Is Manning's Current Contract The Best Thing For The Colts?

[betheafan41]

You may be correct.

Since BP now has his own radio show, you can call him up daily and harangue him about it. I'm sure he would love hearing from you.

I call it the fans' revenge.

i may do that lol make a great debate lol

[Superman]

and he also had a duty to build a better team incase manning went down. its who i blame for all of this is BP. as bad as it sounds, but he built this team to fit Manning and manning only. he wasnt thinking about the possibility of him being out for weeks or a whole year. the defense was fine at the beginning then teams caught on to the whole speed defense scheme and the division teams started a run first pass later game plan and it hurt. 3 of the best RB's in the NFL are in the AFC South, that dont happen by accident. BP built this defense to hold leads, not to play in ties or come from behind.

I understand your point, but this is a cliched statement that really doesn't hold water.

1) Tony Dungy's "small and fast" philosophy is what this team was built around. Polian gave Dungy what he wanted, and fully embraced doing so. But the credit/blame for the defense from 2002 on goes to Tony Dungy, not Bill Polian.

2) Over the last nine years, the Colts have come from behind to win games more than any other team in the NFL. Oftentimes, it was partly due to improved play by the defense in the second half (two examples: 2008 in Houston, and 2009 against NE). Tons of credit goes obviously to Manning and the offense, but without the defense, those comebacks never happen.

3) Every defense plays better with a lead, because the opposing offense has to play with less balance. And when you have two great pass rushers, that plays right into your strengths.

[Jaric]

No, but for Irsay to "put it in Manning's hands" is cowardly. He should just come out and say that they aren't paying the $28 million and that it's his decision and why.

Might just be me, but I think you misunderstood what Irsay meant by that.

Basically that there are certain things the team will need him to commit to regarding his salary cap impact and it's going to be up to him to decide if he can work with it or not.

Which isn't really saying anything that isn't true of every other contact negotiation.

[UndecidedFrog]

Not relevant unless you were saying this before Manning's contract expired. He's no older now than everyone expected him to be. The age isn't the issue here, not without the injury and the difficulty in recovering for someone his age.

I disagree. It is plenty relevant. Typically, as a player approaches his last contract, management will want to time it such that it coincides with expected retirement. Irsay and BP should have made this a 3 year deal at most, not a 5 year deal. They know the statistics, and they knew the injury that PM had. With that knowledge, they should not have negotiated a deal with all that upfront guaranteed money.

[schwamm]

Might just be me, but I think you misunderstood what Irsay meant by that.

Basically that there are certain things the team will need him to commit to regarding his salary cap impact and it's going to be up to him to decide if he can work with it or not.

Which isn't really saying anything that isn't true of every other contact negotiation.

We must stop this nonsense. Don't you understand that Irsay is to blame for global warming, our nation's problems with obesity, and porn on the internet. Worse still, he lies about it regularly. He is evil and malicious, and anything he does that might lead to Manning not being a Colt just proves that he is trying to destroy all that is good in the world. Don't be the apologist.

[UndecidedFrog]

We must stop this nonsense. Don't you understand that Irsay is to blame for global warming, our nation's problems with obesity, and porn on the internet. Worse still, he lies about it regularly. He is evil and malicious, and anything he does that might lead to Manning not being a Colt just proves that he is trying to destroy all that is good in the world. Don't be the apologist.

LOL, at least it is Irsay. Before Luck was the person responsible for Manning not being a Colt, as if Luck could do anything about that without pulling an Eli.

[Superman]

I disagree. It is plenty relevant. Typically, as a player approaches his last contract, management will want to time it such that it coincides with expected retirement. Irsay and BP should have made this a 3 year deal at most, not a 5 year deal. They know the statistics, and they knew the injury that PM had. With that knowledge, they should not have negotiated a deal with all that upfront guaranteed money.

His health status is absolutely a part of the picture, and I wonder why they did things the way they did as well. But we're not talking about just anyone. We're talking about Peyton Manning, a player that they were not going to let walk, no matter what. His age wasn't a part of the picture. A five year contract for a 35 year old quarterback who has never missed a game isn't a problem.

The fact that he'd recently had three neck surgeries (which we just found out, don't know if Irsay knew that) is what should have influenced Irsay's decision. Not his age, I don't think.

