"Manning should take pay cut to win SB"

[amfootball]

http://pantherlair.sportsblog.com/posts/566096/peyton_manning_should_take_a.html

 

We have had this discussion up here many times on the "cost" of an elite QB. This author suggest that Manning should take a pay cut so the Broncos can build a better team around him. Currently, the Broncos are projected to have ~$18 mil given the cap will go up this year but they have so sign key players like Thomas next year. Decker is most likely gone as he will get #1 receiver money and they may ask Welker to take a pay cut as well.

[Beauregarde]

http://pantherlair.sportsblog.com/posts/566096/peyton_manning_should_take_a.html

 

We have had this discussion up here many times on the "cost" of an elite QB. This author suggest that Manning should take a pay cut so the Broncos can build a better team around him. Currently, the Broncos are projected to have ~$18 mil given the cap will go up this year but they have so sign key players like Thomas next year. Decker is most likely gone as he will get #1 receiver money and they may ask Welker to take a pay cut as well.

Why should he take a pay cut? They might restructure it a bit so that some is paid after he is retired but I wouldn't take one less dollar then what he is getting. He is a bargain compared to some. They will just have to replace some of those players like all other good teams have to do.

[dgambill]

http://pantherlair.sportsblog.com/posts/566096/peyton_manning_should_take_a.html

 

We have had this discussion up here many times on the "cost" of an elite QB. This author suggest that Manning should take a pay cut so the Broncos can build a better team around him. Currently, the Broncos are projected to have ~$18 mil given the cap will go up this year but they have so sign key players like Thomas next year. Decker is most likely gone as he will get #1 receiver money and they may ask Welker to take a pay cut as well.

There is no such thing as taking a pay cut. The NFL players union wouldn't allow it. There is such a thing as restructuring your contract with an extension so that your cap hit is less and more money is guranteed etc...problem with that....Peyton doesn't have many years left...you can't stretch it out at the end...without hurting the team when he retires because he would hamstring the team when he is gone. Legitimently he has probably two years left to win another ring....this coming year and perhaps the next...his money will be coming off the books when his contract expires...they will still be able to sign DT and JT. I'm not sure what this take a pay cut thing means...unless you mean restructure over longer period. Tom did that...but at the back end of that contract he won't be able to do it again and again. Eventually you have to eat that money...and pay the piper....as time runs out on these guys years its harder and harder to restructure.

[Fx Stryker]

How about he take a 3yr/ $3M extension to spread the contract out.

Then the Broncos cab restructure again before the extension starts.

Other big time quarterbacks do that.

[dgambill]

How about he take a 3yr/ $3M extension to spread the contract out.

Then the Broncos cab restructure again before the extension starts.

Other big time quarterbacks do that.

Does he have 3 yrs left? Myself..I don't see it. I think he believes he can break all the records and retire by the end of his contract...and still has as good a shot at a SB as anyone else....I think they can get back...I could be wrong but I just don't see that 3rd year happening...and I don't think they want like 12 million on the books with a guy not playing.

[BrentMc11]

Peyton Manning had one of the best seasons a quarterback in the NFL has EVER had.  Why in the hell would he be asked to restructure his contract?

 

He is a class act win or lose!  That is all I will say on this topic.  PERIOD...EXCLAMATION POINT!!!!  

 

[dgambill]

Peyton Manning had one of the best seasons a quarterback in the NFL has EVER had.  Why in the hell would he be asked to restructure his contract?

 

He is a class act win or lose!  That is all I will say on this topic.  PERIOD...EXCLAMATION POINT!!!!  

 

That is very true....I don't think he should..nor is it even help the team but if he wants to add one more season to his contract and he thinks he will play it out...and wants to give himself the greatest chance to get back to the SB....sure he could do that...it would be nice to just retain what they have on offense and get some help in that secondary. Just imagine if Peyton honestly thought a throw away was a good play....or a punt. If he thought his team could afford to do it.....that team would be deadly....imagine if the defense could flip the field for him like NE regularly does for Tom...or Seattle for Russell....WOW.

