Seahawks Insider

Morning links: Wooing Peyton Manning

Post by Eric Williams on Feb. 8, 2012 at 9:40 am with 41 Comments »
February 8, 2012 9:40 am
Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning against the Seattle Seahawks in the fourth quarter of an NFL football game in Indianapolis, Sunday, Oct. 4, 2009. The Colts defeated the Seahawks 34-17. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy)

In an open letter to his former teammate, Brock Huard of ESPN 710 Seattle provides a convincing argument for Peyton Manning landing in Seattle once the Indianapolis Colts ultimately decided to part ways with the aging quarterback in March.

Huard cuts the 32 teams down to seven, and ultimately argues the best landing spot for Manning is Seattle because of Pete Carroll and his commitment to winning, Tom Cable and the continuation of the improvement along the offensive line, a young and talented roster filled with emerging, Pro Bowl-type players, a strong home-field advantage and owner Paul Allen’s commitment to putting forth the necessary financial resources to winning a championship.

ESPN’s Mike Sando takes a closer look at the Seattle Seahawks unrestricted free agents, and says re-signing Marshawn Lynch and Red Bryant should be a priority for the team.

Rod Mar of Seahawks.com gives us his to 10 photos from the 2011 season.

Clare Farnsworth of Seahawks.com talks to Hall of Famer Steve Largent about Cortez Kennedy’s inclusion into the Hall of Fame.

Sean Jensen of the Chicago Sun-Times reports that the Bears have hired former Seattle offensive coordinator Jeremy Bates as the team’s quarterbacks coach and passing game coordinator, reuniting him with Jay Cutler.

Former Seattle defensive line coach Dan Quinn, now working as the defensive coordinator for University of Florida, turned down an opportunity to be the defensive coordinator for Tampa Bay.

Former Seattle quarterbacks coach Bill Lazor is a candidate to become Tampa Bay’s offensive coordinator. Lazor currently works as the offensive coordinator for the University of Virginia.

Scott Wolfe of the Los Angeles Daily News reports that USC head coach Lane Kiffin reached out to Seahawks assistant secondary coach Rocky Seto to see if he would be interested in returning to USC as the defensive backs coach, but he declined.

We know you love them. So here’s a look at Pete Prisco of CBS Sports’ first power rankings for 2012. The Seahawks come in at No. 20.

Rob Rang of NFLDraftScout.com has the official list of players invited to the NFL Scouting Combine in Indianapolis.

Categories:
Morning links
Leave a comment Comments → 41
  1. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Interesting read by Brock Huard.

    Maybe Huard, Carroll, and Allen can convince Manning to at least come out west and check things out.

    And just when I come back to reality Eric has to get the Manning talk rolling again. Lol.

  2. RDPoulsbo says:

    Way too much assumptions that he’ll just be able to play at anywhere close to the level he did before the injury. Then put him on a team with a completely different culture and no rapport with receivers like he did with Wayne. I still feel in the unlikely event it happens, it’ll be nothing but a disaster.

  3. And by disaster, you mean worse than TJ? Why would this not make sense? It changes nothing except shelling out more $$. I’m okay with that as long as we still draft a QB that JS/PC like… and work on our pass rush.

    Besides…an incentive laden contract? How is that a bad idea?

    Bring manning to SEA!

  4. *Manning. (Sorry sir)

  5. RDPoulsbo says:

    Here’s the thing. T-Jax may not be great, but he’s not a disaster either. People calling him such are overblowing the situation. Watch some Rex Grossman or Chad Henne if you want to know disaster. Manning has an entrophied tricep and some nerve damage in his throwing hand that will change his throwing motion and release and not for the better. That alone spells disaster before you even consider rapport with a new team.

    Bringing him in takes away a QB spot that could otherwise go to someone with a legitimate chance of developing into a starter.

  6. Dukeshire says:

    If Huard believes Manning coming to Seattle is a great idea, then I’m now even more comfortable in my feeling it’s a bad idea. It’s not simply a matter of losing money, it’s about crippling the franchise from realizing their potential. Whatever their next decision at QB is, it must be a home run. And someone who will be here for many years to come. The time for so called stop-gap there is over, and I believe that’s what Manning essentially would be.

