Broncos' Brock Osweiler was ready to replace Peyton Manning

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Brock Osweiler wasn't warming up so he could say, "Hi mom!" on TV.

The rookie quarterback was coming in if the Broncos got the ball back in the final seconds of their game Monday night against Atlanta.

"I was going in for the Hail Mary," Osweiler said. "I'm not sure what the dividing line was as far as me going in, but I was getting ready to go in."

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_21573841/broncos-brock-osweiler-replace-peyton-manning

[Ravage!!!]

hmmm..... interesting

[Davii]

Are they saying Peyton's arm isn't strong enough for a hail mary?

[Ravage!!!]

Are they saying Peyton's arm isn't strong enough for a hail mary?

do you think that Peyton's arm is as strong as Os' is at this point?

[Davii]

do you think that Peyton's arm is as strong as Os' is at this point?

I doubt it ever was, but are we talking from midfield Oz would've pulled the trigger or closer?

Get the ball back on our five with 35 seconds left does Oz or Peyton go in?

[slim]

I guess it would depend on the situation. If we are on the wrong side of the 50, OZ....otherwise it would probably be Manning.

[Ravage!!!]

I guess it would depend on the situation. If we are on the wrong side of the 50, OZ....otherwise it would probably be Manning.

Exactly. I think they are saying.. if its just going to be ONE long throw.... depending on just how far....it could have been Oz making that throw. Thats all there is to it. Not runing the last minute offense, not running drives, not ging to give him the ball for the no-huddle in crunch time..... its just a "take it and chuck it" type of thing. If it was a spot on the field that Manning could reach the endzone with lots of loft, then Manning stays in.

Not really much else to it.

[pnbronco]

I guess it would depend on the situation. If we are on the wrong side of the 50, OZ....otherwise it would probably be Manning.

From what I heard on the radio that's what they were saying. If it was over 50 yds, OZ is 21 years old and they think he can throw up to about 70 yards. Peyton is 36 and it's normal for QB's to loose distance when they get over 30 yrs old.

[vandammage13]

From what I heard on the radio that's what they were saying. If it was over 50 yds, OZ is 21 years old and they think he can throw up to about 70 yards. Peyton is 36 and it's normal for QB's to loose distance when they get over 30 yrs old.

Even more normal to for a QB to lose distance after his neck is reattached to his body by a couple of staples.

[weazel]

Im thinking it depended where the ball was going to be. If it was going to be a very deep throw than of course, use the young guy with the arm, why risk your 100 million dollar guy in there just for a hail mary.

[weazel]

Even more normal to for a QB to lose distance after his neck is reattached to his body by a couple of staples.

:rolleyes:

[topscribe]

Are they saying Peyton's arm isn't strong enough for a hail mary?
As Legwold said in the DP, Peyton on his best day can't chuck the ball as
powerfully as Brock. Never could. Brock has a howitzer for an arm. If the
Broncos need a 70-yard hail mary, for instance, Brock's the man. Peyton
never was.
.

[Ravage!!!]

Even more normal to for a QB to lose distance after his neck is reattached to his body by a couple of staples.

ONce again, ignorance is not your friend.....even with it being an exaggerated statement, it still shows an effort to remain stubborn on incorrect facts.

[Simple Jaded]

Do you think a team wants a pitcher on a pitch count going out to left field to one-hop a throw to beat a base runner at home plate? Manning is still rehabbing.......

[slim]

Do you think a team wants a pitcher on a pitch count going out to left field to one-hop a throw to beat a base runner at home plate? Manning is still rehabbing.......

It depends...is Dan O'Dowd the GM?

[Simple Jaded]

It depends...is Dan O'Dowd the GM?

Only if he agrees to fall on the sword for inept ownership.......

[vandammage13]

ONce again, ignorance is not your friend.....even with it being an exaggerated statement, it still shows an effort to remain stubborn on incorrect facts.

So you are saying the neck problems hasn't affected his arm strength?...I'm pretty sure Manning has said it has...

There was nothing incorrect about my statement (other than the obvious exaggeration part about the staples)

The lack of arm strength has probably more to do with his neck issues than it does his age....Why do you think Favre could still sling it at 40, or we still routinely see MLB pitchers throwing over 90MPH despite being WELL over 40?

Arm strength does not decline very fast with age, provided you stay healthy.

[topscribe]

So you are saying the neck problems hasn't affected his arm strength?...I'm pretty sure Manning has said as much...

There was nothing incorrect about my statement (other than the obvious exaggeration part about the staples)

The lack of arm strength has probably more to do with his neck issues than it does his age....Why do you think Favre could still sling it at 40, or we still routinely see MLB pitchers throwing over 90MPH despite being WELL over 40?
Manning has been very candid about his problems, and he hasn't mentioned arm
strength lately. Moreover, had you really taken note of the deep outs he threw
in the Pittsburgh games and the darts he threw to Thomas and Decker later in
the Atlanta game (Thomas was covered on one, and Decker dropped the other),
you would realize that arm strength is not an issue with Peyton. Rust might be,
but arm strength is not.
.

[MOtorboat]

So you are saying the neck problems hasn't affected his arm strength?...I'm pretty sure Manning has said it has...

There was nothing incorrect about my statement (other than the obvious exaggeration part about the staples)

The lack of arm strength has probably more to do with his neck issues than it does his age....Why do you think Favre could still sling it at 40, or we still routinely see MLB pitchers throwing over 90MPH despite being WELL over 40?

Arm strength does not decline very fast with age, provided you stay healthy.