[BOTT]

Should have taken less money to begin with

[pacolts56]

It all sounds good in theory....IF Elway makes the right moves with cap management and free agent acquisitions...AND Fox and Del Rio make the right coaching moves in their game planning....AND the injury bug stays away....AND most of all, if the team executes on the field to and through the playoffs.

 

IMO...its becoming more and more of a tail-chase for Manning with a whole bunch of moving parts, but Pat Bowlen and John Elway are clearly willing to gamble on short-term results so we'll see what happens.

 

But after that Super Bowl beat down and the very similar way we attacked and defeated Denver....and the schedule they play next year?

 

I don't think it matters what he gets paid....I think the window has closed.

[Caleb3502]

I didn't think a 5 year 95 million dollar contract was necessary to be signed.  I could see like 5 years, 60 Million.  I know he had a great season but he can't take money away from signing good players.  One of the reasons why Indy has only 1 SB ring.   

[SilentHill]

If he wants a ring, he needs to figure out a way to take a pay cut.

[Fx Stryker]

Does he have 3 yrs left? Myself..I don't see it. I think he believes he can break all the records and retire by the end of his contract...and still has as good a shot at a SB as anyone else....I think they can get back...I could be wrong but I just don't see that 3rd year happening...and I don't think they want like 12 million on the books with a guy not playing.

I know. I don't think he should or even has to take a cut.

I was just pointing at another situation we are bound to hear about.

[Jay Kirk]

Peyton Manning had one of the best seasons a quarterback in the NFL has EVER had.  Why in the hell would he be asked to restructure his contract?

 

He is a class act win or lose!  That is all I will say on this topic.  PERIOD...EXCLAMATION POINT!!!!  

 

Lol don't matter anyway ,really don't know what all the what ifs or he shoulds are about anyway,because the Lombardi  belongs to none other than the Indianapolis Colts next year    :disco:   

[BrentMc11]

Lol don't matter anyway ,really don't know what all the what ifs or he shoulds are about anyway,because the Lombardi  belongs to none other than the Indianapolis Colts next year    :disco:   

I had to LIKE!!!

[dw49]

There is no such thing as taking a pay cut. The NFL players union wouldn't allow it. There is such a thing as restructuring your contract with an extension so that your cap hit is less and more money is guranteed etc...problem with that....Peyton doesn't have many years left...you can't stretch it out at the end...without hurting the team when he retires because he would hamstring the team when he is gone. Legitimently he has probably two years left to win another ring....this coming year and perhaps the next...his money will be coming off the books when his contract expires...they will still be able to sign DT and JT. I'm not sure what this take a pay cut thing means...unless you mean restructure over longer period. Tom did that...but at the back end of that contract he won't be able to do it again and again. Eventually you have to eat that money...and pay the piper....as time runs out on these guys years its harder and harder to restructure.

 

 

The above is not true. At least the first sentence .. I stopped reading after that.

[amfootball]

Should have taken less money to begin with

That was my thought as well. Too late now ...

[dw49]

If he wants a ring, he needs to figure out a way to take a pay cut.

 

 

How about he take a 3yr/ $3M extension to spread the contract out.

Then the Broncos cab restructure again before the extension starts.

Other big time quarterbacks do that.

 

The above is pretty bad... like another poster say there is "no such thing as taking a salary cut i the NFL." Manning has all his money pretty much all his salaries coming form his base salaries for the remainder of his contract. The last 3 years of his contract call for 15 mill , 19 mill and 19 mill. He has what looks to be 2.5 a year in a pro rated bonus in each year. If you just extended for 3 years like you suggest , all you will do is just bring that 2.5 a year for pro rated bonus down to about 1.25 million per  year. So his cap number would be around 16,250 instead of 17.5  in 2014. In 2015 it would bring from $21,500,000 to $20,125,000.

 

If you are thinking of doing something like Brady did. You would have to just ditch the present contract and give him something like 40 mill for a signing bonus , extend the contract and juggle the yearly base salaries like you want. This would get the cap down. The problem is that he might not be able to play past another year. Now you have all that guarfnteed money you just gave him and you take a massive cap hit. You could I guess try to do something with roster bonuses ? Dunno I only know a little about this stuff. I think it might be a tough deal to manipulate considering his health and age. 

