clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Continuing the Eli discussion

New, comments

I wasn't going to do this, but considering the reaction I've seen so far I'd like to spend another day debating Eli Manning.

As I write this, the poll question I posed yesterday regarding whether or not Eli would eever lead the Giants to a Super Bowl title, has produced an exact 50-50 split. Half the voters say yes, half say no. As usual, folks are divided on Eli.

I think that someday he will. As I've said, he will never be the equal of his brother, Peyton, but he will be an upper echelon quarterback in the NFL for a long time.

That doesn't mean, however, that I think Ernie Accorsi should have given up so much to trade for him. Especially not when Ben Roethlisberger and Philip Rivers were also available in that same draft.

It is those two players whom Manning's career should be judged against, not Peyton's. Right now, you would have to say Eli is No. 3 in the Eli-Ben-Philip comparison, but that story can't fully be written until their careers are over 10-12 years from now.

Fact is, though, as much as I have faith that Eli will be fine I do believe the Giants would have been better off never making that trade.

They could have easily stayed where they were (No. 4, I believe) and taken Roethlisberger, which is what they likely would have done.

That would have saved them the pair of draft picks they also shipped to San Diego, and it has been well documented that the Chargers used one of those picks to select Shawne Merriman.

It's not a rip on Eli, but you can't tell me the Giants wouldn't be better off today with Roethlisberger at QB and Merriman anchoring their defense.

Your thoughts?