[UndecidedFrog]

His health status is absolutely a part of the picture, and I wonder why they did things the way they did as well. But we're not talking about just anyone. We're talking about Peyton Manning, a player that they were not going to let walk, no matter what. His age wasn't a part of the picture. A five year contract for a 35 year old quarterback who has never missed a game isn't a problem.

The fact that he'd recently had three neck surgeries (which we just found out, don't know if Irsay knew that) is what should have influenced Irsay's decision. Not his age, I don't think.

All good team management know how to time contracts for aging players. Brees is up for a new contract now. He is 33 for 2012. Look at the term of the Saints new contract with him. I doubt very much they will do another 6 year contract with him. I think it will more likely be a 4 year contract.

Tom Brady's current contract expires after the 2014 season, when he turns 38.

The Colts should have signed a 3 year deal with PM last year, given what they knew at the time.

[pmanningfan1896]

I blame Tom Condon for designing a contract his client couldn't fulfill. The contract as it stands will not be honored by Irsay.

Just so you know originally, if you don't remember, Irsay wanted to make Peyton the highest payed QB in the league and had offered him a 5 year deal, but Peyton warned him that he would be getting himself into cap trouble incase he got hurt, thus putting this option in...it'll be sadly ironic if Peyton doesn't end up on the colts next year because of this. He also by the way took less money to have people like Addai resigned (only person I can remeber off the top of my head)

[The Fish]

Just so you know originally, if you don't remember, Irsay wanted to make Peyton the highest payed QB in the league and had offered him a 5 year deal, but Peyton warned him that he would be getting himself into cap trouble incase he got hurt, thus putting this option in...it'll be sadly ironic if Peyton doesn't end up on the colts next year because of this. He also by the way took less money to have people like Addai resigned (only person I can remeber off the top of my head)

He was hurt at the point they inked the contract to make it worse!

[UndecidedFrog]

He was hurt at the point they inked the contract to make it worse!

Colts management (BP and Irsay) should have known better than to negotiate and execute this contract with what they knew at the time.

I do not blame Peyton or Condon. They were just taking advantage of the situation.

[The Fish]

Colts management (BP and Irsay) should have known better than to negotiate and execute this contract with what they knew at the time.

I do not blame Peyton or Condon. They were just taking advantage of the situation.

I dunno how "honorable" taking advantage of the situation was in that instance, not surprising, but not honorable, considering how generous Irsay was willing to be.

[UndecidedFrog]

I dunno how "honorable" taking advantage of the situation was in that instance, not surprising, but not honorable, considering how generous Irsay was willing to be.

In business, and make no mistake about it, this is business, one agrees to a contract when one can live up to the terms of the agreement. PM, thus far, has lived up to the agreement, given the agreement provides for the instance of injury. Irsay and Polian should have known better. I think, in part from this experience, Irsay has learned from it, and is now approaching the option bonus payment with a much more sober eye towards business.

[The Fish]

In business, and make no mistake about it, this is business, one agrees to a contract when one can live up to the terms of the agreement. PM, thus far, has lived up to the agreement, given the agreement provides for the instance of injury. Irsay and Polian should have known better. I think, in part from this experience, Irsay has learned from it, and is now approaching the option bonus payment with a much more sober eye towards business.

Agreed, it was a bad contract. Irsay isnt going to put anymore money other than this 10 mill when he gets cut on the books. It's a technical point to find bad guys in a situation where the contract is agreed upon by all parties, but if it was such common knowledge that Peyton could potentially never be right again, how did going for one last payday help Peyton now with no real determined value?

Thats where an agent has to put his clients interests ahead of his own financial interest. I have no doubt that Peyton wants to play now for reasons that aren't based in finance.

[UndecidedFrog]

Agreed, it was a bad contract. Irsay isnt going to put anymore money other than this 10 mill when he gets cut on the books. It's a technical point to find bad guys in a situation where the contract is agreed upon by all parties, but if it was such common knowledge that Peyton could potentially never be right again, how did going for one last payday help Peyton now with no real determined value?

Thats where an agent has to put his clients interests ahead of his own financial interest. I have no doubt that Peyton wants to play now for reasons that aren't based in finance.

