Hypothetical Question: No Medical Clearance

[JoKeR]

Lets say Peyton's recovery isn't looking good a Irsay has to cut him. How does a team go about signing him if he's not medically cleared to play?

[Meltdown]

It is not that a team can't sign him in that situation but none would, since he is no good to them if he is not healthy. I believe Manning retires when all is said and done.

[Smitto]

Exactly none would sign peyton... what i think would most likely happen is peyton would not be cleared and during the offseason keep getting healthy and working out then eventually be cleared and sign with a team... that seems like the most likely thing to me.

[MB-ColtsFan]

Well, that's thething. As i stated in another post, March 8th to training camp is a lifetime. I'm no doctor, but i would *think* that there is a possibility he could heal after March 8th enough to play again.

If he gets released and heals before camp starts there would be no reason for another team not to sign him.

[JoKeR]

Well, that's thething. As i stated in another post, March 8th to training camp is a lifetime. I'm no doctor, but i would *think* that there is a possibility he could heal after March 8th enough to play again.

If he gets released and heals before camp starts there would be no reason for another team not to sign him.

Irsay said Manning didn't have to be 100%, just healthy enough to show he'd be ready in time for the regular season.

My question is what if his health isn't trending for the better, how does another team sign him?

[presto123]

That's why we will have to release him IMO. Nobody knows the if and when on nerve regeneration. Even if he does come back it could still be a year or more from now. Who's to say he won't miss all next season as well? I say chances are he is done but I hope mother nature is kind and he defies the odds.

[jskinnz]

Lets say Peyton's recovery isn't looking good a Irsay has to cut him. How does a team go about signing him if he's not medically cleared to play?

One man's trash is another's treasure.

Or in football terms, Colts cutting him for health reasons does not mean another team can't sign and give him medical clearance.

[MSColtsFan]

I believe the evaluation of health is done on a team by team basis, so there is no 'cleared to play' in a broad NFL context (except for concussions, which now fall into a new category). So another team could give him a physical, be pleased enough with 85% return to strength (or whatever), and if PM says he's good to go (his doctors have cleared him for contact, etc.), they can sign him.

[JoKeR]

Exactly none would sign peyton... what i think would most likely happen is peyton would not be cleared and during the offseason keep getting healthy and working out then eventually be cleared and sign with a team... that seems like the most likely thing to me.

Thinking outside the box but still logical, you might be right.

[MAC]

Exactly none would sign peyton... what i think would most likely happen is peyton would not be cleared and during the offseason keep getting healthy and working out then eventually be cleared and sign with a team... that seems like the most likely thing to me.

Well, that's thething. As i stated in another post, March 8th to training camp is a lifetime. I'm no doctor, but i would *think* that there is a possibility he could heal after March 8th enough to play again.

If he gets released and heals before camp starts there would be no reason for another team not to sign him.

This is kind of how I have been looking at it, but reading your responses makes me consider something that had never previously occured to me.

I wonder if the Colts could resign him? I doubt that there are any rules against it. I would think that the act of releasing him would scrub the prior contract. The new contract could fill in the missing gaps from the old one. If both parties are interested, it would simply serve to postpone the March deadline.

I doubt that Peyton wants to be paid another fortune for not playing again anyway, so if he and Irsay discussed it rationally there shouldn't be any hurt feelings. It wouldn't be a personal insult, just an affirmation of what Irsay previously stated quite clearly: if Peyton is healthy he will be playing for the Colts (meaning that if he isn't healthy he won't be playing for anyone). I realize that the tea leaves seem to be suggesting that Irsay is ready to move on, but who knows. There is a huge difference between not wanting to destroy your salary cap for someone who may not be able to play, and not wanting a healthy Peyton Manning. I would be astonished if Irsay felt the later.

[JoKeR]

One man's trash is another's treasure.

Or in football terms, Colts cutting him for health reasons does not mean another team can't sign and give him medical clearance.

I did not know that. Im not saying your wrong but that seems like some funny business to me. To me he's either cleared or he's not. I hope some other team can't just play him because they want him to be healthy when he's not.

Do you think another team can sign him to a future contract that states" if he's healthy by *blank*date, he's going to get paid *blank*"

[Smonroe]

I believe the evaluation of health is done on a team by team basis, so there is no 'cleared to play' in a broad NFL context (except for concussions, which now fall into a new category). So another team could give him a physical, be pleased enough with 85% return to strength (or whatever), and if PM says he's good to go (his doctors have cleared him for contact, etc.), they can sign him.

