Tavern talk: What’s Peyton worth now?

Manning's biggest item might be in peaking too early for the season. With Freeney taking some games off to be ready for the stretch run, do they have any kind of room for even the slightest letdown at Peyton's position?

so if he would have sanchez cleveland would have quinn, anderson & sanchez on board, an 0-3 record with fans clamoring for sanchez. with the talent on hand sanchez would be damaged much like couch was. sanchez is succeeding due to the talent surrounding him not vice versa.
pulling the plug on a qb after 6 total games with the franchise damages the player as he knows he's no longer trusted by the organization & the organization as it is seen as weak & indecisive.

ron-disagree Sanchez has got it however you define it and he's going to be around a long time.

Parcells said the difference between a good coach and a great coach is the QB (or something like that), and I agree with him.

Rebuilding 101 who's my quarterback? Mangini knew he didn't have one...he tried to trade both, but he thinks he's smarter than everyone else. He doesn't want a big time QB. He wants the glory.

Manning is unreal. For all his success I like the way he carries himself. Very likable guy. I'm a Pats fan and I believe Brady is the better player, but at that level does it really make any difference? Could you really be wrong with either of them?

I'd say this...Manning has made a ton of money. Guy's like Brady and Michael Jordan have not always held a gun to their teams head. I'd be more impressed if Manning doesn't want an eye popper for a contract. He deserves to be the highest paid, but you can do that with grace IMO.

Mangini is truly awful at personnel evaluation (among many other things). He was the one who pushed the Jets to draft Schlegel in 06 (3rd rd) and of course, Gholston last year.

Good riddance - hey Cleveland, between Sanchez and Mangini, let's call it even for the '85 WC.

I may not be an NFL personnel guy, but to me it looks like the Browns completely blew it in the first two rounds of the draft. Center was probably not the best position to draft in the first round, especially when you had an opportunity to draft at 5 (with practically no talent on the roster!). 2nd round, 2 average-talent type receivers? Robiskie was supposed to be a contribute-early kind of guy, and he's last on the depth chart. Veikune, a DE moved to LB? Nice project, but as is obvious they need TALENT. Project players are for winning teams, I thought. Good luck, Browns fans, with Mangenius.

Mangini is truly awful at personnel evaluation (among many other things). He was the one who pushed the Jets to draft Schlegel in 06 (3rd rd) and of course, Gholston last year.

Good riddance - hey Cleveland, between Sanchez and Mangini, let's call it even for the '85 WC.

No reason to think Tom Moore will leave. He has said before that he will stay around as long as somebody is willing to have him. And considering how Jim Irsay went out of his way to bring him back this year and he is Peyton's only OC, I think they will want to hold onto him.

Mudd is gone though, he has said so.

Mangini is truly awful at personnel evaluation (among many other things). He was the one who pushed the Jets to draft Schlegel in 06 (3rd rd) and of course, Gholston last year.

Good riddance - hey Cleveland, between Sanchez and Mangini, let's call it even for the '85 WC.

I agree with ron.

You could put any quarterback on that team right now and they'd suck.

Careful, Lombardi. You're veering into Peter King Territory.

Couple of years back, ole' Peyton tossed six picks against the Chargeros and the NFL's Version of Peter Gammons Meets Sgt. Schultz spent the first two-thirds of his column defending Archie's boy.

Johnny U he ain't. Johnny U never will he be.

Lacks the titles. Lacks the production in the final 120 ticks. Lacks the respect the league's NON-PR Division.

Great pitchman. A Dan Marino with a ring. A Fran Tarkenton who didn't choke every time.

But, Lombardi, don't go into Peter King Territory. That kind of crap may get you a kiss on the fanny in Canton, but you'll lose any and all respect of the readers who have a clue and understand the game.

Hey Mike
about the Manning thing...
I'm all for that to pay the guy what he's due, he has sure deserved it, but there is one thing bothering me about Payton that's been in all articles on NFL I have read from the start of the season.
Now, I'm from Serbia, a small country in the Balkans, in Eastern Europe, and probably all the hype about the guy and all the NFL in particular is in smaller degree than in the USA, so I think we can see things more clearly.
Payton has a record in the postseason 7-8. For a QB making so much fuss, I think he should probably have at least more wins than losses. If we count out the Superbowl season he is 3-8. In the last two years his postseason was cut by a large underdog in both times (namely San Diego). In the first games no less.
Kinda make you go with Philip Rivers (3-3 in the postseason, but we all remember last season don't we?).
Now don't get me wrong. I think that Payton Manning is the best player that touched the damn ball, I just think that the hype about him is way out of proportions. It is not fair to the rest of the players and QBs.
And about the money he is going to get, how much it amounts in the end it is still not enough for the excitement we are getting every Sunday :-).