    Thanks for the power rankings, E. Super valuable information.

  7. There are NO sure thing – Home run – guys out there available to us.

    Say what you want about Luck / RG3 – no promised

    Manning / Flynn same thing.

    Thats the deal – NOBODY knows.

    also, I am pretty sure everyone on here is in agreement that we only want Manning, IF HEALTHY. The team doctors will know whether or not to give him clearance and/or even make him an offer. What we all know is that JS/PC aren’t going to go after a guy that can’t help the team in their eyes. So if they go after him, check him out and sign him – I, for one will be very excited.

    But for my 2 cents – I actually am in favor of trading down picking up an extra #1 next year and going after Barkley. Of they unprovens he is the one I like the most right now.

  8. How is this any different than the Hasselbeck situation last off-season?

    While some would argue Matt had some left in the tank, he wasn’t PC’s guy, he was Holmgren’s. Manning built his legacy in Indy and so if what I believe is true about PC, he is patiently waiting to get his own guy, be it through this year’s draft or free agency (someone like Flynn).

    If there’s no one out there he’ll continue to put all the pieces of the puzzle together elsewhere, like he’s done with our OL and defense while having our stopgap TJ under center. I feel PC is staying the course and can’t be bothered to be distracted with all this Manning talk.

    But like Dukeshire said, the window is closing and we’ll have to pull the trigger on someone now (Flynn or take a flyer in the mid rounds of the draft) or next year (make moves to better our chances for his guy Barkley).

  9. Duke:

    I think “crippling the franchise from realizing their potential” is a bit inflamatory.

    If PM is healthy, how does that hurt your potential for winning? You draft a QB and let him sit under Manning for a couple seasons. That’s playing to win now and planning for the future at the same time. Are you for playing a rookie QB in his first season? How many prospects do you think can handle that straight out of college? Or do you draft a guy and let him gel under TJ’s tutalage?

    If your argument is for Matt Flynn, then I can understand that. But assuming we will draft a QB this year, I don’t see how bringing PM in hurts us.

    Again, if PM is healthy and is willing to accept incentive based salary, he wins games for us, gives us playoff hopes, gives the young guys playoff experience, and hands the torch off to our young QB after he’s won us a couple super bowls. :P

    RD: You’re making a lot of assumptions about Mannings health. I’m not presuming to know eather way what his status will be. But if he is healthy, I like it. Just like Flynn/Hasselbeck (and many more) sitting a young QB under PM and letting him learn would not be the worst thing in the world.

    TJ isn’t the worst thing ever. But is that really our standard? To not be the worst thing ever? Eff that, I want a good QB.

  10. RDPoulsbo says:

    That seems to be the case mach1na. PC talking about deemphasizing QB so not everything is on 1 guy was going on before TJ. It was something he was talking about with Matt when he was around and he actually had the ability to put his team on his shoulders and win games. That’s the flaw with Brock’s argument. Even if the team had a disaster at QB to the point where they’d have to push the panic button and go for a QB, it wouldn’t be a move like throwing money at an aging superstar.

    PC is still looking for his guy, but he’s being careful about it. That can be seen in the contracts given to both Whitehurst and T-Jax. Both of these guys only got short term deals to prove themselves without handcuffing the team to a long term anchor that weighs down the team.

  11. FleaFlicker says:

    Good comments from Duke and XC.

    I know everybody has concerns about Manning, but like some other folks have said, there’s no way the front office is even serious about signing him unless he completes a satisfactory workout in front of the coaches. If he can’t make throws, then move on. If can, then he has potential to be a difference maker.

    Manning + a guy like Portis or even Yates or we wait another year to draft a QB…that’s still building for the future. If we’re worried about the alpha dog not yielding to the young pup over time, his contract could be tied into his own starts as well as team passing performance for the season.