It is hard to time the last payday. Given the injury and the multiple surgeries, the rehab timing be so uncertain, I think PM needs to reflect that he was extremely fortunate that Irsay/Polian provided him with this contract, and paid him $26.4MM to not play. I understand that PM is a very competitive person, and will want to play again. However, his body will ultimately show him the reality of that possibility.

[Superman]

All good team management know how to time contracts for aging players. Brees is up for a new contract now. He is 33 for 2012. Look at the term of the Saints new contract with him. I doubt very much they will do another 6 year contract with him. I think it will more likely be a 4 year contract.

Tom Brady's current contract expires after the 2014 season, when he turns 38.

The Colts should have signed a 3 year deal with PM last year, given what they knew at the time.

Forgive me for saying this: I don't put too much stock in what you're saying, given you have the benefit of hindsight.

I thought Manning would do a four year deal, but five years wasn't that surprising. Prior to the last surgery, there was still thought to be a very good chance he'd be back for the opener. He had never missed a game, ever. The idea of him playing for five more years was not ridiculous to consider, and the contract offered the team a fair amount of flexibility in the last two years of the contract, considering how front-loaded it was.

Also, the team doesn't just get to dictate the terms of the new contract. (Perhaps they should have just kept Manning on the franchise tag last season; would have been practically the same outcome, except for the $7 million in cap space the long-term deal cleared up in 2011. But the flip side is there would be no dead cap hit of $10.4 million in 2012 (assuming the Colts don't exercise the option). Flip side to that is that maybe we wouldn't have resigned Addai, Bullitt and Vinatieri, and would have saved that money in cap space anyways. Vinatieri proved to be worth his new contract, but the other two will probably be cut and result in a dead cap hit in 2012 also. All things considered, it's probably a wash.)

For Brees, I wouldn't be surprised if he winds up with a five year, $100 million contract, making him the highest paid player in the league.

[Superman]

Next question to consider: What would happen to the Colts cap standing if they were to release Manning, then resign him to a smaller or more incentivized deal? We know there's a $10.4 million cap hit, but what kind of contract would it take to keep him, and what kind of cap hit would it carry for 2012?

[David Dunbar]

Its very sad that sometimes decisions are tuff and not popular,but --- happens! Through all this about Manning and the Irsay or Colts future has became Media foder or insanity! 1-its money first -True 2-its about Colts future not history 3-the most revealing fact its Mannings health or decision period.The fact that he wants to play has always been apparent and it still is.He may be able to play in the future and stay healthy but its not good for the Colts future period so why two mature men can't sit down and either reach an agreement on how they want the public know the results is only about MONEY and Publicity period!So go at it MEDIA bloods in the water.

[UndecidedFrog]

Forgive me for saying this: I don't put too much stock in what you're saying, given you have the benefit of hindsight.

1) Brees is not hindsight. He is currently a UFA. And we shall see what contract he finally agrees upon.

2) You don't have to put any stock in anything I say....but then....

3) if you don't, I wonder why you ask me?

I thought Manning would do a four year deal, but five years wasn't that surprising. Prior to the last surgery, there was still thought to be a very good chance he'd be back for the opener. He had never missed a game, ever. The idea of him playing for five more years was not ridiculous to consider, and the contract offered the team a fair amount of flexibility in the last two years of the contract, considering how front-loaded it was.

The idea of PM playing for 5 more years after his multiple neck surgeries, IMO is ridiculous. I fault Irsay/Polian for that contract. And it is just very fortunate that the contract has this option bonus which now provides an out. The contract, being front-loaded meant that the flexibility in the out years represent significant unamortized pro-rated bonus accelerations to the cap should the team opt to flex.

Also, the team doesn't just get to dictate the terms of the new contract. (Perhaps they should have just kept Manning on the franchise tag last season; would have been practically the same outcome, except for the $7 million in cap space the long-term deal cleared up in 2011. But the flip side is there would be no dead cap hit of $10.4 million in 2012 (assuming the Colts don't exercise the option). Flip side to that is that maybe we wouldn't have resigned Addai, Bullitt and Vinatieri, and would have saved that money in cap space anyways. Vinatieri proved to be worth his new contract, but the other two will probably be cut and result in a dead cap hit in 2012 also. All things considered, it's probably a wash.)

I think the team must approve the terms of the new contract. If the team doesn't like it, they can always say no. With hindsight, it would have been better to keep PM on the tag.

