Odds Of Manning Returning

[WSO]

and i never ONCE said that i didnt want to take Luck or that i didnt think that we should...fact is, i DO think we SHOULD take Luck...all i was saying is that the people who say that we can only have one or the other because the #1 never sits, needs to take a minute to understand WHY the other #1s havent had to sit.

You're barking up the wrong tree, bro

It's not just because #1's don't sit. It's also because Manning has a 16M cap hit if the Colts keep him. His total salary is 35Mish next season. Add Lucks salary and bonus and you're looking at over 40M or even more just at the QB spot alone. This is why it doesn't make sense to me to have both. I see it as one or the other.

[coltsblue1844]

It's not just because #1's don't sit. It's also because Manning has a 16M cap hit if the Colts keep him. His total salary is 35Mish next season. Add Lucks salary and bonus and you're looking at over 40M or even more just at the QB spot alone. This is why it doesn't make sense to me to have both. I see it as one or the other.

Total dollars doesnt equal salary cap hit, though...the salary cap hit could actually be a little less than it was THIS year, with Manning, Collins, Painter and Orlovski....would you not rather have Luck as the back up than Collins/Painter/Orlovski?

The salary cap is the $ you have to consider, the bonus money doesnt count vs the cap, and if Jim Irsay wants to pay the guys money that doesnt count vs the cap, then i'm all for it...besides, whatever bonus/non cap money he pays, will be/has been already made for him by Peyton and will be by Luck in the revenue they cause: Ticket sales, jersey/merchandise sales, tv money etc. Manning has already made Jim a fortune, as i'm sure that Luck very well may continue for him.

[MCurtis32]

The more I think about the situation, If peyton is healthy by draft time, trade the pick. get one of LSU defensive backs. Pick Landry Jones from Oklahoma. He will be ready to play after manning is done. Use the rest of the picks to fill in nicely. If Peyton is not healthy by draft time, do the same or gamble for the future with Luck. It seems the Colts are getting long in the tooth at several positions. The only way I see Peyton leaving for another team is if he can't be healthy enough to play here. The only way Luck is going to be successful is to have a good team around him. I was all about picking Luck in the beginning, now I don't know. I'm sure when Montana left Sanfran thier fans were messed up too.

[MSColtsFan]

The more I think about the situation, If peyton is healthy by draft time, trade the pick. get one of LSU defensive backs. Pick Landry Jones from Oklahoma. He will be ready to play after manning is done. Use the rest of the picks to fill in nicely. If Peyton is not healthy by draft time, do the same or gamble for the future with Luck. It seems the Colts are getting long in the tooth at several positions. The only way I see Peyton leaving for another team is if he can't be healthy enough to play here. The only way Luck is going to be successful is to have a good team around him. I was all about picking Luck in the beginning, now I don't know. I'm sure when Montana left Sanfran thier fans were messed up too.

Jones is going back for his senior year. Oklahoma announced that this afternoon. With Barkley out, and Jones out, I think Luck and RGIII go one two, which means trading the number one overall doesn't land you a QB at all. At least not a top tier QB prospect this year. I see the Rams more likely to move out of the two spot because someone will love RGIII and move up to get him. Or Luck if RGIII goes one, obviously. So many teams need a QB, and now there are only two first rounders in my opinion. I think Jones was not a first rounder by the way - tougher times after he lost his weapons.

[Superman]

It's not just because #1's don't sit. It's also because Manning has a 16M cap hit if the Colts keep him. His total salary is 35Mish next season. Add Lucks salary and bonus and you're looking at over 40M or even more just at the QB spot alone. This is why it doesn't make sense to me to have both. I see it as one or the other.

If you have Peyton at a $35 million cap hit next season (which I think your numbers are off, I think the cap hit would be about $30 million, but let's say you're right), that's the problem. Not the $4-5 million that would go to his backup.

By the way, that's about going rate for a decent backup quarterback anyways. Which everyone seems to agree we need, desperately. I would rather than be Luck than almost anyone else.

To my mind, the quarterback money is pretty much the same whether we keep Manning and draft Luck or keep Manning and sign someone else to back him up.

The only way it's significantly different is if we decide NOT to pick up Manning's option. In which case, we're still stuck with a pretty hefty cap hit for Manning's voided contract ($16 million), plus we're (presumably) paying Luck $4-5 million, and we're signing another backup quarterback or two, and we're right back up above $25 million devoted to quarterbacks in 2012.

So now, assuming Manning is healthy, do you want to pay $35-40 million in 2012 to quarterbacks, whether it's Manning and Luck or Manning and somebody else? Or do you want to pay $25-30 million in 2012 to quarterbacks, without Manning?