I believe you're correct. We've seen guys fail physicals for a trade and then go on playing with their original team. Like you said, if he's 85% and improving, I'm sure there are more than a few teams willing to roll the dice.

[jskinnz]

I did not know that. Im not saying your wrong but that seems like some funny business to me. To me he's either cleared or he's not. I hope some other team can't just play him because they want him to be healthy when he's not.

Do you think another team can sign him to a future contract that states" if he's healthy by *blank*date, he's going to get paid *blank*"

There is no standard among teams. See NorCalColts response in this thread. It is spot on.

Money is a very big consideration in this as well. The Colts can look at his medical charts and see that he is not yet healthy enough to play and determine that his medical status is too risky. And then another team could come in, look at that same medical history, do their own physical, and determine that he is worth the risk at a lesser cost.

[Smitto]

This is kind of how I have been looking at it, but reading your responses makes me consider something that had never previously occured to me.

I wonder if the Colts could resign him? I doubt that there are any rules against it. I would think that the act of releasing him would scrub the prior contract. The new contract could fill in the missing gaps from the old one. If both parties are interested, it would simply serve to postpone the March deadline.

I doubt that Peyton wants to be paid another fortune for not playing again anyway, so if he and Irsay discussed it rationally there shouldn't be any hurt feelings. It wouldn't be a personal insult, just an affirmation of what Irsay previously stated quite clearly: if Peyton is healthy he will be playing for the Colts (meaning that if he isn't healthy he won't be playing for anyone). I realize that the tea leaves seem to be suggesting that Irsay is ready to move on, but who knows. There is a huge difference between not wanting to destroy your salary cap for someone who may not be able to play, and not wanting a healthy Peyton Manning. I would be astonished if Irsay felt the later.

Thats the thing though, if the colts were to release peyton why should they sign him back i mean the potentially will have Luck or Griffin and the way i see it they are both capable of starting right away.

We all know irsay is gonna draft a QB with the #1 pick.. question is will he keep both, i dont think there is any way he will.. IF peyton is healthy and cleared to play regardless of that i think irsay will release peyton for the simple fact that you cant carry both and still field a balanced football club.

[JoKeR]

There is no standard among teams. See NorCalColts response in this thread. It is spot on.

Money is a very big consideration in this as well. The Colts can look at his medical charts and see that he is not yet healthy enough to play and determine that his medical status is too risky. And then another team could come in, look at that same medical history, do their own physical, and determine that he is worth the risk at a lesser cost.

Ok so they might just sign him anyway and just wait to actually play him? Its just a matter of how much money your willing to risk for a player that may not play. Kinda like the past regular season except we knew it was more than likely he would not play.

[OldSchoolColt]

I know Peyton wants to play for the Colts, and Isray wants him on the field to sell tickets and win games. If he fails the physical by March 8th, then I see him hanging around until near training camp and based on the rate he is healing, the Colts could offer him a much smaller bonus and an ensintive laced contract to play for the team when he is ready. Isray said that if healthy, he would be playing for the Colts. Then 2-3 years down the road, trade him for draft picks, based on Luck's play. He would have to have a safe contract with any team. His surgeon said it was a matter of time before the nerve heals, with luck and the right contract, I see him with the Colts.

[Peyton and Eli fan]

They said on Mike and Mike this morning that Peyton was cleared to take hits in December. He wasn't ready to throw for a game yet though, but technically there was nothing medically saying he couldn't play.

[wercolts]

you cant carry both and still field a balanced football club.

That's not necessarily the case. There are a lot of other contracts to work out that could put the team in a much better position to carry both.

[MSColtsFan]

Ok so they might just sign him anyway and just wait to actually play him? Its just a matter of how much money your willing to risk for a player that may not play. Kinda like the past regular season except we knew it was more than likely he would not play.

Exactly. And if you're one of those teams that chases it all the time, like the Redskins, I'm sure waiting until week one wouldn't mean a thing to them. Especially going into expecting something less than 100% health to begin with.

[Smitto]

That's not necessarily the case. There are a lot of other contracts to work out that could put the team in a much better position to carry both.

You dont get it, the cap is 120mil peyton and Luck would acquire 50+mil of that cap.... there's no way of working around that my friend.

