Browns Interested In Peyton Manning?

[candyman93]

We’re an 0-16 team. 

 

Hell, why not? It’s impossible for things to be worse than they are right now.

[INbengalfan]

45 minutes ago, candyman93 said:

We’re an 0-16 team. 

 

Hell, why not? It’s impossible for things to be worse than they are right now.

Aas harsh as it is, it could always be worse.  The front office could get 5 year extensions, Haslam has his assets frozen but can't sell the team, and Kizer is the only QB not on IR.

[buno67]

I think this might be the football guy the browns need in their front office.

Have heard and read things that his time with Denver that he took a lot mentals notes on how Elway ran and did things because he wanted to end up like that one day.

Also with his father and brother, he has a lot of connections to a lot of football people that might make it easier when it comes to looking for people to hire

[Kiltman]

It seems inevitable he gets back into football, I think he'd probably not have to jump at this chance.

But it'd probably be the biggest role/power he'd get

[Small Town Values]

His accuser will pop out of the woodwork again - if the Browns hire him?

Particularly in this current climate. 

Edit... Just ran his name through a news search, & that same accuser, has been active as recent as the end of last month. 

[BrownLeader]

On 11/19/2017 at 12:55 PM, FourThreeMafia said:

Oh god....

Look, I dont presume to know how good Peyton would be as a GM/executive, but I dont know why people just blindly assume he would be good just because he was an amazing QB.    I think people just assume it because of Elway's success.

This seems like a very Haslam kind of move though....hire a high profile name that gets people excited and talking....even though they havent really proven anything in regard to running a team.

If Peyton really is interested in getting into a GM type role, he would be better off waiting for something better to open up.     Hell, who knows...with the way the Colts are going, that job might open up in the near future, although Im not sure if working for Irsay is much better than working for Haslam, but at least the history is there.     Not sure why he would take the risk of going to work for perhaps the worst owner in the league as his first GM job.   Wait a few years and some other opportunities will come along.

He basically only needs to pick the right QB with the #1 overall and lure some good offensive coaches. There isn't an easier opportunity to look smart in league right now.

23 hours ago, y*so*blu said:

I too saw the thread title and thought they wanted him at QB.

Front office ... hmm. Well, we know he has a great football mind, he makes good commercials, and he looks pretty good in a suit, but is he really cut out for an executive position? Does he have any kind of history there? This seems totally out of left field.

Kind of like John Lynch.

[MWil23]

The Browns do it, get bashed. Deservedly so because the Browns are inept.

The 49ers do it (with Lynch), and get lauded for being "geniuses".

At least be consistent people.

[BrownLeader]

On 11/19/2017 at 1:46 PM, bzane said:

Probably will be a seamless transition. Peyton was planning for this, back in his playing days- part QB, part executive! Seems like he might be good at contract negotiations, based on his barnstorming tour selling himself to the highest bidder, playing one team off another.

More like this....

[lancerman]

9 minutes ago, MWil23 said:

The Browns do it, get bashed. Deservedly so because the Browns are inept.

The 49ers do it (with Lynch), and get lauded for being "geniuses".

At least be consistent people.

Well the 49'ers won't do it anyways. The Browns may do it.... but there will be the sense that they got a big name who has no experience as an executive who will be a football guy trying to change or run an analytics department with a coach who hates them. Also prepare to exclusively draft offensive skill positions

[MWil23]

1 hour ago, lancerman said:

Also prepare to exclusively draft offensive skill positions

Considering the Browns have under drafted them since 1999 I don’t think that I will be too upset about that

[43M]

9 hours ago, MWil23 said:

The Browns do it, get bashed. Deservedly so because the Browns are inept.

The 49ers do it (with Lynch), and get lauded for being "geniuses".

At least be consistent people.

I wasnt sold on the Lynch hiring either.  Still not.   Time will tell, though.

I would hold the same stance with Peyton Manning. Not saying he cant be good....I just think people are assuming he will be a great GM based on what kind of player he was.

More than anything, it just seems like a move Haslam would make because it SEEMS like a good move, not because he is bright enough to know whether it actually is or not.   

[MemphisEagles]

Well if this gets him to stop doing those awful commercials with Mr. Accidental Racist

[The Gnat]

The one good thing about having Peyton has a high-up exec is that the owner would lose a little bit of power in terms of decision making. Now, it might not be that way, but I don't think Peyton would stay around long if that wasn't the case as why would he ever need to work again if it isn't a good situation? Basically, everyone knows Peyton Manning, and we tend to think he's got a good football IQ (and nothing would really say otherwise). If it works at GM, who knows, but if people hear the the the owner overrode him, people wouldn't be happy at all.

[SteelKing728]

On 11/19/2017 at 12:11 PM, HorizontoZenith said:

You're not getting my point.  It's not that they took a tight end instead of a QB, it's that they wasted a first round pick on a tight end when they don't have a confirmed good QB to throw to him. 

My issue is with the fact that they spent a first round pick on a tight end.  You don't spend first round picks on tight ends period, much less when you're a team trying to build itself up to be a playoff team for the first time in 20 years. 

And no, I shouldn't complain about them not taking a QB instead of Garrett.  Defenses win championships, and Garrett has elite defensive potential.  Pass rushers have literally won Super Bowls for teams.  They're CRUCIAL building blocks to getting to the playoffs and winning in playoffs.

How many times has a tight end been a crucial element to a team getting into the playoffs?  It doesn't happen.  Tight ends (and receivers for that matter) are luxury positions.  If you take a tight end in the first round, you deserve to suck.  If you take a receiver in the top 20, you deserve to keep sucking.  The Browns have done both in back-to-back drafts. 