And about the Browns...
No matter who is the QB, even if it were Payton, they are in trouble enough as it is.
Their problem is in organization, not in the players. They should be looking for the solutions elsewhere, besides their roster.

Greetings from Serbia, and stay the best as you always have been.

I'm not a colts fan so I'm not wound up over what kind of deal Peyton gets except in how it will impact other QB deals. But let's face it, the running game and defense have never carried this team so what would they be without him. Regardless of whether he's Johnny U or not (Mark) he is what makes this team into a perennial contender so how can they not give him what he asks? If they don't, what other teams would (Snyder and Davis are always lurking)? What I wonder is if he'll go for the all out money or realize that to win more Super Bowls he'll need to keep it reasonable so other areas of the team can be addressed.

All I can say about the Browns is...those poor Browns fans.

@Bokee

I don't think I need to break down why teams win and lose in the playoffs for you, but Manning's post-season record is a reflection of his teams. Ask Drew Brees, John Elway, Tom Brady, Dan Marino, etc. about their success with a good team or lack of success with teams that could play D or run the ball. And most of Manning’s early post-season record is a reflection of the post-season success of New England. One team’s dynasty is another teams failure.

@Mark

I suggest you enjoy the Manning era while it lasts because I get the sense you're taking it for granted. As a fan of football, it doesn't get much better. How often does a QB of Manning’s calibre come along? Unfortunately I have never had the opportunity to watch Johnny U play football, but I appreciate he was an amazing player who achieved some very great things in football. However, the success Johnny U had experienced has no reflection on what Manning can or can't do on the football field. You might want to let Unitas go and enjoy some of the best players to play the game since 1974.

Lombardi, you are seriously down on Quinn. Maybe the lack of decisiveness and accuracy that he has shown is a reflection of the lack of confidence he has because of the terrible coaching job he has been witness too. I commented on this before, If he didn’t split pre-season reps, had the confidence of his coaching staff, and maybe a consistent WR2 that he could build a rapport with instead of the poo-poo-platter rotation they’re giving him, he might be playing better. I doesn’t help that Cleveland traded away Winslow, his favourite target from last year. The guy has been setup to fail. Sanchez was not the right pick for this team either Lombardi. I agree with Ron.

I'll just echo that PM - which is what is homies call him - is really, really really good. There is no hype involved involved with this Manning, he was, is and will be the one of the elite. As for him not winning enough in the playoffs, Football is a team game and PM does not play defense. As for who is the best right now, I'm not sure but you can count on the usual suspects in PM, TB and Drew Brees (who is relatively new to the club). The difficulty in judging QBs is that it should not be based only on winning, but a number of attributes that are system-specific. The QB or the system is no different than the chicken or egg argument and good QBs normally stay in one system so it is impossible to truly judge. In other words QB play analysis does not occur in a vacuum, or any other positions for that matter, but especially QBs.

I believe in the top 3 for these reasons.
Manning for his consistent numbers and excellence. Enough said.

Brady because his 2005 and 2006 seasons were played with what on other teams would be a collection of number 3 receivers - and he still put up top numbers. His videogame-like 2007 season only confirmed his skill.

Brees because he has been sucessfull with two totally different seasons and his confirmation - as Brady's 07 is occured last year.

Eric Mangini thinks he's smarter than everyone else. Also, he is always trying to be Bill Belichick. Maybe I'm overthinking here, but is Mangini setting up both Quinn and Anderson to fail in order to play Rattliff? Bret Rattliff is his guy, and he insisted to include him in the Sanchez trade.

Quinn has played bad, but you have to include the poor playcalling, the horrible right side of the line, and the insistence on playing Cribbs as the number 2 WR and the lack of running game into the mix.

I'm no Mangini fan, but the QB situation there would put any coach between a rock and a hard place. What would you do? Continue to play a guy who was not producing? Good way to lose your locker room. Sit the guy your FO blew draft picks on? Good way to lose your job. Either way, Mangini is screwed.

I think Peyton needs to be smart about his new contract. He has already made more money than he will ever need through contracts and endorsements. He now has to think about winning more SB's and in order for that to be a possibility he has to give the Colts salary cap relief by signing a contract in the top 10 but not top 1-3.

Mark

I think you were a little to hard on Manning; but that was the best post that I can remember reading.

mcgarnicle79,

I enjoy many a player post-1974. The late-Walter Payton, Lawrence Taylor, Anthony Munoz, Jonathan Ogden, The Steel Curtain, John Madden's Raiders, Buddy Ryan's 46 in Chicago, the terribly underrated Harry Carson, the Hogs in D.C., John Hannah, Montana to Clark (even though Montana's a punk), Zorn to Largent, Jerry Rice and John Taylor, Kellen Winslow, Danny Fouts, John "Pre-Coke" Jefferson, the so damn smooth Mike Haynes and Rod Woodson, the terribly underrated Derrick Brooks and Warrick Dunn, New England revivalists Corey Dillon and Fred Taylor, Randy Moos and Wes Welker, Reggie White, Bruce Smith, Walter Jones and Cortez "Give That Man Some Damn Respect" Kennedy, Kenny Anderson, Curtis Martin, and the uncatchable, unstoppable, unbelievable Barry Sanders and his understudy, Marshall Faulk.