[Mustng959]

I'm first a Tennessee Vol fan .... though this year was the pits. :ashamed: I've been a Colts fan since old #19 was slinging it downfield in Baltimore. I remember Peyton's dad, Archie, tearing my Vols up in Mississippi back in the late 60's but I've always had a great respect for the family. When Peyton chose to attend college at Tennessee, I was ecstatic.

That said, I don't want to see Peyton risk a life-disabling injury in order for the Colts to climb back on top in the NFL. He's done just about everything you could expect a great quarterback to do (except win the Heisman and that is still a sore subject down here in VOL land). If Peyton is 100% and wishes to continue playing, I would not want it to be for anyone except the Colts. But I would really rather see him stay healthy, enjoy family life and maybe do some coaching to try and pass on that tremendous talent and football "sense" that he possesses to other upcoming talent. In other words, don't come back to please the fans Peyton .... do what is best for YOU!

My first post here so be gentle ...........

[doogansquest]

Why are people saying things like, "I'd rather see Manning walk than risk his health..."?

You do realize that the fusion took, right? This means that he is now LESS likely to suffer the same nerve damage than he did before. That's what happens once the callous forms: it gets stronger.

[That Guy]

Why are people saying things like, "I'd rather see Manning walk than risk his health..."?

You do realize that the fusion took, right? This means that he is now LESS likely to suffer the same nerve damage than he did before. That's what happens once the callous forms: it gets stronger.

It's like taking a chain and welding two of the links together. The chain becomes stronger, but mobility and flexibility are decreased. There is also the issue of the nerves. The bones may have fused properly, but nerves do not regenerate quickly. Just because his fusion took, does not mean his neck is stronger, and it certainly does not take all of the risk out of football.

[super8todd]

Lets do this.. admit you were off when you said in 2 years people will forget Manning even existed, and i will say im sorry..

Nonsense. This argument is invalid. I never said Manning wasn't great! I just said he is done for, and that it is time to move on. I don't expect an apology from anyone, I already know there are people out there who are too afraid to move on too. Facts are facts, and blind people can at least reason even if they can't see... can you?

[DILLIGAFER]

Nonsense. This argument is invalid. I never said Manning wasn't great! I just said he is done for, and that it is time to move on. I don't expect an apology from anyone, I already know there are people out there who are too afraid to move on too. Facts are facts, and blind people can at least reason even if they can't see... can you?

Humm, maybe I was to subtle.. here lets try this.. you stated in 2 years people wont remember Manning ever exisited did you not. So what argument are you talking about? Dense people. What? To say he wont be remembed that the argument you tried to make with me? Really?? WRONG!

Oh, and that icon means i was being sarcastic and no, it wasnt an appology. Get real.

[sb2001]

In every single drafting scenario, the #1 pick plays. Please name the last one who didn't start.

Aaron Rodgers was drafted in the late 20's on a team that had a HOF QB that still had a few years to go.

Completely different situation.

I dont think the Colts situation is very different due to the bizzare year we have had. Besides we get a # 1 with a HOF QB that might still have a few years to go.

[LightninMax]

Put a healthy Manning on any team with an adequate defense and running game and it's a playoff team that can threaten a Super Bowl.

Another way to look at it. A healthy Peyton is a Colt an unhealthy Manning is retired. I think we just have to be patient.

[NoSuckForLuck]

Manning is going to be traded.. best for him and for us.. We are rebuilding.. in 2 more years we won't even remember Manning ever existing.

That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard! I am sorry to say but anybody that will get rid of one of the greatest ever for a rookie is dumb. I wouldn't even think about ditching Peyton if he can play. Who knows I might be an dipstick.

[coltsblue1844]

If you have Peyton at a $35 million cap hit next season (which I think your numbers are off, I think the cap hit would be about $30 million, but let's say you're right), that's the problem. Not the $4-5 million that would go to his backup.

By the way, that's about going rate for a decent backup quarterback anyways. Which everyone seems to agree we need, desperately. I would rather than be Luck than almost anyone else.

To my mind, the quarterback money is pretty much the same whether we keep Manning and draft Luck or keep Manning and sign someone else to back him up.

The only way it's significantly different is if we decide NOT to pick up Manning's option. In which case, we're still stuck with a pretty hefty cap hit for Manning's voided contract ($16 million), plus we're (presumably) paying Luck $4-5 million, and we're signing another backup quarterback or two, and we're right back up above $25 million devoted to quarterbacks in 2012.

So now, assuming Manning is healthy, do you want to pay $35-40 million in 2012 to quarterbacks, whether it's Manning and Luck or Manning and somebody else? Or do you want to pay $25-30 million in 2012 to quarterbacks, without Manning?

The CAP HIT is $17mil, not 30 or 35 million. The other money that would go to Manning would be bonus money from Irsay, that doesnt count beyond the $17million cap hit for next year...if we want to worry about the salary cap hit of our players, look no further than Freeney, who has a whopping $19million cap hit for next season (yes, Freeney's hit is $2million HIGHER than Peyton's next season)

[CAN'T STOP EM]

I am one of the biggest fans of Peyton Manning out there.

