daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 ... who would it be? I stole this from the Dolphins board. My answer is definately PEYTON MANNING. Peyton almost never gets sacked because he gets rid of the balls so fast. I would put my money on the fact that he has the ball out of his hands faster than anyone in the league. Think about it. The reason, we know McNabb can scramble is because he holds onto the ball along time and has to move out of the pocket. Same with Vick. Manning just drops back - throws. So he is an offensive linemans friend. Put it this way: Manning - Sacked 6 times this year McNabb - Sacked 24 times this year (this is 3 less than BLEDSOE) Vick - Sacked 34 times this year (this is 7 MORE than BLEDOE) So as you can see, Manning steps back - chucks it - TD.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 With what they're paying Manning, the Colts will soon BE just Manning on offense. We'll see how he does without the receivers, RB's, and O-line he's been accustomed to.
daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Author Posted December 1, 2004 With what they're paying Manning, the Colts will soon BE just Manning on offense. We'll see how he does without the receivers, RB's, and O-line he's been accustomed to. 140350[/snapback] Another Manning hater. IMO Manning makes recievers who they are. Do you think Harrison and Wayne would be as good on another team that doesnt have Manning calling AUDIBLES and exploiting the defenses weakness's. Think about it. Manning audible to tell the recievers where the holes are going to be in the coverage.
Astrobot Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I'll take Julius Peppers at DE. I was going to take John Abraham, but I figure we'll get him in FA. My other thought was Kenechi Udeze or Ed Reed. I'm picking younger guys so I have that position locked up longer.
ICE Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 With what they're paying Manning, the Colts will soon BE just Manning on offense. We'll see how he does without the receivers, RB's, and O-line he's been accustomed to. 140350[/snapback] he will succeed.
daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Author Posted December 1, 2004 he will succeed. 140361[/snapback] No doubt.
daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Author Posted December 1, 2004 Wow. You guys are going young instead of proven. Im totally opposite. I go PROVEN.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Another Manning hater. IMO Manning makes recievers who they are. Do you think Harrison and Wayne would be as good on another team that doesnt have Manning calling AUDIBLES and exploiting the defenses weakness's. Think about it. Manning audible to tell the recievers where the holes are going to be in the coverage. 140356[/snapback] Harrison, definitely. Wayne is a good #2 behind Harrison, and Stokely is a great #3. James is a great RB. Glenn, Saturday, and Diem at LT, OC, and RT, are excellent players at the most important positions on the O-line. Manning is a great QB. Together they ALL make up that offense. The problem is what Manning is getting paid. It will be tough to keep that offense together, and do what they need to do which is improve the defense.
daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Author Posted December 1, 2004 Harrison, definitely. Wayne is a good #2 behind Harrison, and Stokely is a great #3. James is a great RB. Glenn, Saturday, and Diem at LT, OC, and RT, are excellent players at the most important positions on the O-line. Manning is a great QB. Together they ALL make up that offense. The problem is what Manning is getting paid. It will be tough to keep that offense together, and do what they need to do which is improve the defense. 140367[/snapback] You can find anyone to do good at #2 when you have Harrison and Stokely on the team. They sign Harrison, let Wayne go and stick josh reed for all we care in #2 and he will do just as good. Manning tells him on the line where to go to get open - he follows directions - he is open.
daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Author Posted December 1, 2004 Brett Favre 140371[/snapback] Your joking right? Hasnt he been thinking of retiring since like 1999 ... he probably will at the end of this year.
Alaska Darin Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Your joking right? Hasnt he been thinking of retiring since like 1999 ... he probably will at the end of this year. 140375[/snapback] Nobody said what year he had to be from. From what I've seen this season, dude can be productive for 5 more years. Of course, I'd like to have GB OLine, too.
daquixers Posted December 1, 2004 Author Posted December 1, 2004 Nobody said what year he had to be from. From what I've seen this season, dude can be productive for 5 more years. Of course, I'd like to have GB OLine, too. 140379[/snapback] Oh. Your speaking off in his prime. IMO Brett Favre plays a GUARANTEED 6 games of easy defenses. 2 games a year against Minnesota, Chicago, and Detroits defense. I would love to play those defenses 6 times - every year. Yeah Green Bay's 0-line is wicked.
Fezmid Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I'll take Julius Peppers at DE I agree -- Peppers. The guy has a bunch of sacks, a couple of INTs, some FFs. If we had a dominant DE (sorry, Shoebel), our D would be unstoppable. It seems like pressure on the QB is the only thing we're not getting consistantly right now. CW
BRH Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 Right here, right now? Without caring about next year? One guy to get us into the playoffs this year, or at least to run the table? My first reaction is it's got to be a quarterback. And I'm not a Bledsoe hater. My team, right or wrong, and all that. But that's the position that can stand the most improvement right now. BUT. Continuing in the right here, right now vein, any quarterback who comes in will have to learn the offense and get in sync with the other ten guys and the offensive coaches. That takes time and we don't have it. So my considered reaction is that it has to be a big-play defensive guy, either a sack-happy end or a punishing safety. That's why I think Astrobot has it right on with Julius Peppers or Ed Reed. Either one of those guys would take a damn good defense and make it great. And that's what we need in these last six weeks.
BADOLBILZ Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 antonio gates 140364[/snapback] I second that one. It makes me sick to think the Bills missed out on that guy when he was basically free for the taking, and even sicker that AJerk Smith signed him. Gates is a game changer with more talent than Gonzalez, Shockey or Winslow. Without Gates, the 2004 Chargers are not good AT ALL on offense. With him they are dominant.
Like A Mofo Posted December 1, 2004 Posted December 1, 2004 I'll take Julius Peppers at DE. I was going to take John Abraham, but I figure we'll get him in FA. My other thought was Kenechi Udeze or Ed Reed. I'm picking younger guys so I have that position locked up longer. 140357[/snapback] I agree with Peppers. He is young and can dominate a game, and would round out te Bills defense.
Recommended Posts