And that's just the cast I can remember over the past 30 years!

I just don't think Peyton Manning hung the damn moon. In fact, I think Peyton Manning has failed to maximize his abilities and not done everything he could do. I feel the same way about Brett Favre, whose very name I no longer wish to hear in this ESPN-saturated world. (Forgot to add Marvin Harrison, Isaac Bruce, and Art Monk, a trio that never gets the proper kudos, above.) I also consider Dan Marino a loser - even though I attribute a good portion of his failure to a lack of defense and/or running game in Shula Land - and I hardly think much better of Jim Kelly, who gagged four times in the big game.

(Hines Ward, however, played big and blocked like an offensive tackle in December and January. Knows how to catch a football, too. Superb player. Same for Troy Brown in New England and Arthur Shell and the late-Eugene Upshaw in Oakland.)

Fact is, Peyton Manning's daddy showed more guts than his offspring. And his brother, who plays in that second-half wind tunnel in Jersey, has as many rings on his finger that matter. (Don't forget Phil Simms, who navigated that cesspool for a decade. Another clutch player. Roger Staubach, Jim Plunkett, and Terry Bradshaw - pain in the posterior that the latter will always be - also knew how to grip a football when the money was on the line.)

Peyton Manning seems to come up small, smaller, and smallest in the big games. Even in his Super Bowl year, Manning was known more for his less than stellar play in the AFC title game and Super Bowl. Hell, the Colts defense delivered in that quagmire that was the Super Bowl.

I don't dislike Peyton Manning. I just think he's overrated. I feel even more strongly about Brett Favre and his ESPN Promotional Team.

My list of finest QBs goes like this:

1. Johnny U. - The Man who made the league. And the two-minute drill. And tossed a touchdown pass in 47 straight games. Like Don Hutson for receivers and Jim Brown for running backs, the barometer against which all others are measured then, now, and always.

2. Otto Graham - Played in 11 title games. Went home the best eight times. Ruled the All-American Football Conference. Then went with his team's namesake to the NFL and owned that, too. How good was Graham? He retired in 1954. In 1955, Paul Brown, after struggling with a series of Graham's successors in camp, goaded Graham, then 34, out of retirement. Good idea, too. Browns went 10-2 and crushed the Rams, 38-14, in the title game for Graham's final crown.

3. Joe Montana - A punk. A Notre Dame grad. Undersized. Arrogant. And still a damn fine quarterback. Four Super Bowls played. Four Super Bowls won. Denver fans still wake up screaming his name. Made Elway look foolish, which wasn't hard. Stubborn. Had a superb coach in Bill Walsh. Had a litany of great receivers. Betcha forgot Freddie Solomon. Everyone ignores(d) John Taylor. No one remembers Russ Francis. Just a couple of clowns named Clark and, oh yeah, Rice. Roger Craig, superb pass-catcher out of the backfield. Tough, smart line. Steve Wallace and a cast of characters.

4. Sammy Baugh - Was the league in the '30s and '40s. Played a game that featured 20-yard in-routes and drawing plays up in the dirt. Did it without a face mask and never lost his charm. Tougher than Bobby Layne, no slouch himself, and a better quarterback, too. In this era of numbers, Baugh's name is forgotten. In this era of The Greatest Ever being yelped every 10 seconds, Baugh completed 70.3 percent of his passes in 1945. Even Ike wasn't that precise! (I know, I know. Google Ike to find out for which team he played.)

5. Tom Brady - Dislike listing active players among the all-time greats. Elway would be a good cop-out here. Problem was, Elway pulled a "CraigMorton" too often in the first decade of his career. Brady has the rings. Three out of four. The Giants turned him into a pinata a couple of Super Bowls backs. His wife (ahem) may finish the job. But facts are facts. Brady won with a bunch of No Names. Brady came into the league a sixth-round afterthought. Can't see Brady rising much higher on this list. Additional failures may even knock him off it in place of Elway. But Brady beats Elway and Bradshaw and stat freaks Favre, Marino, and Fouts for this spot.