    And before everybody jumps on the Yates idea, think about Tom Brady’s development. As a rookie, Brady threw three passes. As a sophomore QB he started 14 games and threw for 3000 yds with an 85 rating. If there were never a tuck rule, 2001 would have been an unremarkable season for him. Now, Yates comes in this year as a 3rd string rookie and tosses almost 1000 yds in six games with an 80 rating. I’ll be the first to recognize that he was forcing the ball a lot, but the skill level is there. Who knows what the trade value on Yates would be, but it’s potentially a good risk/reward proposition.

    Fire away, gentlemen…

  12. Dang, that was my longest post ever!

    Just curious if we could gain a barometer on how people here feel about Manning coming to SEA. Could we do a poll? If we already have,my bad!

  13. Dukeshire says:

    Home run and sure thing aren’t mutually exclusive. That is, they may have to take a calculated risk to get the best QB for this team, rather than taking the perceived safe player. But no matter how they approach the decision, they damn well be right with whoever they decide on.

  14. Soggybuc says:

    Brock makes a good case, it’s not just Rice either theres also Miller, Baldwin, Carlson and Lynch to consider. that and how much would a Peyton Manning help Obo and a young cat like Lockette look? just Sayin…

  15. Dukeshire says:

    Cornett – I agree there’s some hyperbole in my comment. However, Manning is not healthy, and if they do indeed sign him, he will of course be the starter. Should he not return to health and something resembling his previous play, this team will be left where they are now (which is actually a step backward, as they would not have improved). Or worse, they are left without any clear direction at the most important position in team sports.

    Signing an injured player, who has not regained his health (on this case, the ability to throw at an NFL level) is a major risk. One I’d prefer they not take, looking several years down the road.

  16. Duke, I hear ya.

    My position is that I don’t know what PM’s heath is or will be–and I wouldn’t be keen on bringing him in unless he passed our teams’ physicals.

    You’re making the assumption that he will be injured or become injured and that because of that, we should stay away. If he’s not healthy when Indy drops him, fine, let someone else take that chance. But if he is healthy, why not? Every position in football faces injury risks. If he gets injured, he doesn’t have much gauranteed money written-in anyways. TJ or drafted QB or someone else comes in and does mediocre…which might be what we’re currently looking at anyways.

    I think we are agreed though, that if he hasn’t made significant strides in his recovery, let someone else hope and pray. I’m fine with that too.

  17. A nice argument by Brock about why coming to Seattle could work for Manning. Would it work out for the rest of the team? No doubt he would elevate a lot of players’ games, and it would be a good learning experience for many. However, I’d be concerned about it becoming the Manning show and turning into something of a distraction. There will be 52 other players on the active roster. I’d like to make sure that they were getting all the attention they needed, from the coaches and the fans.

  18. Dukeshire says:

    It’s a tough one, no question. But for me, it’s not like a Hasselbeck situation, where I presumed he would get injured again. Manning isn’t healthy right now. By every report I’ve heard / read, the nerve to his tricepts has yet to regenerate, which restricts his ability to throw the ball. In addition, there’s no rehab that he can do to expedite the process. It comes back when it comes back. So my concern is that they invest time and money into a player, that at best would be here for a fairly short period. Anyway… just my 2 cents.

  19. But it was OK for it to be the Lynch show? The Red show, Kam show. Nobody controls that but they crazy fans/media.

    I don’t care whose show it is. Let’s win! Thats what I want

  20. boycie99 says:

    Interestingly as per Adam Schefter the Cards have hired Frank Reich, Peyton’s QB coach for the past 6 years in Indy, as their QB coach….

    Kolb anyone ?

  21. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Does anyone really know the extent of Mannings injury? We can speculate all we want, but I doubt that anyone really Knows for sure.

    Reports saying this or that with respects to the severity of his injury and/or to what extent he will recover I take with a grain of salt!

    Most all qbs get injuried ( young and old ) at some point in their careers.
    So how can Manning really set this franchise back? That’s like saying that Jackson was the better option last year over Hasselbeck.

    Do you think Eric wishes that his Raiders should have not pursued an often injuried qb from New England because he might set the franchise back?
    No! Plunkett went on to help the Raiders win two Superbowls.

    We wouldn’t be given up picks for Manning. And we can still draft a future qb to be groomed by him. And if it doesn’t pan out so what!