For Brees, I wouldn't be surprised if he winds up with a five year, $100 million contract, making him the highest paid player in the league.

I can easily see a 5 year deal, making him 38 in the last season. However, I do not see $100MM. I see it more like $75MM or less, depending on how much is structured as upfront bonuses versus salary.

[UndecidedFrog]

Next question to consider: What would happen to the Colts cap standing if they were to release Manning, then resign him to a smaller or more incentivized deal? We know there's a $10.4 million cap hit, but what kind of contract would it take to keep him, and what kind of cap hit would it carry for 2012?

I am assuming you are directing this question to me.

Releasing PM before June 1, 2012, will be a one-time hit the 2012 cap at $10.4MM.

Any re-signing to a new contract will be layered on top of that.

If you can provide me with the general terms of the new smaller, or more incentivized deal, I can tell you what that will likely be for the cap.

I have no idea what kind of deal PM will find acceptable.

While you think on that, here are some guidelines to follow:

a) LTBE (likely to be earned) incentives hit the cap the same year they are offered. IOW, they are treated like straight salary.

b) ULTBE (unlikely to be earned) incentives do not hit the cap in 2012. However, if they are earned, and paid, they hit the following year's cap.

The difference between LTBEs and ULTBE is the likelihood of being earned. Some examples:

1) $XXX for getting to the SB = ULTBE

2) $XXX for getting the league MVP = ULTBE

3) $XX for each game started = LTBE

4) $XX for completing 60% of pass attempts = LTBE if past history shows this has been previously achieved

5) $XX for 40 TD passes = LTBE if past history shows that his has been previously achieved.

[funktacious2]

So I want your opinion, do you think the Colts (which it doesn't look like they are going to) continuing with Manning's contract as it currently stands is a good thing?

Absolutely not. You can't risk cap problems through 2015 on 46 year old injured QB. If his bonus could have been due in say, late July and his health issue was a little more clear then maybe, but that's clearly not the case.

[UndecidedFrog]

Absolutely not. You can't risk cap problems through 2015 on 46 year old injured QB. If his bonus could have been due in say, late July and his health issue was a little more clear then maybe, but that's clearly not the case.

That would be a 36 year old injured QB. LOL

[Superman]

1) Brees is not hindsight. He is currently a UFA. And we shall see what contract he finally agrees upon.

2) You don't have to put any stock in anything I say....but then....

3) if you don't, I wonder why you ask me?

C'mon man! I'm not talking about Brees; I'm talking about Manning. And it's easy to say "the Colts shouldn't have given Manning five years" after he just missed the season. No one was saying "we shouldn't give Manning five years" in July. If you were, forgive me.

The idea of PM playing for 5 more years after his multiple neck surgeries, IMO is ridiculous. I fault Irsay/Polian for that contract. And it is just very fortunate that the contract has this option bonus which now provides an out. The contract, being front-loaded meant that the flexibility in the out years represent significant unamortized pro-rated bonus accelerations to the cap should the team opt to flex.

I'm not a doctor (obviously), and I don't play one on the Internet. But it sounds like the issue isn't his neck or his multiple neck surgeries. The question is whether he can regain the strength in his arm. And the contract was agreed upon before the cervical fusion, so we're talking about minimally invasive surgery, similar to the one he had in 2010 and bounced back to throw 679 times for 4500 yards. There was no indication that he wouldn't be able to play many more years.

At that point, he wasn't just a 35 year old quarterback. He was a 35 year old quarterback playing at an incredibly high level who had never missed a start, had only missed one snap due to injury in his career, and was second all-time in terms of durability. The team was obviously considering life after Manning, but no one expected it to be thrust upon them so quickly. And that's after three surgeries in two years.

I think the team must approve the terms of the new contract. If the team doesn't like it, they can always say no. With hindsight, it would have been better to keep PM on the tag.

Agreed. But the Colts wanted Manning on a long-term deal, and Manning wanted five years. That's the way that goes. He agreed to a smaller contract with an out for the team after 2011, but wanted five years. I don't think three years was a reasonable option, even with the surgery involved.

If he had already done the fusion, he probably would have stayed on the tag.

I can easily see a 5 year deal, making him 38 in the last season. However, I do not see $100MM. I see it more like $75MM or less, depending on how much is structured as upfront bonuses versus salary.

