Why didn't we trade Manning

[LUCKyday]

I know this is late and everything but we cut Manning... We could have gotten a few good picks for him why didn't we do that

[Moncrief]

We are a classier organization than that. To trade away the man who has done so much for us and this state would be downright nasty

[FireJimCaldwell]

Simple answer:

 

Polian & Irsay made a mistake by signing him at all last year.

 

Complicated answer:

 

The way his contract was constructed, it basically made it impossible to trade him.  The only way to realistically trade him would have been to pay him the option bonus that was due at the end of the 2011 league year(28 Million). Then they could have traded him, but the salary cap ramifications would have been a lot worse than they actually were. Instead of him counting 10.4 in dead cap space, he would have accounted for 38.4 million in dead cap space alone.. So the turnover on the roster would have been much greater.

[DS3]

We are a classier organization than that. To trade away the man who has done so much for us and this state would be downright nasty

Exactly

[Gavin]

Teams probably had a good idea he was going to be a FA so why another team pay an arm and a leg in draft picks

[FireJimCaldwell]

We are a classier organization than that. To trade away the man who has done so much for us and this state would be downright nasty

I  really don't see that having anything to do with it.

 

If they would have been able to trade him to x, y, or z, without suffering any more cap penalties, then they would have done so. 

[Gavin]

We are a classier organization than that. To trade away the man who has done so much for us and this state would be downright nasty

your aware that many times the words business and classy are oxymorons right

[Superman]

I know this is late and everything but we cut Manning... We could have gotten a few good picks for him why didn't we do that

 

Like FJC said, the structure of his contract and the due date of the option bonus made it prohibitive. The Broncos structured his new contract in a more sensible way.

 

As I've learned more about the way contracts work, I wonder more and more why Irsay and Polian did what they did with the Manning contract. It really didn't make much sense, nor did it protect the team financially. We're carrying a $10.4m cap hit in 2012, and we paid Manning $26m in 2011. We might as well have carried him on the franchise tag.

 

What we should have done, if we were going to do a new contract, is give him five years, $90m. Signing bonus of $13m, with a roster bonus of $7m (that's the most I've seen in an NFL contract, if we could go higher, I'd go higher and reduce the signing bonus) due 8/1. No option bonus in 2012. Base salaries are whatever Condon and Manning want them to be. The team would have had a lot more flexibility, could have traded or restructured however we wanted, whenever we wanted.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Like FJC said, the structure of his contract and the due date of the option bonus made it prohibitive. The Broncos structured his new contract in a more sensible way.

 

As I've learned more about the way contracts work, I wonder more and more why Irsay and Polian did what they did with the Manning contract. It really didn't make much sense, nor did it protect the team financially. We're carrying a $10.4m cap hit in 2012, and we paid Manning $26m in 2011. We might as well have carried him on the franchise tag.

 

What we should have done, if we were going to do a new contract, is give him five years, $90m. Signing bonus of $13m, with a roster bonus of $7m (that's the most I've seen in an NFL contract, if we could go higher, I'd go higher and reduce the signing bonus) due 8/1. No option bonus in 2012. Base salaries are whatever Condon and Manning want them to be. The team would have had a lot more flexibility, could have traded or restructured however we wanted, whenever we wanted.

The contract did open up immediate cap room with a reduction of the franchise tag #, so there was some urgency to get something done. 

It would have been tough, and it might have ruffled his feathers(but i'm willing to bet they are/were  ruffled anyway), but the best thing they could have done from a Colts perspective would've been to either resend the franchise tag making him a free agent, and either constructing a contract based on incentives(even though they would have likely counted against the cap since they were LTBE), and then since he didn't play/reach incentives, they would have been credited into the 2012 season. Or addressing his status as a free agent when he  became healthy, which would have been this past off-season.  

 

Maybe another team steps in and offers him a contract for 2011, maybe they don't, but from a pure financial position, he should have never been given the contract he was given, even though the way he set it up did give the Colts an out. I know it was rumored that Irsay wanted to do 5 years 100 million, full guaranteed, and if that were the case they obviously Manning would be wearing the horse shoe, the pick would have been traded, etc, but it seems Manning/Condon had more knowledge of the cap risks than Irsay/Polian and gave him the out after one year.   5/100 fully guaranteed with Manning never playing another down would be hard to swallow. From a year to year basis, they would likely have to keep him active for most if not each of those years then simply put him on IR, if he would have never been able to play again.

