There are 109 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Would Peyton have been a better fit than Alex?

Mella is a Packard fan actin g like a niners fan. Lol no lie
Originally posted by Method:
Mella is a Packard fan actin g like a niners fan. Lol no lie

Peyton would have been a good back up
Originally posted by mella8:
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
1 SB in 14 years. Said it before, will say it again. 90 mill for a very very small chance of winning the SB./thread

Peyton will somehow come here and suddenly after 14 years be able to win the big one automatically. SOmething he has never done. 1/14 for the GOAT. Not taking away anything Manning has done during regular season, but still chances are just as good with Alex and our 75+ million we saved.


From a financial point of view, I completely agree. Was Peyton worth taking the risk, considering all the salary cap implications and the amount of players we would lose in the process ? Of course not. But then again, Peyton was always a short term solution. The point of getting him was to win now.

The question posed is whether or not Peyton would have been a better fit in our offense. Answering that question alone (not taking into account the cost effectiveness of it), I think the answer is yes. He's a better QB than Alex; he's smarter, more skilled, and more experienced. That doesnt take anything away from Alex, bc he's also very good and is playing lights out for us. But it's clear that Alex is a systems QB --- he's good at what he does based on his supporting cast. Peyton can get by with an average supporting cast.

As for the notion that Peyton has had limited success over his career, one could say the same about Steve Young. Steve only won 1 SB in a span of about a decade, but the reason why he's a beloved Niner is bc he ALWAYS gave us a chance to make it to the big game, and thats exactly what Peyton brought to the table. And thats why Harbaugh entertained the idea of signing him --- not that he guaranteed a SB victory, but on a 1;1 comparison with Alex Smith, the odds were greater that we would win the SB with Manning behind center than with Alex.

Now, based on the current makeup of the team, it makes sense to keep Alex bc with him, we have the ability to keep our defense intact and therefore you're committing MORE years of success with Alex than with Peyton. But in terms of a short term solution, I think Peyton coldve been great --- and I dont think anyone here would have been complaining if Manning was our QB right now.

Because Manning's 3 interceptions played big part in the loss this year, I'm sure plenty people would have been unhappy.
Originally posted by fastforward:
Originally posted by mella8:
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
1 SB in 14 years. Said it before, will say it again. 90 mill for a very very small chance of winning the SB./thread

Peyton will somehow come here and suddenly after 14 years be able to win the big one automatically. SOmething he has never done. 1/14 for the GOAT. Not taking away anything Manning has done during regular season, but still chances are just as good with Alex and our 75+ million we saved.


From a financial point of view, I completely agree. Was Peyton worth taking the risk, considering all the salary cap implications and the amount of players we would lose in the process ? Of course not. But then again, Peyton was always a short term solution. The point of getting him was to win now.

The question posed is whether or not Peyton would have been a better fit in our offense. Answering that question alone (not taking into account the cost effectiveness of it), I think the answer is yes. He's a better QB than Alex; he's smarter, more skilled, and more experienced. That doesnt take anything away from Alex, bc he's also very good and is playing lights out for us. But it's clear that Alex is a systems QB --- he's good at what he does based on his supporting cast. Peyton can get by with an average supporting cast.

As for the notion that Peyton has had limited success over his career, one could say the same about Steve Young. Steve only won 1 SB in a span of about a decade, but the reason why he's a beloved Niner is bc he ALWAYS gave us a chance to make it to the big game, and thats exactly what Peyton brought to the table. And thats why Harbaugh entertained the idea of signing him --- not that he guaranteed a SB victory, but on a 1;1 comparison with Alex Smith, the odds were greater that we would win the SB with Manning behind center than with Alex.

Now, based on the current makeup of the team, it makes sense to keep Alex bc with him, we have the ability to keep our defense intact and therefore you're committing MORE years of success with Alex than with Peyton. But in terms of a short term solution, I think Peyton coldve been great --- and I dont think anyone here would have been complaining if Manning was our QB right now.

Because Manning's 3 interceptions played big part in the loss this year, I'm sure plenty people would have been unhappy.


Yeah, but he's also one of the few QBs in this league that can recover from 3 INT and still give his team a chance to win .
Originally posted by mella8:
Yeah, but he's also one of the few QBs in this league that can recover from 3 INT and still give his team a chance to win .