I think Eli, Brady and Peyton set the table for Brees' contract already. I don't see him taking less than $18 million a season. I don't know anything, of course, but he's never gotten a big, "I'm one of the five best players in the league" contract, and at 33, he won't get another shot at it. Maybe he agrees to a more reasonable and team-friendly contract, but there's really no basis for the Saints to ask him to do so. Were he to be tagged, he'd have a cap hit of $16 million. On the free market, he could easily get $100 million, with all the cap space teams will have this season. If he takes one for the team, that's a different story.

[Superman]

I am assuming you are directing this question to me.

Releasing PM before June 1, 2012, will be a one-time hit the 2012 cap at $10.4MM.

Any re-signing to a new contract will be layered on top of that.

If you can provide me with the general terms of the new smaller, or more incentivized deal, I can tell you what that will likely be for the cap.

I have no idea what kind of deal PM will find acceptable.

While you think on that, here are some guidelines to follow:

a) LTBE (likely to be earned) incentives hit the cap the same year they are offered. IOW, they are treated like straight salary.

b) ULTBE (unlikely to be earned) incentives do not hit the cap in 2012. However, if they are earned, and paid, they hit the following year's cap.

The difference between LTBEs and ULTBE is the likelihood of being earned. Some examples:

1) $XXX for getting to the SB = ULTBE

2) $XXX for getting the league MVP = ULTBE

3) $XX for each game started = LTBE

4) $XX for completing 60% of pass attempts = LTBE if past history shows this has been previously achieved

5) $XX for 40 TD passes = LTBE if past history shows that his has been previously achieved.

So for Manning, 4 and 5 are LTBE, but for Alex Smith, they wouldn't be, right? I would assume the incentives would be starts, completions, yards, touchdown passes, etc. All LTBE incentives, which would hit the cap in 2012. Probably would include Super Bowl and MVP ULTBE incentives as well.

Either way, I doubt that this approach would provide any more cap relief in 2012 than exercising the option would. Difference is the $28 million cash that Irsay has to pony up, not the cap space.

We're a long way from "it's not about the money."

[UndecidedFrog]

I'm not a doctor (obviously), and I don't play one on the Internet. But it sounds like the issue isn't his neck or his multiple neck surgeries. The question is whether he can regain the strength in his arm. And the contract was agreed upon before the cervical fusion, so we're talking about minimally invasive surgery, similar to the one he had in 2010 and bounced back to throw 679 times for 4500 yards. There was no indication that he wouldn't be able to play many more years.

His neck was the cause of the nerve damage that led to muscle atrophy. He got his neck fixed via cervical fusion, but that did not address the damaged nerve which needs to regenerate. The need of neck surgery should have raised red flags on the 5-year deal at the time it was contemplated.

At that point, he wasn't just a 35 year old quarterback. He was a 35 year old quarterback playing at an incredibly high level who had never missed a start, had only missed one snap due to injury in his career, and was second all-time in terms of durability. The team was obviously considering life after Manning, but no one expected it to be thrust upon them so quickly. And that's after three surgeries in two years.

It was continued poor foresight that led to relying on PM to return soon, and salvage the season. At the time of the contract signing, I doubt the team was considering life after PM, as was evidenced by the fiasco that was Collins/Painter/Orlovsky.

I think Irsay has learned a valuable lesson.

I think Eli, Brady and Payton set the table for Brees' contract already. I don't see him taking less than $18 million a season. I don't know anything, of course, but he's never gotten a big, "I'm one of the five best players in the league" contract, and at 33, he won't get another shot at it. Maybe he agrees to a more reasonable and team-friendly contract, but there's really no basis for the Saints to ask him to do so. Were he to be tagged, he'd have a cap hit of $16 million. On the free market, he could easily get $100 million, with all the cap space teams will have this season. If he takes one for the team, that's a different story.

If anything, the current PM contract will serve as a warning to the Saints as they contemplate the Brees agreement. I can see Brees making $18MM a season if it were structured as a straight salary, no bonuses. With upfront guaranteed money bonuses, I can easily see that average per year drop from $18 to $15 or even less.

