The Colts need to release Peyton Manning.

[detlef]

 

Ridiculous? Really?

 

Age can catch up with players very quickly. The difference between a 34 yr old QB and the same guy at 36 yrs old can be enormous. Manning's drop down the rungs may have already started. Or it may start in 6 months, or a year. His injury risk - especially a neck injury - makes that even more likely. Do you think a person with fused vertebrae can perform just as well as the same person without? Now that's ridiculous.

 

Then look at their recent drafts. Where are the high impact guys? I'll give you Angerer. Who else? The team was already weak on D but always had Manning's arm to protect them. Now the team looks even weaker and has a questionable Manning at QB. And yet your contention is that it's ridiculous to think they're not an automatic contender if they simply bring Manning back? Really?

 

Manning is going to use up way too much cap space for as great a risk as he is - both in regard to potential decline in performance as well as the potential for future injury - when he comes back. IND doesn't have enough team around him right now to make that investment worth while. I'd argue they'd be much, much better off cutting bait and starting over with their next potential franchise QB. Let Manning make his deal with a team that has many more pieces in place to make a SB run, a team that is in its window right now.

Agreed.

[BeeR]

Of course he is going to "miss a beat." Older doesn't mean better at this point in his career.

Never said it did. It doesn't necessarily mean worse either, at least not significantly. The point which you are trying so hard to miss is that if healthy odds are very good that he will be at or very near the same level he's always been. Of course anything is possible.

 

I never said that he is "done." I said the he cannot carry a sh*tty team like the Colts to a Super Bowl. Given that the Denver f'n Broncos are in the playoff, I wouldn't say that the Colts would not be "playoff contenders."

I see, so you think he could carry them to the playoffs, but no way can they make the SB. And your proof is it didn't happen in 2010. Got it.

 

FYI if a team makes it to the playoffs - as they did year after year with Manning and basically the same team - they are SB contenders, even if they aren't really the best team out there. PS he doesn't have to be 100% as good as he was in 2010. So if your point is to nit-pick and say he won't be 100% but only 98% (or similar), BFD. If he's reasonably close to his old self they have a shot. In fact that should be obvious, since they did year after year with basically the same team or level of team.

 

A Manning in his prime couldn't make that team a Superbowl contender without help.

Even though he did it in 2010. OK.

[detlef]

Even though he did it in 2010. OK.

Surely you're not implying that team (minus Manning, of course) was no better than this team.

[Jimmy Neutron]

IMO, the idea scenario would be for Manning to redo his contract - say a three year moderate deal and stay in Indy to raise Luck from a pup.

[BeeR]

Age can catch up with players very quickly. The difference between a 34 yr old QB and the same guy at 36 yrs old can be enormous. Manning's drop down the rungs may have already started. Or it may start in 6 months, or a year. His injury risk - especially a neck injury - makes that even more likely. Do you think a person with fused vertebrae can perform just as well as the same person without? Now that's ridiculous.

Is it? What history if any is there of a QB anywhere near his caliber having that kind of injury and what did they do afterwards? Honest question as I don't recall any offhand. And saying "this or that CAN happen" doesn't really mean much. The question is what are the odds? What do you think is most likely if Manning gets a clean bill of health for next season:

 

- he plays terribly

- he plays "OK" but nowhere near his same high level

- he plays close to or at the same level

 

I'd say the last one is most likely. And if so, there is no reason to believe the Colts won't be right back in the playoffs. You disagree, fine.

 

Then look at their recent drafts. Where are the high impact guys? I'll give you Angerer. Who else? The team was already weak on D but always had Manning's arm to protect them. Now the team looks even weaker

Assuming a healthy Manning, why are they weaker? Again honest question that may be so but seems to me this is mostly the same team he carries to the playoffs every year.

 

and has a questionable Manning at QB. And yet your contention is that it's ridiculous to think they're not an automatic contender if they simply bring Manning back? Really?

I didn't say "automatic" playoff contenders but I think it is likely and to say otherwise is pretty ridiculous. Really. What has changed from this perennial playoff team other than Manning? The team's D has more or less sucked most of his career. So? There they are in the playoffss year after year.