You still trade to much on his past.
  • cciowa
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 24,057
Originally posted by fastforward:
Originally posted by mella8:
Yeah, but he's also one of the few QBs in this league that can recover from 3 INT and still give his team a chance to win .

You still trade to much on his past.
agree. who cares. alex would never put himself and the team in that position by throwing three first quarter picks in the first place. please retire this topic
Originally posted by Wodwo:


Looks like Manning does not have the arm like he had before. One of those were under thrown. The other was just bad read. He should know better. Not exactly spirals, kinda wobbly.
[ Edited by qnnhan7 on Sep 18, 2012 at 10:25 AM ]
No.
You also have to consider that Peyton Manning is costing the Broncos $50 Million per year. Who would you rather not sign, Navorro Bowman? Therefore a big NO!
Originally posted by MiamiNiner:
You also have to consider that Peyton Manning is costing the Broncos $50 Million per year. Who would you rather not sign, Navorro Bowman? Therefore a big NO!

no he's not
Originally posted by Garcia:
Peyton Manning isnt a west coast QB correct?

This is the part everyone forgets! Commentators last night brought this up that if Manning came here, he would want to run HIS offense. Alex most likely gave us the best chance to win THIS year...maybe Manning, next year but it's not worth that risk on any level if you ask me for all the aforementioned reasons!
Originally posted by mella8:
Originally posted by fastforward:
Originally posted by mella8:
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
1 SB in 14 years. Said it before, will say it again. 90 mill for a very very small chance of winning the SB./thread

Peyton will somehow come here and suddenly after 14 years be able to win the big one automatically. SOmething he has never done. 1/14 for the GOAT. Not taking away anything Manning has done during regular season, but still chances are just as good with Alex and our 75+ million we saved.


From a financial point of view, I completely agree. Was Peyton worth taking the risk, considering all the salary cap implications and the amount of players we would lose in the process ? Of course not. But then again, Peyton was always a short term solution. The point of getting him was to win now.

The question posed is whether or not Peyton would have been a better fit in our offense. Answering that question alone (not taking into account the cost effectiveness of it), I think the answer is yes. He's a better QB than Alex; he's smarter, more skilled, and more experienced. That doesnt take anything away from Alex, bc he's also very good and is playing lights out for us. But it's clear that Alex is a systems QB --- he's good at what he does based on his supporting cast. Peyton can get by with an average supporting cast.

As for the notion that Peyton has had limited success over his career, one could say the same about Steve Young. Steve only won 1 SB in a span of about a decade, but the reason why he's a beloved Niner is bc he ALWAYS gave us a chance to make it to the big game, and thats exactly what Peyton brought to the table. And thats why Harbaugh entertained the idea of signing him --- not that he guaranteed a SB victory, but on a 1;1 comparison with Alex Smith, the odds were greater that we would win the SB with Manning behind center than with Alex.

Now, based on the current makeup of the team, it makes sense to keep Alex bc with him, we have the ability to keep our defense intact and therefore you're committing MORE years of success with Alex than with Peyton. But in terms of a short term solution, I think Peyton coldve been great --- and I dont think anyone here would have been complaining if Manning was our QB right now.

Because Manning's 3 interceptions played big part in the loss this year, I'm sure plenty people would have been unhappy.


Yeah, but he's also one of the few QBs in this league that can recover from 3 INT and still give his team a chance to win .

Why are you still trying to pose as a niner fan? It's pathetic go back to your fudge packer board.
Originally posted by MiamiNiner:
You also have to consider that Peyton Manning is costing the Broncos $50 Million per year. Who would you rather not sign, Navorro Bowman? Therefore a big NO!

lol
Originally posted by JiksJuicy:
1 SB in 14 years. Said it before, will say it again. 90 mill for a very very small chance of winning the SB./thread

Peyton will somehow come here and suddenly after 14 years be able to win the big one automatically. SOmething he has never done. 1/14 for the GOAT. Not taking away anything Manning has done during regular season, but still chances are just as good with Alex and our 75+ million we saved.

Overrated regular season stat padder.

Glad he's out in Denver throwing picks and Alexander the Great is ballin.