1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Help me understand "Then what in 2-3 years"

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Bumrush, Mar 6, 2012.

  1. Bumrush

    Bumrush Stable Genius Club Member

    29,473
    34,332
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    One common phrase I continue to see in these forums, AM radio and in the local newspaper is, "What will happen in 2-3 years when Peyton retires"? Have we been watching the same debacle this past quarter century? Outside of several deep playoff runs with Marino, this team hasn't sniffed true contention in 25 years and hasn't won a Super Bowl in nearly 40 years.

    I just have a really hard time understanding that argument within the context of acquiring Manning (assuming he is healthy) and 2-3 years of high level play at the QB position, which would almost guarantee us playing in an AFC Championship game or even Super Bowl within that time period. We are talking about one of the greatest QB's in NFL history. Aren't you guys sick and tired of "wait till next year" or hoping that another unheralded, FA QB will suddenly turn in to an all pro? The other side of this is that we can utilize Manning while grooming our next franchise QB for when he retires..

    2-3 years of relevance is a godsend compared to the last 15 years of crap.. How could anyone who has suffered with this team downplay the impact that would have on this team and fanbase? The one year of elevated QB play in 2008 was one of the most satisfying years of my life watching football, I'd gladly sign up for 3 years of Manning and then worry about "what happens in 2-3 years"
     
  2. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    that sums up how i feel almost to the T....

    I was fairly against the Manning situation at the start but... the more I've sat on the idea the more I like it, I can't agree more. Obviously we are going to wait for his release and his work out and exam report....... but still.... I mean it's Manning FFS. Hah.
     
  3. DolfanTom

    DolfanTom Livin' and Dyin' w/ Ryan!

    3,169
    979
    0
    Apr 26, 2008
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    I want Manning, period.

    But I don't think it means we're screwed in 2-3 years, if we take the approach of drafting a quality kid (hint, Tannehill) this year, or next. I mean, a quality QB w/ upside who isn't quite ready yet (unlike Luck or RGIII), and will actually benefit from watching and learning from the greatest QB since Dan Marino. I understand some figure we shouldn't "waste" our top pick on a QB if we get Manning, as there are probably other areas that should be enhanced if we we solve QB, but I would have no issue w/ taking a QB #1. If not, maybe a Cousins in Rd. 2 or 3 if he gets that far.

    But man - Manning! I mean, does everyone realize what this means if he is even close to his former self? We are immediately in the mix for a title run. Immediately! My God - where do I sign up for that!!
     
  4. Bumrush

    Bumrush Stable Genius Club Member

    29,473
    34,332
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    Yup... And on top of that you are getting a very different type of Manning.. You are getting a Manning with a chip on his shoulders... Hungry to stick it to every doubter and to prove to the NFL that he reigns supreme.... It could get downright scary if he is anywhere near his 2010 level.

    Think Marino 1994, 4500 yards and some monstrous comebacks.
     
  5. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I think most that are opposed to signing Manning believe that he will not be good enough to carry us to a Super Bowl. The fear is that you don't make it that far with him, and you're also sacrificing a piece of the future in the meantime.

    I don't think anyone that believes Manning will reach his past ability is opposed to signing him.
     
    MAFishFan likes this.
  6. MonstBlitz

    MonstBlitz Nobody's Fart Catcher

    21,176
    10,130
    113
    Jan 14, 2008
    Hornell, NY
    I don't see what the problem is. You enjoy 2-3 years or whatever Manning can give you and within that 2-3 years you address your impending need at the position with a 1st round QB pick. This board defends Ireland religiously, yet those same defenders state he would ignore the QB position if we signed Manning. If he did ignore the position because we signed Manning, that's a failure on his part. It doesn't make signing Manning intrinsically a bad move.
     
  7. Bumrush

    Bumrush Stable Genius Club Member

    29,473
    34,332
    113
    Nov 25, 2007
    At the same time we haven't realized the future since the mid 90's... Why not go all in and see what happens, WHILE grooming a QB the right way? I think Philbin is the guy to do it. He already did it with Rodgers and look at the result.

    One can also argue that drafting a first round QB or trading up for someone like RG3 can derail the future even more.. Because a failure on that end would derail the future for 4-5 years.. I'd take a scenario with Manning under center and a QB that has been through several training camps, mop up duty and preseason.. In that scenario the team has more than enough time to determine the value of that QB and cut their losses before committing to 2-3 years of failure just to find out.
     
  8. dWreck

    dWreck formerly dcaf

    5,200
    2,975
    113
    Oct 23, 2011
    Sebring, FL
    There is no question about if grooming a qb behind manning is the right thing to do.... the question is "IS Ireland going to pull the trigger?" and pull it the right way?

    as much as i want it to happen....... idk

    but i agree with your statement.
     