[MAC]

You dont get it, the cap is 120mil peyton and Luck would acquire 50+mil of that cap.... there's no way of working around that my friend.

Other threads have gone around and around with this before. That number is high by several million. More importantly, the vast majority of it is Peyton, which means that the team was well aware of the obligation before this most recent season. And it was considered to be a "cap friendly" deal.

The only "change" is that the backup will now be making $5-6 million, instead of chump change. But how many people on here (and Bill Polian) now regret that the Colts haven't had a qualified backup to begin with, and how much would that cost? Collins made $4 million if memory serves. IF Peyton is healthy, I don't think that QB salaries are the problem. The issue is obviously paying all that money - and then finding out that he's not healthy.

[Smitto]

Other threads have gone around and around with this before. That number is high by several million. More importantly, the vast majority of it is Peyton, which means that the team was well aware of the obligation before this most recent season. And it was considered to be a "cap friendly" deal.

The only "change" is that the backup will now be making $5-6 million, instead of chump change. But how many people on here (and Bill Polian) now regret that the Colts haven't had a qualified backup to begin with, and how much would that cost? Collins made $4 million if memory serves. IF Peyton is healthy, I don't think that QB salaries are the problem. The issue is obviously paying all that money - and then finding out that he's not healthy.

Yes the team was well aware, BUT the team did not know that they would be having the #1 overall draft pick to pick another QB to add to that salary... if the colts knew that peyton would have never gotten that deal.

Andrew luck or Griffin's signing bonust will be 15mil... if the colts plan on doing anything they will have to look at high end guys like freeney to cut or maybe renegotiate... who knows they probably might even have a hard time franchise tagging a player like mathis or wayne.

[Scipio]

Thats the thing though, if the colts were to release peyton why should they sign him back i mean the potentially will have Luck or Griffin and the way i see it they are both capable of starting right away.

Because Manning is the better player (when/if finally healthy) than either of them in the immediate future.

EDIT - Also, the cap hit for 2012 for both Manning and Luck would be around 21-22m, far from 50m. Not all bonus counts toward cap in 1 year.

[Smitto]

Because Manning is the better player (when/if finally healthy) than either of them in the immediate future.

EDIT - Also, the cap hit for 2012 for both Manning and Luck would be around 21-22m, far from 50m. Not all bonus counts toward cap in 1 year.

...... What are you talking about?

Peyton is due 28mil signing bonus... + his salary which is 7mil that = 35mil

Andrew Luck is getting a 15mil signing bonus.. thats 50+ mil right there if you add it to peytons...

As for the cap hit i was not talking about that... the 50mil will be what the colts will pay peyton and andrew if they both were on the team which includes signing bonus and salary (excluding andrew's salary).

[MAC]

...... What are you talking about?

Peyton is due 28mil signing bonus... + his salary which is 7mil that = 35mil

Andrew Luck is getting a 15mil signing bonus.. thats 50+ mil right there if you add it to peytons...

As for the cap hit i was not talking about that... the 50mil will be what the colts will pay peyton and andrew if they both were on the team which includes signing bonus and salary (excluding andrew's salary).

OK, now I understand your earlier post - but I wouldn't worry about it at all. Once again, they already knew what Peyton's commitment was going to be. The sticker shock is only in the additional $15 million, not $50 million.

Look at it this way, the maximum amount that they can spend - on average - per year is the amount of the salary cap. A lot of bonuses in one year simply means that your cash outlay is going to spike - but then it HAS to drop in ensuing years to compensate because of the cap. It's NOT an additional expense, it's just shifted to a different year. The teams "should" have the cash on hand, and if they don't they can borrow it. The TV contracts in hand would ensure any bank that it's an incredibly low risk loan. It's an inconvenience, not THE reason to release Peyton.

[Smitto]

OK, now I understand your earlier post - but I wouldn't worry about it at all. Once again, they already knew what Peyton's commitment was going to be. The sticker shock is only in the additional $15 million, not $50 million.

Look at it this way, the maximum amount that they can spend - on average - per year is the amount of the salary cap. A lot of bonuses in one year simply means that your cash outlay is going to spike - but then it HAS to drop in ensuing years to compensate because of the cap. It's NOT an additional expense, it's just shifted to a different year. The teams "should" have the cash on hand, and if they don't they can borrow it. The TV contracts in hand would ensure any bank that it's an incredibly low risk loan. It's an inconvenience, not THE reason to release Peyton.