Like a monkey humping a football.

[I Eat Staples]

Even more normal to for a QB to lose distance after his neck is reattached to his body by a couple of staples.

Peyton Manning couldn't throw the ball 70+ yards in his prime. Neither can Brady or Brees.

Osweiler is a big, strong guy. He can throw the ball as far as anyone, it's only normal that they'd use him if the situation calls for someone to throw one pass as hard as they can. Much ado about nothing.

[TXBRONC]

Osweiler has a stronger arm at this stage but I can't see them taking the ball out of Mannings hands.

[vandammage13]

Peyton Manning couldn't throw the ball 70+ yards in his prime. Neither can Brady or Brees.

Osweiler is a big, strong guy. He can throw the ball as far as anyone, it's only normal that they'd use him if the situation calls for someone to throw one pass as hard as they can. Much ado about nothing.

I could buy this, except that I don't remember the Colts ever taking Manning out on deep Hail Mary passes while he was there.

[jhns]

I could buy this, except that I don't remember the Colts ever taking Manning out on deep Hail Mary passes while he was there.

You should describe his last few hail marrys for us. Don't forget to include who his backups were at the time.

[Ravage!!!]

So you are saying the neck problems hasn't affected his arm strength?...I'm pretty sure Manning has said it has...

There was nothing incorrect about my statement (other than the obvious exaggeration part about the staples)

The lack of arm strength has probably more to do with his neck issues than it does his age....Why do you think Favre could still sling it at 40, or we still routinely see MLB pitchers throwing over 90MPH despite being WELL over 40?

Arm strength does not decline very fast with age, provided you stay healthy.

Because your comment suggested the NECK has a problem and is weak in nature. Which has been your ignorant stance for some time. You feel that Peyton's "neck" is weak, he's more injury prone because of it, and his "neck" (itself) is injured. You have stated many times that you are worried that the moment Manning takes a hit, that his "neck" is going to be re-injured. All of which is incorrect.

His NECK is not injured. Its a nerve located in the neck. A hit will not hurt him more than any other QB taking a hit. He's no more prone to injury than he would be without the nerve problem. The "neck" (itself) is not injured, and thus the comment about it being "attached by staples" ... only indicated that you feel his "neck" is weak. I commented on it being an "effort" of ignorance because you have been corrected many times on this, but refuse to accept that Manning is no more of an injury risk of the "single hit and he's out" than any other QB in the NFL.

Manning's arm strength is fine. I know you want to believe otherwise because it gives you more reason to believe you are 'right' that Denver made a mistake.

[vandammage13]

Because your comment suggested the NECK has a problem and is weak in nature. Which has been your ignorant stance for some time. You feel that Peyton's "neck" is weak, he's more injury prone because of it, and his "neck" (itself) is injured. You have stated many times that you are worried that the moment Manning takes a hit, that his "neck" is going to be re-injured. All of which is incorrect.

His NECK is not injured. Its a nerve located in the neck. A hit will not hurt him more than any other QB taking a hit. He's no more prone to injury than he would be without the nerve problem. The "neck" (itself) is not injured, and thus the comment about it being "attached by staples" ... only indicated that you feel his "neck" is weak. I commented on it being an "effort" of ignorance because you have been corrected many times on this, but refuse to accept that Manning is no more of an injury risk of the "single hit and he's out" than any other QB in the NFL.

Manning's arm strength is fine. I know you want to believe otherwise because it gives you more reason to believe you are 'right' that Denver made a mistake.

Really Rav...Neck or nerve in the neck...we're debating semantics here..

I know you want to believe that his arm strength is fine because it gives you more reason to believe that Denver made the right move and we have a shot at the SB...but his arm isn't the same.

[Ravage!!!]

Really Rav...Neck or nerve in the neck...we're debating semantics here..

I know you want to believe that his arm strength is fine because it gives you more reason to believe that Denver made the right move and we have a shot at the SB...but his arm isn't the same.

Dude.. there is a HUGE difference between having an injured "broken neck"... and having a nerve located in the neck. HUGE. Thats not semantics, thats completely different things.

As far as making the right decision.... we absolutely made the right decision. !00%, not doubt about it, not even a second thought, not one moment of doubt, made the right choice. Peyton's arm strength is fine, and has NOTHING to do with that decision being the right one. We aren't ready for the Super Bowl this year, but are a MUCH MUCH better team with him behind center. I'll ALWAYS ALWAYS listen to Mark Schlereth, who's been to a LOT of Denver practices, tell me that Peyton's arm is fine after he's watched him make all the throws (as well as bombing them 55 yrds in the air)...over your crying about how Peyton's arm "is not the same."

Each and every time I hear someone that knows football, talk about Peyton's arm strength...they all are saying the same thing "his arm is more than fine."

[MOtorboat]

Doctors, coaches, ex players, current players, executives, executives that are former players...

Nah...they are all just lying...right VanDammage?

[I Eat Staples]

I could buy this, except that I don't remember the Colts ever taking Manning out on deep Hail Mary passes while he was there.

Most teams that have starting QBs who can't throw a 70-80 yard hail mary will just try a hook and ladder or similar play.

[BroncoNut]

Even more normal to for a QB to lose distance after his neck is reattached to his body by a couple of staples.

Let's be fair. I think that's a bit of a stretch

[bcbronc]

You guys can bury your head in the sand all you want but clearly Elway and Fox want to get their man, Oz, starting at the earliest opportunity.