 

The cap situation is bad, but it could have been worse. It clearly could have been better, but it could have been a lot worse.

 

Your proposal is better than what happened. Maybe Condon was fearful of him not recovering, and wanted more up front. You also had Irsay's ego working against the Colts by wanting/demanding him being the highest paid player.  Maybe more info will come out one day in the form of a book either by Polian, or Manning or both.... Who knows...

[Gavin]

The contract did open up immediate cap room with a reduction of the franchise tag #, so there was some urgency to get something done. 

It would have been tough, and it might have ruffled his feathers(but i'm willing to bet they are/were  ruffled anyway), but the best thing they could have done from a Colts perspective would've been to either resend the franchise tag making him a free agent, and either constructing a contract based on incentives(even though they would have likely counted against the cap since they were LTBE), and then since he didn't play/reach incentives, they would have been credited into the 2012 season. Or addressing his status as a free agent when he  became healthy, which would have been this past off-season.  

 

Maybe another team steps in and offers him a contract for 2011, maybe they don't, but from a pure financial position, he should have never been given the contract he was given, even though the way he set it up did give the Colts an out. I know it was rumored that Irsay wanted to do 5 years 100 million, full guaranteed, and if that were the case they obviously Manning would be wearing the horse shoe, the pick would have been traded, etc, but it seems Manning/Condon had more knowledge of the cap risks than Irsay/Polian and gave him the out after one year.   5/100 fully guaranteed with Manning never playing another down would be hard to swallow. From a year to year basis, they would likely have to keep him active for most if not each of those years then simply put him on IR, if he would have never been able to play again.

 

The cap situation is bad, but it could have been worse. It clearly could have been better, but it could have been a lot worse.

 

Your proposal is better than what happened. Maybe Condon was fearful of him not recovering, and wanted more up front. You also had Irsay's ego working against the Colts by wanting/demanding him being the highest paid player.  Maybe more info will come out one day in the form of a book either by Polian, or Manning or both.... Who knows...

 

"I know it was rumored that Irsay wanted to do 5 years 100 million, full guaranteed, and if that were the case they obviously Manning would be wearing the horse shoe" Thats my hangup right there, There was no public mention or statement by Manning that I am aware of that says he went to Irsay and said ok Jim I'll rework and extend the contract (for example like he did with Denver) to reflect the uncertainty (at that time) of the state of his health. He sounded like he was fine talkin about how everyone was walkin on eggshells (which is what started the back and forth between Manning and Jim). From the way I took it it was either owe him the 19 million with not knowing (at the time) how his neck was and not being able to know. I also dont think "ego" is what its called when your wantin to make the best QB in the game the highest paid player

[FireJimCaldwell]

"I know it was rumored that Irsay wanted to do 5 years 100 million, full guaranteed, and if that were the case they obviously Manning would be wearing the horse shoe" Thats my hangup right there, There was no public mention or statement by Manning that I am aware of that says he went to Irsay and said ok Jim I'll rework and extend the contract (for example like he did with Denver) to reflect the uncertainty (at that time) of the state of his health. He sounded like he was fine talkin about how everyone was walkin on eggshells (which is what started the back and forth between Manning and Jim). From the way I took it it was either owe him the 19 million with not knowing (at the time) how his neck was and not being able to know. I also dont think "ego" is what its called when your wantin to make the best QB in the game the highest paid player

 

If you recall, his contract was signed on 7/31. 

 

He was activated on 8/29. 

 

On 9/5 he had another procedure. 

Colts statement

 

 

INDIANAPOLIS COLTS STATEMENT ON PEYTON MANNING

As previously stated on Monday, Sept. 5^th, Peyton Manning has undergone further testing and consultation with several specialists regarding his rehabilitation.  The results of these tests and the consensus of the consultations was that further surgery was warranted.  Peyton has undergone this surgery today by having a single level anterior fusion.  The surgery was un-eventful.

 

This procedure is performed regularly throughout the country on persons from all walks of life, including professional football players.  Two former Colts players had this same procedure last winter and have fully resumed their careers.  Rehabilitation from such surgery is typically an involved process.  Therefore, there will be no estimation of a return date at this time.  We will keep Peyton on the active roster until we have a clearer picture of his recovery process.