Im not sure how all the salary works but i know that if the colts had to be force to borrow money it would only be about 2mil+ which isnt much..... i think the whole point is if the colts keep both QB's its gonna be hard to field a contender because that 28 mil or 15 mil could be used for other things.. freeney alones gonna get 14mil+ this year. Obviously thats just part of the game, but at the same time i think with what irsay said "being balanced on both sides of the ball salary wise" he's gonna be forced to make a decision.

[BuildtheMonster1285]

It is not that a team can't sign him in that situation but none would, since he is no good to them if he is not healthy. I believe Manning retires when all is said and done.

I agree

[Quantum88]

NorCalColt and jskinnz are correct and there have been times in the past when we have failed a player for some physical reason and another team has signed him. I actually believe that is what will happen with Manning and have posted that in a couple of other threads. I just don't see how we can "rebuild" for a reasonably quick turn around (two years) and still pay the $28 million bonus on March 8th.

This makes me ill, but it is a reality. Watching Johnny U in a Chargers uniform made my stomach churn and seeing Manning in another uniform will be even worse, particularly if it is in a super bowl game.

[oldunclemark]

Lets say Peyton's recovery isn't looking good a Irsay has to cut him. How does a team go about signing him if he's not medically cleared to play?

You can sign a free agent who's not 100% healthy...

you just cant trade a player who cant pass a physical...

Truthfully..the Colts could cut him and then resign him

[Scipio]

...... What are you talking about?

Peyton is due 28mil signing bonus... + his salary which is 7mil that = 35mil

Andrew Luck is getting a 15mil signing bonus.. thats 50+ mil right there if you add it to peytons...

As for the cap hit i was not talking about that... the 50mil will be what the colts will pay peyton and andrew if they both were on the team which includes signing bonus and salary (excluding andrew's salary).

There is a difference between wat will hit the cap this year and what Irsay will lose out of his pocket. They are not the same number and Irsay has said many times he has not issue paying PM and signing a #1 QB.

The cap hit in 2012 would only be around 22m for both. In fact PM and Irsay could rework his contract to lessen the cap hit for 2013 once the new NFL year starts.

Everything is workable... it really just depends on PMs health. On Mar 8th, if Irsay feels that PM will be good to go for opening day, he will be given the bonus. We know this because that is what Irsay has said and he has never said any different. Just because he has not said anything recently does not mean he changed his mind, it just means he has not reason to repeat himself.

In fact I would wager he kinda enjoys the media spike. I mean there really is not such thing as bad press in entertainment.

[oldunclemark]

There is a difference between wat will hit the cap this year and what Irsay will lose out of his pocket. They are not the same number and Irsay has said many times he has not issue paying PM and signing a #1 QB.

The cap hit in 2012 would only be around 22m for both. In fact PM and Irsay could rework his contract to lessen the cap hit for 2013 once the new NFL year starts.

Everything is workable... it really just depends on PMs health. On Mar 8th, if Irsay feels that PM will be good to go for opening day, he will be given the bonus. We know this because that is what Irsay has said and he has never said any different. Just because he has not said anything recently does not mean he changed his mind, it just means he has not reason to repeat himself.

In fact I would wager he kinda enjoys the media spike. I mean there really is not such thing as bad press in entertainment.

I agree, Sci....

The money is not the issue to Irsay......Manning is part of the franchise...

Irsay seems embarassed by the 2-14.....and he axed most of the staff...

....He wants to keep up Indy's high profile and worth.

The way to do it?: "Pey-Luck' Keep Manning...,Sign Luck...

Dont think about the bonus..

think about the worth of the franchise is Indy has both Andrew Luck and Peyton Manning...and they are the talk of the NFL...

[Scipio]

There is a difference between what will hit the cap this year and what Irsay will lose out of his pocket. They are not the same number and Irsay has said many times he has no issue paying PM and signing a #1 QB.

The cap hit in 2012 would only be around 22m for both. In fact PM and Irsay could rework his contract to lessen the cap hit for 2013 once the new NFL year starts.

Everything is workable... it really just depends on PMs health. On Mar 8th, if Irsay feels that PM will be good to go for opening day, he will be given the bonus. We know this because that is what Irsay has said and he has never said any different. Just because he has not said anything recently does not mean he changed his mind, it just means he has no reason to repeat himself.

