Are we really this desperate for a franchise QB and a Super Bowl victory that we're willing to hedge our bets on a 36 year old QB coming off major neck surgery with not even a hint he'll be ready by September?
It's been 8 months since his May surgery, and 5 months since his follow up surgery. You can CHOOSE to believe the highly unlikely, that Michael Lombardi's report comes from guys that haven't seen Peyton Manning in a month...if that's what you want to do. I don't think that's reasonable. I for one think it is pretty daunting that 8 months after the original surgery and 5 months after the follow up surgery, Peyton Manning still can't get velocity on the ball, and can't even throw to his left. So yes, I'm making plans that don't include Peyton Manning.
Honestly, I think alot of this is intentional leaking of misinformation from various Dolphins sources as if to divert attention from our real target, Matt Flynn. I rarely agree with Armando Salguero, but he's right that the Philbin-Flynn connection is too strong to ignore and that the notion that we're just willing to scrap the system Philbin and Sherman are familiar with, and the reason they were brought here, just so we could grab Manning, doesn't make alot of sense. If all we needed was Manning, then we would've kept Sparano and Daboll, as Manning is so good it doesn't matter the coaching, apparently. Nah, I think the logical conclusion is: Step 1, Get Philbin. Step 2, Sign Flynn. Step 3, get playmakers. If we follow that trajectory, I think we'd be successful. It just makes too much sense.
If he's a system QB and we still had Sparano(or any other non-WC offense coach), then I'd be worried. But since we have the system in place, he'll be a natural fit. The only drawback I see is that GB has alot of talent on that offense and we really only have Marshall and Bush(and Bess if he fits). We need a TE, a second starting WR, right side OL help, and better depth overall. I'm only worried that RIGHT NOW we are void of talent on offense, but that could change after FA and the draft, obviously.
This is just my impression, but I think he is varying between being barely able to grip a football and being able to throw with poor velocity.
Some do, some don't, but that's really not the important point. The point is that recovery from this injury is all about nerve regeneration. The doctors have no impact on that. All they can do is clear the path and then wait like everybody else. At that point all the doctors or anybody else can do is give percentages. Reality is that in nerve injuries where the nerve doesn't regenerate immediately those odds are poor. That's just the way it is.
The unknown is Manning. Nobody on the planet can tell you whether or not that nerve will ever regenerate or how much motor function he'll lose. All we know is that in cases where the nerve doesn't regenerate immediately that you're generally looking at about a year of recovery once the nerve starts regenerating. That last surgery was in December so we're basically looking at November if it did in fact start regenerating immediately. All reports back then were that it had not. Banking on Manning is the definition of writing off another season. The one option that does not write off the season is Flynn. You have a healthy QB who would be stepping into the same offense he's practiced in for years.
Yes to that and it is Peyton Manning , it isn't ... say Chad Pennington with all due respect there is a huge difference imo. Desperately desperate .
as long as Manning understands, that we understand about the nerve, and negotiates a contract that understands the nerve, than sure, take a chance.. Right now, from what we know, he's throwing a football without the nerve regenerating..I don't want that Manning, the Manning who has Pennington arm strength..If he's willing to sign a contract that reflects where he is and not what he might become, then bring it on..
Jennings and Nelson are a good amount better than any combination we have imo..I'd take them over ours. I think those two receivers are not products of a system or QB...very talented players.
I'm not sure whether this is the argument you're making or not, but before making that "product of the system" argument with Flynn, keep in mind tha Jennings didn't even play in the Detroit game.
I think this is the way to look at it. I'm not sure how the guy (Joe Philbin) that just coached Matt Flynn a few months ago can call him an "unknown"...and that goes for Mike Sherman and Ryan Tannehill as well. On the other hand, the injury stuff with Manning is a true unknown, unknowable thing. Maybe he'll regenerate and be fine. Maybe he won't. There's no what to know that, or even have a valid guess at it. Incidentally I think Manning's last surgery was early September, no?
My point is, how in the world is Chris Weinke's case going to tell us anything about how Peyton Manning will recover? If a concert pianist breaks his hand and has surgery on it, are you going to forecast him to be playing Stravinsky at Symphony Hall just because your buddy who never got beyond Chopsticks broke his hand the same way and had the same surgery and was playing Chopsticks at drinking parties again within the year?
You're wrong Raf about the timeline. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7304392/peyton-manning-doctor-says-fusion-healed-firmly The final surgery was September 8, 2011. He was then cleared to return to work (i.e. throwing) in December, just like Weinke. It took Weinke 4 months from the time he returned to work, to where he regaiend the strength to play. Manning is right in that time frame. Manning probably should've had the fusion in May, but he and the Colts chose a less invasive procedure. Had he ahd the fusion in May, this saga probably would have been resolved long before now.