[TXBRONC]

Because your comment suggested the NECK has a problem and is weak in nature. Which has been your ignorant stance for some time. You feel that Peyton's "neck" is weak, he's more injury prone because of it, and his "neck" (itself) is injured. You have stated many times that you are worried that the moment Manning takes a hit, that his "neck" is going to be re-injured. All of which is incorrect.

His NECK is not injured. Its a nerve located in the neck. A hit will not hurt him more than any other QB taking a hit. He's no more prone to injury than he would be without the nerve problem. The "neck" (itself) is not injured, and thus the comment about it being "attached by staples" ... only indicated that you feel his "neck" is weak. I commented on it being an "effort" of ignorance because you have been corrected many times on this, but refuse to accept that Manning is no more of an injury risk of the "single hit and he's out" than any other QB in the NFL. I know you want to believe otherwise because it gives you more reason to believe you are 'right' that Denver made a mistake. Manning's arm strength is fine.


Rav it's still considered an injury. It didn't happen because he plays football but it is still an injury. Where Vandammage appears to be ignorant (possibly by choice) is that a doctor had clear him to resume playing. For whatever reason Dammage doesn't to grasp that fact. These doctor are not going intentually risk their careers by sued for malpractice. Also a doctor has come out and said Mannings is not at of re-injury by taking hits. Even if Manning wasn't dealing with this health issue he couldn't have lost some velosity on his passes. Elway's wasn't the same at 35 years of age as it was at 22. He was still a great quarterback. He's also just wrong about Favre. He also lost some velosity as he got older. Obviously he can't see it because he's a Tebowite. Sad.

[TXBRONC]

So you are saying the neck problems hasn't affected his arm strength?...I'm pretty sure Manning has said it has...

There was nothing incorrect about my statement (other than the obvious exaggeration part about the staples)

The lack of arm strength has probably more to do with his neck issues than it does his age....Why do you think Favre could still sling it at 40, or we still routinely see MLB pitchers throwing over 90MPH despite being WELL over 40?

Arm strength does not decline very fast with age, provided you stay healthy.

FYI a baseball is a sphere and a football is oblong and it's twice the size of a baseball. I just thought you would like to know that.

No Favre did not throw the football with the same velosity at 40 as he did at 22.

[catfish]

Rav it's still considered an injury. It didn't happen because he plays football but it is still an injury. Where Vandammage appears to be ignorant (possibly by choice) is that a doctor had clear him to resume playing. For whatever reason Dammage doesn't to grasp that fact. These doctor are not going intentually risk their careers by sued for malpractice. Also a doctor has come out and said Mannings is not at of re-injury by taking hits. Even if Manning wasn't dealing with this health issue he couldn't have lost some velosity on his passes. Elway's wasn't the same at 35 years of age as it was at 22. He was still a great quarterback. He's also just wrong about Favre. He also lost some velosity as he got older. Obviously he can't see it because he's a Tebowite. Sad.

just want to make the distinction that a Dr. saying someone is ok to play football, is not the same as a Dr. saying they are 100% back to where they were. I don't think Oz going in for a Hail Mary means anything a he has a stronger arm than Peyton ever did, but there is a distinct possibility that the nerve damage has left Manning with a slightly weaker arm. Luckily huge arm strength was never part of his game and he is picking teams apart on short to intermediate passes as well as he ever did, so really it is probably a non-issue for the most part

[TXBRONC]

just want to make the distinction that a Dr. saying someone is ok to play football, is not the same as a Dr. saying they are 100% back to where they were. I don't think Oz going in for a Hail Mary means anything a he has a stronger arm than Peyton ever did, but there is a distinct possibility that the nerve damage has left Manning with a slightly weaker arm. Luckily huge arm strength was never part of his game and he is picking teams apart on short to intermediate passes as well as he ever did, so really it is probably a non-issue for the most part


True but I didn't see a necessity in stating what is well known. Manning himself said his arm isn't 100% so why would I to state what is well known fact. If he had said nothing but it is known that he's in rehab it doesn't take a genius to figure out he's not 100%. Even if the nerve completely regenerates he still may not throw with the same velocity because of age. Elway lost some velosity as he got older.

Drew Brees has been one of the better deep ball passers over the last several years not because has a cannon for an arm it's because he is very good at putting the right amount air under a pass.

[catfish]

True but I didn't see a necessity in stating what is well known. Manning himself said his arm isn't 100% so why would I to state what is well known fact. If he had said nothing but it is known that he's in rehab it doesn't take a genius to figure out he's not 100%. Even if the nerve completely regenerates he still may not throw with the same velocity because of age. Elway lost some velosity as he got older.

Drew Brees has been one of the better deep ball passers over the last several years not because has a cannon for an arm it's because he is very good at putting the right amount air under a pass.

agree with everything you said, my point was mostly for clarification because that kind of seemed the point that van was trying to get across was that there was some deterioration due to injury, and the response was he was cleared by a Dr. I may have misread or misinterpreted though

[BroncoJoe]

A really stupid and misleading headline. He wasn't going to come in to "replace" Manning. He was going to come in for one throw if we had a chance for a hail Mary.

Silly to even argue about the article, IMO.

[tomjonesrocks]

Out of camp it was written Manning can throw about 45 yards downfield and that's it. Some have speculated it could lead to defenses "figuring him out" and "jumping routes". We'll see.

Either way its safe to assume Os can throw it farther.

Even Elway has said his arm strength faded at the end of his career. It sucks but it is what it is.

[Ravage!!!]

Out of camp it was written Manning can throw about 45 yards downfield and that's it. Some have speculated it could lead to defenses "figuring him out" and "jumping routes". We'll see.

