Where does Peyton Manning End Up?

[BLUE 1,026]

Look at some of the splits besides 2006. They aren't, um, exactly terrible; Some coming after the Super Bowl winning season.

 

If he ends up in Miami like I think he will, I just have a feeling he'll be just fine, barring any injury(s) that would most likely also keep him out of Arizona....I just don't think that Arizona of all teams has that huge of an edge over Miami because of a retractable roof.

Edited March 8, 2012 by BLUE

[Jayrus 51]

My vote is he goes to Miami. That's where the smart money currently seems to say Peyton will land. Washington has also been thrown out there as a contender for his services, but is there one single player in the FA the Redskins aren't rumored to be after?

 

I've said in response to people suggesting Seattle make a play for him that I don't want him here, and that it makes no sense considering the direction we're going in and our past moves. (Shipping out Hasselbeck, and passing on Palmer).

 

Now I'm not saying Manning in Seattle couldn't work. It could IF he can still play like Peyton Manning after all those surgeries. We have a defense. We have a running game to support him and some young skilled recievers for him to throw to. In this draft we could easilly shore up our pass-rush and our oline. QB would be our only question mark, which Manning could fill nicely IF he can still play at a competative level.

 

If he can still play well, Manning could take us places... for a couple years. That's the problem. Seattle doesn't need a QB to carry them "For a couple years" We need a franchise QB to lead us for the forseeable future.

 

Manning could make us playoff contenders while he's here. Maybe if we get damn lucky he wins us a lombardi. But his time with us would be limited. We'd still have to keep looking for someone to replace him, even if we do sign him. So it comes down to whether anyone we can get this year can be that guy, or should we just make a play for Manning to be relevant for the short term? I'd rather get a long term solution at QB.

 

All things considered, I think Manning is going to want to go where he has the best chance of going out with another ring. Also there will be other teams (Dolphins and Redskins most likely) That look primed to throw huge money at him. I'm not sure the Seahawks are going to be willing throw the kind of cash at him those teams will, or that Manning will want, or that he'd see us as the place to go to get that career capping Superbowl win.

 

I love Peyton Manning. He's an all time great, and if he does come here i'll be rooting for him. I just think there's better options for him and for us.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

lol Seattle fans.

 

If you desperately need a QB and have an opportunity to get Peyton Manning, you don't fucking pass on it.

 

You would seriously take some ''QB of the future'' and 10 years of 7-10 win seasons and no SB titles over say three years of Peyton Manning and a Lombardi?

 

Let's fucking get real here, Seattle fans.

[Duck Fallas 209]

My heart: He lands in Washington with Wayne and Vincent Jackson.

 

My head: He lands in Miami with Wayne.

[True Blue 16]

My vote is he goes to Miami. That's where the smart money currently seems to say Peyton will land. Washington has also been thrown out there as a contender for his services, but is there one single player in the FA the Redskins aren't rumored to be after?

 

I've said in response to people suggesting Seattle make a play for him that I don't want him here, and that it makes no sense considering the direction we're going in and our past moves. (Shipping out Hasselbeck, and passing on Palmer).

 

Now I'm not saying Manning in Seattle couldn't work. It could IF he can still play like Peyton Manning after all those surgeries. We have a defense. We have a running game to support him and some young skilled recievers for him to throw to. In this draft we could easilly shore up our pass-rush and our oline. QB would be our only question mark, which Manning could fill nicely IF he can still play at a competative level.

 

If he can still play well, Manning could take us places... for a couple years. That's the problem. Seattle doesn't need a QB to carry them "For a couple years" We need a franchise QB to lead us for the forseeable future.

 

Manning could make us playoff contenders while he's here. Maybe if we get damn lucky he wins us a lombardi. But his time with us would be limited. We'd still have to keep looking for someone to replace him, even if we do sign him. So it comes down to whether anyone we can get this year can be that guy, or should we just make a play for Manning to be relevant for the short term? I'd rather get a long term solution at QB.

