Jim, but I'm always concerned about how far that apple might have fallen.

Edited by MAC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's precisely my point. I've seen plenty of bad decisions, and Irsay was there for most of them...

...I like Jim, but I'm always concerned about how far that apple might have fallen.

i give irsay more credit than you do i suppose. he's grown a lot wiser over the years and that gets my respect. i am sure manning himself was a great influence on him. also notice the boneheaded decisions ended when the old man passed (RIP)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck's performance changes nothing - he is simply "as advertised". This is what we all expected, and thank goodness for it actually. The problem would be if he did NOT perform as advertised. I - for one - would be furious if the FO screwed this one up. Been there, done that. Art Schlicter, John Elway, Jeff George. I can remember how the frustration tasted all too well, and I've had enough of it. If you make a bold move like this you'd darn well better get it right.

I understand why Manning was released and expressed acceptance of it at the time. I thought that it was in Peyton's best interests to move on as well. I would have preferred to see him stay regardless of the consequences, but the Colts saw an opportunity and grabbed it. I understand it completely and I'm OK with it - honest. I "got over" it in April.

This is as good a time as any to say that in my opinion, acceptance of Manning's release hasn't been the problem on this site. The two camps are more about the fact that some people (like myself) think that it is appropriate to openly respect what we had. Manning didn't make an obscene gesture and leave us for more money, he was ripped away - and cried about it. It is as if we are going through a grieving process, and want to mix in regret for what we lost along with the optimism for the future. A long, slow, sad, process. The other camp wants to rip the bandaid off and cauterize the wound with fire. They seem threatened by the mere mention of Manning's name, and try to bully those who bring him up in any context. Some put Luck on a pedestal that he hasn't had time to earn, while trying to knock Peyton off the one that he richly deserves. They treat him as if he is now "the enemy", instead of a favorite son who has been forcibly ostracized. I just don't get it. THEY make it very hard for me to enjoy my new team, not Irsay or the staff. Frankly if I wasn't reading this site I would be enjoying the rebuilding process a lot more.

Nicely done.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i give irsay more credit than you do i suppose. he's grown a lot wiser over the years and that gets my respect. i am sure manning himself was a great influence on him. also notice the boneheaded decisions ended when the old man passed (RIP)

I want to give him credit, and I do genuinely like him - that wasn't lip service. It's mostly his influence when he was the GM that gives me pause. I thought that the best decision that he ever made was to bring in a top level GM and let him go to town. I took that as "I understand that my judgement on talent is deficient, I'm going to hand the reins over to a pro and sit back and watch". The process of switching to Grigson made me VERY nervous. Sure, Polian was too dominating, but now we've gone too far in the other direction. Watching the interplay between Grigson and Irsay at press conferences reminds me a lot of things I've seen between new managers and owners in small business's I've worked at. I would be willing to bet that Grigson's hiring process involved a long list of "this is what the other guy did wrong". Grigson - as a brand new GM at a young age - is very likely hyper focused on addressing that "list", and giving Irsay what he thinks Irsay wants. I'd much rather have a competent and experienced GM who is free to focus on what he knows works. I said that I was relieved about Luck, but the jury is going to be out on Grigson (and therefore Irsay) for some time to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to give him credit, and I do genuinely like him - that wasn't lip service. It's mostly his influence when he was the GM that gives me pause...

...I'd much rather have a competent and experienced GM who is free to focus on what he knows works. I said that I was relieved about Luck, but the jury is going to be out on Grigson (and therefore Irsay) for some time to come.

the same thing you worry about with the irsay/grigson team is what i see with the irsay/irsay team. jimmy was too young & didn't earn the job through the ranks. but more importantly, i think he had his dad in his ear telling him to do boneheaded things. i feel a lot better about jimmy being in grigsons ear than the latter. grigson probably needs irsay in his ear because he may be in a little over his head. from what i've seen, i feel good about them as a team, filling in for one another's weaknesses. grigson appears to be an excellent talent evaluator, and irsay is a master politician, unlike his father

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck's performance changes nothing - he is simply "as advertised". This is what we all expected, and thank goodness for it actually. The problem would be if he did NOT perform as advertised. I - for one - would be furious if the FO screwed this one up. Been there, done that. Art Schlicter, John Elway, Jeff George. I can remember how the frustration tasted all too well, and I've had enough of it. If you make a bold move like this you'd darn well better get it right.