Either way its safe to assume Os can throw it farther.

Even Elway has said his arm strength faded at the end of his career. It sucks but it is what it is.

Stink has said over and over again on the radio this week that he's been to many Bronco practices, and has seen Manning throw the ball 55 yrds in the air. Now that may be 45 yards down field if he has a 10 yard drop, I don't know. But 50+ yards in the air is more than enough to be a downfield threat.

[Ravage!!!]

Rav it's still considered an injury. It didn't happen because he plays football but it is still an injury. Where Vandammage appears to be ignorant (possibly by choice) is that a doctor had clear him to resume playing. For whatever reason Dammage doesn't to grasp that fact. These doctor are not going intentually risk their careers by sued for malpractice. Also a doctor has come out and said Mannings is not at of re-injury by taking hits. Even if Manning wasn't dealing with this health issue he couldn't have lost some velosity on his passes. Elway's wasn't the same at 35 years of age as it was at 22. He was still a great quarterback. He's also just wrong about Favre. He also lost some velosity as he got older. Obviously he can't see it because he's a Tebowite. Sad.

yes, it's an injured nerve, not a broken or injured "neck" due to a hit. Its not like he missed a season because of a vicious hit or landed on his head, thus breaking a neck bone. His "neck" is no weaker than it was in his prime. As you stated, I'm just making it clear that its NOT an injury that can be "re-injured" purely because he gets tackled or sacked.

And you are right. Farve obviously lost velocity on his passes as well. I guess it still comes down to the fact that some just don't want to accept that Manning, at this age, is MUCH better of a passer than a young QB that was here before....and will be a better QB at 50 than that QB will ever be.

[catfish]

yes, it's an injured nerve, not a broken or injured "neck" due to a hit. Its not like he missed a season because of a vicious hit or landed on his head, thus breaking a neck bone. His "neck" is no weaker than it was in his prime. As you stated, I'm just making it clear that its NOT an injury that can be "re-injured" purely because he gets tackled or sacked.

And you are right. Farve obviously lost velocity on his passes as well. I guess it still comes down to the fact that some just don't want to accept that Manning, at this age, is MUCH better of a passer than a young QB that was here before....and will be a better QB at 50 than that QB will ever be.

I dont think anyone could make the argument that the other QB was better than Manning. The only possible argument I can see is if Manning should be the 2nd highest paid QB in the league if his skills are diminished, but it isn't coming out of my pocket and you guys aren't near the cap so who cares

[Ravage!!!]

I dont think anyone could make the argument that the other QB was better than Manning. The only possible argument I can see is if Manning should be the 2nd highest paid QB in the league if his skills are diminished, but it isn't coming out of my pocket and you guys aren't near the cap so who cares

That would be a pretty silly argument since better players always get paid more money. We could always be at the bottom of the salary cap if we simply wanted to have the worst players at ever position, thus saving money.

[catfish]

That would be a pretty silly argument since better players always get paid more money. We could always be at the bottom of the salary cap if we simply wanted to have the worst players at ever position, thus saving money.

do you feel at this point that he is better than

Brady
Rogers
other Manning
Romo
Big Ben
Stafford

point being if $$ are paid to better players he should be better than all those guys. Once again it isn't my money so who cares, but the point could be made that if he is demanding 100% elite pay, but providing 90% elite skills

[Rick]

I think manning is still fine. He can't chuck it down the field as far as some other guys but he is still accurate as hell and smart. he made some errors in the Atlanta game but he still came out ok after settling down. He has completed 68% of his passes over the season.

If I followed play by play right he went 6-9, 45 yards with 3 picks in quarter 1. The rest of the game he went 18-28, 64%, 196 yards and a TD and a 96.7 QB rating.

The falcons threw some stuff at a rusty manning and an ill prepared broncos team that they just were not expecting, on the road, and it cost manning to throw 3 picks.

But if the falcons had manning all figured out and had his puny grand father arms all dealt with why did Manning still manage a 96.7 rating the other 3 quarters and the broncos score 3 TDs the rest of the game after that miserable first quarter?

The offense just needs time to gel. Have to remember not only is this the first season this offense and this QB are put together, the QB didn't play at ALL last year.

I am more worried about the fact that Manning is on pace to be sacked 40 times this year then whether he can pretend to be a QB he hasn't been his entire career and chuck the ball way down the field for deep bombs.

Manning has always been about smart choices, accurate passes, and having receivers that can catch and run good routes. It may just take some time.

[catfish]

I think manning is still fine. He can't chuck it down the field as far as some other guys but he is still accurate as hell and smart. he made some errors in the Atlanta game but he still came out ok after settling down. He has completed 68% of his passes over the season.

If I followed play by play right he went 6-9, 45 yards with 3 picks in quarter 1. The rest of the game he went 18-28, 64%, 196 yards and a TD and a 96.7 QB rating.

The falcons threw some stuff at a rusty manning and an ill prepared broncos team that they just were not expecting, on the road, and it cost manning to throw 3 picks.

But if the falcons had manning all figured out and had his puny grand father arms all dealt with why did Manning still manage a 96.7 rating the other 3 quarters and the broncos score 3 TDs the rest of the game after that miserable first quarter?

The offense just needs time to gel. Have to remember not only is this the first season this offense and this QB are put together, the QB didn't play at ALL last year.

I am more worried about the fact that Manning is on pace to be sacked 40 times this year then whether he can pretend to be a QB he hasn't been his entire career and chuck the ball way down the field for deep bombs.

