Crimson Manticore

I'd give 'em a pass on this card if D'Avenant Archer wasn't in the same set. Outside of that, it'd be a passable, if clunky, white common duder.

Yeah, a lot of Legends cards are secretly white. It's weird, I know. But look at the card: It's got a low power:mana cost ratio. That's unusual for red. It's got flying, which doesn't happen (typically) on smaller red creatures. Finally, it's got the archery ability (T: ~ deals 1 damage to target attacking or blocking creature) which is firmly in white's color. It's a very un-red ability -- you can't use it very effectively offensively, and it's hard to get it to work at four mana, regardless of color issues. Compare it to Ballista Squad, a devastating 10th Edition limited pick. Same four mana -- easier at 3W, actually! -- but you trade the irrelevant flying (when will you attack with these duders?) for a scalable archery ability. It's just not in the same league.

Something we've been skirting for a while is the nature of color bleed. Early sets ascribed to the rule that rare cards could be strictly better than common cards (Gray Ogre v. Granite Gargoyle -- or nearly any 2R creature in alpha -- f'rexample), and that an ability could be ported from the "correct" color to another if one just watered it down (Prodigal Sorcerer to D'Avenant Archer, f'rexample). These are, generally speaking, Bad Ideas(tm). Sometimes an ability works better in one color than in others -- Prodigal Sorcerer's pinging is a red ability, and only made sense in blue because "a wizard did it"; but, generally speaking, the colors haven't changed a whole lot since the game began. Rather, when shifting an ability -- say, archery -- from one color to another, it's best to show how that color's ideas change the implementation of the ability. Something like this:

See? Same idea -- pinging -- but it's aggressive pinging. It also plays into that devil's choice that red likes to offer -- "Take 3 or lose your guy?" -- without that horrible, horrible Browbeat mechanic.