  9. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Simply, I don't think that the medical facts make it realistic to believe that the Manning we get will give us "high level QB play". I think that realistically you can expect to get a Manning that has inconsistent, Feidler level arm strength, that misses multiple games next year and the next and then retires. Then after those two years we have to start over and install the system that Philbin and Sherman were brought in to install and we'll have passed on two QBs who we had more information about than we are likely to ever have again. I just don't see Manning as a good bet. I see him as an extremely poor bet, that sets us back years.
     
    FinSane, MAFishFan and KB21 like this.
  10. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    See....thats where I am at a cross roads with this. Everyone keeps using medical facts to build their case for or againt signing Manning, when even that is a grey area....you'll see complete opposite opinions on him Medically. Each side will have Doctors that say he can or cant. So...I dont care. Ill take a shot at Manning..and his health. For a chance at greatness the next 2-3 years? No doubt... For a chance to relegate the Pats to a part of the AFC East story, and not THE AFC East story.... No Doubt. For a chance to send the Jets packin...and likely send Sexy Rexy home....No Doubt. Its a game of chance no matter which way you cut it.

    Put it this way...


    The chances of Peyton Manning being 95% of the Hall of Fame QB he is.....far outweigh the chances of anyone not named Luck being a starting QB and being close to 95% of the Hall of Fame QB he once was. If you want a chance at greatness....sometimes you gotta take a chance. "Pushes his chips to the center of the table" Im all in.....
     
  11. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Given that what I bolded and underlined is what you think, then I'm not surprised you don't understand the opinions of some of us.
     
  12. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    Well...while I wouldnt go so far to say it is guaranteed.....I would say signing Manning would certainly boost our odds of winning the Super Bowl. Id say it makes us on even footing "at this point in time" with the Patriots. I say that...because if the Pats sign a good outside WR, get some secondary help, and some pass rush help....they would have to seriously still be considered the odds on favorite to win the AFC East.

    But...say what you want. And I dont care who you are.....your full of it....if we sign Manning...and as we get closer to the start of the season...and things look good health wise....your gonna be salivating at the possibilities....
     
  13. NorFlaFin

    NorFlaFin Active Member

    I see Peyton Manning the same way I saw Chad Pennington. You bring in Peyton to tutor the QB of the future as well as teach the entire offense how to be professionals.

    The only real difference is instead of waiting by happenstance and getting a cut Chad Pennington right before the season starts, the Phins get a chance a sign a cut Peyton Manning right before the draft happens.

    His contract totally depends on his health nothing more, nothing less.
     
  14. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    The 2-3 thing isn't a big deal. The important thing is that we build a solid team for the run now with Manning and for whoever we have to take over after he's done.

    Def don't mind the idea of that next QB getting to watch and learn from Peyton for a few seasons either.
     
  15. KB21

    KB21 Almost Never Wrong Club Member

    24,029
    40,478
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    It absolutely does make signing Peyton Manning an intrinsically bad move, because by doing so, you are making a commitment to him and to winning now for him. Because of that commitment to win now, you don't use a first round pick on a playe who does not help you win now. That's what you get with Peyton Manning. In fact, I will go as far as to say that Peyton will have it as part of his contract that the team uses their first round pick on someone that can help them win now.
     
  16. smahtaz

    smahtaz Pimpin Ain't Easy


    This team’s ineptitude can be traced back to one thing and one thing only. They continually try to circumvent the tried and true process of building a franchise. As long as they keep going the quick fix route by relying on an aged QB who’s best years are behind him, instead of drafting a blue chip QB prospect, they will continue to muddle in mediocrity.

    Let’s not forget, as well as CP10 played during ’08 this team doesn’t sniff any kind of success without the wildcat.

    I have no problem bringing in Manning as long as Luck, Griffin or Tanny are brought in as well.

    Enough is enough already.
     
  17. KB21

    KB21 Almost Never Wrong Club Member

    24,029
    40,478
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    The only thing signing Peyton Manning will guarantee is butts in the seats, and therein is reason why Stephen Ross wants to make this move. This has nothing to do with on the field performance. This is all about making headlines, creating a buzz, and putting butts in the seats.

    Think of Dan Marino 1999 and his peformance that season. That is what you will likely get with Peyton Manning.
     
    FinSane likes this.
  18. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I disagree with that statement and I don't even see it as close. I would say that the chances of Manning being 95% of what he was is less than even Moore playing like 95% of what Manning was. I also don't see the medical reports as all that grey. I see the positive reports as vague. They all avoid any specifics about the nerve regenerating. They have to b/c they don't know. They can't know. They're just hoping like anybody else. The medical facts I'm relying on are what everybody who has this injury has to deal with. And their not colored by people who have to put on a brave face or spin it as positively as possible.
     
  19. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    That really makes no sense.

    The only player we most likely wouldn't draft if we sign Manning would be Tanny.

    Aside from drafting a QB in the 1st, what we want and what Manning wants are the same thing.
     