Manning has always been about smart choices, accurate passes, and having receivers that can catch and run good routes. It may just take some time.

absolutely, even if Manning has lost something on the deep routes, he more than makes up for it on the short to intermediate routes

[Ravage!!!]

do you feel at this point that he is better than

Brady
Rogers
other Manning
Romo
Big Ben
Stafford

point being if $$ are paid to better players he should be better than all those guys. Once again it isn't my money so who cares, but the point could be made that if he is demanding 100% elite pay, but providing 90% elite skills

Sorry.... I don't believe anyone's salary is purely based on a sliding scale. 90% of HIS elite skills is still better than 90% of the NFL. When he is on his game, he's better than Romo, Big Ben and Stafford. Period. He showed it when playing against Pitt on opening night. So being "90%" of that level is absolutely worth his salary. To me, saying otherwise is just plain silly. As far as him "demanding" anything... I didn't see a hold out or a DEMAND at all. Getting paid the salary of which he is paid is different than you are making it out to be.

Right now, it would seem that Brees is the overpaid one. Or are we only basing salaries on a 1 game performance now...week to week? Because I SURE AS HELL didn't see the ridiculous comments about his pay after week one. If he played the entire game as the did 75% of the Atlanta game, we wouldn't be hearing about it now. It's an over-reaction to some bad reads. I've seen Brady throw 4 INTs in a game before...against the Chiefs. Things happen.

[topscribe]

do you feel at this point that he is better than

Brady
Rogers
other Manning
Romo
Big Ben
Stafford

point being if $$ are paid to better players he should be better than all those guys. Once again it isn't my money so who cares, but the point could be made that if he is demanding 100% elite pay, but providing 90% elite skills
I don't understand how you and others are coming up with these percentages.

Is there a scale or something I don't know about?
.

[slim]

Is any player's salary directly in line with their actual skill level? Or some vastly overpaid and some vastly underpaid? Contracts are funny that way.

[catfish]

Noone would argue that his pay was too much after game one because it was a great performance, had he done the same this week you wouldn't hear any complaints, he didn't. The worry now is who is going to show up next week most likely it will be the above average QB that he has historically been.

To say he didn't demand is ridiculous, he was being sought by at least 5 teams, he went to the one that gave him a chance to win and was able to pay him a huge amount of money to go there. You think the Broncos paid him 19Mil because they are nice guys? It is the number that was required for Manning to go to Denver, they don't meet it he goes somewhere else, that is the definition of a demand

Drew Brees is looking rough this year too, it could easily be said he is not living up to his contract, doesn't change the fact that right now only 2 games in Manning's numbers also don't justify his contract, doesn't mean it will continue that way, it wont. By the end of the year I expect him to be top 6 in passer rating, but if it continues as it has the last 2 games he will not have been worth the money.

[catfish]

I don't understand how you and others are coming up with these percentages.

Is there a scale or something I don't know about?
.

90% being slightly less than 100% no more no less. If I take out the numbers and just saying they are paying the 2nd highest amount in the NFL for a QB that it can be argued due to health reasons is no longer physically performing everything he used to dowould it be better.

I am not even trying to actually make this argument, more playing devils advocate

[Rick]

It is only 2 games, but to also add to the bit about jumping his routes because he can't throw far.

In 2009, the year before the reported arm weakening because of the nerve damage, Manning averaged 11.45 yards per completion. He averaged 7.88 yards per attempt.

This season, and I will take away that 71 yard TD to Demarious even though that play WAS made, he is at 10.07 yards per completion and 6.82. With the Thomas play he is at 11.49 per completion and 7.84 per attempt.

Is that REALLY that big of a drop off? Taking away the Thomas completion, even though I am sure he had plenty of short passes go the distance over his career, he is only averaging a yard less.

Is that REALLY that big of a loss?

[catfish]

Is any player's salary directly in line with their actual skill level? Or some vastly overpaid and some vastly underpaid? Contracts are funny that way.

That is kind of the point I am trying to make. I am not saying that the broncos shouldn't have signed him, or that the contract was a mistake, they should have and it wasn't. Simply saying it could be argued that Manning is being overpaid based on a VERY small sample that is most likely not going to be validatesd as the season goes on. No more no less. And even if he never hits 100% he wont be as overpaid as many in the league

[catfish]

It is only 2 games, but to also add to the bit about jumping his routes because he can't throw far.

In 2009, the year before the reported arm weakening because of the nerve damage, Manning averaged 11.45 yards per completion. He averaged 7.88 yards per attempt.

This season, and I will take away that 71 yard TD to Demarious even though that play WAS made, he is at 10.07 yards per completion and 6.82. With the Thomas play he is at 11.49 per completion and 7.84 per attempt.

Is that REALLY that big of a drop off? Taking away the Thomas completion, even though I am sure he had plenty of short passes go the distance over his career, he is only averaging a yard less.

Is that REALLY that big of a loss?

1 yard per attempt is actually kinda a big deal, but you cant and shouldnt take away the 71 yard run, .04 yds is nothing. The only argument that I am trying to make would be last year aaron rogers had 9.25 YPA Tom Brady had 8.75 Matt Schaub Had 8.49

7.84 would put him 10th as compared to a full season last year, and that isn't counting INT VS TD thus far

again I am just doing a devils advocate thig for the sake of discussion I think Manning was the right move, and if his current salary is what it took it was worth it. The Broncos have the money to spend

[Ravage!!!]

