Why would anyone suppose that unless they're just being hypothetical? I don't think Manning is anywhere near being healthy enough to keep on playing so, I don't see the point in arguing about far-fetched hypotheticals. But then...I'm not the thread police, so have at it.
too late. every response you've made to this thread has been an argument against a far-fetched hypothetical. we all know that the texans' brain trust wouldn't even entertain the idea of a fully-healthy peyton manning.
http://blog.chron.com/ultimatetexan...ng-is-single-the-texans-should-try-to-mingle/ Cutting out the excessive verbal padding to hone in on his 3 points. This is almost a laughable point, seeing as Peyton's chances of returning to "prior form" are somewhere between 1% and 0.0001% If I were exploring any Manning option, criteria #1 would be a live demonstration that he can throw a 65 mph football again. #2 would be that he can throw 30 times without his arm falling off. I really do not believe that his accessory nerve has recovered or will. Manning in his prime was a Marino-like statue. Schaub wasn't a track star, but he was capable running the boot. Our offense utilizes that on about a third of our passes. Manning is the literal definition of a pocket passer. Seriously. Try to visualize Peyton running a bootleg offense. So way to go Solomon, your two major points about Peyton > Schaub in truth are actually Peyton <<< Schaub. Fail. This point is all well in good....but you can't bring a guy of Peyton's stature into the fold without shutting down Schaub and taking in massive risk. Peyton won't sign on unless it's going to be his team, his system, his role as on-field OC. If this were playstation, great, but it's not. You don't blow up Kubiak's entire offense on a wing and a prayer that Peyton will defy astounding odds and return to his prime.
It's easy to sit back and say "Oh yeah, Peyton Manning is a better QB, therefore Texans + Peyton = Superbowl!" But it's just not-that-simple... there is no "for sure" fully-healthy Peyton Manning (even with doctors clearance it's still a risk)... and then there's the money factor... the age factor... and how he would fit in with this staff. It looks like you're oversimplifying this issue in an effort to basically find justification to get rid of Schaub or rip on the front office. Like ima said, this hypothetical exercise is a waste of time. Yes, in a bubble, a fully healthy Peyton Manning is better than Matt Schaub. That's about all we can concede to you here, because everything else is just us spit balling from our computer chairs.
you're using every possible extreme that favors your stance to make your point. let me ask you this...let's assume that peyton is healthy. let's assume that they have to "blow up kubiak's entire offense" and give peyton any supposed power he wants. do you still think there's any way in hell that we don't run away with the AFC South every single season he is here?? quit acting like there's a chance that manning would ruin our team. looks like solomon must have been gleaning my posts for his column.
Kubes should talk peyton into coming here for league minimum, thus still keeping Schaub, because texans are superbowl front runners.:grin: /dreaming.
no. once again, i like schaub. certainly wouldn't commit to him for the next 7 years like you would, and i think he barely makes the cut of the top 15 qbs in the league, but i don't have a problem with him. he's serviceable to good, and a distant distant cry from great. we are talking about upgrading to possibly the best quarterback of all time. on a super bowl caliber team, whose window we are currently in. "how he'd fit in" is a question that, if you listed every nfl player in the league, peyton manning and drew brees would be at the bottom of that list and classified as "completely unnecessary to even consider worrying about".
So basically your argument boils down to this: Even though Peyton Manning isn't healthy, I'm angry because (IMO) the Texans front office wouldn't go after him if he WAS healthy. I don't know, man. It just seems like an odd hill to plant your flag on. Kind of like being angry with the Texans because you don't think they wouldn't trade AJ for a 1993 version of Jerry Rice.
i agree with card. the only real question, which is HUGE, is "is he healthy". if peyton is healthy and 90% of peyton of old, being concerned about his ability to run a bootleg seems pointless. he manages amazing offenses. And if our style has to come to him a bit, that's fine. he might not have been much at bootlegs, but his offenses were unstoppable when he had a solid run and play-action game. That said, even if Peyton was 100% completely healthy, clearly back to his old self, given a clean bill of health by the doctors, etc., etc. the Texans front office is extremely unlikely to go after him. they just don't seem to make those types of moves. why, i don't know? QB remains the biggest ?? position on the team. All the talent in the world, which they now finally have, doesn't matter if they don't improve at that position. Schaub is an improvement, but also not if he's not healthy. i'm not angry about it. if they have a better solution to solving the QB issue, that's fine. I just don't PERSONALLY believe that solution is more seasoning for Yates, or fingers crossed on Schaub. I could be wrong, especially about Schaub, who throws in some healthy seasons every once in a while, but would feel a lot better if they had a Jeff Garcia with the Titans esque backup. Not that you're likely winning a superbowl then, either, but you certainly could. Jeff Garcia with the Titans in his first year on this squad, and we probably beat Baltimore, and its not a stretch to put them in the Superbowl, given Baltimore played NE so close.
You want him, he wants you, everyone is willing to make the deal...... And pay him with what cap space? You've got to wheel and deal every nickle just to re-sign your the significant contributors that define your team and that is probably losing Mario Williams. thread is ridiculousness
This is where the argument falls apart. I can't relate to someone who "barely" has him in the top 15. That means he's mediocre at best. Which he is not. Putting him barely in the top 12 is pushing it, barely in the top 10 is definitely more sensible. What you're saying simply doesn't add up compared to the facts. Peyton Manning, in this current situation (health, age, contract, etc), is not more valuable to this franchise than Matt Schaub. Sorry, that's just how it is. We're rolling with Matt, and Peyton isn't coming here (and rightfully so for both parties), so get used to it.
don't understand....so if i have him as the 13th or 14th best qb in the league, i'm nuts, but if i have him as the 12th, i'm perfectly sensible? ummm...ok. brady, brees, rodgers, manning, manning, roeth, rivers, stafford, matt ryan, vick, romo, cam newton. there's 12. left out of there are andrew luck, dalton, flacco, cutler. luck is a no-brainer to rather have than schaub, but i don't want to have to hear whining about how he hasn't even played yet. anyway, i have schaub 13th regardless, which is "barely in the top 15". why is that so crazy?
I'm not sure why you guys think Shaub is elite. He was having a less than stellar year before his injury. His accuracy seemed not as great as previous seasons. I don't think top 15 is a huge stretch at all. Also the argument that he can't run a bootleg is ridiculous. So what? If you have a healthy Manning with Andre and Foster then this offense would hum with the most vanilla of offensive play calling. Of course that is a huge if. You do not consider it until you are absolutely convinced that he is ready to go.
and yet, like i said, you are offering counter-arguments to mine. i guess we are both planting our flags on odd hills.
that picture doesn't even make sense here. it's cool to use since you obviously are unable to form an argument to what i just said though. guess it just hit you like a brick wall that schaub "barely makes the top 15 qbs". no problem. sorry i don't have a bunch of clever pics at my disposal to post when i don't have a counter-argument to somebody.