 

Manning is going to use up way too much cap space for as great a risk as he is

This much might be true, unfortunately. Curse that 28 mil. Edited January 5, 2012 by BeeR

[detlef]

IMO, the idea scenario would be for Manning to redo his contract - say a three year moderate deal and stay in Indy to raise Luck from a pup.

Besides the fact that it's not going to happen, if the Colts want to stay with Manning for a few more years, they're better off trading that pick for a kings ransom and addressing a bunch of needs. Three years is a long time and that team has far too many needs to have the 2nd best player on the team sitting on the bench that whole time.

[detlef]

What has changed from this perennial playoff team other than Manning? The team's D has more or less sucked most of his career. So? There they are in the playoffss year after year.

Harrison, Wayne, Clark > Wayne, Garcon, Tamme

Young Freeny and Mathis > older Freeny and Mathis

 

That's just a few things that stuck out.

[BeeR]

Yeah a contact rework would be great but he just made the deal. Even he isn't likely about to do that, unfortunately.

[Furd]

You win beer.

 

Manning is going to be back to old form. His injury, surgeries, fused neck, age, and missing an entire year won't have any significant effect on him.

 

That same guy is worth the $28M this spring even though you won't really know if he is "healthy" at that time.

 

The salary cap doesn't matter with Manning.

 

The Colts as a team really aren't that bad. They're just about the same as they were in other years.

 

And the Lions, Bengals, Broncos and Texans are Super Bowl contenders this year.

 

How could I have been so ridiculous?

[BeeR]

Harrison, Wayne, Clark > Wayne, Garcon, Tamme

Young Freeny and Mathis > older Freeny and Mathis

 

That's just a few things that stuck out.

How are either of these things relevant? Harrison wasn't there in 09 or 10. They made the playoffs and their passing game was still one of the best around.

 

Re Freeney and Mathis getting older, so? Everyone's getting older on every team. And? Last I saw they were still playing about as good as they ever did. Yes it's another year, again they could suddenly take a downturn but that again gets into anything could be this or that.

 

This is about his health and the cap issue. No more, no less. And again I agree they are both significant.

[Big Dogs]

IMO, the idea scenario would be for Manning to redo his contract - say a three year moderate deal and stay in Indy to raise Luck from a pup.

Besides the fact that it's not going to happen, if the Colts want to stay with Manning for a few more years, they're better off trading that pick for a kings ransom and addressing a bunch of needs. Three years is a long time and that team has far too many needs to have the 2nd best player on the team sitting on the bench that whole time.

 

I'm not so sure Manning wouldn't redo his contract. Some players and agents would have signed the original contract so that it completely favored the player without regard for the team. Even though this was a healthy contract, Manning made sure the deal was structred in such a way that it was fairly cap friendly, and that there was enough room to bring Addai back this past year (not that I thought that was too bright to begin with ) Plus, he even said he made sure the 5 year deal was really a 1 year deal with an option to renew for 4 more years.

 

I don't think ANYONE, including Peyton realized what impact this injury would have on him in terms of a timeline. To be honest, IMHO, it wouldn't shock me at all if they didn't renegotiate the contract before the 03/08 deadline.

[Ice1]

IMO, the idea scenario would be for Manning to redo his contract - say a three year moderate deal and stay in Indy to raise Luck from a pup.

 

The only thing Manning might do is renegotiate his bonus payment time frame clause but he will not redo the contract as there is no incentive.

 

I can't imagine the Colts passing on Luck under any circumstance. He is a generational type prospect at the pro level. Teams don't pass up those type of players. No doubt teams will be bring huge offers but I highly doubt they accept any of them for 1.1. The Colts are in full rebuild mode.

 

The Colts may figure out a trade scenario for Manning but I think he is done in Indy and believe there is a better than fair chance he is done playing due to his injury.

 

Luck is NFL ready and will/should start week one in the NFL.

Edited January 5, 2012 by Ice1

[BeeR]

You win beer.

I am not interested in "winning." Excuse me for wanting to discuss this and disagreeing with you.

 

Manning is going to be back to old form. His injury, surgeries, fused neck, age, and missing an entire year won't have any significant effect on him.

Nice word twist. That isn't what I said.

 

That same guy is worth the $28M this spring even though you won't really know if he is "healthy" at that time.

 

The salary cap doesn't matter with Manning. .