Noone would argue that his pay was too much after game one because it was a great performance, had he done the same this week you wouldn't hear any complaints, he didn't. The worry now is who is going to show up next week most likely it will be the above average QB that he has historically been.
Above average is being VERY conservative at the VERY least. I th ink you know you are choosing your words purposely on that.


To say he didn't demand is ridiculous, he was being sought by at least 5 teams, he went to the one that gave him a chance to win and was able to pay him a huge amount of money to go there. You think the Broncos paid him 19Mil because they are nice guys? It is the number that was required for Manning to go to Denver, they don't meet it he goes somewhere else, that is the definition of a demand
You are just being plain out blind. For one, he could have gotten MORE money from other places had he chosen to go. Everyone knew how much he was worth in salary. But he didn't come and hold out for an amount. He was paid the amount of money he was making prior to last season. Do you think Elway was going to insult him by giving a low-ball offer? Please. Call it what you want if it makes you feel better, but "demanding" is pretty ridiculous considering he could have gotten more money and didn't hold out for more.


Drew Brees is looking rough this year too, it could easily be said he is not living up to his contract, doesn't change the fact that right now only 2 games in Manning's numbers also don't justify his contract, doesn't mean it will continue that way, it wont. By the end of the year I expect him to be top 6 in passer rating, but if it continues as it has the last 2 games he will not have been worth the money.

This is absurd. So you base everything week to week, or game to game, or season to season. A great player isn't "worth" his salary if he has an off year? Wow. You try to make this out to be a "factual" statement, and in reality its not at all. The Saints are getting MORE Than their money back with Brees as their QB. Promotions, ticket sales, jersey sales, and TV games are more than paying for the money they are paying Drew Brees. To say that he has not been "worth the money" is ludicrous at best.


***EDIT. I'm sure tha twe just have two different definitions... or perceptions... or what "demanding" is. After reading this post, it came across as a lot more "cross" than I intended with typing. I feel its the wrong word to use considering Manning didn't choose Denver because of pay.

[topscribe]

90% being slightly less than 100% no more no less. If I take out the numbers and just saying they are paying the 2nd highest amount in the NFL for a QB that it can be argued due to health reasons is no longer physically performing everything he used to dowould it be better.

I am not even trying to actually make this argument, more playing devils advocate
So, um, you have no dog in this fight? :coffee:



Or no fight in the dog? :D

(Sorry - couldn't help myself.)
.

[Ravage!!!]

1 yard per attempt is actually kinda a big deal, but you cant and shouldnt take away the 71 yard run, .04 yds is nothing. The only argument that I am trying to make would be last year aaron rogers had 9.25 YPA Tom Brady had 8.75 Matt Schaub Had 8.49

7.84 would put him 10th as compared to a full season last year, and that isn't counting INT VS TD thus far

again I am just doing a devils advocate thig for the sake of discussion I think Manning was the right move, and if his current salary is what it took it was worth it. The Broncos have the money to spend

No.. 1 yrd is not kinda a big deal. But although I can appreciate what Rick is trying to show, comparing 2 games to a full season isn't really a good comparison. Not to mention, there are a TON more factors involved in this stat than the QB or how his arm is "feeling" that contribute to those stats. But the 1 yrd, after just 2 games, is absolutely not a big deal of difference when it comes to comparing "yrds per attmept"..even if it were a full season's stats. Maybe to some that want it to be, but I dont think it means squat when you take into account Manning's accuracy and football intelligence. Putting the ball on the mark, and to the right place is a LOT more "kinda big deal" than the yardage per attempt.

[Rick]

I know your only putting things out for discussion, as am I :)

The year that the colts played the saints in the SB was the year manning averaged 7.88 per attempt. I don't think that a yard less in a throw is that big a deal. The big deal is whether when he throws that yard less...or the yard more, is he hitting it accurately.

The point I am making, or trying, is that with Manning, his game has NEVER been about taking huge shots down the field, so I believe the media took a surgery, and 3 picks on the road against a good defensive cord in Nolan, and decided that Manning cannot throw long anymore and defenses will start to cut off all his short pass routes and have made it into an overblown issue where it just isn't.

As I mentioned earlier, getting into a rhythm with the offense, shaking the rust off, and figuring out pass protection, those are the issues.

[catfish]

Above average is being VERY conservative at the VERY least. I th ink you know you are choosing your words purposely on that.


You are just being plain out blind. For one, he could have gotten MORE money from other places had he chosen to go. Everyone knew how much he was worth in salary. But he didn't come and hold out for an amount. He was paid the amount of money he was making prior to last season. Do you think Elway was going to insult him by giving a low-ball offer? Please. Call it what you want if it makes you feel better, but "demanding" is pretty ridiculous considering he could have gotten more money and didn't hold out for more.



This is absurd. So you base everything week to week, or game to game, or season to season. A great player isn't "worth" his salary if he has an off year? Wow. You try to make this out to be a "factual" statement, and in reality its not at all. The Saints are getting MORE Than their money back with Brees as their QB. Promotions, ticket sales, jersey sales, and TV games are more than paying for the money they are paying Drew Brees. To say that he has not been "worth the money" is ludicrous at best.

I should have said at the very minimum an above average qb, if he gets back to anywhere near where he has been in the past he is top 5 easy.

