Did You Hear Irsay Say This?

[DILLIGAFER]

http://m.nfl.com/news/09000d5d825a9074/colts-owner-irsay-not-sure-if-manning-can-resume-career/

[theblueplague]

Yes, he did.. but he said it more matter of factly in more of a dodging-the-question manner. Nothing of significance here.

[ColtJ82]

http://m.nfl.com/new...-resume-career/

Is that really any different than what has been said all along. No one knows what 2-3 months from now holds.

[MTC]

Yes.

[DILLIGAFER]

Is that really any different than what has been said all along. No one knows what 2-3 months from now holds.

Well, first off nfl.com made it sound like Manning wasnt coming back and twisted it a little. I wanted to know Irsays exact words on the matter VS nfl.com's opinion on what he said.

[Nadine]

Yes. We are all waiting to see if manning can still play

[super8todd]

Manning is done... lets get some trade value out of him now.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Manning is done... lets get some trade value out of him now.

Amazing.. some still think there is a chance he could be traded. I sure how you were being sarcastic.

[super8todd]

Amazing.. some still think there is a chance he could be traded. I sure how you were being sarcastic.

No.. I am not joking. Amazing how some people don't see the value to trading in something that is spent and getting something in return.

Edited January 7, 2012 by 21isSuperman
Mod edit: personal shot

[Balzer40]

Well, first off nfl.com made it sound like Manning wasnt coming back and twisted it a little. I wanted to know Irsays exact words on the matter VS nfl.com's opinion on what he said.

How did they twist his words? I picked up on those quotes during his news conference and made me think for the 1st time that Manning indeed may not be back. I posted about it after his presser.

[FireJimCaldwell]

No.. I am not joking. Amazing how some people don't see the value to trading in something that is spent and getting something in return. Just do yourself a favor and don't get into anything near or related to business. You're better off serving the people than managing them.

I guess i need to change careers then.

See the thing is.. Some people have an understanding of the salary cap and its limits. Obviously you don't. So I'll continue to understand what can and can't happen with Manning, while you go along twiddling your thumbs.

Now that I cleary know you weren't being sarcastic, I truly feel sorry for you.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

No.. I am not joking. Amazing how some people don't see the value to trading in something that is spent and getting something in return. Just do yourself a favor and don't get into anything near or related to business. You're better off serving the people than managing them.

The Colts owe Manning $28 million on March 8th. If they don't him, he becomes a free agent. If they pay him, it's too costly to trade him. The trading period doesn't open until after March 8th. It's basically a "no trade clause" in the contract.

[BIGugly]

Manning is done... lets get some trade value out of him now.

Value to whom as what?

[Smonroe]

The Colts owe Manning $28 million on March 8th. If they don't him, he becomes a free agent. If they pay him, it's too costly to trade him. The trading period doesn't open until after March 8th. It's basically a "no trade clause" in the contract.

Thanks for posting that. Sometimes it's good to throw a dose of reality on people. I imagine the same "let's trade Manning now" people will soon fill up the board with "Let's get ____ ", - another FA we could never afford.

[jskinnz]

No.. I am not joking. Amazing how some people don't see the value to trading in something that is spent and getting something in return. Just do yourself a favor and don't get into anything near or related to business. You're better off serving the people than managing them.

You say yourself he is done and then in the next breath mention trading him for something. If he is "done" wouldn't potential trade partners recognize this too?

[TheNextGM]

I believe Irsay when he says if Manning is healthy enough to play, he's a Colt. End of discussion.

[haseo15]

i'm going to laugh when manning comes back and puts up another fine season over 4,000 yards passing and over 30 TD like always.

[chad72]

Irsay did say major changes will be coming in the offseason when the season started and asked us to be patient. He was probably talking about the Polians then.

[BigColtsFan2k]

I believe with all of my heart, Peyton WILL be with us next season IF health doesn't stand in the way.