I have never seen someone turn a franchise around, and keep it competitive

For so very long.

He is a hall of famer for certain.

But...... I personally dont expect him back. (even though i wished it werent so)

There are 2 problems.

1) Peyton has had his 3rd surgery in a little over a year. On Sept 8th when he had the most recent surgery, he opted for the surgery that would speed up the healing process. It was quoted by several sources that he would be back in 6-8 weeks. Another source said he would be playing in 8-12 weeks.

It has now been 17 weeks.

He reportedly will probably fail a physical this week. After 2 other surgeries, that were completed that also failed, it appears from the surface, that this last one is not on track, and may also be a failure.

With NFL QBs a significant drop in velocity can change a great QB to an average QB or worse.

I remember watching Bert Jones go from a great player to an average player, after losing that velocity.

(i realize that a rotater cuff surgery is different than what Peyton had, but both surguries may impact velocity of the football)

90 percent healthy doesnt cut it in the NFL for a QB, nor should you pay that much money for what may now be an average NFL QB.

2) This team has huge holes and aging vets. I know we dont approach the league like Dan Snyder with

FA's, but 28 million would go a long way to rebuilding our team.

I hope i am wrong, but unless Peyton restructures, and makes an amazing recovery, I don't see him here next year.

For what it's worth

INDIANAPOLIS -- Joseph Addai knows this much about Peyton Manning's recovery: His right arm is getting stronger.

Addai was one of three Colts players catching passes last week from the four-time league MVP. On Wednesday, he told The Associated Press that Manning is putting some zip on his short passes.

"He's not throwing deep-level passes, but the short stuff is really good enough to play," Addai said.

IMO I think a 90% Manning ( Not your average QB ) is still better than 90% of the current QB's

[Esquire59]

28%

[WSO]

If you have Peyton at a $35 million cap hit next season (which I think your numbers are off, I think the cap hit would be about $30 million, but let's say you're right), that's the problem. Not the $4-5 million that would go to his backup.

By the way, that's about going rate for a decent backup quarterback anyways. Which everyone seems to agree we need, desperately. I would rather than be Luck than almost anyone else.

To my mind, the quarterback money is pretty much the same whether we keep Manning and draft Luck or keep Manning and sign someone else to back him up.

The only way it's significantly different is if we decide NOT to pick up Manning's option. In which case, we're still stuck with a pretty hefty cap hit for Manning's voided contract ($16 million), plus we're (presumably) paying Luck $4-5 million, and we're signing another backup quarterback or two, and we're right back up above $25 million devoted to quarterbacks in 2012.

So now, assuming Manning is healthy, do you want to pay $35-40 million in 2012 to quarterbacks, whether it's Manning and Luck or Manning and somebody else? Or do you want to pay $25-30 million in 2012 to quarterbacks, without Manning?

no its not 30m not even close

it clearly says in the 2nd sentence of my post that Manning is a 16mill cap hit

also why would there be a 16mill cap hit for exercising Manning's opt out clause?

[Superman]

no its not 30m not even close

it clearly says in the 2nd sentence of my post that Manning is a 16mill cap hit

also why would there be a 16mill cap hit for exercising Manning's opt out clause?

I misunderstood.

So then I don't know what we're talking about. Why isn't it economical to keep Manning at $16 million and keep Luck at $4-5 million?

[WSO]

I misunderstood.

So then I don't know what we're talking about. Why isn't it economical to keep Manning at $16 million and keep Luck at $4-5 million?

I don't know if paying a 35(soon 36) year old QB coming off 3 neck surgeries still not 100% is worth a 16mill cap hit. If Manning comes back and throws for 4k+ yards, 30 TDs like the Manning of old then I would love it. No complaints and he would deserve every penny.

But right at this moment it doesn't make sense to me. $16mill against the cap / $35mill salary. . that's a lot for a player in the current state he is in.

To put that in perspective, Brady made $36.5Mill in the last 2 seasons combined.

[Superman]

I don't know if paying a 35(soon 36) year old QB coming off 3 neck surgeries still not 100% is worth a 16mill cap hit. If Manning comes back and throws for 4k+ yards, 30 TDs like the Manning of old then I would love it. No complaints and he would deserve every penny.

But right at this moment it doesn't make sense to me. $16mill against the cap / $35mill salary. . that's a lot for a player in the current state he is in.

To put that in perspective, Brady made $36.5Mill in the last 2 seasons combined.

I don't care what he's going to "make," because that's not the actual cap hit. To me, he's making $18 million/year. The rest is cap magic -- smoke and mirrors.