If he didn't demand that salary from Denver , then the Broncos should have just paid him 10 Million and they would have got a hell of a deal. The fact is money wasn't the only consideration for playing here, but to say Manning didn't come in with a # that he required to play here is silly. Manning demanded his salary, any person who is courted by several companies makes their salary demands. If I go to a company where I work 60 hours a week I will demand a higher Salary than a company that I work 40. Or more salary from a company that has less chance to move up the corporate ladder, there are always other variables. Manning has a skill that is rare and in demand, taking all other varialbe in to account he is able to dictate what he needs to be paid to play. I am not faulting him


If Drew Brees has an off year it is one thing, he is the face of that franchise, he is only 33, he is not coming off a year where he was out for a whole year. If Elways skills started to deteriorate towards the end of his career he was still the face of the franchise and did not have the questions about major injuries. Manning did not play at all last year, the teams that bid on his services were all taking a chance that he would come back and play at or close to the level that he has historically played at. At this point it is impossible to know if he will. I would say it is likely, but if he doesn't they paid too much. I don't see what the uproar is about that statement

[Ravage!!!]

I know your only putting things out for discussion, as am I :)

The year that the colts played the saints in the SB was the year manning averaged 7.88 per attempt. I don't think that a yard less in a throw is that big a deal. The big deal is whether when he throws that yard less...or the yard more, is he hitting it accurately.

The point I am making, or trying, is that with Manning, his game has NEVER been about taking huge shots down the field, so I believe the media took a surgery, and 3 picks on the road against a good defensive cord in Nolan, and decided that Manning cannot throw long anymore and defenses will start to cut off all his short pass routes and have made it into an overblown issue where it just isn't.

As I mentioned earlier, getting into a rhythm with the offense, shaking the rust off, and figuring out pass protection, those are the issues.

I think it was an excellent point. I don't think the 1yrd per ATTEMPT is a big deal at all. Like I said, there are a ton of other factors that could be, and would be, involved as to the reasons of that stat fluctuating from year to year, and "arm strength" on either 7 yrd passes or 9 yard passes, isn't really even one of them. :salute:

[MOtorboat]

I'd say 'yes' to paying Peyton Manning his salary again every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[slim]

The money doesn't matter.

[catfish]

I'd say 'yes' to paying Peyton Manning his salary again every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

assuming he plays even close to how he has historically, and i believe he will I agree. He is paid the right amount for where he is and what was needed to get him here. When you have a monopoly on elite QB skills in free agency you are able to get what could be considered more than you are worth vs other elite QB's. Not faulting him for wanting it, not faulting the broncos for giving it to him they absolutely made a right call and a pretty low risk one at that, its not like Brady was available if Manning turned them down.

$10 a beer at a football game is overpriced, I would still pay it and be happy I did. I could bitch that a beer at a bar is $2, or that I can by a 12 pack for 10 bucks, but $10 beer is what is available and I want a beer, doesn't make it a bad decision to buy one. best comparison I could come up with

[catfish]

The money doesn't matter.

I agree, said as much in my first post I believe

[Rick]

Something else I am curious about is how exactly the media feels that teams aggressively cutting off short routes would work against this Broncos offense.

When they cut off the short routes vs orton it could work because Orton did not have the ability to read a defense like manning does, and take advantage of the weaknesses he sees like manning can.

With this team, if they cut the short game, are they not going to have a safety or 2 sitting back in case manning hits Thomas and he breaks a tackle or 2?

If they are going to sit a safety back and still double team Thomas, who is going to be 1 on 1 for manning to take advantage of?

Are they going to flood the short game with a bunch of CBs? Won't manning see that and make an adjustment and just hand off to Willis? is a bunch of CBs going to bring down Willis?

maybe they are going to double the wide outs and drop LBers into coverage in case Willis does get the ball, the LBers can chase him down? Wouldn't manning then take advantage of the LBers being in coverage then and Hit Tamme/Dressen?

I am not really a coach or football expert but i don't see how even flooding a short game against a line of scrimmage adjuster like Manning would even work without him taking advantage of it it in some way, even if it doesn't involve deep passes.

[catfish]

Something else I am curious about is how exactly the media feels that teams aggressively cutting off short routes would work against this Broncos offense.

When they cut off the short routes vs orton it could work because Orton did not have the ability to read a defense like manning does, and take advantage of the weaknesses he sees like manning can.

With this team, if they cut the short game, are they not going to have a safety or 2 sitting back in case manning hits Thomas and he breaks a tackle or 2?

If they are going to sit a safety back and still double team Thomas, who is going to be 1 on 1 for manning to take advantage of?

Are they going to flood the short game with a bunch of CBs? Won't manning see that and make an adjustment and just hand off to Willis? is a bunch of CBs going to bring down Willis?

maybe they are going to double the wide outs and drop LBers into coverage in case Willis does get the ball, the LBers can chase him down? Wouldn't manning then take advantage of the LBers being in coverage then and Hit Tamme/Dressen?

I am not really a coach or football expert but i don't see how even flooding a short game against a line of scrimmage adjuster like Manning would even work without him taking advantage of it it in some way, even if it doesn't involve deep passes.

It is going to be interesting to see what they do. They might try it until a team gets burned bad deep. I think you will see more of what they did last week, not showing anything until the last second, if the teams are capable of doing so. Going to be a pretty interesting year, don't know that any defense is going to do anything but keep themselves from getting blown out. I don't see Manning being stopped altogether, regardless of if there is a strength issue or not

[FlyByU]

After watching the game again I can tell you that Manning's arm is not as strong as it use to be but it is still very accurate barring the 3 int's in the last game. I think you will see the Manning we seen in the Steelers game vs. the Texans.

[catfish]

After watching the game again I can tell you that Manning's arm is not as strong as it use to be but it is still very accurate barring the 3 int's in the last game. I think you will see the Manning we seen in the Steelers game vs. the Texans.