 

There has to be special instances where this isn't true though.

so you're picking top 10, and have needs at OT and WR. The first 9 picks have been OT. In this case, do you take OT#10 or the general consensus best WR in the draft. For arguments sake, we'll say the team OTC has that WR as their general consensus best WR on their board too.

Or better yet, what about once in a generation type talents like Randy Moss? Would you pass on him in the first?

Lastly, in the past 10 years, to when Indy won it, we've had:

Reggie Wayne

Marvin Harrison

Santonio Holmes

Heath Miller

Robert MeachemMeachem

Hakeem Nicks

Percy Harvin (1st round pick traded for him)

Demaryius Thomas

Be part of Superbowl winning teams. The whole top 20 part you added is nonsense  just to help your agenda.

In general, it may not be a good idea to go WR/TE in the first, but we've seen teams win championships even after doing so.

[MacReady]

Just now, SteelKing728 said:

There has to be special instances where this isn't true though.

so you're picking top 10, and have needs at OT and WR. The first 9 picks have been OT. In this case, do you take OT#10 or the general consensus best WR in the draft. For arguments sake, we'll say the team OTC has that WR as their general consensus best WR on their board too.

I'd try my hardest to trade down.  If I couldn't trade down and there was another position (DE, DB, LB, RB, QB) that was as highly rated as the WR, I'd take that position first.  No exceptions.  Top ten picks are supposed to be the future of your team, and I don't want the future of my team to rely so heavily on every other position.

Quote

Or better yet, what about once in a generation type talents like Randy Moss? Would you pass on him in the first?

The Randy Moss players of this world help my point more than hurt it.  Randy Moss is a generational, all-time talent that managed to play for five different teams.  He was a diva, and he never won a Super Bowl. 
 

Quote

Reggie Wayne

Marvin Harrison

 

30th and 19th overall.  Not horrible.  Personally, I would have taken Ray Lewis at 19 instead of Marvin Harrison. 
 

Quote

 

Santonio Holmes

Heath Miller

 

25th overall and 30th overall. 

Quote

 

Robert Meachem

Hakeem Nicks

 

27th and 29th

Quote

Percy Harvin (1st round pick traded for him)

Lol, what?  Seahawks win that game if Harvin was a Bronco.  Vikings drafted him.  You can't even be seriously thinking this is a good example to help your argument. 

Quote

Demaryius Thomas

22nd.

I'm surprised you didn't bring up Jerry Rice.  Rice and Harrison are the only two examples I've ever found that were worth the first round pick when looking at what else was available.  They just so happen to both have been top 10 receivers all time.  So if you know for certain, for absolute certain, that you're getting a top 10 all-time receiver, you go ahead and spend that top 20 pick on them.  Otherwise, there's literally always a better option within five picks of that receiver. 

Considering that DEFENSE and LINES win Super Bowls and nobody has ever won a Super Bowl because of WR play...

Cooper?  I'll take Scherff or Leonard Williams. 
Kevin White?  I'll take Beasley, Gurley or Waynes.
Devante Parker?  I'll take Gordon, Armstead, Peters.
Watkins?  I'll take Mack or Matthews. 
Evans?  I'll take Barr or Lewan. 
Beckham?  I'll take Donald, Shazier, Mosley or even Martin.  Hell, I'd still take Clinton-Dix over Beckham just because of the BS. 
Blackmon?  I'll take Kuechly or Gilmore.
Floyd?  I'll take Brockers, Irvin, Kirkpatrick, Melvin Ingram. 
Green?  Give me Peterson. 
Julio Jones, with 22 less touchdowns than Nelson (who missed a season) over the span of his career?  Think I'll take Tyron Smith or Watt. 
Heyward-Bey?  I'll take Raji.
Crabtree?  I'll take Orakpo, Jenkins or Cushing. 
Calvin Johnson?  I'll take Joe Thomas or Adrian Peterson. 
Ted Gin?  I'll take Patrick Willis or Marshawn Lynch. 
Braylon Edwards?  Adam Jones, Antrell Rolle. 
Troy Williamson?  Lol, literally any of the next 5. 
Mike Williams?  Lol.  The next five all went to pro bowls (Ware, Merriman, Brown, Thomas Davis, Derrick Johnson). 
Larry Fitzgerald?  Rivers is a franchise QB.  Sean Taylor was a generational safety. 
Roy Williams?  Roethlisberger, Dunta Robinson, Hall, Vilma. 
Reggie Williams?  Roethlisberger, Robinson, Vilma, Tommie Harris.
Lee Evans?  Tommie Harris, Shawn Andrews, Will Smith. 
Michael Clayton?  Shawn Andrews, Will Smith.
Charles Rogers?  Andre Johnson (it counts for the point I'm making) and Terence Newman.
Andre Johnson?  Terence Newman, Jordan Gross (all-pro, 3x pro bowl better than fringe HoF WR).
Donte Stallworth?  Albert Haynesworth.
David Terrell/Koren Robinson?  Dan Morgan, Marcus Stroud. 
Rod Gardner/Santana Moss?  Steve hutchinson, Casey Hampton, Nate Clements.
Peter Warrick?  Lol, Jamal Lewis, Corey Simon, Thomas Jones, Brian Urlacher.
Plaxico Burress?  Brian Urlacher, Shaun Ellis, John Abraham. 

That's every top 16 WR since Burress.  There has only been one single case where there wasn't a similar player at a more important position, and that was when Andre Johnson was taken.  Every single other instance there has been a better or equal performer within 5 picks at a more important position. 

Receiver is nice to have, but not a prerequisite for winning a Super Bowl.  Find me a team that has won a Super Bowl without top line play or top defensive play.  Now count out how many teams have won without top WR play.  Because the Patriots have won 2 Super Bowls this decade without anything close to an elite WR, and they've lost one with a top 5 receiver all time.