 

All this said and I'm no expert.. but I can think of 2 ways where it could be done. 

 

1) Take a pay cut as the writer suggested. But looking at that , he's only counting 17.5 mill against this year's cap. Not that horrible.

 

2) Just turn his base into a signing bonus  which would be the traditional way teams restructure deals and just push the problem down the road.\

 

 

BTW.. not saying it's never happened but who are these great QB's that sign that kind of extension... 3 years at 3 mill ? I've never seen anything like that . Not saying I've seen every contract a great QB has signed , but your sounding like it's a pretty common place deal. Could you give some recent examples on that one ?

[dgambill]

The above is not true. At least the first sentence .. I stopped reading after that.

I apologize I guess I'm missinformed. I've never seen anyone say void my contract and only pay me $3 million dollars. I don't think that is even possible let alone would the players union allow it. Now I went on to say he could restructure and spread out the money over multiple years but he doesn't have much left in the tank...eventually the Broncos would be on the books for 12-13 million and he owuldnt even be playing. So how do you exactly take a pay cut without restructuring....because to me he can't just say give me only 10 million and use the other 7 to buy some players. 

[southwest1]

It all sounds good in theory....IF Elway makes the right moves with cap management and free agent acquisitions...AND Fox and Del Rio make the right coaching moves in their game planning....AND the injury bug stays away....AND most of all, if the team executes on the field to and through the playoffs.

 

IMO...its becoming more and more of a tail-chase for Manning with a whole bunch of moving parts, but Pat Bowlen and John Elway are clearly willing to gamble on short-term results so we'll see what happens.

 

But after that Super Bowl beat down and the very similar way we attacked and defeated Denver....and the schedule they play next year?

 

I don't think it matters what he gets paid....I think the window has closed.

"If Peyton Manning really wants to win a Super Bowl he will restructure his contract and give the Broncos more cap space to work with. Just keeping what free agents they have won't be enough. " 

 

The strange thing is 18's age scares me a little bit. Manning is gonna be 38 in March I believe & once a QB approaches 40 the rigors of a decade plus in the NFL begins to take it's toll. In short, your body begins to breakdown. True, to Manning's credit, he does release the ball quickly & he has taken less money that allowed GM Bill Polian in INDY to place weapons around him in the past so Peyton would certainly be open to the discussion. 

 

I have no doubt that Peyton can continue to win Playoff games & get back to the big dance, but win it? That's gonna require a better Denver pass rush & cut Champ Bailey right now. He's too darn old & not effective speed wise anymore. I would encourage Manning to take less dough if he truly wants another shot at a ring. All the matters now is can Denver win the SB? Those detractor voices just went from whispering to shouting no IMO. Peyton should take less money to get more defensive weapons in Colorado. 

 

I love Manning, but without more cap room the Broncos are not reaching the Lombardi Promiseland or emerging victorious in my estimation. Sometimes the truth hurts, but it still must be said. 

[MAC]

There is nothing wrong with Peyton's contract. He could have easily signed for $25 million per when he was a free agent, and pushed to renegotiate a lot higher than that after Flacco got paid if he was only concerned with money. He's got a fair contract.

 

For those talking about it being extended, I'll point out that it's designed to have as little dead money as possible in the event that Peyton is unable to play it out. It's in line with all the vets who are getting 1-2 year "show me" contracts from Denver. The team is trying to win now without sacrificing the future, and I can't imagine them being interested in deviating from that.

 

Topics such as this always have an underlying "he's got enough money - if he really cared about winning he'd play for free" tone. That's pure hogwash. It's a job, and he deserves to get paid. Plus the players association gets cranky at the thought of players taking less than they are entitled to. An elite player taking less directly takes money out of the pocket of the next elite player at the same position who gets franchised, and sets the standard lower for EVERY player at their position. It's not in "the players" interest for unnaturally low contracts to be issued, and players - as members of the association and as lifelong members of that informal fraternity - feel as much if not more loyalty towards other players than they do to management. In fact I'd say that an elite player playing "for free" would be about as well received as the players crossing the picket line when there was a strike. It's simply not realistic, fair, or rational on any level to suggest that any player "should" take a major cut in salary so their team can sign other players.