I would tend to agree, maybe not as good as vs the Steelers(that was a pretty good game even for hi statistically), I think as the game starts to slow down even more for him, and he gets more used to what he is capable of doing he will not have another week like last week

[Chef Zambini]

Something else I am curious about is how exactly the media feels that teams aggressively cutting off short routes would work against this Broncos offense.

When they cut off the short routes vs orton it could work because Orton did not have the ability to read a defense like manning does, and take advantage of the weaknesses he sees like manning can.

With this team, if they cut the short game, are they not going to have a safety or 2 sitting back in case manning hits Thomas and he breaks a tackle or 2?

If they are going to sit a safety back and still double team Thomas, who is going to be 1 on 1 for manning to take advantage of?

Are they going to flood the short game with a bunch of CBs? Won't manning see that and make an adjustment and just hand off to Willis? is a bunch of CBs going to bring down Willis?

maybe they are going to double the wide outs and drop LBers into coverage in case Willis does get the ball, the LBers can chase him down? Wouldn't manning then take advantage of the LBers being in coverage then and Hit Tamme/Dressen?

I am not really a coach or football expert but i don't see how even flooding a short game against a line of scrimmage adjuster like Manning would even work without him taking advantage of it it in some way, even if it doesn't involve deep passes.manning will have more control at home, being able to audible.
non-verbal communication is NEW for his NEW teammates, this was part of the problem in ATL !
but PM was also far too eager to answer his critics and throw deep balls EARLY.
NOLAN anticipated that, PM made bad decisions and tried to force the issue (ego) instead of taking open targets underneath !
PM got schooled, but unlike PUNK QBs, he learned his lesson !
He will be SMARTER, this week, he has to be !
Our D will see their most complete oppponent this week too, and maybe the best offensive mind and gameplan in the leaGUE !
a win for our broncos this week would be monumental, heavy emphasis on the MENTAL !

[Simple Jaded]

Really Rav...Neck or nerve in the neck...we're debating semantics here..

I know you want to believe that his arm strength is fine because it gives you more reason to believe that Denver made the right move and we have a shot at the SB...but his arm isn't the same.
As if his arm has to be the same for it to be the right move. If Manning never played a down for the Broncos it was the right move. The sad part is the fact that you need justification for making a change at QB because when your QB is as bad as Tebow was a change at QB is a given.

This concern over his neck is just a steaming pile of pretentious bullshit, the Broncos are taking a risk that is well worth the investment.......

[Chef Zambini]

people who wan to argue that we should have kept TT over Pm are obviously dummer than a box of rocks and not worthy of any debate.

[Ravage!!!]

Teams always disguise their coverages, and try to move "at the last second" in order to fool the QB. Thats nothing new, that wasn't something that Altanta invented, and it wasn't something Manning has never seen before. IT all comes down to how well they disguise and how quickly Manning reads. 90% of the time, Manning wins that match. Just as he did against the best defensive mind in football, the DC in Pitt.

[Chef Zambini]

nolans ameoba front is nothing new.
Pm has seen it before.
but last sunday, PM was far too eager to prove he could still throw 20+ yard passes and his desire got the best of his mensa; it played right in to the nolan strategy.
last sunday, PM was more stubborn than smart. hopefully a little humility will pay dividends going forward.

[MOtorboat]

nolans ameoba front is nothing new.
Pm has seen it before.
but last sunday, PM was far too eager to prove he could still throw 20+ yard passes and his desire got the best of his mensa; it played right in to the nolan strategy.
last sunday, PM was more stubborn than smart. hopefully a little humility will pay dividends going forward.

That would be cool, if he was running an amoeba front.

[Ravage!!!]

nolans ameoba front is nothing new.
Pm has seen it before.
but last sunday, PM was far too eager to prove he could still throw 20+ yard passes and his desire got the best of his mensa; it played right in to the nolan strategy.
last sunday, PM was more stubborn than smart. hopefully a little humility will pay dividends going forward.


That would be cool, if he was running an amoeba front.

Yeah... not quite sure what the amoeba front has to do with anything .... yet. But its true, Manning has seen it before since it was derived to fool Manning.

[Chef Zambini]

nolan himself used the phrase amoeba !

[MOtorboat]

nolan himself used the phrase amoeba !

Well, he can call it what he wants...

The first two interceptions they were in a standard nickel, with four down lineman.

On the third, they were in a 3-3-5, with linebacker faking the blitz.

Neither were Belichek's amoeba.

[Chef Zambini]

Teams always disguise their coverages, and try to move "at the last second" in order to fool the QB. Thats nothing new, that wasn't something that Altanta invented, and it wasn't something Manning has never seen before. IT all comes down to how well they disguise and how quickly Manning reads. 90% of the time, Manning wins that match. Just as he did against the best defensive mind in football, the DC in Pitt.
it was the PATS who developed the amoeba front to confuse manning.
it is exactly wha you discribe without a 'title'
Nolan gave it the name amoeba, not me. hate on nolan, save your ravage rampage against anything i post for another conversation, we happen to be in aagreement on this one.

[Ravage!!!]

it was the PATS who developed the amoeba front to confuse manning.
it is exactly wha you discribe without a 'title'
Nolan gave it the name amoeba, not me. hate on nolan, save your ravage rampage against anything i post for another conversation, we happen to be in aagreement on this one.


You have your panties in a wad. I know where the defense came from, but the post you just quoted wasn't referring to you at all. It was referring to catfish's post on how defenses will try to do the same thing that Atlanta did by not moving before split seconds before the snap.