[conklincolt]

I believe that peyton will never play for another team,period. Why? not money. I think he would retire a Colt and only a Colt and hopefully join our coaching ranks in some or any manner. With that said, he has NO TRADE value at all if he wont play.

[conklincolt]

opps sorry same post twice.

[No 1 Manning Fan]

No.. I am not joking. Amazing how some people don't see the value to trading in something that is spent and getting something in return. Just do yourself a favor and don't get into anything near or related to business. You're better off serving the people than managing them.

First of all, it would be irresponsible to absorb the cap hit we would take for trading Manning. It would be a better option to just cut him before the money is due. Secondly, if he is not in playing condition, what would his trade value be? Who wants to trade real value for a broken QB? And if he is healthy, why not play him?

Your premise makes no sense to me.

[Bleedin Blue]

The only real way I see Manning being traded is if he is healthy enough to start and plays a full 2012 season. Then that huge $28M is off the books for any franchise that takes him and he has demonstrated he is healthy enough to play so that other teams are interested. Then we are free to move on in 2013 with Luck who has had a season to observe one of the best QB's of all time operate.

This actually makes sense because Manning needs to prove to the Colts and to the rest of the league he can still play. The Colts shouldn't pass up one of the best prospects in a decade so we really need to take Luck. This also lets Irsay "thank" Manning for all the years he has contributed to the Colts.

This makes for a better transition from one franchise QB to the next IMO and all parties can take something positive away..

[Smonroe]

The only real way I see Manning being traded is if he is healthy enough to start and plays a full 2012 season. Then that huge $28M is off the books for any franchise that takes him and he has demonstrated he is healthy enough to play so that other teams are interested. Then we are free to move on in 2013 with Luck who has had a season to observe one of the best QB's of all time operate.

This actually makes sense because Manning needs to prove to the Colts and to the rest of the league he can still play. The Colts shouldn't pass up one of the best prospects in a decade so we really need to take Luck. This also lets Irsay "thank" Manning for all the years he has contributed to the Colts.

This makes for a better transition from one franchise QB to the next IMO and all parties can take something positive away..

So, you're saying Irsay would pay him $28M and then trade him? Then he'd have to pay big money for the players he'd get in the trade, because you have to assume they're high quality players. Or he'd get future draft picks, be out $28M, which I believe still counts somewhat against the cap, and have nothing to show for Manning next season.

IMHO, that just doesn't make good business sense. But, what do I know?

[Bleedin Blue]

So, you're saying Irsay would pay him $28M and then trade him? Then he'd have to pay big money for the players he'd get in the trade, because you have to assume they're high quality players. Or he'd get future draft picks, be out $28M, which I believe still counts somewhat against the cap, and have nothing to show for Manning next season.

IMHO, that just doesn't make good business sense. But, what do I know?

I'm not suggesting we trade Manning for players so there is no cap hit there. Really the only thing we are talking about is the huge $28M hit in 2012. That's not insignificant but Irsay is on the hook for that regardless if he plans on starting Manning in 2012. So really the only scenario where Irsay doesn't pay the $28M is where Manning gets cut and this organization gets nothing in return for him. Personally...if I were Irsay...I would pay Manning the $28M (assuming Manning is healthy of course) then start him throughout 2012 with the knowledge that he is proving to the league that he is healthy (and giving me the most trade value) then trade Manning for as many picks as I could get out of him. None of this is bad business sense IMHO. But again, what do we know.

[chad72]

So, you're saying Irsay would pay him $28M and then trade him?

Only if you can re-do Peyton's contract for the next 3 years making it a bit more cap friendly, without a no-trade clause, and trade him after showcasing a year of good health (I did start a thread for it about Peyton and Luck co-existing for exactly a year). The question is, will Tom Condon agree to that? Fat chance, says my gut and so do most of the others . But then, paying $28 mil. if Peyton is not close to 100% would be a gesture that can be used to negotiate a cap friendly deal for the next 3 years. The cap hit for this year will be set in stone by paying the $28 mil. but by re-negotiating the next 3 years in some fashion, maybe we can alter the cap hit that makes his contract tradeable.