I understand why Manning was released and expressed acceptance of it at the time. I thought that it was in Peyton's best interests to move on as well. I would have preferred to see him stay regardless of the consequences, but the Colts saw an opportunity and grabbed it. I understand it completely and I'm OK with it - honest. I "got over" it in April.

This is as good a time as any to say that in my opinion, acceptance of Manning's release hasn't been the problem on this site. The two camps are more about the fact that some people (like myself) think that it is appropriate to openly respect what we had. Manning didn't make an obscene gesture and leave us for more money, he was ripped away - and cried about it. It is as if we are going through a grieving process, and want to mix in regret for what we lost along with the optimism for the future. A long, slow, sad, process. The other camp wants to rip the bandaid off and cauterize the wound with fire. They seem threatened by the mere mention of Manning's name, and try to bully those who bring him up in any context. Some put Luck on a pedestal that he hasn't had time to earn, while trying to knock Peyton off the one that he richly deserves. They treat him as if he is now "the enemy", instead of a favorite son who has been forcibly ostracized. I just don't get it. THEY make it very hard for me to enjoy my new team, not Irsay or the staff. Frankly if I wasn't reading this site I would be enjoying the rebuilding process a lot more.

Very Nice Writeup!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the same thing you worry about with the irsay/grigson team is what i see with the irsay/irsay team. jimmy was too young & didn't earn the job through the ranks. but more importantly, i think he had his dad in his ear telling him to do boneheaded things. i feel a lot better about jimmy being in grigsons ear than the latter. grigson probably needs irsay in his ear because he may be in a little over his head. from what i've seen, i feel good about them as a team, filling in for one another's weaknesses. grigson appears to be an excellent talent evaluator, and irsay is a master politician, unlike his father

That's a good point. I certainly agree with you in that I feel significantly more comfortable with the current combo, and I'm optimistic. If I have any problem with Grigson it's that I live a little too close to Philly, and I'm not all that fond of what they've tried to accomplish in recent years. Any enthusiasm for emulating them (not to mention the poaching of their roster) makes me uncomfortable. Not all that thrilled with his public persona to this point either, and I see no basis for applauding his skills as a talent evaluator just yet. Hopefully this time next year I'll be crowing his name from the rooftops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was against throwing in the towel. That has never changed in my mind. It has to do with the integrity of the game. A team should never lose on purpose. As a fan, I could never root for that, because I have stated my beliefs, and I hate hypocrisy with a passion.

Now, fast forward a bit. I am and always will be a huge PM fan. I wanted to see us trade the pick and try for the remainder of his career. That did not happen. I am a fan of the Colts and I got on board with the decision. I could not be happier than I am with the direction of the franchise now, and Jim Irsay is front and center with those decisions. He made a tough call, and considering the magnitude of the large amount of changes that were made, and the people he choose to implement those changes.

I give a hearty thumbs up.

I will not change my feelings about this, no matter what Luck does or what Peyton does. My team is moving on and forward, and I am with them 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the same thing you worry about with the irsay/grigson team is what i see with the irsay/irsay team. jimmy was too young & didn't earn the job through the ranks. but more importantly, i think he had his dad in his ear telling him to do boneheaded things. i feel a lot better about jimmy being in grigsons ear than the latter. grigson probably needs irsay in his ear because he may be in a little over his head. from what i've seen, i feel good about them as a team, filling in for one another's weaknesses. grigson appears to be an excellent talent evaluator, and irsay is a master politician, unlike his father

I agree shake. Frankly, I just have a really hard time understanding why people are still so upset with Irsay. He has done exactly what the franchise needed to do. He made difficult decisions that he knew some wouldn't like, but he still done it because it was the right thing to do.