More twisting my words. Surprise.

 

 

The Colts as a team really aren't that bad. They're just about the same as they were in other years.

...with a healthy Manning, correct.

 

And the Lions, Bengals, Broncos and Texans are Super Bowl contenders this year.

Yes. That's what being in the playoffs means. FYI. Granted their odds are longer of course.

 

How could I have been so ridiculous?

Dunno. Edited January 5, 2012 by BeeR

[Bronco Billy]

Seriously, who here got hold of BeeR's password. This blue-and-white colored glasses wearer just can't be the lovable skeptical crumudgeon we have all come to know and love. What next? Promoting racial harmony throughout the universe?

Edited January 5, 2012 by Bronco Billy

[Big Dogs]

re: reworking his contract:

 

1. I know why IND would, but why would Peyton?

 

2. Don't y'all think he structured it this way on purpose?

 

By making a large payment *before* the season started, he was/is forcing the team to choose between him and Luck. I don't think it's ego, but rather he knows that if the team uses 1.01 in any way except Luck, that the team becomes better now and will help Peyton win another SB.

 

Ok, I'll bite here....... Do you really think that Manning knew in August (when he signed this contract), that he would not only be out for the entire year, but that the Colt's would be bad enough to secure the first pick in the draft, and would absolutely take Luck with that pick????

[Whiskey Pimp]

Beer, do you really think that with a healthy Manning back in 2012 that the Colts will be the same as 2010? If they keep Manning and draft luck that means they let go of most of their free agents (Wayne, Mathis, Garcon, Saturday, etc). That means it's a very new team with a lot of cheap players and even if Manning is healthy he won't have even close to the same supporting cast he's had in the past (and that cast wasn't all that strong).

[Square]

This blue-and-white colored glasses wearer just can't be the lovable skeptical crumudgeon we have all come to know and love.

Who in the F are you talking about? Well, I suppose you two would get along.

[stevegrab]

Ok, I'll bite here....... Do you really think that Manning knew in August (when he signed this contract), that he would not only be out for the entire year, but that the Colt's would be bad enough to secure the first pick in the draft, and would absolutely take Luck with that pick????

 

I was thinking the same thing.

 

Beer, do you really think that with a healthy Manning back in 2012 that the Colts will be the same as 2010? If they keep Manning and draft luck that means they let go of most of their free agents (Wayne, Mathis, Garcon, Saturday, etc). That means it's a very new team with a lot of cheap players and even if Manning is healthy he won't have even close to the same supporting cast he's had in the past (and that cast wasn't all that strong).

 

I'm curious if this belief that they cannot retain those FAs is true. According to #s that BB provided earlier in this thread, if they release him before 3/8/12 the cap hit is $16M, if they keep him through the contract its $18.4M. Not much of a difference, but I also get that it ends there, no big cap numbers in 2013 and beyond. Will the extra $2.4M in cap space for 2012, and $18-20M in more cap space beyond that be enough to sign those FAs?

[Bronco Billy]

Who in the F are you talking about? Well, I suppose you two would get along.

 

You say that like its a bad thing.

[BeeR]

I am also wondering just how many of their "gotta keep" FAs (a short list to be sure) they would lose and just how big of an impact that would have.

 

Hey I have it! All Manning has to do is pull a Favre "retirement" and change his mind in August.

[Big Dogs]

That specific scenario? No. But ido think that he and/or his agent wanted control of the situation by asking for an extremely unusual roster bonus amount eat an unusual time (before the calendar year).

 

Ok, I'll buy that argument about having the ability to control the situation, but think that specific piece of this deal was more of his agent doing his job and asking Peyton to allow him to protect him......... However, with that said, I think Peyton would be willing to still renegotiate if you look at the whole picture....

 

Early on, Irsay came out the season before, and stated on multiple occasions that he was beyond willing to make Peyton the highest paid player on this planet. That was public info before the first contract discussion was ever held. Irsay even said that publically after Peyton had his 2nd surgery. If I was Peyton's agent, I would have been walking into those initial contract negotiation meetings with uncontrollable drool at the thought of the contract that could be signed.