    Because like BobbyK said, an 85% Manning is better than most starting qbs in the NFL. And I believe he will have a stronger drive to succeed than ever before to prove that he still is the best qb in the NFL. And for that matter to prove he is still the best in his family.

  22. Dukeshire says:

    Georgia – This may shed some light. He was cleared to play based on the fusion surgery having taken hold and healed. And according to his doctor, he could have played last Sunday, “… had the nerve to his tricepts regenerated…”. So, we do know some things with relative certainty.

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7534274/sources-peyton-manning-medically-cleared-resume-nfl-career

  23. Dukeshire says:

    As for how he could set this franchise back, I tried to detail that previously. And as I said, only an opinion. And Hass had Locker ready behind him, in theory, Seattle wouldn’t have a similar situation.

  24. Cornutt says:

    Duke:

    I hope my own two cents’ worth didn’t seem like an attack. I value your 2 cents worth…for what that’s worth. :P

    We’re going to hear a hell of a lot of conjecture about PM, but most sources seem to think PM can take a hit, but that his arm strength isn’t good yet.

    Here’s an interesting take on the situation that certainly makes it sound like he’s nowhere close. But still, I won’t put significant faith in media reports until teams have had a real chance to get a look at him whenever Indy cuts him loose.

    http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/1493/peyton-manning

  25. RDPoulsbo says:

    I had just read that boycie99. If you look at Arizona’s history of moves at QB, it does fit the pattern. In the past 20 or so years, the only QBs they’ve ever spent time trying to develop themselves are Plummer and Leinart. Kolb was a similar move with poor results. Manning would be trying to relive that Warner magic once again.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/59000/hmmm-cardinals-hire-mannings-old-coach

    I’d say go for it Cards! The longer they spend trying to avoid the hard work of developing talent themselves, the longer they will fail to achieve success in any sustaining way.

  26. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- What did Mannings doctor say 4 months ago when Manning said he felt fine and was expecting to play before too long?
    Things got really quiet after Manning said that. About the time Colts suck for Luck campaign started.

    And Locker ready behind Hasselbeck ? In a lockout shortened training camp year? The same Locker that you and some others said was not ready to be an NFL starter if ever. The same Locker that you said was overrated and you couldn’t understand why Washington fans thought he was so good?
    What changed your mind about Locker Dukeshire?

  27. Dukeshire says:

    I don’t understand your point about Manning. You’ll have to help me with that one.

    What changed my mind about Locker? Obviously his play. Lol. And the larger point about that situation vs what Seattle would have with Manning, is that if Seattle wants him, they will not have the luxury of “waiting” until after the draft to sign him. Tenn, because of the lockout, was able to draft their future, then sign his mentor, in a manor of speaking. Seattle would most certainly have to sign Manning, then also have to invest significant draft capital into a. QB. I don’t see that happening.

  28. This is what I want in a QB:

    http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/29900/kirk-cousins-impresses-with-speech

    The only game I saw of his was one in which he sucked, but this is the exact type of face of the franchise type player (in addition to being a good QB) that I want to add at this position.

  29. SeahawkFan12 says:

    Cousins backing up Manning is what I want, with TJack as “insurance”.

  30. My comment about “the Manning show…” It would dwarf the Lynch show, the Red show, or the Kam show. It would be all about him. People (coaches, players, fans) only have so much mental space for attention. The more that attention is filled up with the issues of one Hall of Fame but injured player and every detail of the success or failure of his comeback, the less goes out to the other players. If he’s healthy, and we draft or sign a QB for the long term, I can see the advantage. But if he comes and fails it could set the team back more than trying to grow our own QB.

  31. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Dukeshire- my point about Manning is that he felt good enough to play 3-4 months ago but mysteriously didn’t play for the rest of the season. Now we hear all of a sudden that he could play last Sunday. OK the doctors may be right However I don’t trust the way this has all played out so far this season. I could be wrong. Hopefully we will Know more in the next few weeks.

    About Locker is that his play was very similar to what his play was at Washington. His completion percentage was around 52%. Not very good. However he has a knack for leading his team and putting them in position to win when the game is on the line. Something that Luck has yet to prove because he had much better college players around him.