 

All things considered, I think Manning is going to want to go where he has the best chance of going out with another ring. Also there will be other teams (Dolphins and Redskins most likely) That look primed to throw huge money at him. I'm not sure the Seahawks are going to be willing throw the kind of cash at him those teams will, or that Manning will want, or that he'd see us as the place to go to get that career capping Superbowl win.

 

I love Peyton Manning. He's an all time great, and if he does come here i'll be rooting for him. I just think there's better options for him and for us.

 

It does fit with the PC/RS philosophy. Of course they'd love to draft a franchise QB like Luck or RGIII, but until that opportunity arises (which it doesn't look like it will happen soon, especially not this year), they're still going to look for a franchise QB. Hasselbeck can be good to great, but he's not really a franchise QB. Maybe they didn't see Palmer as one either. Peyton is everything they've been looking for, except young. Also, we don't need to waste a draft pick on him, so we'd be free to potentially draft a franchise QB in the next 2-3 years to replace him.

 

Bring him and Wayne to Seattle!

[True Blue 16]

You're fucking kidding me right, Ed?

 

For example.. his indoor/outdoor splits from the Colts Super Bowl year in 2006...

 

Indoors (9 games): 198/294, 2315 yards, 21 touchdowns, 2 INTs, 112 QB rating

Outdoors (7 games): 164/263, 2082 yards, 10 touchdowns, 7 INTs, 88.6 QB rating

 

Dome baby.

 

Flawed analysis; dome/no dome isn't the only variable there... all of the non dome games are also all road games. I'm too lazy (and don't give a shit) to look it all up, but compare only the road indoor and road outdoor games, and do it over more than just one year, to get a more accurate picture. My guess is that the difference is slight.

Edited March 8, 2012 by True Blue

[Jayrus 51]

@BJGE : I thought I explained in my post I wouldn't say no to him if we got him. I just don't want to see us ride Manning fora couple years only for him to retire and leave us back to square one. Even if we get him we need to groom someone to take over for him. We don't need to screw ourselves like the Colts did.

 

Also, you seem pretty convinced that signing Peyton Manning = Assured Lombardi. Yes the current press is his recovery is going well, but until he hits the field we have no idea if he can still play like the Peyton of old. What kind of shape would we be in if we sign him to a huge 4 year contract only to have him come out and not be able to throw? What if he has a relapse of noodlearm as has to have another surgery? Now we have a bunch of money tied up in an aging QB who can't play and we're back where we started.

 

So, yes. I would love for Peyton to come up here and win us a Superbowl. I'm just not sure he can still play at that level. If we signed him and it turns out his arm is gone, or he has to have another surgery, I guarantee you'll be on here laughing at us for throwing huge money at an injured product.

 

Also I don't know how commited the Seahawks are to getting him. Other teams will be throwing huge money at him, so it becomes a question of how desperate are we? How much are we willing to spend on an older QB coming off multiple surgeries? Even if it is Peyton Manning he won't do us any good if he can't throw the way he used to.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Jayrus

[Packers Dynasty 2010 116]

How does Manning turn any of these teams into contenders like some of you think? I still doubt Manning will play anywhere near as good as he did before the surgery.

[BC 331]

lol Seattle fans.

 

If you desperately need a QB and have an opportunity to get Peyton Manning, you don't fucking pass on it.

 

You would seriously take some ''QB of the future'' and 10 years of 7-10 win seasons and no SB titles over say three years of Peyton Manning and a Lombardi?

 

Let's fucking get real here, Seattle fans.

 

Alright, since you have reading issues (I wouldn't really expect more from someone like you anyways) I will try to make it a bit more legible.

 

We are attempting to build a YOUNG, LASTING generation of players that will produce a contender for the next decade, not acquire players at the tail end of their careers to get us back into rebuilding mode once we part ways with them.