In fact I would wager he kinda enjoys the media spike. I mean there really is no such thing as bad press in entertainment.

Sorry I ment to edit my post and not repost it.

Please delete mods.

[JoKeR]

I agree, Sci....

The money is not the issue to Irsay......Manning is part of the franchise...

Irsay seems embarassed by the 2-14.....and he axed most of the staff...

....He wants to keep up Indy's high profile and worth.

The way to do it?: "Pey-Luck' Keep Manning...,Sign Luck...

Dont think about the bonus..

think about the worth of the franchise is Indy has both Andrew Luck and Peyton Manning...and they are the talk of the NFL...

Great point.

[FireJimCaldwell]

If he's released for medical reasons, all a team/Manning would have to do is come to terms on a contract and have him pass a physical.

[Smitto]

There is a difference between wat will hit the cap this year and what Irsay will lose out of his pocket. They are not the same number and Irsay has said many times he has not issue paying PM and signing a #1 QB.

The cap hit in 2012 would only be around 22m for both. In fact PM and Irsay could rework his contract to lessen the cap hit for 2013 once the new NFL year starts.

Everything is workable... it really just depends on PMs health. On Mar 8th, if Irsay feels that PM will be good to go for opening day, he will be given the bonus. We know this because that is what Irsay has said and he has never said any different. Just because he has not said anything recently does not mean he changed his mind, it just means he has not reason to repeat himself.

In fact I would wager he kinda enjoys the media spike. I mean there really is not such thing as bad press in entertainment.

Where did you get that it would be 22mil for both this year? peyton this offseason is gonna be paid (if kept) 35 mil... and andrew lucks signing bonus alone will be 15 mil.

Now correct me if im wrong but doesnt that mean 40% of the salary going to just two players?

[FireJimCaldwell]

This is another example of knowing how the salary cap system works, but some might have more knowledge if they read posts.

[MSColtsFan]

Where did you get that it would be 22mil for both this year? peyton this offseason is gonna be paid (if kept) 35 mil... and andrew lucks signing bonus alone will be 15 mil.

Now correct me if im wrong but doesnt that mean 40% of the salary going to just two players?

Bonus money is prorated, extended through the life of the contract, or however it is broken up depending upon how it is contractually dispersed. The cap hit and cash out of pocket are two totally different numbers. Both are huge issues, but they are not the same.

Brandt goes over some of the numbers in this article: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Peyton-Predicament-Part-1.html

Although he doesn't exactly break it down completely, this is about as decent a showing of how the cash out of pocket for bonuses (a one time payments) and salary cap numbers (yearly salary plus prorated portions of bonuses, etc.) would be for Manning and Luck.

[Smitto]

Bonus money is prorated, extended through the life of the contract, or however it is broken up depending upon how it is contractually dispersed. The cap hit and cash out of pocket are two totally different numbers. Both are huge issues, but they are not the same.

Brandt goes over some of the numbers in this article: http://www.nationalf...ent-Part-1.html

Although he doesn't exactly break it down completely, this is about as decent a showing of how the cash out of pocket for bonuses (a one time payments) and salary cap numbers (yearly salary plus prorated portions of bonuses, etc.) would be for Manning and Luck.

Your own link

Manning + Luck = $50 million for 2012

Not to mention that the following season i believe it would be 80 million including what they made this offseason lol... thats insane just for two players? and one isnt even starting?

Like i said before if the colts new they would be in THIS CURRENT situation.... they would not give manning the deal he has now.

[MSColtsFan]

Your own link

Manning + Luck = $50 million for 2012

Not to mention that the following season i believe it would be 80 million including what they made this offseason lol... thats insane just for two players? and one isnt even starting?

Like i said before if the colts new they would be in THIS CURRENT situation.... they would not give manning the deal he has now.

Not arguing with you - you are 100% correct, no matter if cash out of pocket or salary cap, the numbers are staggering. But the $50 milliion total cost for 2012 is not the cap cost in 2012. Manning set to make 7.4, plus whatever prorated portion of the $28 million bonus, and the first pick would be in the $4-$5 million, plus any prorated portion of the signing bonus, etc. So as some have suggested, closer to $22 million against the cap for 2012. And yes, it does escalate for 2013, 2014, and 2015, so the yearly cap hit would be greater as the years went on with both (Manning for sure, and I presume for the first pick too, since that's what almost all contracts do - see Freeney).