No, but the fact remains that another QB has had this exact same surgery (for an injury that was far worse) and returned to the field to play as well as he had before. In fact, the recovery timeline from fusion surgery appears to bee xactly the same for Manning as it was for Weinke. There is a medical protocol for this kind of thing which calls for 4 months of ehaling, 4 months of rehab. Peyton is in month 2 of rehab after he was cleared to resume work on schedule. There is certainly reason to believe that this will work.
Of course. Peyton Manning can be expected to throw strong, crisp passes again in no time...just like the passes Chris Weinke (never) threw.
I don't know why you're so against this. I'm not suggesting we sign Manning without watching him throw, doing an investigation, weighing the pros and cons, etc. And truth be told I'm perfectly fine with Flynn/Tannehill/Weeden or something else I haven't thought of. But what I don't understand is summarily rejecting, without all the information, the one option that is most likely to have us in the Super Bowl the next two years. What is wrong with exploring the possibility? You and Raf and KB may ultimately prove to be right, but we don't know that today. If Manning is released by the 8th of March, and likely sooner, there is plenty of time to perform the encessary investigation without costing you Flynn or anybody else.
Did Weinke have the type of coordination, nervous-system, or whatever else is innately needed to be as talented and precision-like of a passer as Manning? No, he didn't. So comparing Weinke to Manning is irrelevant. Now, if you're saying that Manning could return to the level of a Weinke, then you'd have a solid case, but Manning wouldn't be a HOF QB if he were Weinke. It's that extra natural skill that elevates him from Weinke to Manning that some of us are skeptical will return. It's like having a piano or guitar finely tuned to ensure each note is precise and pristine. Sure, you can play it well w/o the tune up, but will it be at a level that only few in the world can match? Manning might get back to "playable" but to assume he'll be finely tuned like previous Manning is just that-- an assumption.
1. I'm not summarily rejecting anything. If an idea is put forward (such as, Chris Weinke did it, so obviously Peyton can as well), and that idea is total BS, I'm going to explain why that idea is total BS. Simple as that. 2. I do NOT think Peyton Manning is the only option that has a chance of getting us to the Super Bowl in 2012 or 2013, or even the best option. 3. I've already explained the many reasons I would not pursue this option. Bottom line is, it's not the right option for this team.
I keep asking people this same question and no one ever answers me. What sense does it make to sign Manning and then draft a QB in the 1st round? If you're going to draft a QB in the 1st round, you shouldn't be taking Manning. If you take Manning you should be drafting a player to help you win now WITH Manning instead of a guy who's not going to play until Manning leaves.
Fair enough, but the Chris Weinke example is not BS. Just because Chris Weinke was never as good as Manning, prior to or after the surgery, is besides the point. The point is a QB with this same injury, that was even worse actually, had this exact surgery and returned to his exact level of play following rehab that he was at prior to surgery. Sure, maybe Weinke was a special case, but it has been done.
So Miami potentially has a quarterback that is ready to take over when Manning leaves. I do not agree with your statement. I think it makes plenty sense to draft a QB in the first round and take Manning. Anyone to bring in to win NOW with Manning could be brought in Free Agency
Because: A. Manning won't play for very long. B. Rookie QBs can take years to develop. C. This team should be capable of winning a SB with a healthy Manning no matter what we do with the #1 pick. D. Reduced rookie wage scale makes it less painful to sit a QB for a year or two. E. You wanna be set up for the future; nothing will better ensure this than having a studly potential franchise QB waiting in the wing. F. We'll have to draft a QB in the 1st sooner or later, so it'd be better to draft an outstanding talent now if we have the chance (and let him groom behind Manning) than to force a pick a few years from now and potentially throw him into the fire before he's ready. G. We cant just assume that a potential franchise QB will be available at our selection a few years from now, so if we have the chance now, we take it and be grateful for the opportunity. Added: H. A few years from now, the QB will become more valuable than a guy drafted to "help win now". (See Aaron Rodgers & Steve Young) I. Rookies take time to develop, so there's no guarantee one will significantly "help us win now". J. Free Agency should be used to fill immediate needs; the draft should be more about building for the future.
Chris Weinke not being even close to as good as Manning IS the point. If an old Ford P.O.S. breaks down you might get away with fixing it with some duct tape and an oxyacetylene torch, but does that mean the same methods will work on an Audi Q7? How much rehab of the nerves and muscle did Chris Weinke really need to throw the inaccurate, long wind-up wobblers that he generally threw around?
Irsay has seen Manning throw and is "pleased". Considering moving bonus date. http://www.stampedeblue.com/2012/2/...edly-seen-peyton-manning-throw-and-is-pleased Perhaps this will all be moot.
As for this Peyton/Tannehill thing...I personally don't think Peyton will sign with a team that doesn't tell him what they're doing with their draft pick.