[UndecidedFrog]

So for Manning, 4 and 5 are LTBE, but for Alex Smith, they wouldn't be, right? I would assume the incentives would be starts, completions, yards, touchdown passes, etc. All LTBE incentives, which would hit the cap in 2012. Probably would include Super Bowl and MVP ULTBE incentives as well.

Yes, unless one successfully makes the argument that PM's previous year's stats were zeroes since he didn't play, effectively making all the LTBEs into ULTBEs. However, I think that is far fetched.

Either way, I doubt that this approach would provide any more cap relief in 2012 than exercising the option would. Difference is the $28 million cash that Irsay has to pony up, not the cap space.

Again, yes. The current PM contract is projected to hit the 2012 cap at $17MM. The release will trigger $10.4MM. Theoretically, the new PM contract, to be considered more cap -friendly than the current contract, will need to hit the 2012 cap at less than $6.6MM (vet min salary of $0.95 + LTBEs).

Is this something PM will be wiling to accept? I don't know how much he values retiring as a Colt, how much his competitive nature will accept or not accept this. Do you have any insights?

We're a long way from "it's not about the money."

Some of us knew that it would be all about money a long time ago.

[Superman]

His neck was the cause of the nerve damage that led to muscle atrophy. He got his neck fixed via cervical fusion, but that did not address the damaged nerve which needs to regenerate. The need of neck surgery should have raised red flags on the 5-year deal at the time it was contemplated.

Show me your concern back in July, otherwise this is hindsight talking. The concern in July was with getting him on a long-term deal, not whether it should be three years or five years.

It was continued poor foresight that led to relying on PM to return soon, and salvage the season. At the time of the contract signing, I doubt the team was considering life after PM, as was evidenced by the fiasco that was Collins/Painter/Orlovsky.

I think Irsay has learned a valuable lesson.

Polian had talked about the possibility of drafting a quarterback in 2011, and made it seem like it was a very real possibility. Whether he was selling or being serious, I don't know. But let him tell it, and Dalton and Kaepernick were both on our draft board. So was TJ Yates, though he wouldn't have been anything more than a backup.

The Terrible Triumvirate was more about expecting Manning to play in 2011 and not adjusting to the strengths and weakness of the team than it was not thinking about the future.

I'm sure Irsay has learned several lessons from the past couple years as it pertains to paying star players, negotiating in the media (or maybe not). More than anything, have a backup plan.

If anything, the current PM contract will serve as a warning to the Saints as they contemplate the Brees agreement. I can see Brees making $18MM a season if it were structured as a straight salary, no bonuses. With upfront guaranteed money bonuses, I can easily see that average per year drop from $18 to $15 or even less.

I don't think there are very many parallels between the Brees contract and the Manning contract, particularly since Brees hasn't had any injury issues since 2005. He's not coming off of three neck surgeries. The Saints will play their hand, and Brees probably won't hit free agency, but on the free market, Brees would get five years, $100 million, no problem. Brees might give the Saints a discount.

[Superman]

Yes, unless one successfully makes the argument that PM's previous year's stats were zeroes since he didn't play, effectively making all the LTBEs into ULTBEs. However, I think that is far fetched.

The CBA determines LTBEs/ULTBEs, right? So that's probably real far fetched.

Again, yes. The current PM contract is projected to hit the 2012 cap at $17MM. The release will trigger $10.4MM. Theoretically, the new PM contract, to be considered more cap -friendly than the current contract, will need to hit the 2012 cap at less than $6.6MM (vet min salary of $0.95 + LTBEs).

Is this something PM will be wiling to accept? I don't know how much he values retiring as a Colt, how much his competitive nature will accept or not accept this. Do you have any insights?

Nope. But I don't think it's as likely as some do, although it's a hundred times more likely than picking up the option.

Some of us knew that it would be all about money a long time ago.

And it should be. Irsay is far from miserly, but he has to make good decisions for the franchise. It really doesn't make sense to keep paying Manning like he isn't coming off a lost season and a cervical fusion, like there aren't concerns about his ability to regain his level of play, and so on. If Manning hadn't needed the fusion and had played the whole season, I don't think we'd be talking about the option bonus, even if we had the #1 pick. So I get the "it's not about the money" angle, but it is about the money, considering all the variables that are in play.

[funktacious2]

That would be a 36 year old injured QB. LOL

lol didn't notice the typo thanks!