3-Wide: Would the Broncos be better off trading Peyton Manning?
3-Wide is a weekly feature in which theScore's NFL editors debate the hot topics around the league. Grab a cold towel and brace for hot takes.
Would the Broncos be better off trading Peyton Manning?
Caitlyn Holroyd: The Broncos have flat-out denied rumors that they tried to trade Manning to the Texans, and there's reason to believe them. Yes, Manning looked like a shell of himself at the end of last season, but he still led the team to a 12-4 finish and a playoff berth. Even if the Broncos believe Brock Osweiler is ready to step into a starting role, they would be making a huge gamble replacing a future Hall of Famer with an unproven backup. Manning gives Denver the best chance at winning a Super Bowl out of the two, and that's what the team should be focused on right now.
Michael Amato: Absolutely. There's no doubt Manning can still play at a high level, but that's not going to last very long. Based on the way he struggled down the stretch last year, it wouldn't be shocking to question whether he even has another full season of elite play left. It's always smart to get rid of a diminishing asset in the NFL while he still has value, and that's exactly what Manning is right now.
Joe Thomson: The only way this makes sense is if the words "Brock Osweiler Era" are never spoken. If a team like the Texans offers you two first-round picks or some other jaw-dropping compensation for Manning, you'd have to look at it in an effort to find a real quarterback of the future and set your franchise up for the next 10-15 years. Manning's likely to play one more season anyways.
Who is the NFL's best backup quarterback heading into the 2015 season?
Amato: I can't believe I'm saying this, but it might be Christian Ponder. He has plenty of starting experience under his belt and being a good backup has a lot to do with understanding the team's current system. Having worked with Oakland Raiders offensive coordinator Bill Musgrave for three years in Minnesota, Ponder would have a good grasp of playbook if called into action to relieve Derek Carr.
Thomson: Shaun Hill. He's got everything you want in a backup QB. He's experienced, has solid locker room character, and is not going to ever cause a quarterback controversy by wowing the fan base. Hill is incredibly reliable and has the kind of chubby face and doughy physique a backup QB should have.
Holroyd: Mark Sanchez was thrust into a starting role for the Philadelphia Eagles last season when Nick Foles went down with a shoulder injury and led the team to a respectable 4-4 record. He had some ugly interceptions, but he also came in during the toughest stretch of the schedule. There's a reason Chip Kelly brought Sanchez back on a two-year deal, and he could become even more valuable for the Eagles depending on how well Sam Bradford's knees hold up this season.
Which NFL stadium has the worst name now that LP Field is no more?
Thomson: MetLife Stadium isn't that bad until you remember that Snoopy is the mascot for MetLife Insurance. Say what you want about Charlie Brown and his less than sterling record on courage, but Snoopy is supposed to be his best friend, and what does he do? He tries to kiss Lucy, he steals Linus' blanky, he completely undermines his supposed best friend at every turn. Snoopy is a damn fool and so is this damn fool stadium!
Holroyd: University of Phoenix Stadium gets my vote because it's misleading. It sounds like a college team's stadium, but it's not. In fact, the University of Phoenix doesn't even have a football team, let alone an athletics department.
Amato: I'm not a huge fan of Sports Authority Field at Mile High. Nothing against the company, but the name doesn't have a good ring to it and it just sounds weird. Any name that doesn't end in Stadium or Field should be banned.