Originally posted by GEEK:
Definitely Manning - but I don't think that is the right question to ask.
Why haven't the Colts been more aggressive at finding an upgrade to their backup QB position in the past 6-odd years? The Patriots are similar to the Eagles in that they have been able to find substitutes for Brady and still play at a somewhat high/decent level - Cassel being the main one. Now they have Ryan Mallett, who I think is the perfect fit as that developmental QB.
Now the Colts have done what exactly? Jim Sorgi for over a half decade, drafted Painter in the 6th round, and signed a vet QB that will be 39 years old in December.
Piss poor front office work for not locking up a capable backup. Hell, they could have gotten Shaun Hill for a late round pick.
How many straight games did Manning play in? There isn't a need for a backup with you have the best quarterback in the league in his prime. Once you go to your backup quarterback(for teams with star quarterbacks), you're screwed. Rarely do you find a team in the league with a backup who should be a starter.
Originally posted by ninermaniac:
Watch them get Luck :(, talk about sucking at the best time.
I think they might trade that pick if they got it. It might be our best chance to get him.
You think so? I don't think there is any way they pass on Luck. If Manning could play another five years, that might be a wise decision as a short-term gain. Although they'll probably be losing the next Peyton Manning over the next fifteen seasons..
This fan site is dedicated to the 49ers and their fans. It is in no way affiliated with the NFL or any of its teams. All teams and players mentioned on this site are registered trademarks of the NFL. The use of any team names, words, trademarks, logos or photos have been used for descriptive purposes only. The content and information from other sites is the property of their respective owners. Player and team photos used with permission from USA TODAY Sports Images.