  20. MAFishFan

    MAFishFan Team Tannehill

    3,561
    447
    83
    Sep 20, 2011
    Massachusetts
    i can't wait for this to be over...i'm tired of manning! flynn! tannehill! manning! osweiller! flynn! weeden! trade for rg3! manning! flynn! whatever ross wants, ross will get...in the end he writes the checks...if he wants manning to fill seats, then manning it is...and we as fans better hope he's healthy and more than servicable, because i have no desire to watch 2-3 years of 9-7 football with an oft injured manning while having no future plan...if they sign manning, you're not looking at drafting a qb until the later rounds and well, we know how that works...i think it has much more downside than upside, but maybe that's just me being beaten down as a dolphins fan for years talking, but all i see is culpepper all over again...if manning does happen and the dolphins end up slightly better thna medicore, it will show me ross has no committment to winning, it's all about shiny pieces
     
  21. KB21

    KB21 Almost Never Wrong Club Member

    24,029
    40,478
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    Medical facts area also not clouded by the fact that this is Peyton Manning. Many on here seem to think that because this is Peyton Manning, he will defy all odds that are currently against him: age, co morbid neck condition, length of career, multiple surgerys with minimal response.
     
  22. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Do you really think Manning cares about the long-term success of the franchise? I would say he's more concerned with his personal legacy.
     
  23. KB21

    KB21 Almost Never Wrong Club Member

    24,029
    40,478
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    And Tannehill is the player the team should be drafting if they sign Peyton Manning. They should, but I'm fairly certain they won't. Brandon Weeden doesn't make much sense to me because at his age, to maximize him, you really need him to start immediately. Otherwise, you are going to be starting a 32 year old first time starter who is already past his physical prime.
     
    Harmalama likes this.
  24. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    And do you really think any of the players we draft this year are expected to only perform for the 2-3 years Manning is here?
     
  25. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    So we should hope Tannehill is there and then let him sit for year or do we throw him right in there?

    Don't like that idea either way.
     
  26. KB21

    KB21 Almost Never Wrong Club Member

    24,029
    40,478
    113
    Dec 6, 2007
    That is better than hoping that Peyton Manning recovers from his injury and plays like he did 10 years ago.
     
  27. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    No, but there are ones that would be able to help the team when Manning is here, and there are ones that aren't.

    Lets keep in mind that there is a reason why Manning isn't looking to reduce his cost to stay in Indy. Its because he wants to win now.
     
  28. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    Or 2 years ago, but who's counting?
     
  29. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    79,599
    159,162
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    And a fine good afternoon to you as well.
     
    vt_dolfan likes this.
  30. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    Would you want to stay in Indy? It's an absolute mess there. Why would anyone with 2-4 years left want to ride that out?

    And who are these players that would only help the team when Manning is here?
     
  31. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Anybody who plays QB.
     
  32. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    Cool so anyone aside from Tanny like we already said.

    I can't imagine Manning is so unreasonable that he can't fathom the team drafting a QB to mold for after he's gone.
     
  33. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Tannehill, Weeden, Flynn, RG3...

    I'm sure he can fathom it. But I can't imagine that he would go to a team that isn't all-in going for a SB in the next 3 years.
     
  34. slickj101

    slickj101 Is Water

    15,886
    8,901
    113
    Dec 21, 2007
    NY
    Like RG3 is even a reasonable option for what he'd cost :lol:

    Flynn is all on Philbin so if he was 100% on him being legit then I'd think Ross would listen to his new HC's 1st major decision.

    The other two are just good prospects right now that would still have to be developed.

    Why wouldn't we go all-in for a SB run this year and next? We really aren't that far off if Manning can play at a high level.
     
  35. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    I just don't see Manning playing at a high-level to be a very good proposition.
     
  36. vt_dolfan

    vt_dolfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    Lol...I can understand how you read it the way you...did....but...it was rhetorical...not...CK = I dont care who you are, your full it it....

    I meant...anyone would be full of it, if we signed Manning and the closer we got to the season.....and you said you werent salivating just a little...

    Seriously was not directed at you...at all.
     
    ckparrothead likes this.
  37. VManis

    VManis Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    5,753
    9,844
    113
    Nov 10, 2010

    I get that reasons why you are against signing Manning, but has a player ever included clauses in their contract on who a team can or cannot draft? Beside the phrase "help them win now" is so vague that it could never be enforced.
     
  38. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Thats why you have the entire process where the player meets with management before signing a contract.
     
  39. Killerphins

    Killerphins The Finger

    9,313
    4,169
    0
    Nov 11, 2008
    This thread is made up of assumptions that Manning would be 100% and back to his old self.
    Who wouldn't want that but that's not the case.
    A washed up QB can set you back further. See Culpepper.
     
    MAFishFan, RevRick and Stringer Bell like this.
  40. FinSane

    FinSane Cynical Dolphins Fan

    19,862
    5,792
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Melbourne, Fl
    Even when Manning was healthy...he only go to one Superbowl. How is he coming here less than 100% healthy somehow guarantee that we're contenders?
     

Share This Page