Getting so upset over a guy that most have never met and never will and even if they did, he would forget their face in 5 minutes time. Manning was a great QB that put us on the football map, but it was time to move on, he knew it, Irsay knew it, and most logical fans knew it too.

Irsay IMO is one of the best, if not the best, owners in the game. He does what he feels he needs to do to make the Colts winners, even if he has to have a setback at first to do it. He could have packed this franchise up and moved it a long time ago, but he worked to keep them here. I guess people will always hold a grudge and never to be able to move on. They won't appreciate that we have an owner that makes sacrifices to win.

Sorry for the rant, but it irritates me to no end when people can't see the forest for the trees, so to speak.

BTW Mac, this is not directed towards you, I just know some people that are still really upset with Irsay and the Colts in general and can't be happy for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a good point. I certainly agree with you in that I feel significantly more comfortable with the current combo, and I'm optimistic. If I have any problem with Grigson it's that I live a little too close to Philly, and I'm not all that fond of what they've tried to accomplish in recent years. Any enthusiasm for emulating them (not to mention the poaching of their roster) makes me uncomfortable. Not all that thrilled with his public persona to this point either, and I see no basis for applauding his skills as a talent evaluator just yet. Hopefully this time next year I'll be crowing his name from the rooftops.

i can understand that from the philly perspective, but i don't think i'd color grigs as the face of the eagles. it's true, however, that the jury is still out on him

I agree shake. Frankly, I just have a really hard time understanding why people are still so upset with Irsay. He has done exactly what the franchise needed to do. He made difficult decisions that he knew some wouldn't like, but he still done it because it was the right thing to do.

Getting so upset over a guy that most have never met and never will and even if they did, he would forget their face in 5 minutes time. Manning was a great QB that put us on the football map, but it was time to move on, he knew it, Irsay knew it, and most logical fans knew it too.

it's no wonder irsay partakes in mind numbing substances. if you truly care about something, as i thinks it's clear he does, it must really hurt to hear some of the bitter criticisms

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to give him credit, and I do genuinely like him - that wasn't lip service. It's mostly his influence when he was the GM that gives me pause. I thought that the best decision that he ever made was to bring in a top level GM and let him go to town. I took that as "I understand that my judgement on talent is deficient, I'm going to hand the reins over to a pro and sit back and watch". The process of switching to Grigson made me VERY nervous. Sure, Polian was too dominating, but now we've gone too far in the other direction. Watching the interplay between Grigson and Irsay at press conferences reminds me a lot of things I've seen between new managers and owners in small business's I've worked at. I would be willing to bet that Grigson's hiring process involved a long list of "this is what the other guy did wrong". Grigson - as a brand new GM at a young age - is very likely hyper focused on addressing that "list", and giving Irsay what he thinks Irsay wants. I'd much rather have a competent and experienced GM who is free to focus on what he knows works. I said that I was relieved about Luck, but the jury is going to be out on Grigson (and therefore Irsay) for some time to come.

Can't grade a draft class accurately for two to three years, so much of Grigson's work will be pending approval for a while, definitely.

But, other than you're concern, there's not much evidence that Grigson is interested in giving Irsay what he wants. Grigson was interviewed by both the Rams and the Bears before he got hired by the Colts. Even if he didn't get offered a job, he would have been on the short list for teams looking for GMs next year and beyond, until he got a job. I don't think he would have accepted the Colts job, given the condition of the roster and the looming Manning decision, if he didn't expect to have a certain level of autonomy. And I would expect that he would have expressed that during the interview process.

Beyond that, the moves he's made have been right in line with his stated objective: do whatever he can to improve the level of talent on the team. There's not much second-guessing anything he's done from a personnel standpoint. It all makes sense, based on what we know of him and what he's said he wants to do.