 

Chris Clemmons and Leroy Hill are oldest players we have (Clemmons the oldest at 31). Furthermore, I would like to add that having a successful generation does not require an elite quarterback. We dumped Matt Hasselbeck and acquired Tarvaris fucking Jackson. We actually became a better football team. Why? Because we revamped the offensive line, running game, and most important of all, the DEFENSE. We are finally doing things right in Seattle by addressing the units that ultimately determine the success of a football team.

 

Starting from the very top of the front office, we brought in the right guys to run the show. We brought in a new GM, a great OL coach, and a head coach that all have meshed together and changed the face at nearly every starting position, and we have made so many positives changes with the exception of 1 or 2 moves (Charlie Whitehurst). For once we have a successful building philosophy that has worked for many other NFL franchises, and I'm actually confident that if it continues, it will produce an exciting product. I want to see the result of this finished product of a young, kickass football team.

[Thanatos 2,847]

You're fucking kidding me right, Ed?

 

For example.. his indoor/outdoor splits from the Colts Super Bowl year in 2006...

 

Indoors (9 games): 198/294, 2315 yards, 21 touchdowns, 2 INTs, 112 QB rating

Outdoors (7 games): 164/263, 2082 yards, 10 touchdowns, 7 INTs, 88.6 QB rating

 

Dome baby.

 

This would also be explained by the fact that all but one of the indoors games are at home, and all the outdoors games are away. So... fail reasoning.

[baltimoreravens 19]

Alright, since you have reading issues (I wouldn't really expect more from someone like you anyways) I will try to make it a bit more legible.

 

We are attempting to build a YOUNG, LASTING generation of players that will produce a contender for the next decade, not acquire players at the tail end of their careers to get us back into rebuilding mode once we part ways with them.

 

Chris Clemmons and Leroy Hill are oldest players we have (Clemmons the oldest at 31). Furthermore, I would like to add that having a successful generation does not require an elite quarterback. We dumped Matt Hasselbeck and acquired Tarvaris fucking Jackson. We actually became a better football team. Why? Because we revamped the offensive line, running game, and most important of all, the DEFENSE. We are finally doing things right in Seattle by addressing the units that ultimately determine the success of a football team.

 

Starting from the very top of the front office, we brought in the right guys to run the show. We brought in a new GM, a great OL coach, and a head coach that all have meshed together and changed the face at nearly every starting position, and we have made so many positives changes with the exception of 1 or 2 moves (Charlie Whitehurst). For once we have a successful building philosophy that has worked for many other NFL franchises, and I'm actually confident that if it continues, it will produce an exciting product. I want to see the result of this finished product of a young, kickass football team.

 

From what I know about Seattle this seems spot on, and I like what they're doing. I don't think acquiring Peyton Manning is a negative for whoever gets him, but setting your mission back further by spending a ton of money on Manning and Wayne seems counterproductive to what Carroll wants to do. The fact that Seattle was throwing a lot of money around seems odd to me considering that they've been pushing for a young team with a future.

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

This would also be explained by the fact that all but one of the indoors games are at home, and all the outdoors games are away. So... fail reasoning.

 

This

[Glanvilles Grits 142]

Arizona since they have a retractable roof and Larry Fitzgerald. Manning is a dome baby. Always has been, always will be.

 

Well I would suppose that takes the Vikings out of the running!

 

Zing!

[BucD+ 648]

Per RotoWorld:

One team official who has contacted the player rep for Peyton Manning got the "definite impression" that the Dolphins, Broncos, and Redskins are the front-runners for the quarterback, according to CBSSports.com's Mike Freeman.

The same official believes Manning has already narrowed his list despite public comments to the contrary. Additionally, the official gets the sense that Manning is open to playing in the NFC, even in the East, contrary to previous reports. We would take this report with a grain of salt. Manning's agent is going to show his full hand when he can play interested team against each other.

Mar 8 - 1:09 PM

Source: CBSSports.com

Edited March 8, 2012 by BucD

[KiLaSix9+ 398]

Why are the Bucs an option?

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

Per RotoWorld:

 

Per Roto

Appearing on SportsCenter Thursday, ESPN 980 Washington's Chris Russell said he's "hearing" free agent Peyton Manning does not want to play for the Redskins and has already informed people in the building.