The alternative is move the $28 mil. option due date stating to Tom Condon that it is reasonable for the Colts to ask Peyton to demonstrate he is 100% healthy enough for them to give him the option bonus.

[Smitto]

No.. I am not joking. Amazing how some people don't see the value to trading in something that is spent and getting something in return. Just do yourself a favor and don't get into anything near or related to business. You're better off serving the people than managing them.

You do realize it would cost the colts alot to trade manning?... im guessing you dont. Peyton will not be traded.. he will either be retained or cut... or just retire.

[Tony Sullivan]

You do realize it would cost the colts alot to trade manning?... im guessing you dont. Peyton will not be traded.. he will either be retained or cut... or just retire.

This is true, Manning isn't going to put himself in a position where the Colts can trade him wherever the Colts like.

[Smitto]

This is true, Manning isn't going to put himself in a position where the Colts can trade him wherever the Colts like.

And another thing is the colts owe him... i highly doubt he will reconstruct his contract just for a rookie QB, and i think wayne knows that and thats why he's so pessimistic about being back with the colts because there wont be good money to go around.

Which also brings up the point about not having two big QB's on the roster cause that hinders your chance of being a playoff caliber team.

[Bleedin Blue]

You do realize it would cost the colts alot to trade manning?... im guessing you dont. Peyton will not be traded.. he will either be retained or cut... or just retire.

This is true for 2012 only. After that Manning's yearly salary is around $20M which when you compare franchise quarterbacks...is still a bit high but not crazy and I do think that if he comes back and plays close to "his level" that other franchises would love the opportunity to have him. There are about 3 franchises that are one quarterback away from a superbowl...SF leads that pack with Denver and Arizona right behind them.

[FireJimCaldwell]

This is true for 2012 only. After that Manning's yearly salary is around $20M which when you compare franchise quarterbacks...is still a bit high but not crazy and I do think that if he comes back and plays close to "his level" that other franchises would love the opportunity to have him. There are about 3 franchises that are one quarterback away from a superbowl...SF leads that pack with Denver and Arizona right behind them.

Manning's salary cap # increases 1 million each year starting at 16 in 2011.

If he's paid the 28 million dollar bonus, as others have mentioned, it would be irresponsible to trade him for up to 3 years due to the salary cap penalties that we would then receive.

[Smitto]

This is true for 2012 only. After that Manning's yearly salary is around $20M which when you compare franchise quarterbacks...is still a bit high but not crazy and I do think that if he comes back and plays close to "his level" that other franchises would love the opportunity to have him. There are about 3 franchises that are one quarterback away from a superbowl...SF leads that pack with Denver and Arizona right behind them.

I have no doubt in my mind that if peyton comes back and is retaind, there is no way he will be traded.. for the simple fact that the guy was and simply is that aweosme... this is his 3rd neck surgery and the last one didnt even heal correctly leaving him to play with pain yet he still won the mvp... now that it is healed 100%, if he gets strengh back in that throwing arm he will be back on the ball and i have no doubt about that in my mind.

If peyton is retained he will retire a colt, there's no doubts about it. he may retire in the next three years but i firmly believe that if he is able to play he will retire a colt.... but your right though trading him will be easier after the upcoming season.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I have no doubt in my mind that if peyton comes back and is retaind, there is no way he will be traded.. for the simple fact that the guy was and simply is that aweosme... this is his 3rd neck surgery and the last one didnt even heal correctly leaving him to play with pain yet he still won the mvp... now that it is healed 100%, if he gets strengh back in that throwing arm he will be back on the ball and i have no doubt about that in my mind.

If peyton is retained he will retire a colt, there's no doubts about it. he may retire in the next three years but i firmly believe that if he is able to play he will retire a colt.... but your right though trading him will be easier after the upcoming season.