It makes sense for the owner to be involved in big picture decisions, like deciding on a head coach, even giving input for first round picks and big money signings. Word is that, even when Polian was here, Irsay was always somewhat involved with respect to first rounders. We know he hand picked Dungy. Caldwell was kind of forced upon him, but he definitely signed off on the transition. He was involved in every Manning decision, from the draft to his contracts to his release. Irsay has never been an absentee owner, but he has also allowed his GM the authority to make the day to day decisions that a GM should make from a football standpoint.

I think he'll make sure to never allow a situation like what we had with Polian, where perhaps Polian's reach and influence were a little too pronounced. But I haven't noticed anything from him or from Grigson that suggests that Grigson is overly concerned with making Irsay happy or giving him what he wants. I think what Irsay wants, more than anything else, is a good football team with players and coaches that represent the organization well. If Grigson believes in his vision -- which it seems so far that he does -- then he will continue in his quest to put together the best team and staff that he can.

There's a lot to be said for experience, of course. But Grigson comes in with a clean slate; he's not a retread who failed at a previous stop, nor is he someone who was booted out by new ownership or something like that. We don't know much about him other than what he's done in his first eight months on the job. And, almost to a move, I am 100% on board with his decisions. The jury is definitely still out. We like this draft and offseason right now, but it could look like a disaster three years from now. Still, I'm not at all worried that Irsay is meddling, or that his shadow is looming over everything Grigson does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was against throwing in the towel. That has never changed in my mind. It has to do with the integrity of the game. A team should never lose on purpose. As a fan, I could never root for that, because I have stated my beliefs, and I hate hypocrisy with a passion.

Now, fast forward a bit. I am and always will be a huge PM fan. I wanted to see us trade the pick and try for the remainder of his career. That did not happen. I am a fan of the Colts and I got on board with the decision. I could not be happier than I am with the direction of the franchise now, and Jim Irsay is front and center with those decisions. He made a tough call, and considering the magnitude of the large amount of changes that were made, and the people he choose to implement those changes.

I give a hearty thumbs up.

I will not change my feelings about this, no matter what Luck does or what Peyton does. My team is moving on and forward, and I am with them 100%.

We are here because we care, no doubt about that.

We all eventually root for the laundry. Some get attached to the players, some to the laundry, some to both. But all of them want the Colts to win eventually. There is no one singular way to please everyone, no matter what the situation is in life.

This Manning decision is no different. At worst we hope for a temporary reset button before our beloved franchise is alive and kicking and winning again. :) That one, we can get all get on board with, no matter how it is accomplished.

Magnify our agreements and shrink our differences, we will be alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew the decision to cut bait with Manning was coming. The Colts organization needed to use his contract extension option bonus money to remold and revamp the entire defense, release players with diminishing skill sets, and acquire a coaching staff, particularly a head coach that could adjustments on the fly, knew what to do if an entire scheme or formation broke down, and who realized that this team needed to toughen up, get size on both lines, and drop the "finesse/soft" label for good.

The best franchises in the NFL: The Patriots, The Steelers, The Giants, and the Ravens know when to release aging veterans, slide the understudy player in, and that NFL games are won and lost on a reliable ground game, superb special teams, play, and size, speed, technique, and girth in the trenches on the o-line and d-line. I don't care how great your franchise QB is, if he can't survey the field because your line is pathetic, your QB won't win many games on his back.

The decision wasn't Luck over Manning. It was retool the defense, improve the secondary, and get some tenacity at the line of scrimmage. A franchise Ferrari is only as good as the convoy of players who protect him and give him the time he needs to succeed plain and simple IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this rebuild was more than just about Peyton Manning. Jim Irsay stated the day after last years opening game loss to the Texans for fans to be prepared for "shock" in the next 18 months. I believe then he wanted a new "tougher" team identity and is headed that direction. More offensive balance and a stingy defense.The past was great but the future looks even greater!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...