 

[southwest1]

There is nothing wrong with Peyton's contract. He could have easily signed for $25 million per when he was a free agent, and pushed to renegotiate a lot higher than that after Flacco got paid if he was only concerned with money. He's got a fair contract.

 

For those talking about it being extended, I'll point out that it's designed to have as little dead money as possible in the event that Peyton is unable to play it out. It's in line with all the vets who are getting 1-2 year "show me" contracts from Denver. The team is trying to win now without sacrificing the future, and I can't imagine them being interested in deviating from that.

 

Topics such as this always have an underlying "he's got enough money - if he really cared about winning he'd play for free" tone. That's pure hogwash. It's a job, and he deserves to get paid. Plus the players association gets cranky at the thought of players taking less than they are entitled to. An elite player taking less directly takes money out of the pocket of the next elite player at the same position who gets franchised, and sets the standard lower for EVERY player at their position. It's not in "the players" interest for unnaturally low contracts to be issued, and players - as members of the association and as lifelong members of that informal fraternity - feel as much if not more loyalty towards other players than they do to management. In fact I'd say that an elite player playing "for free" would be about as well received as the players crossing the picket line when there was a strike. It's simply not realistic, fair, or rational on any level to suggest that any player "should" take a major cut in salary so their team can sign other players.

No argument there MAC. Peyton deserves to be compensated for all the preparation he puts in to win football games & the flawless precision he demands at practice. However, contracts are restructured all the time & they are often front loaded or back loaded to determine when a play receives the bulk of their money.

 

Ask several players to restructure their contracts not just 18. If you wanna win & compete for a championship, this move must be done. Manning may be NFL royalty, but Lombardi Greatness does not allow for a Divine Right Of Kings salary wise MAC. Something must give way 1st. There a word for that: Self sacrifice.  What more important? Financial security or NFL immortality? Only Peyton can answer that question truthfully. 

[alawai]

I'm not saying greed nor the love of money but as a professional football player you're one hit away from never-never land. Whether if you're a Hall-of-Famer or a sub your career is too short, you've got to think money!  You are your own commodity!  That's your livelihood!

 

Should Peyton go up to Elway and ask to restructure the contract to get more/better quality players?  Should Elway go up to his owner and ask to restructure his contract to get more/better furniture for the office?

 

I hope I'm not sounding greedy but your body and talent is your livelihood, don't shortchange yourself!

[HtownColt]

Yea because taking a pay cut is such the American way lol

[southwest1]

I'm not saying greed nor the love of money but as a professional football player you're one hit away from never-never land. Whether if you're a Hall-of-Famer or a sub your career is too short, you've got to think money!  You are your own commodity!  That's your livelihood!

 

Should Peyton go up to Elway and ask to restructure the contract to get more/better quality players?  Should Elway go up to his owner and ask to restructure his contract to get more/better furniture for the office?

 

I hope I'm not sounding greedy but your body and talent is your livelihood, don't shortchange yourself!

I get where you coming from 100GFB. Yes, that certainly is the other side of the NFL coin. Get as much money as you can as quickly as you can because your career could be over in just a single play. It's a valid point. No, you do not come across as greedy at all 100GFB. You are essentially saying that given the punishment this league dishes out get as much money as you can to live on in retirement because tomorrow is guaranteed to no one. Good point. 

 

My only point is this: After a crushing SB loss like that, how do you regroup & do your priorities change? Do you start thinking of life after football & think about stepping back? Or do you say darn it nobody embarrasses the Broncos like that & our new mission is to get back & rectify this wrong? Do you start thinking about leaving the game for good or continuing to kick butt & redefine the record books?

 

If you asked me to encapsulate it completely, it would be this: How does Manning erase this loss from his memory while still using it as fuel to show the NFL world that 18 is far from dead & done?  

[Fx Stryker]

I was sarcastically pointing at what Brady did. I have no issue with Peyton contract. He earns it, and his cap is the last issue for the Broncos.

