Thursday, February 2, 2012
Mythbusting: Redskins and Peyton Manning
By Dan Graziano
INDIANAPOLIS -- Somebody wanted a Washington Redskins post. Hey, so do I. But when nothing's going on, nothing's going on. It hasn't been this hard to find Redskins topics since the lockout. But after I got back from the Madonna news conference, I found this item from the Washington Examiner, which attempts to shoot down all of the silly reasons people are coming up with to insist that either the Redskins won't pursue Peyton Manning or that he wouldn't want to play for them.
It's well done, especially insofar as it addresses flimsy, eight-year-old speculation that Manning wouldn't want to play in the same division as his brother. (Seriously, people. Do you think that's really still true if it ever was? Both guys are pretty well established at this point.) But this is the one I really want to address specifically:
5. The Redskins don't do business this way anymore » This one is true. But isn't the clock ticking on the Shanahan regime? And doesn't the owner have an itch he's dying to scratch?
I don't think the clock is, actually, ticking on the Mike Shanahan regime. He's entering the third-year of a five-year contract, and the aforementioned owner has, to this point, kept his contractual promise to remain in the background and allow Shanahan and Bruce Allen to build the team their way. There's nothing to indicate that's about to change.
Furthermore, signing Manning wouldn't represent a reversion by the Redskins to their "old way" of doing business. It would, if Manning is healthy, potentially represent the best possible short-term solution to their biggest short-term problem. They need a quarterback, Rex Grossman and John Beck aren't good enough, and even if they were, the two of them together aren't half as good as Peyton Bleeping Manning.
And yes, quarterback is a long-term problem for the Redskins, too. Signing Manning wouldn't help that. But if Shanahan can't find his franchise quarterback in this year's draft or free-agent market, what's so wrong about filling the Redskins' many other needs via those avenues and bringing in one of the best quarterbacks in the game to hold the place until they find the franchise guy?
All I know is, it's a weird world when people are thinking up reasons their team shouldn't want Peyton Manning. If he's healthy, he's going to help someone win games next year. Why wouldn't you want it to be your team?