    If Seattle does or doesn’t sign Manning how does that effect who they may sign or draft for their future qb?

  32. Dukeshire says:

    Where I disagree with you, is that it’s not what Manning is saying, it’s his doctors. He had surgery in September and his doctors didn’t clear him to play until last week. They are the ones who said he could have played last Sunday (i.e. he was cleared to play). If I were listening to what Manning said, then there might be some ambiguity. But his doctors have been clear.

    I’ve already admitted Locker surprised me with his play. But to say Luck is better than him simply due to the players around him is foolish, wih due respect. I’m not denying Stanford is / was more talented, but I am saying Luck is FAR more accomplished and NFL ready, due to his own abilities, independent of the talent around him.

  33. jake535i says:

    Good point by boycie99. If they were really interested in Kolb last year, he can be had for a heck of a lot cheaper this year if the Cardinals sign Manning.
    The hype will be less, won’t cost any picks if he’s released and whatever team signs him has much more leverage in negotiating a more reasonable contract after his lacklustre performance last year. If the price is similar to Jackson, why not?

  34. Back to the Cousin talk. I saw him play in only one game, the first vs Wisconsin. MSU won and Cousins sucked. He might be a good pick, can’t say. If we go the draft route my vote based on what I’ve seen is for Foles. He has critics too but he’s looked good in the games I witnessed.

  35. Dukeshire says:

    For what it’s worth, I too like Foles. I believe after the Ariz / Stanford game, I referred to him as the “poor man’s Luck”. Yeah, I’ll stand by that

  36. Speaking of Arizona QB’s not sure why all of a sudden Ostweiller is getting talked about – I don’t remember him being good – at all!!

    Foles I think is decent – Not sure why he was talked about during the early part of the season and then went down hill (as far as talk went)

    It will clearly be interesting going forward from here!

  37. RDPoulsbo says:

    I like Foles more than Cousins, but I don’t think he’ll be there when Seattle picks in the 2nd round and he’s way too much of a reach in the 1st. After Seattle picks, there’s still teams that need a QB like Denver. No, I don’t buy that Elway’s onboard with Tebow. Plus, you have the Washington and Cleveland picking again and one of them is not going to get RG3. If they want him, I think they’ll need to trade up to get him. I do like Cousins, but not as a starter this year and he might be there in the 3rd round.

    As for Manning, his agent admitted last week that no one knows if or when the nerve damage will heal. People who have recently witnessed him throwing say he doesn’t look anywhere near ready. There’s just too many red flags here.

  38. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I would be happy if we pick either Still or Upshaw with the first pick, and if they have already been picked try to move down and perhaps choose Tannehill.
    If we can’t move down then pick a guy like Decastro, Kirpatrick, or best player instead of reaching for a defensive front seven prospect if Still or Upshaw have already been picked.

  39. GeorgiaHawk says:

    Still and Upshaw.

  40. I hear all this talk about everyone wanting Manning to come out here, but Manning has the ability to go where ever he wants. Again, why would he want to come to Seattle, because of our TE’s and OL, come on. I don’t think he wants to come out West and if he did, it would be to Frisco or AZ. Remember his brother on draft day, I think there’s something with this family about staying on the East coast. Also, if Manning is healthy, why would the Colts let him walk, how embarressing would that be for them and a slap in the face to their fan base if he went somewhere else and rocked it. Manning is the Colts obviously, we saw that this year. Why would they let him walk just for Luck to come in and try to do his best Payton impersonation? That spells disaster. I guess you could relate it to the Montana situation, but the the 9er’s had a bad ass team still, the Colts do not. All I can say is I’m on the F L Y N N to win train. All aboard. Go Hawks.

  41. GeorgiaHawk says:

    I don’t think Manning wants to come out here and play also. I just hope he doesn’t pick Arizona or the 49ers.

    Flynn would be great to have along with a drafted middle round qb.

    One more year of not drafting a qb or picking up a highly regarded free agent qb will possibly set this franchise back despite the other improvements to the team.

    The fans are going to get restless half way through this season if the FO doesn’t at least find a qb that can compete for the starting spot. Imo.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0