[alawai]

I get where you coming from 100GFB. Yes, that certainly is the other side of the NFL coin. Get as much money as you can as quickly as you can because your career could be over in just a single play. It's a valid point. No, you do not come across as greedy at all 100GFB. You are essentially saying that given the punishment this league dishes out get as much money as you can to live on in retirement because tomorrow is guaranteed to no one. Good point. 

 

My only point is this: After a crushing SB loss like that, how do you regroup & do your priorities change? Do you start thinking of life after football & think about stepping back? Or do you say darn it nobody embarrasses the Broncos like that & our new mission is to get back & rectify this wrong? Do you start thinking about leaving the game for good or continuing to kick butt & redefine the record books?

 

If you asked me to encapsulate it completely, it would be this: How does Manning erase this loss from his memory while still using it as fuel to show the NFL world that 18 is far from dead & done?  

 

 

 

 

No problem SW1!  We're on the same corner just looking in different directions. Yes PM may need to re-set his priorities but he should not shortchange himself/others/club.  No I don't know of any win/win scenarios for him and the Broncos. 

[southwest1]

Yea because taking a pay cut is such the American way lol

You know HtownColt. Your statement is a good one & it makes me why in the world we never hear about NFL front office executives tightening their belts & taking less money to help the franchise out financially. LOL! 

[Jules]

IMO pretty much every NFL player could take a pay cut. Especially considering how many in the country are struggling, starving and trying to make ends meet. But, the NFL is a cash cow and the amount of money put into it is sometimes jaw dropping.......

[MAC]

No argument there MAC. Peyton deserves to be compensated for all the preparation he puts in to win football games & the flawless precision he demands at practice. However, contracts are restructured all the time & they are often front loaded or back loaded to determine when a play receives the bulk of their money.

 

Ask several players to restructure their contracts not just 18. If you wanna win & compete for a championship, this move must be done. Manning may be NFL royalty, but Lombardi Greatness does not allow for a Divine Right Of Kings salary wise MAC. Something must give way 1st. There a word for that: Self sacrifice.  What more important? Financial security or NFL immortality? Only Peyton can answer that question truthfully. 

I know that SW, but that's not what this thread is about (as I was trying to point out).

 

This thread is flat out about asking Peyton to take a pay cut, which it sounds like you agree is an absurd proposition. Contract restructurings are about playing games with the cap - the player involved NEVER ends up with less money in their pockets as a result. In fact they virtually always get EXTRA money as part of the restructure. I also tried to point out that the BRONCOS don't appear to be interested in robbing peter to pay paul by creating large future dead money obligations. It's the TEAMS who do these things, it has precious little to do with the players.

 

And again, this was started by AM, and the motivation is to imply that "Brady has made a sacrifice, therefore he's better than Manning". As FX alluded to with a ;) in his reply, we've talked the Brady contract around in circles until we are all dizzy, and I don't believe that it was a sacrifice on his part in the first place. It's the most cynical kind of cap manipulation. The fact that the Broncos haven't stooped to the same level is admirable. The reality is that Peyton is ALREADY accepting perhaps $8 million or more less per season than he could get if he was putting his own financial interests ahead of winning. He's getting a fair contract.

 

Once again, it's a job. Players aren't fans, they are employees. All businesses are competitive. I'd love to find a person on here who is interested in reducing their own salary in hopes of improving their employers chances of competing and profiting. No, you obtain the most money that you possibly can, work as hard as you can, and when you leave the employer moves on. The Broncos owner is concerned with his own ego and profit, is he making a sacrifice for Manning? It's a business - period.

 

This all comes from people looking at their own paychecks and thinking "ah, he's rich, he doesn't need it". That's not their decision. Any employees LIFE revolves around how much money they earn. The job is simply what they do to earn the money. Why in Gods name would anyone expect an athlete to give away money to help the team? They pose it as a moral issue, but in actuality fans who suggest this are suggesting that a player swap one human failing (greed) for another (ego) because it benefits THEMSELVES. There is no moral high-ground here, everyone involved is thinking of themselves - such is life.

[dw49]

I was sarcastically pointing at what Brady did. I have no issue with Peyton contract. He earns it, and his cap is the last issue for the Broncos.