How would it be easier after the upcoming season? That would accelerate nearly 29 million into the cap. If he's paid the bonus he's a Colt for at least 3 years.

[manningstheman]

I dont see anything in those comments that says Manning wont be back. Its a medical decision. Jim has always said that if Manning is healthy and can return he will. All he was stating in that quote is the same thing anyone would say. If Peyton cant play then he isnt going to play for us. lol. I mean what else would he do if he is unable to medically get cleared to play. You cant play if you are not healthy enough to play. That whole quote is just a Owner stating the facts.

[Bleedin Blue]

Manning's salary cap # increases 1 million each year starting at 16 in 2011.

If he's paid the 28 million dollar bonus, as others have mentioned, it would be irresponsible to trade him for up to 3 years due to the salary cap penalties that we would then receive.

What salary cap penalties? I'm suggesting that the $28M signing bonus be paid this year (again, assuming that Manning is healthy). Only signing bonuses are immediately due upon a release, waiver or trade. Since we're talking about 2013...that number is $0. Now the team that receives Manning in 2013 will also receive his then current contracted salary and that will be under their cap...not ours...regardless of the yearly increment. That's for that team's GM to renegotiate and/or deal with.

Now let's be clear...in this scenario the Colts take a huge salary cap hit this year...and that hurts a lot because normally his signing bonus would have been prorated over the course of the contract but what I'm really saying here is that we are blowing up this team in a rebuilding year so we would see salary cap benefits to releasing players like Brackett and Bullitt plus we have a number of players that are free agents this year so unless they receive a new contract they are not going to count against the cap.

The benefits to all this are multifaceted.

1. First, Peyton gets to prove his value to other teams and his stock will rise thus netting our new GM more in possible trade.
   
2. Manning will receive his $28M bonus and his contract will be much more tolerable to other teams.
   
3. Our new draft pick (Luck) will be able to start after only 1 year and will have had a chance to observe a HOF quarterback prepare for games, break down opponents, train, etc.
   
4. The regular picks we have in rounds 2-7 will be signed under the new rookie scale so their contribution to the overall salary cap is much more affordable.
   
5. After 2012 the team will have a much more cap-friendly number and will be ready to reload around a new QB with 1 more year of experience.
   

[FireJimCaldwell]

What salary cap penalties? I'm suggesting that the $28M signing bonus be paid this year (again, assuming that Manning is healthy). Only signing bonuses are immediately due upon a release, waived or traded. Since we're talking about 2013...that number is $0. Now the team that receives Manning in 2013 will also receive his then current contracted salary and that will be under their cap...not ours...regardless of the yearly increment. That's for that team's GM to renegotiate and/or deal with.

Now let's be clear...in this scenario the Colts take a huge salary cap hit this year...and that hurts a lot because normally his signing bonus would have been prorated over the course of the contract but what I'm really saying here is that we are blowing up this team in a rebuilding year so we would see salary cap benefits to releasing players like Brackett and Bullitt plus we have a number of players that are free agents this year so unless they receive a new contract they are not going to count against the cap.

The benefits to all this are multifaceted.

1. First, Peyton gets to prove his value to other teams and his stock will rise thus netting our new GM more in possible trade.
   
2. Manning will receive his $28M bonus and his contract will be much more tolerable to other teams.
   
3. Our new draft pick (Luck) will be able to start after only 1 year and will have had a chance to observe a HOF quarterback prepare for games, break down opponents, train, etc.
   
4. The regular picks we have in rounds 2-7 will be signed under the new rookie scale so their contribution to the overall salary cap is much more affordable.
   
5. After 2012 the team will have a much more cap-friendly number and will be ready to reload around a new QB with 1 more year of experience.
   

Read up and how the cap works and get back to me.

[Bleedin Blue]

Read up and how the cap works and get back to me.

http://entertainment...question644.htm

Because salaries have continued to grow at a rate outpacing the salary cap, teams have found ways to circumvent the cap. Signing bonuses don't count toward a team's cap for a given year. A player who receives a signing bonus gets more money for that year than his recorded "salary," leaving more room in the cap for the other players.