I don't know where you got the $16 million figure from because I couldn't find it to save my life, but if that's the actual cap hit, then that's just fine by me. If you have the most important player in the league at the most important position making 13% of your salary cap (that's assuming a $120 million cap, which is probably low), you better do a good job putting players around him, but it's definitely doable. Even if you're paying Luck $5 million to ride the bench.

If -- IF -- Manning is healthy, no reason he's not a 30 touchdown, 4,000 yard quarterback. And I can't see Irsay agreeing to keep him when he has an out, not unless he's reasonably sure that Manning is healthy. But that's a different conversation. Manning's health is the overriding issue for me, and I really, really hope he's healthy. Assuming he is, there's no cap issue in my mind. You keep him. And even if you have another $5 million tied up with Luck, that's okay, because it's worth. At least to me. The whole "you can't keep Manning and Luck" issue is contrived, in my opinion, because I don't think there's any problem with keeping two quarterbacks, even if one is arguably the greatest of all time, and the other is the hottest prospect of all time. Doesn't matter. Consider yourself lucky, and figure everything else out as it becomes necessary to do so.

[HGRekks]

I've done the math. 72.53956820934923% likely. It's science.

[JoKeR]

"Never tell me the odds"-Han Solo

[Superman]

"Never tell me the odds"-Han Solo

Nice.

[WSO]

I don't care what he's going to "make," because that's not the actual cap hit. To me, he's making $18 million/year. The rest is cap magic -- smoke and mirrors.

I don't know where you got the $16 million figure from because I couldn't find it to save my life, but if that's the actual cap hit, then that's just fine by me. If you have the most important player in the league at the most important position making 13% of your salary cap (that's assuming a $120 million cap, which is probably low), you better do a good job putting players around him, but it's definitely doable. Even if you're paying Luck $5 million to ride the bench.

If -- IF -- Manning is healthy, no reason he's not a 30 touchdown, 4,000 yard quarterback. And I can't see Irsay agreeing to keep him when he has an out, not unless he's reasonably sure that Manning is healthy. But that's a different conversation. Manning's health is the overriding issue for me, and I really, really hope he's healthy. Assuming he is, there's no cap issue in my mind. You keep him. And even if you have another $5 million tied up with Luck, that's okay, because it's worth. At least to me. The whole "you can't keep Manning and Luck" issue is contrived, in my opinion, because I don't think there's any problem with keeping two quarterbacks, even if one is arguably the greatest of all time, and the other is the hottest prospect of all time. Doesn't matter. Consider yourself lucky, and figure everything else out as it becomes necessary to do so.

A simple google Search for Manning's contract shows his cap hit next season is 16M (some say 17M)

It also shows his combined salary is around 35M (28M bonus + 7.5M salary)

Theres a lot of "IF's" in your statement. Right now the FACT is he is a 35 soon to be 36 year old QB who hasn't played in 4 or 5 months coming off 3 neck surgeries who is not 100% healthy. Based on that, it wouldn't make sense to pay him all that money. If he restructures then sure but right now he is not a 35M QB.

[Superman]

A simple google Search for Manning's contract shows his cap hit next season is 16M (some say 17M)

It also shows his combined salary is around 35M (28M bonus + 7.5M salary)

Theres a lot of "IF's" in your statement. Right now the FACT is he is a 35 soon to be 36 year old QB who hasn't played in 4 or 5 months coming off 3 neck surgeries who is not 100% healthy. Based on that, it wouldn't make sense to pay him all that money. If he restructures then sure but right now he is not a 35M QB.

A lot of those websites are conflicting and inaccurate. No matter. I hope you're right, because a $16 million cap hit is a lot better than a $30 million cap hit.

If he's not healthy, then there's nothing to talk about. This entire discussion is based off that one big IF, because that's what the whole thing hinges on. His age isn't the issue; Irsay knew last year that he was going to be 36. He'd already had two surgeries on the neck, and the third, while more invasive, was also meant to correct the problem. So yes, theres' that big IF, but it's the most important question to be answered.

And the only reason we're waiting for that IF to be cleared up is because he's Peyton F. Manning. This isn't Elvis Grbac or Chad Pennington we're talking about. It's one of the best to ever play the position, a player that is good enough to make your team a contender just by being on the field, if he's healthy. So it's worth it to figure out whether he's healthy or not. And if you have a reasonable degree of certainty that he is, then there's nothing wrong with paying him what you're going to pay him, because he'd be worth it.

And the $4-5 million to a rookie quarterback picked #1 overall isn't consequential.

It would be even better if Manning would agree to restructure, considering the circumstances. But there's no reason to consider that unless he's healthy.

[Tracy Denton]

I would rather have a healthy Manning for 4 more years than an unproven rookie, But, Who will be the back up if we don't draft Luck ? We could probably get Brady Quinn for a late round pick, Your thoughts on this ? I think Quinn would be a solid back up with Peytons grooming !