 Maybe Im misunderstanding what your saying. But Brady didnt take a pay cut . He took like another 50 million up front and signed for 10 million per year when hes like 39-40 years old. This is far different than asking Manning to take a pay cut. Like comparing apples and submarines 

[dw49]

I apologize I guess I'm missinformed. I've never seen anyone say void my contract and only pay me $3 million dollars. I don't think that is even possible let alone would the players union allow it. Now I went on to say he could restructure and spread out the money over multiple years but he doesn't have much left in the tank...eventually the Broncos would be on the books for 12-13 million and he owuldnt even be playing. So how do you exactly take a pay cut without restructuring....because to me he can't just say give me only 10 million and use the other 7 to buy some players. 

 

 

 

Players take pay cuts that is fact. Happens all the time but not the way you have it presented above. Of coarse a player doesn't go to management and say "void my contract and pay me only 3 million $. " But they do and are "allowed" to play for less than they were contracted for. Now if Manning said pay me 3 million $ for 2014 , the CBA probably would come in and try to void that kind of a deal. The thought of manning doing that is ridiculous. Facet is Manning is scheduled for around a 15 mill base for 2014 and his pro rated bonus is 2.5. That's 17.5 . Why in Gods name shouldn't he make that ? How about Flacco and Rodgers giving back some money as their teams were worse than Denver's.

 

Anyway... I'm gettig off tract. We were talking about players taking pay cuts. It pretty much always happens when a player signs a big contract and it's backloaded. I'll use  Marvin Harrison for an example as you're probably familiar with how that situation played out. He was in the last year of his contract and was due 12 mill. There was no way in heck he was worth even half that amount considering age and health. So in order to stay with the Colts , he would have had to take a substantial pay cut. We don't even know if the Colts offered him a contract but if they did , he would either accept it or test the market. Usually when these instances occur and they occur very frequently , the player decides to go out and see if 1 of the 31 remaining teams will do better. There often could be some hurt feeling involved too. This is why you don't see a whole bunch of players actually taking pay cuts. They normally end up with another team for pretty much what they were offered to begin with. There is nothing in the CBA that prohibits this. What they would try to stop is a guy like Manning deciding out of the blue that he will play 2014 for 7-8 mill. and I think probably that is what you meant when you said "there is no such thing as a pay cut." 

 

You ask how he could take a pay cut without restructuring ? Technically I guess he could say don't pay me the 17 mill base and 19.5 cap hit in 2015. He could probably shave 2-3 mill in 2015 and not get flack from the CBA. But if your asking how he could do enough to really make a difference ? The only was I can think of is to restructure the deal and push the money you want to free up down the road. Ya know .. this is all so stupid that I hadn't even read the article that starfted this thread. I just went back and read it. I mean .. who wrote that ? Had to be a 3rd grader or a buffoon. Says he should take a pay cut... but how much ? He probably could do 3 mill and count 14.5 . What does that accomplish. Then he says he should restructure ...How do you do that without some upfront bonus money ? 

[southwest1]

I know that SW, but that's not what this thread is about (as I was trying to point out).

 

This thread is flat out about asking Peyton to take a pay cut, which it sounds like you agree is an absurd proposition. Contract restructurings are about playing games with the cap - the player involved NEVER ends up with less money in their pockets as a result. In fact they virtually always get EXTRA money as part of the restructure. I also tried to point out that the BRONCOS don't appear to be interested in robbing peter to pay paul by creating large future dead money obligations. It's the TEAMS who do these things, it has precious little to do with the players.

 

And again, this was started by AM, and the motivation is to imply that "Brady has made a sacrifice, therefore he's better than Manning". As FX alluded to with a ;) in his reply, we've talked the Brady contract around in circles until we are all dizzy, and I don't believe that it was a sacrifice on his part in the first place. It's the most cynical kind of cap manipulation. The fact that the Broncos haven't stooped to the same level is admirable. The reality is that Peyton is ALREADY accepting perhaps $8 million or more less per season than he could get if he was putting his own financial interests ahead of winning. He's getting a fair contract.