 

Peyton will immediately begin the rehabilitation regimen mapped out by the surgeon.  We anticipate no further updates or availabilities beyond those required by the NFL Media Policy for the immediate future.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

So for starters, there wasn't a contract to rework. He was under the franchise tag.  So any contract was going to be a new contract. So, the option bonus alone is proof that he didn't take the rumored 5 years/100 and let the chips fall wherever they may. Personally I wish that he would have.

 

Now, we aren't privy to what happened or didn't happen in those 7 days where he activated and had the last procedure.  Or even exactly where his level stood on July 31st.

 

I stand by my viewpoint that a contract should have never been signed, and maybe the Denver Broncos contract set up came from Elway & his people, and maybe it came from Condon/Manning with a lesson learned from this last deal with the Colts. I do remember at some point Manning said the he suggested the option bonus so that they could have an out if he couldn't continue to play, and even though he's playing at an MVP level, they utilized that out. 

 

I'm not sure the eggshells comment started the back & forth or not, I'd have to dive into that a bit. But I do believe that was more about how employees had been dismissed and how a key card worked this morning for someone and no longer works this afternoon, and I'm not 100% certain if that was before or after the boom was dropped on the Polian's, again, that's something I'd have to look into, but not really wanting to. So I'll just leave it at that.

Ego might be the best word, but the boasting, and making those comments in the media about Peyton was going to be the highest paid player, isn't the best way to handle a negotiation, even if you you feel that with every fiber of your being. You don't go in and say I'm going to pay top dollar on a house or a car, or anything that can be negotiated. He should have attempted to get the best deal for the Colts that he could have. He didn't. That's on him. I put that on him more than either Polian, since he's the one that met with Manning to get the i's dotted and the t's crossed.  If you have 20k to spend on a car, and you can get it for 16 compared to 19, you should want to get it for 16k.  Completely different scale, but a similar type of example. 

 

Last March, prior to everything going down. If I'm Irsay, while I might not able to witness Manning throw with my own two eyes(per the cba), but you better believe I would have known exactly where his condition/ability/etc stood, whether that is talking to David Cutcliffe, Stokley, Saturday, or coming up with other various ways to get it accomplished.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Some insight from Polain following that signing.

 

 

 

Vice Chairman Bill Polian

 

Opening Statement:

“Fourteen years ago we did Peyton’s contract at 56^th street. We rode up here together to training camp and it was kind of fitting that while this wasn’t the last ride, we could see that day coming, hopefully not for five years. The timeline on this was that we were preparing to go ahead with the franchise tag, if necessary. It had been a difficult transition because we knew it could cost us to lose players because of the new collective bargaining agreement and the things that were in it. Peyton called me on Thursday and we had a long talk, discussed a lot of issues; he made it clear he didn’t want to be highest paid player in the league. He didn’t want his contract to interfere with the ability to put the best team possible on the field, and that he wanted to end his career as a Colt. I transmitted that information to Jim. Subsequently, Peyton, Jim and I got to together and met Friday. We worked through all of the aims and aspirations that everybody had and the one overriding goal was that Peyton would finish as a Colt and go directly to Canton (Ohio) and hope to God we are all around for that; certainly I am for that day. Over the weekend we worked very hard to make that happen, it wasn’t easy. The contract was difficult to do because we were doing something that really almost had never had never been done before in terms of the kind of player Peyton is, which is one of a kind. It did get done and as a result, which Peyton mentioned, because of the cash room he created, we were able to sign Joseph Addai , Antonio (Mookie) Johnson and Ryan Diem back. We are a much better football team because of the sacrifice and leadership position he took. That’s probably as good a description of him you possibly can find. From the day he arrived we have been a better football team because of his sacrifice and hard work and leadership, and that goes on for five more years.”