On that we agree. Feels better. I don't think you and I have disagreed substantively since Parcells v. some other czar. Once every 4 years isn't too bad.
added, if you're the GM, owner, coach etc and you don't absolutely love the QB with your 1st round pick, then you don't draft him. Basically, having Manning shouldn't be a reason to pass on a QB you're completely smitten with.
I'm a bit confused as to why the Peyton question always seems to yield a Flynn question. I actually think they are somewhat unrelated. Obviously the #1 goal for this team would be to sign a young franchise QB. Given that goal, if Philbin felt that Flynn was really a franchise QB, he would sign him. I have no doubt that if Philbin felt there was a 27 year old healthy young Rodgers/Brees/Manning/Brady type QB we would go after him with everything we've got. Clearly they don't think Flynn is that franchise guy. What do you do if there is no young franchise QB? I don't think you say, "well screw it, let's just sign an average QB like Henne or Moore and commit to them long term" The Flynn decision is really about whether they believe he's equal to Matt Moore or equal to Rodgers. Remember Moore is under contract and he's pretty damn good so if you're bring someone in you're doing it because you think he can be elite. While everyone seems to think that the decision making tree for our front office starts with Peyton and works down, I think it starts with Flynn then to the draft and then to Peyton. If Peyton is target #1 then they have decided Flynn's ceiling is probably Matt Schaub and they are out of reach of drafteable sure thing franchise prospects. If that's the case, Flynn is out anyway. The only impact I see with Manning is our draft strategy not free agent strategy.
I don't agree with this. The Peyton Manning gamble carries a lot of risk with a limited reward. He's 36 years old, so even if he does recover, he's got how many years of quality play left in the tank? Maybe two, if you're lucky (on top of the luck it'll already take to get him to recover his throwing power)? So let's say it's a 50/50 gamble with Peyton and the injury thing. The 50 that represents reward is quality QB play for 1 or 2 years. Whereas if you take what you feel is a 50/50 gamble with Brandon Weeden or Matt Flynn, the 50 that represents the reward will last for 6 to 8 years. And then of course if you feel that Tannehill is as high as a 50/50 gamble, then the 50 that represents reward lasts for more along the lines of 12 years. So given the extremely short term nature of the risk/reward dynamic with Peyton Manning, you're only taking on that risk because you believe the reward wins you a Super Bowl in 2012 or 2013. If that's the case, you need to do everything you can to make that happen. Besides, I'm pretty sure Peyton Manning won't go to a team that would think about using their 1st round, top 10 pick on a QB even after they sign him.
''on NFL live and he said kravitz is wrong and manning does not have a "noodle arm". He said Manning has made significant progress and is throwing the ball very hard, he might of had a noodle arm a month ago but his arm is getting stronger. Mort said he spoke to somebody who saw manning throw this morning and manning was throwing the ball really well and making all the throws. He also said that Manning has been in constant contact with Chris Weinke who had the same neck surgery his sophomore season at Florida State and came back for his Junior season and brought FSU to the championship, weinke has been telling Manning to be patient and his arm strength will comeback.''
Joe Philbin is not the GM. And nothing that has happened thus far justifies the statement, "Clearly they don't think Flynn is that franchise guy."
Everybody has an agenda. I don't take Mort much more seriously than anybody else, since he is a bit of a Condon mouthpiece. But at least his source had the sense to make the report as positive for Peyton as possible by assuring that Peyton was throwing hard "today". But until Peyton is released, and he starts working out for neutral parties, we won't know anything. All I'm suggesting we do is fully investigate the possibility because the payoff is potentially astronomical. A decision doesn't need to be made today, so don't make it. Wait until you have more information.
Polian said on serius today that the Kravitz article was false.. Maybe he has an agenda, maybe he doesn't..
Polian on PTI today (per Dave hyde) "Peyton will play at a high level again." Progress made has been "marked" Spoke with Manning ten days ago who told him the progress was "coming but coming slowly" Peyton is making sideline throws but "hasn't aired it out 50 yards or even 45 yards yet" We'll see.
I thought the last surgery was in December, thanks for correcting that. I don't see the payoff as astronomical. I see maybe two years of elite play if everything goes well (which as I have said, I don't expect). I don't see that payoff as valuable as 7 to 12 years of elite play you could potentially get with the other options. (IMO Flynn is far and away the safest option). And if in 30 days everything has gone so well that it would be reasonable to sign Manning, then I expect that Indy will not release him. (We then might be in a position to try and get the Luck pick!!!). That's basically how I see it going down. Either Manning is healthy and he's not released or he's not healthy and we take a big risk for an unlikely short-term payoff. In the process passing on Flynn or compounding our short-term thinking by passing on a first round QB yet again to pursue one of those almost never successful "win now" plans.
for me, I can take a piece of both angles, not to excited because I know his fate relies on something he cannot control..and optimistic because there is another month to go to show progress..