 

Once again, it's a job. Players aren't fans, they are employees. All businesses are competitive. I'd love to find a person on here who is interested in reducing their own salary in hopes of improving their employers chances of competing and profiting. No, you obtain the most money that you possibly can, work as hard as you can, and when you leave the employer moves on. The Broncos owner is concerned with his own ego and profit, is he making a sacrifice for Manning? It's a business - period.

 

This all comes from people looking at their own paychecks and thinking "ah, he's rich, he doesn't need it". That's not their decision. Any employees LIFE revolves around how much money they earn. The job is simply what they do to earn the money. Why in Gods name would anyone expect an athlete to give away money to help the team? They pose it as a moral issue, but in actuality fans who suggest this are suggesting that a player swap one human failing (greed) for another (ego) because it benefits THEMSELVES. There is no moral high-ground here, everyone involved is thinking of themselves - such is life.

Fx Stryker proposed an interesting approach in his post: "How about he take a 3yr/ $3M extension to spread the contract out." One which you & I both liked presumably to cost less money in the longrun & use that savings over time to either draft more athletic players or secure the services of a trusted veteran. You need more money to land key weapons under NFL salary cap restrictions. It's as simple as that. 

 

Yes, Pat Bowlen loves the revenue that Manning is generating annually at Mile High in terms of merchandizing sales, ticket sales, & broadcasting revenue sure, but winning Championships is paramount in ownership circles & Pat Bowlen expects Manning to win a SB not come ever so close. You are paying 18 to essentially get you over the hump & win team rings where your revenue will easily double & triple financially speaking.

 

Why take less money you ask? Gee, I don't know to get a better line, to get premium pass rushers, & win the SB god willing. No, you are swapping intense greed for more greed, which directly benefits the owner more than it ever does the fans MAC let's get real here okay. 

 

No, not all NFL businesses are competitive. The Oakland Raiders have been a dismal franchise since about 2002. 

[Synthetic]

Do you really think a guy that had to have 97 million dollars just for two seasons with Denver is going to take a pay cut to try and win a Super Bowl?

 

 

Nope.

 

If there is one thing he loves as much as his stats, it's money.

[MAC]

Fx Stryker proposed an interesting approach in his post: "How about he take a 3yr/ $3M extension to spread the contract out." One which you & I both liked presumably to cost less money in the longrun & use that savings over time to either draft more athletic players or secure the services of a trusted veteran. You need more money to land key weapons under NFL salary cap restrictions. It's as simple as that. 

 

Yes, Pat Bowlen loves the revenue that Manning is generating annually at Mile High in terms of merchandizing sales, ticket sales, & broadcasting revenue sure, but winning Championships is paramount in ownership circles & Pat Bowlen expects Manning to win a SB not come ever so close. You are paying 18 to essentially get you over the hump & win team rings where your revenue will easily double & triple financially speaking.

 

Why take less money you ask? Gee, I don't know to get a better line, to get premium pass rushers, & win the SB god willing. No, you are swapping intense greed for more greed, which directly benefits the owner more than it ever does the fans MAC let's get real here okay. 

 

No, not all NFL businesses are competitive. The Oakland Raiders have been a dismal franchise since about 2002. 

It's abundantly clear why the fans, management and owner would want a player to take less. I'm saying "on what planet is it fair or appropriate to expect the player to take less".

 

FX's comment was a joke. He was alluding to Brady's absurd contract with a ;) . It wasn't a "real" suggestion at all. Such a deal would create an enormous amount of dead money for the Broncos which their every action suggests they are trying to avoid. Would I want it? Well as a Colts fan I don't particularly care if the Broncos end up with dead money after Peyton leaves, but it would be disingenuous for me to demand that the Broncos do it as if it's "the right thing to do". It isn't the right thing for them. 

 

I've said the same things a few different ways here. Basically:

 

a) Players don't take pay cuts. Expecting to them to do so is ridiculous.

b) The Broncos don't want to cripple themselves. Expecting them to do so is ridiculous.

[Dustin]

Do you really think a guy that had to have 97 million dollars just for two seasons with Denver is going to take a pay cut to try and win a Super Bowl?

 

 

Nope.

 

If there is one thing he loves as much as his stats, it's money.