 

On the difficulty to make decisions on guys as they get older:

“Let me go back and echo what Jim said. We have a plan and have had a plan since day one. Jim set the parameters and he left it to me to execute the plan and we have done it pretty well and part of that is that we take contract situations and salary cap situations and cash considerations, which are the most overriding concern, on a year-by-year basis. We didn’t sign Peyton early because that’s the way our plan works and we won’t sign Robert (Mathis) and Reggie (Wayne) early, but they will be along with Pierre (Garcon) probably, the number one priorities next year. We always achieve those number one priorities, the living proof of that is we just signed Peyton and now are already on to next year. The fact of the matter is we have a very organized and detailed plan and a way to do it. We’re going to sit down, Jim and I and Chris and work through next year soon, as soon as we get done with training camp so there will be time for that. In terms of the assessment of players, we have extremely accurate statistics which tell us based on internal measurements how long we think a player can reasonably play at a high level and we share those with the agents. And as you might imagine sometimes they don’t like hearing it. The bottom line is that over the last 14 years we have been right over 90 percent of the time on that, so as Jim and I and Chris sit down, we will say to Jim for example, we feel this player’s appropriate high level life is “x” and we formulate a plan for what’s for appropriate for him and his contract and if we can do it, wonderful, and that happens about 90 percent of the time. If we can’t then that’s OK too. We feel very badly about losing Kelvin Hayden. He has been a great contributor here and a great Colt. In many ways he was a quintessential cover-two cornerback and it’s hard to see player like that go. But there’s only so much room and more importantly only so much cash. We are not a team that generates 300 million dollars in cash every year, so it’s hard for us to fit everybody. No one can. That’s what the system is about. We approach the plan, it’s detailed and we feel like our statistics and measurements are good. It’s worked out for us.”

 

On the patience needed to put together player contracts:

“I understand that agents use the media to try to stir up trouble, but the players know that we take care of our own and nothing could underscore that like today. Peyton’s coming back to finish his career, Joseph Addai is coming back and Ryan Diem is coming back to finish his career. Jeff Saturday is back to finish his career and that is what the Colts and Jim Irsay are all about. That is our philosophy and we’ve gotten a lot of criticism over it, but I’ll stack our record up against anybody. Most importantly, that’s just our philosophy and that’s how Jim Irsay wants to run this organization and it has been good for us.”

 

On the 2011 draft picks:

“Everyone has signed except for Anthony Castonzo and that is an issue I presume is behind us. But we have a couple in front of us. Agents are asking for a four-year guarantee, which we will not do. As I mentioned, we are old school and if we won’t give Joseph Addai, who helped us go to two Super Bowls and helped us win two AFC championships, a fully guaranteed contract we aren’t going to do it for a rookie, any rookie. We love Anthony. We think he’s a great draft choice and we think he would be a great Colt, but it’s time for him to prove that before he gets a fully guaranteed contract.”

 

On Peyton Manning’s injury:

“I think we’re in a pretty good situation. His assessment from Dr. Foyer was lengthy and detailed, but positive. To capture it in a nutshell the, nerve is coming back and it’s on its way to recovery. It’s showing positive signs and it’s likely to accelerate now that Peyton’s back with people he knows and trusts and can work with on an intense level. But there’s no timetable. With these kind of injuries you simply can’t say it’s like a knee and he’ll be back in six weeks. We just don’t know and to speculate would be foolish.”

 

[John Dee]

Is this an issue again?

[Gramz]

Is this an issue again?

don't you mean "still"

[Moncrief]

I  really don't see that having anything to do with it.

 

If they would have been able to trade him to x, y, or z, without suffering any more cap penalties, then they would have done so. 

 

 

I  really don't see that having anything to do with it.

 

If they would have been able to trade him to x, y, or z, without suffering any more cap penalties, then they would have done so. 

 

I don't know how his contract was laid out and what the cap penalties we would have accrued doing so by trading him

[FireJimCaldwell]

I don't know how his contract was laid out and what the cap penalties we would have accrued doing so by trading him

 

See the thing about it was, it was 5 year deal, but it had the option built in due at the end of the 2011 league year, which is why a portion of the option bonus was carried in the 2011 cap, which turned into a credit for the 2012 season. When the trading deadline expired weeks 6 or 7 last season(2011), that was the last moment in time that he could have been traded. 

 

So the team had to a) Pay him the option bonus(28 million) in early March(end of the 2011 league year), or b ) release him.  They chose to release him. 

 

If they would have paid the option bonus, they could have then moved him, but the additional $'s  would have added to the cap misery. 

[throwing BBZ]

He was damaged goods, he got paid $26 Million to rehab, and the Colts TEAM got NOTHING going forward to help them win.

Do you like Apples?

