cenj Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 You saw what happened with Favre in GB. If Manning signs a 5 yr contract -- which he will -- and he feels like he can keep playing past 2 years (again, he will barring injury), then Locker won't get the starting gig no matter what. There was an article the other day about being Manning's backup QB and how it is a terrible situation for a young QB. Locker isn't learning to run Manning's no huddle -- first off, no one else really can; second, it doesn't fit locker's strengths. The Manning deal is only worth it if we go all in for a SB in the next 2 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLocker10 Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Again, why are people putting a limit on Manning for 2-3 years? Seriously, someone please tell me why. Of course it makes sense if you imagine the "perfect" scenario where Manning is healthy, adapts quickly to a new team and is capable of stepping aside after a short number of years. But it's not going to be perfect. It's a lot more complicated than that. I seriously doubt that everything happens so neatly. Ditto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Again, why are people putting a limit on Manning for 2-3 years? Seriously, someone please tell me why. Of course it makes sense if you imagine the "perfect" scenario where Manning is healthy, adapts quickly to a new team and is capable of stepping aside after a short number of years. But it's not going to be perfect. It's a lot more complicated than that. I seriously doubt that everything happens so neatly. This is where you're over thinking it. We don't know what will happen in 2-3 years. All we know is that the Titans want to keep Locker. if he uses that time to get as good as he can then there's no way we can keep an aging Manning over Locker and odds are Bud won't be here to stop it. You saw what happened with Favre in GB. I saw exactly what happened in GB. The team saw Rodgers in practice and knew he was better than Favre at that point and they kept Rodgers when the time came. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TITANfb1 Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Ok now I'm with @reo. Folks are overreacting just a smidge. Overreacting??!! Hell i just robbed a bank, killed a cat, hijacked a hot air balloon and was getting ready to put on a meat suit. Who's overreacting? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmeade- Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 I knew I was right lmfao at people saying Manning wasn't about the money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLocker10 Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Manning wants 90M....60+M guarenteed in first 2 years... http://profootballta...s-old-contract/ I can feel Bud getting excited---or maybe second guessing that 60M signing bonus check....jk sort of... LOL Who wants Manning now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Manning wants 90M....60+M guarenteed in first 2 years... http://profootballta...s-old-contract/ I can feel Bud getting excited---or maybe second guessing that 60M signing bonus check....jk sort of... Wanting it in the first 2 years is a good sign that he knows he could very easily be cut or benched for a younger guy (Locker) in a couple years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmeade- Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Lol at giving this guy 60 million for two seasons, him coming off 13 neck surgerys and not played at all since 2010. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMJ Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 He can go fuck himself for that price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyrus Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 This is where you're over thinking it. We don't know what will happen in 2-3 years. All we know is that the Titans want to keep Locker. if he uses that time to get as good as he can then there's no way we can keep an aging Manning over Locker and odds are Bud won't be here to stop it. Claiming that we don't know what will happen in 2-3 years isn't a reason or rationale for believing that things will work out well. Just because "we don't know" doesn't mean that you don't consider the risk and options. You're assuming that everything will turn out well but you have no reason to believe so. Based on how everything has developed the last few days and indications on what Manning expects in his future it's perfectly safe to think that things won't be "neat and pretty" in 2-3 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmeade- Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Wanting it in the first 2 years is a good sign that he knows he could very easily be cut or benched for a younger guy (Locker) in a couple years. Yes that is a great sign reo. Lets sign him up and blow 60 million cap space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Lol at giving this guy 60 million for two seasons, him coming off 13 neck surgerys and not played at all since 2010. I'm not sold that he'll get it but the neck surgeries aren't an issue if there are no ill effects to his play now and there are clauses protecting you against re-injury. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pragidealist Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Again, why are people putting a limit on Manning for 2-3 years? Seriously, someone please tell me why. Of course it makes sense if you imagine the "perfect" scenario where Manning is healthy, adapts quickly to a new team and is capable of stepping aside after a short number of years. But it's not going to be perfect. It's a lot more complicated than that. I seriously doubt that everything happens so neatly. That goes for any other plan you devise. We may not be able to get a top DE to make the defense good enough for Locker to compete until he is in his prime. Locker might develop slowly, get hurt, will cj decline, will britt stay healthy. One thing is for certain, no matter what happens- it will be complicated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reo Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Claiming that we don't know what will happen in 2-3 years isn't a reason or rationale for believing that things will work out well. Just because "we don't know" doesn't mean that you don't consider the risk and options. You're assuming that everything will turn out well but you have no reason to believe so. Based on how everything has developed the last few days and indications on what Manning expects in his future it's perfectly safe to think that things won't be "neat and pretty" in 2-3 years. It won't be neat and pretty. Odds are Manning will want to keep playing and we've got a decision to make. That decision will be based off how Locker looks as compared to Manning. If he hasn't passed him or gotten close then that means he's not reaching his potential. If he is then it's an easy decision. Yes that is a great sign reo. Lets sign him up and blow 60 million cap space. Didn't say anything about giving him 60M in 2 years. We'll see how it goes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmeade- Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 I'm not sold that he'll get it but the neck surgeries aren't an issue if there are no ill effects to his play now and there are clauses protecting you against re-injury. Have you read the contract? If not you have no idea what potentially clauses there will be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.