 

Didn't Drew Bress holdout? Lol

[BOTT]

There is nothing wrong with Peyton's contract. He could have easily signed for $25 million per when he was a free agent, and pushed to renegotiate a lot higher than that after Flacco got paid if he was only concerned with money. He's got a fair contract.

 

For those talking about it being extended, I'll point out that it's designed to have as little dead money as possible in the event that Peyton is unable to play it out. It's in line with all the vets who are getting 1-2 year "show me" contracts from Denver. The team is trying to win now without sacrificing the future, and I can't imagine them being interested in deviating from that.

 

Topics such as this always have an underlying "he's got enough money - if he really cared about winning he'd play for free" tone. That's pure hogwash. It's a job, and he deserves to get paid. Plus the players association gets cranky at the thought of players taking less than they are entitled to. An elite player taking less directly takes money out of the pocket of the next elite player at the same position who gets franchised, and sets the standard lower for EVERY player at their position. It's not in "the players" interest for unnaturally low contracts to be issued, and players - as members of the association and as lifelong members of that informal fraternity - feel as much if not more loyalty towards other players than they do to management. In fact I'd say that an elite player playing "for free" would be about as well received as the players crossing the picket line when there was a strike. It's simply not realistic, fair, or rational on any level to suggest that any player "should" take a major cut in salary so their team can sign other players.

Nobody is suggesting he play for free or even half of what he is making. It's not like he would be the first pro athlete to take less in the twilight of their career. Hell, Reggie took less money to stay with the Colts and he has made of fraction of what Manning has in his career. I really don't care what he makes, but if he wants to win another championship at this point in his career he is making it harder on himself with that contract.

[MAC]

Nobody is suggesting he play for free or even half of what he is making. It's not like he would be the first pro athlete to take less in the twilight of their career. Hell, Reggie took less money to stay with the Colts and he has made of fraction of what Manning has in his career. I really don't care what he makes, but if he wants to win another championship at this point in his career he is making it harder on himself with that contract.

Once again, he is also taking less money than he could be - likely by a far higher percentage discount (and vastly more money in total) than that Reggie theoretically might be.

 

Not to mention the fact that it's hard to give a home-town discount when your home-town releases you. Why is the implication suddenly that Peyton's contract is unreasonable? It's a freaking bargain.

[oldunclemark]

That's just not true..

 

Denver will have cap space when they release some folks they do not need...

 

One of their 3 TEs..Wes Woodyard...and, I'm afraid, Champ Bailey....

 

......The players they need defensively are on the team..they just got hurt last year...

 

....To suggest that Denver would,be better off if Manning volunteered to make $15 mil instead of $20 mil..

 

                ,is a misunderstanding of the situation.

 

Denver's question is: Who do you REALLY want to resign..referring to Decker and Moreno..and Cromartie

[BOTT]

Once again, he is also taking less money than he could be - likely by a far higher percentage discount (and vastly more money in total) than that Reggie theoretically might be.

 

Not to mention the fact that it's hard to give a home-town discount when your home-town releases you. Why is the implication suddenly that Peyton's contract is unreasonable? It's a freaking bargain.

Never said it was unreasonable....it's a fair contract. But a player in his position, having made the money he has over his career, taking less to win another ring would make sense and would not be unique.

[amfootball]

 Maybe Im misunderstanding what your saying. But Brady didnt take a pay cut . He took like another 50 million up front and signed for 10 million per year when hes like 39-40 years old. This is far different than asking Manning to take a pay cut. Like comparing apples and submarines 

Last year Brady signed a three year $27 mil extension for the 2015 -2017 seasons when he will be ages 38-40. The entire contract was guaranteed and it included a $3 million signing bonus along with annual salaries of $7 million in 2015, $8 million in 2016 and $9 million in 2017, when Brady will turn 40. So he basically got $30 mil guaranteed last off-season to play until he is 40. His contract freed up $8 mil in cap space for the Pats last year and will free up another $7 mil this year. His cap hit will be $13 mil this season.

 

But all of this is moot in terms of Manning as if he was going to do something like this he would have had to do it when he first signed with Denver two seasons ago. His numbers are set now for the next three seasons.