Your comment regarding Mangini's inability to accurately evaluate talent resonates with us here in Seattle. Seahawk president Tim Ruskell has consistently shown an inability or unwillingness to select good players. Trading a 1st round draft pick for Deion Branch? The man's played 2 or 3 games over 3 years. Continuing to pass on a quarterback in the draft when the team had no one in the wings to groom behind an injury-prone Hasselbeck? Passing on an offensive tackle in this year's draft where there were a number of elite candidates in light of an injured and over-the-hill Walter Jones? Passing on all of the good running backs in last year's draft knowing that Mora wanted to emphasize running the ball? And in light of the team's dearth of wideouts in 2008, Ruskell publicly stated that he didn't know that T.J. Houshmanzadeh was even on the [free agent] market?

For my part, I would like like to see you do a piece evaluating each teams capacity to pick up free agents and draft well.

James Mitchell

P.S. Do keep up the good writing and your willingness to objectively present issues in the NFL. Too many of the would-be pundits have neither your knowledge of the game nor a capacity to address important issues, as opposed to human-interest glop or why someone's fingernails are too long.

meateater

He told you what he would do. Draft Sanchez.

Mangini trained under Belichick who twice went the unpopular route; and brought in a new QB displacing an established vet.

The best time for Mangini to do that would have been early in his contract. He was not going to get fired after his first draft.

He clearly either can't evaluate the position or doesn't have the guts to react to what he sees.

You read Peter King for awhile and he says things you know he didn't think of and after awhile you figure out he's nothing but a mouthpiece for favored league sources.

He's a gossip columnist.

He's compromised and you can't believe a word he says.

Mark you are a complete idiot who obviously doesn't know a damn thing about football. Tell me any qb in the history of the league that didn't get their ash handed to them at some point in their career. You make it sound like because Manning had adversity that he sucks at qb which is just moronic. You say stupid things like "Lacks the respect the league's NON-PR Division" and other drivel yet has anyone ever heard anyone in the NFL diss Manning, say he's not the best, not build their whole game plan to stop Manning or not have full respect for him? Not a chance. Since your football IQ is so low do you even remember what the Colts were like before Manning came on board? Do you remember when the Colts were one of the worst teams from the late 70's until the mid-90's when Manning showed up and turned the program around? Of course you don't because you're so stupid you can't see the qb forest for the trees. The fact of the matter is moron mark, if both Brady and Manning were to (hypothetically since you're too stupid to know what reality is) compete for the starting qb job for any team Manning would beat him out every single time - hands down!

Here's what I'll say in regards to Brady. Cassel won 11 games last season and has show himself to be garbage so far this season. I guarantee you Matt Cassel on the Colts wins 5-7 games at most.

Regarding his contract, I hope Peyton doesn't go overboard so that the Colts maintain enough space to be competitive. As for Manning in the playoffs, he could have done better, but last season the defense let him down. The year before that Vinatieri let him down. Also, the fact that the Colts (12-4) played on the road at San Diego (8-8) is a joke. The current system should only be used for playoff qualifying, not for playoff seeding. Teams should be reseeded based on record once playoff berths are finalized. That an 8-8 team plays a home playoff game in the first round against a team that one FOUR (1/4 of a season) more games than them is a travesty.

Mr. Choke,

I'm glad that I have the wisdom of an individual who calls me:

1. "a complete idiot";

2. "moronic"

3. "stupid" (three times); and,

4.. "a moron."

Why, I cannot wait for your next in-depth, knowledge-laden post about my mother or sexual orientation. Perhaps you'll just tell me I'm a member of Peyton Manning's "death panel" or wink and belch "you betcha." One waits in eager anticipation for your intellectually stimulating response.

Mark,

I can understand what you're saying, but I don't think it is worth a lot. It is impossible to evaluate a player independent of his team. Player v. Player comparisons are essentially meaningless when evaluating the aggregate worth of a player. They are really only the least bit insightful when you're talking about individual skills that can be quantitatively assessed (Player X is better at completing passes under pressure than Player Y). Anything else is pure speculation. So comparing Manning to Johnny U (or Tom Brady, or Archie Manning, or Eli Manning) is ridiculous. But more importantly, it is completely asinine.


The fact is, with Peyton Manning, the Colts are 12-4 contenders. The decade before they built a team around him, they were basically the Lions. So, like Lombardi is saying, dude deserves to get paid. Now how is it that Mr. Lombardi is going to " lose any and all respect of the readers who have a clue and understand the game" for saying so? I would venture to say that only readers who have absolutely no clue or understanding of the game would say otherwise.

Spectators of any sport are certainly allowed to pick teams or players to root for or against for any arbitrary reasons they please. But if you are going to say you don't like a player with obvious and proven talent, acknowledge that you're doing it because he is simply a player that you have chosen to root against for an arbitrary reason. Don't try to make it sound like a well informed argument by excessive name dropping. No one enjoys witnessing ill-founded intellectual masturbation.