[Gramz]

He was damaged goods, he got paid $26 Million to rehab, and the Colts TEAM got NOTHING going forward to help them win.

Do you like Apples?

  I prefer tomatoes......   One coming your way    ;)

[Superman]

He was damaged goods, he got paid $26 Million to rehab, and the Colts TEAM got NOTHING going forward to help them win.

Do you like Apples?

 

He was the most important player in the NFL. And the thing is, if you had let him walk for nothing, you still wouldn't have gotten anything going forward. Not even a measly compensatory draft pick, because he didn't play at all last year. So really, you're complaining about Irsay spending HIS money, in good faith, on the most important player in the league.

[Superman]

The contract did open up immediate cap room with a reduction of the franchise tag #, so there was some urgency to get something done. 

 

 

We used that cap space to resign Joseph Addai and Adam Vinatieri. Addai did NOTHING for us, and is out of the league, and as much as I think Vinatieri can be important for a team going to the playoffs, he hasn't really been worth the $7m he's made the past two seasons. Generally, freeing up $7m in cap space is a good thing, so the conventional wisdom says "lower the cap hit," but we didn't do anything good with it. Hindsight being 20/20, it would have been better to keep him on the tag.

 

 

It would have been tough, and it might have ruffled his feathers(but i'm willing to bet they are/were  ruffled anyway), but the best thing they could have done from a Colts perspective would've been to either resend the franchise tag making him a free agent, and either constructing a contract based on incentives(even though they would have likely counted against the cap since they were LTBE), and then since he didn't play/reach incentives, they would have been credited into the 2012 season.

 

You rescind the tag, and he's an unrestricted free agent. I doubt another team comes in and offers him the world, but it could have happened, and now you're giving him $120m fully guaranteed, and you're screwed. Big gamble, but I bet it would have paid off. If you could structure a deal with incentives, you'd be sitting pretty, and be more than able to absorb any dead cap hit from releasing him at the end of the season. I'm not sure how much you can stipulate as incentives, even LBTE, but none of that would have been paid, and would have been credited to the 2012 cap.

 

 

Or addressing his status as a free agent when he  became healthy, which would have been this past off-season.  

 

Keeping him on the tag in 2011 probably means he's still a Colt in 2012. JMO.

 

 

Maybe another team steps in and offers him a contract for 2011, maybe they don't, but from a pure financial position, he should have never been given the contract he was given, even though the way he set it up did give the Colts an out. I know it was rumored that Irsay wanted to do 5 years 100 million, full guaranteed, and if that were the case they obviously Manning would be wearing the horse shoe, the pick would have been traded, etc, but it seems Manning/Condon had more knowledge of the cap risks than Irsay/Polian and gave him the out after one year.   5/100 fully guaranteed with Manning never playing another down would be hard to swallow. From a year to year basis, they would likely have to keep him active for most if not each of those years then simply put him on IR, if he would have never been able to play again.

 

The cap situation is bad, but it could have been worse. It clearly could have been better, but it could have been a lot worse.

 

Agreed. Of course, now, we know that he can still play, so things would have worked out, at least in the short term. I just think Irsay/Polian really didn't consider all the angles when it came to Manning's deal, and maybe that's because they thought he'd be ready to go sooner. I still don't get the logic of stipulating an option bonus in the 2011 league year. Just make it April 15, and you can spend three months renegotiating the contract before the draft. Based on how you explained the CBA clause, the date of the bonus is more of an issue than the actual amount. Push it into the 2012 league year, and you can do whatever you want -- trade, release, restructure, whatever.

 

 

Your proposal is better than what happened. Maybe Condon was fearful of him not recovering, and wanted more up front. You also had Irsay's ego working against the Colts by wanting/demanding him being the highest paid player.  Maybe more info will come out one day in the form of a book either by Polian, or Manning or both.... Who knows...

 

They could have asked for an $8m base salary in 2011, and his cap hit still would have been $17.6m, much less than the $23m tag. But you still have an out. The dead cap hit to release is still $10.4m in 2012, but you have the ability to trade him. Like we've all said, the way they structured that contract just didn't really make sense at the end of the day. It's over now, I think both parties are going to be okay, but it could have been better, I think.