"A couple of different sources inside the organization have told me that Manning's camp made it pretty clear to Redskins officials he doesn't want to come here," said Russell. "... Unless that changes -- and I'm taking my sources at their word -- I don't think Manning's coming to D.C." The Redskins had hoped to make an aggressive offer to Manning, per the Washington Post, but there won't be much they can do if the feeling isn't mutual.

[blotsfan 2,112]

My gut is telling me the Chiefs. Can't say I know for sure why, but it is.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

Alright, since you have reading issues (I wouldn't really expect more from someone like you anyways) I will try to make it a bit more legible.

 

We are attempting to build a YOUNG, LASTING generation of players that will produce a contender for the next decade, not acquire players at the tail end of their careers to get us back into rebuilding mode once we part ways with them.

You DUMBFUCK Seattle fans don't get it.

 

Say you try to invest 2-3 years into Peyton Manning and it doesn't pan... who gives a fuck? Like seriously... you're gonna fucking bitch about lost time when the Seahawks have basically been spinning their wheels for the past five years anyway? Come the fuck on, son. And you Seattle fans act like this is the ONLY year to snag a ''QB of the future''. There'll be ''franchise QB'' prospects in '13, '14, '15, '16, and so on. It's not gonna be end of the god damned world if you take a chance on Manning and it doesn't work out. Fucking think here, lolBC.

 

But go ahead, get your ''QB of the future'' in dog shit Matt Flynn and watch him take you nowhere over the next 5 years.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

This would also be explained by the fact that all but one of the indoors games are at home, and all the outdoors games are away. So... fail reasoning.

Yeah... and he wants to play at least 8 games indoors.

 

This isn't fucking rocket science here.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Yeah... and he wants to play at least 8 games indoors.

 

This isn't fucking rocket science here.

 

You can't call him a dome baby and then throw stats up showing that, while completely ignoring that his home games are in a dome and his visiting games are mostly outdoors, so OF COURSE his stats are going to be better in domes.

 

Not to mention that I bet almost every single QB in the entire league does better indoors than out. It's simple logic.

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

You can't call him a dome baby and then throw stats up showing that, while completely ignoring that his home games are in a dome and his visiting games are mostly outdoors, so OF COURSE his stats are going to be better in domes.

 

Not to mention that I bet almost every single QB in the entire league does better indoors than out. It's simple logic.

No shit, but Manning's stats have been especially inflated from playing indoors.

[Thanatos 2,847]

No shit, but Manning's stats have been especially inflated from playing indoors.

 

Because they're HOME GAMES.

 

Good god, man. ALL QBs have better stats at home than away.

[NYGIANTSFLYHIGH 1]

Because they're HOME GAMES.

 

Good god, man. ALL QBs have better stats at home than away.

 

Dont even waste your time Natos lol...this kid understands nothing

[Piggly Wiggly 960]

Because they're HOME GAMES.

 

Good god, man. ALL QBs have better stats at home than away.

Alright, let's take a look at Mr. Brady's splits for example...

 

Home: 204/309, 2540 yards, 16 touchdowns, 6 interceptions, 100.5 QB rating

Away: 197/302, 2695 yards, 23 touchdowns, 6 interceptions, 110.7 QB rating

 

YO GUISE, ALL QUARTERBACKS HAVE BETTER STATS AT HOME... BOTTOM LINE.

 

[Thanatos 2,847]

Statistical anomaly. Over his career, Brady is better at home than away, although not by much. Brady and Manning have identical differences between outdoor and indoor games over their career, (8-point QBR differential), though Brady has only played 14 games indoors.

 

Over their respective careers, Brady has a QBR of 96.8 at home, and a 95.9 QBR away. Peyton is 97.7 at home, and 92.2 away.

 

Outdoors, Manning has a QBR of 90.8, hardly a dome baby rating, and indoors he is 98.7.

 

Brady is 103.1 indoors vs 95.8 outdoors.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Thanatos19