Say, for example, a player wants a seven-year, $60-million contract. Let's say that the owner decides to give that player an $11-million signing bonus, which is all paid out in the first year but gets factored into the cap as prorated over the course of the seven-year contract ($11-million / 7 years = $1.57-million per year). Most NFL contracts are "back-ended" -- most of the base salary is located in the last two or three years of the contract. If we suppose that our player's contract is structured so that he has a base salary of $2-million the first year, with higher base salaries in the final two years of the contract, the $13-million (base salary + signing bonus) paid out in the first year appears as $3.57-million to the cap! The advantage of signing bonuses for the owner is that he now has more money to spend under the cap. This is how the Washington Redskins ran up a total payroll of $92.41-million in the 2000 season when the cap was $67-million. The advantage for the player is that all signing-bonus money is guaranteed to be paid, whereas an NFL contract is not guaranteed.

There are drawbacks to signing bonuses for the owner, however. Because the bonus is guaranteed to the player, if the player is released, traded or waived, all of the bonus money that was being prorated throughout the length of the contract is accelerated to the present year. So, if our team released its star player after the third year of his contract (before June 1) for whatever reason, the entire remainder of the bonus, almost $6.3-million, will have to count toward the cap the next year (if the team releases the player after June 1, only the yearly $1.57-million will count the next year, and the remainder will count the subsequent year).

Some teams have gotten themselves in trouble using signing bonuses, running up huge portions of cap room taken up by players who haven't played for them in several years. With so much less money to spend than their rival teams, they have little chance of fielding a very competitive team for that year, as the best free agents usually go where the money is.

[FireJimCaldwell]

http://entertainment...question644.htm

Because salaries have continued to grow at a rate outpacing the salary cap, teams have found ways to circumvent the cap. Signing bonuses don't count toward a team's cap for a given year. A player who receives a signing bonus gets more money for that year than his recorded "salary," leaving more room in the cap for the other players.

Say, for example, a player wants a seven-year, $60-million contract. Let's say that the owner decides to give that player an $11-million signing bonus, which is all paid out in the first year but gets factored into the cap as prorated over the course of the seven-year contract ($11-million / 7 years = $1.57-million per year). Most NFL contracts are "back-ended" -- most of the base salary is located in the last two or three years of the contract. If we suppose that our player's contract is structured so that he has a base salary of $2-million the first year, with higher base salaries in the final two years of the contract, the $13-million (base salary + signing bonus) paid out in the first year appears as $3.57-million to the cap! The advantage of signing bonuses for the owner is that he now has more money to spend under the cap. This is how the Washington Redskins ran up a total payroll of $92.41-million in the 2000 season when the cap was $67-million. The advantage for the player is that all signing-bonus money is guaranteed to be paid, whereas an NFL contract is not guaranteed.

There are drawbacks to signing bonuses for the owner, however. Because the bonus is guaranteed to the player, if the player is released, traded or waived, all of the bonus money that was being prorated throughout the length of the contract is accelerated to the present year. So, if our team released its star player after the third year of his contract (before June 1) for whatever reason, the entire remainder of the bonus, almost $6.3-million, will have to count toward the cap the next year (if the team releases the player after June 1, only the yearly $1.57-million will count the next year, and the remainder will count the subsequent year).

Some teams have gotten themselves in trouble using signing bonuses, running up huge portions of cap room taken up by players who haven't played for them in several years. With so much less money to spend than their rival teams, they have little chance of fielding a very competitive team for that year, as the best free agents usually go where the money is.

I don't need to read it. I know how it functions and works. Hopefully you got something out of it though.

[ConBro]

.

[Smitto]

How would it be easier after the upcoming season? That would accelerate nearly 29 million into the cap. If he's paid the bonus he's a Colt for at least 3 years.

After next season peytons contract is 8.4mil in 2013... thats why.