[FireJimCaldwell]

1) We used that cap space to resign Joseph Addai and Adam Vinatieri. Addai did NOTHING for us, and is out of the league, and as much as I think Vinatieri can be important for a team going to the playoffs, he hasn't really been worth the $7m he's made the past two seasons. Generally, freeing up $7m in cap space is a good thing, so the conventional wisdom says "lower the cap hit," but we didn't do anything good with it. Hindsight being 20/20, it would have been better to keep him on the tag.

 

 

 

2 ) You rescind the tag, and he's an unrestricted free agent. I doubt another team comes in and offers him the world, but it could have happened, and now you're giving him $120m fully guaranteed, and you're screwed. Big gamble, but I bet it would have paid off. If you could structure a deal with incentives, you'd be sitting pretty, and be more than able to absorb any dead cap hit from releasing him at the end of the season. I'm not sure how much you can stipulate as incentives, even LBTE, but none of that would have been paid, and would have been credited to the 2012 cap.

 

 

 

3 ) Keeping him on the tag in 2011 probably means he's still a Colt in 2012. JMO.

 

 

 

Agreed. Of course, now, we know that he can still play, so things would have worked out, at least in the short term. I just think Irsay/Polian really didn't consider all the angles when it came to Manning's deal, and maybe that's because they thought he'd be ready to go sooner. I still don't get the logic of stipulating an option bonus in the 2011 league year. Just make it April 15, and you can spend three months renegotiating the contract before the draft. Based on how you explained the CBA clause, the date of the bonus is more of an issue than the actual amount. Push it into the 2012 league year, and you can do whatever you want -- trade, release, restructure, whatever.

 

 

 

4 ) They could have asked for an $8m base salary in 2011, and his cap hit still would have been $17.6m, much less than the $23m tag. But you still have an out. The dead cap hit to release is still $10.4m in 2012, but you have the ability to trade him. Like we've all said, the way they structured that contract just didn't really make sense at the end of the day. It's over now, I think both parties are going to be okay, but it could have been better, I think.

 

1 ) They also brought Diem & Antonio Johnson back, obviously, 2011 was a wash since Manning never saw the field, but there were some moves made that showed they were trying. Even bringing Collins in was an attempt. It failed, but it was an attempt. 

 

2 ) In hindsight, that is what should have been done, but we don't know if there was some form of a set back between the time he was signed/activated /and then 2nd procedure. From the comments, they were mostly on par with his comments during the 2012 summer. I'm working, I'm rehabbing, i'm doing this, I'm doing that, I want to be the best I can be, etc,etc, etc, so maybe he was holding out hope that it would improve and didn't. If that's the case then that contract is on Irsay & Polian. If there was a setback that nobody has really gone on record about then it's just misfortune.  A later date could have been more beneficial, at least at that point they could have tried to make a trade, or at that point they might have been able to watch him work out and decide to go in a different direction all together. 

 

The cap would have been tighter in 2011, but at that point what does it matter. Polian had to have a clue that things were going to go down hill fast without Manning playing.  Anything on the cap outside of his base salary would have been credited back in 2012. I know the labor dispute disrupted a lot of things through the league, his rehab for one, but I think the timing of the labor dispute and then pressure to get people under contract contributed to the deal getting signed.  I know there were rumors of 18 being the red zone QB, so who knows how close that came to happening, but I think everything was rushed due to the lockout. 

 

3 ) I'm not sure.  He'd be looking for a new deal. The players that were retained/resigned likely wouldn't have been, who's to say they might have had to cut others. 2-14 might have been better than what the record would have been at that point and you then have 18 looking for a new deal, and the same likelihood of drafting Luck.  At that point they would be forced to tag him again(March 5th, which would have been his 3rd tagging(140%? I'd have to look it up but it's more than the regular 20% increase), or extend him to a new deal, and personally I don't think he wanted anything to do with Luck/RG3/whoever being on the roster with him because he would know he would needs snaps moving forward. The more I think about it, he might have been tagged and traded for some form of compensation, but I don't think he'd be here.

 

I believe part of the key with the due date being in the 2011 league year was so that part of the option bonus could be utilized in the 2011 cap, which it was, and then when it wasn't paid, there is the credit, so there wasn't the expected 16 million cap hit. That gave it the reduction to 10.4, so moving it April 15th in your example, would have eliminated that benefit in the 2011 league year.  I'm not sure why it was important to do that, considering they could have utilized that space on other people to bring in.

