Quote
LMU93
On one hand, if they keep Keenum he's a solid, experienced backup and could be an asset to Goff. Definitely.
On the other, they used a top-90 overall pick on Mannion which should equate to them thinking he should become their backup at some point. Mannion is under contract through 2018 at a cost of just $1.9M total for the next two years. He'll be in the 3rd year of their system and in theory would get a lot of work in 2017 preseason. Plus with several pending free agents it may be nice not to have to use $3M on a backup QB.
This assumes that you can keep grooming replacements. So if you draft a Mannion replacement (QB B ) in 2017 for when Mannion leaves after 2018, then you have to draft THAT GUY's replacement in 2018 for when QB B leaves after 2020. What are the odds of continually hitting on qbs that way? Cause so far that's 3 (Mannion, QB B, QB C)...and ad infinitum.
So what would realistlcally actually happen is that you have to sign a 3-4 M veteran back up anyway.
So why not just keep the one who has already played for you and knows the offense?
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/23/2016 05:34AM by zn.