 

4 ) You can easily play with the math/#'s to move it around to make it better or worse. Obviously it has worked out, and the path the franchise chose is just one of many that could lead to successes. It was a question many correct answers with varying degrees of popularity & risk. 

 

To me it boils down that if on 7/31 they expected he would need the next procedure, then the contract was 100% foolish, and he should have had his franchise tag reascended with an understanding that if and when he was healthy the Colts would offer him a contract that would take care of things.  

 

Like I said earlier, maybe more light will be shown on the subject when one or more of the parties involved writes a book. 

[LUCKyday]

we could have given him the opportunity to look around find the team he wants to go to and make a deal with that team.

[Gavin]

We used that cap space to resign Joseph Addai and Adam Vinatieri. Addai did NOTHING for us, and is out of the league, and as much as I think Vinatieri can be important for a team going to the playoffs, he hasn't really been worth the $7m he's made the past two seasons. Generally, freeing up $7m in cap space is a good thing, so the conventional wisdom says "lower the cap hit," but we didn't do anything good with it. Hindsight being 20/20, it would have been better to keep him on the tag.

 

 

 

You rescind the tag, and he's an unrestricted free agent. I doubt another team comes in and offers him the world, but it could have happened, and now you're giving him $120m fully guaranteed, and you're screwed. Big gamble, but I bet it would have paid off. If you could structure a deal with incentives, you'd be sitting pretty, and be more than able to absorb any dead cap hit from releasing him at the end of the season. I'm not sure how much you can stipulate as incentives, even LBTE, but none of that would have been paid, and would have been credited to the 2012 cap.

 

 

 

Keeping him on the tag in 2011 probably means he's still a Colt in 2012. JMO.

 

 

 

Agreed. Of course, now, we know that he can still play, so things would have worked out, at least in the short term. I just think Irsay/Polian really didn't consider all the angles when it came to Manning's deal, and maybe that's because they thought he'd be ready to go sooner. I still don't get the logic of stipulating an option bonus in the 2011 league year. Just make it April 15, and you can spend three months renegotiating the contract before the draft. Based on how you explained the CBA clause, the date of the bonus is more of an issue than the actual amount. Push it into the 2012 league year, and you can do whatever you want -- trade, release, restructure, whatever.

 

 

 

They could have asked for an $8m base salary in 2011, and his cap hit still would have been $17.6m, much less than the $23m tag. But you still have an out. The dead cap hit to release is still $10.4m in 2012, but you have the ability to trade him. Like we've all said, the way they structured that contract just didn't really make sense at the end of the day. It's over now, I think both parties are going to be okay, but it could have been better, I think.

I think when you consider Vinatieri has had 2 kicks blocked which would drop his misses from 7 to 5 which would give him a 84.8 percentage in terms of makes (better then his career average of 82.6 percent) then he has lived up to what he has done in the past

[PrincetonTiger]

who new he would have the year he has?

[Gramz]

who new he would have the year he has?

"raising hand" 

[UKColt13]

How many draft picks do people think he would have gone for if he had been tradeable.

[FireJimCaldwell]

we could have given him the opportunity to look around find the team he wants to go to and make a deal with that team.

No not really....

[FireJimCaldwell]

"raising hand" 

Ditto.

 

I knew as soon as he didn't retire that he wouldn't embarrass himself by playing at a lower level. 

[Fx Stryker]

"raising hand" 

 

I'll join you.

[Superman]

I think when you consider Vinatieri has had 2 kicks blocked which would drop his misses from 7 to 5 which would give him a 84.8 percentage in terms of makes (better then his career average of 82.6 percent) then he has lived up to what he has done in the past

 

I don't have a problem with Vinatieri. Just saying I don't think we made good use of the cap space that Manning's contract created. And obviously last year, it didn't matter who the kicker was. I'm glad we have him now, but just weighing the advantages and disadvantages of what we did with Manning.

[Jason_]

"raising hand"

Same here.

[Jason_]

we could have given him the opportunity to look around find the team he wants to go to and make a deal with that team.

And had we done that, the dead cape space for parting ways with him would have almost quadrupled, as fjc has already pointed out. Releasing peyton when we did meant a cap hit of a little over $10 mil. Trading him would have jacked the cap hit up to over $38 mil. Thats why we couldnt trade him.