 

However, when it was all said and done, and despite the large value of the contract, I think the end deal took many by surprise as to the overall structure of the deal and how cap friendly it was. Peyton and his agent walked into those discussions holding all the cards and all the leverage, and walked out with a very fair deal for everyone. That was purely at the direction of Peyton. Because of Peyton's character, I think he would look at the current situation and would absolutely consider restructuring his deal to stay in Indy. Sorry, IMHO, based on everything I've seen about the character of the person, I think this is a real and potential option that can happen. Just my

[Cunning Runt]

I asked "why would Peyton renegotiate" and you answered

 

I think you're right, but I think it is the only reason why he would renegotiate... is because of his character and his relationship with Irsay.

 

I disagree with the "because of his character" part.

 

Peyton's legacy is as an Indianapolis Colt. He wants to maintain that legacy and quite possibly the only way he can do that is by playing ball with the Colts. I think for the first time in years where Manning is concerned, the Colts are entertaining the prospect of life without him. And I think Manning's ego, not his character might cause him to play ball. He's "the man" in Indy. He wouldn't be to anywhere near the same extent anywhere else. Manning's a decent guy, not saying he isn't, but he's the king of Indy and probably wants to stay that way.

 

I hope the Colts release him. Athletes that get paid that much money to play a game do not, in my opinion, deserve the adulation they get.

[detlef]

How are either of these things relevant? Harrison wasn't there in 09 or 10. They made the playoffs and their passing game was still one of the best around.

 

Re Freeney and Mathis getting older, so? Everyone's getting older on every team. And? Last I saw they were still playing about as good as they ever did. Yes it's another year, again they could suddenly take a downturn but that again gets into anything could be this or that.

 

This is about his health and the cap issue. No more, no less. And again I agree they are both significant.

Well, for starters, I think it's fair to question why you want to go back to the glory years of 2010, where they went 10-6 and got bounced in the first round of the play-offs.

 

Sure, they made the big game in 2009 without Harrison but Clark was just a smidge more impressive that year than since. As for Freeney, who's been playing as well as ever? He's got the lowest number of tackles he's ever had in his career and only had fewer sacks than this year once in any year where he played at last 15 games. In fact, when he or Mathis does something good, the talking heads say something along the lines of "That's the Freeney we've always known!" As if it's something we got used to seeing and don't see as much anymore.

 

But the real jewel of your post is the "everyone gets older". That's your argument? Sure, if this was about me bagging on Mathis and Freeney, that would be a great argument. But it's not. It's about the Colts. It's about all the great players they surrounded Manning with are either gone or at the back ends of their careers. That's not a knock on those players, because, like you said, everyone gets older. It's a knock on the Colts because all their best players aren't as good as they used to be.

 

Hell, and that's no crime, because it happens to everyone. That's the price you pay for the kind of run they had. It's pretty hard to build for the future and try and win today at the same time.

 

Thing is, it only makes sense to bring in a high-priced QB in the twilight of his career like Manning if you're basically loaded everywhere else. Because there's really no point in making that kind of commitment to a guy if you're going to surround him with an average cast. And that's what Indy is. If Indy had better players at positions other than QB, they wouldn't have sucked so bad regardless of who played QB.

Edited January 5, 2012 by detlef

[Bronco Billy]

Well, for starters, I think it's fair to question why you want to go back to the glory years of 2010, where they went 10-6 and got bounced in the first round of the play-offs.

 

Sure, they made the big game in 2009 without Harrison but Clark was just a smidge more impressive that year than since. As for Freeney, who's been playing as well as ever? He's got the lowest number of tackles he's ever had in his career and only had fewer sacks than this year once in any year where he played at last 15 games. In fact, when he or Mathis does something good, the talking heads say something along the lines of "That's the Freeney we've always known!" As if it's something we got used to seeing and don't see as much anymore.

 

But the real jewel of your post is the "everyone gets older". That's your argument? Sure, if this was about me bagging on Mathis and Freeney, that would be a great argument. But it's not. It's about the Colts. It's about all the great players they surrounded Manning with are either gone or at the back ends of their careers. That's not a knock on those players, because, like you said, everyone gets older. It's a knock on the Colts because all their best players aren't as good as they used to be.

 

Hell, and that's no crime, because it happens to everyone. That's the price you pay for the kind of run they had. It's pretty hard to build for the future and try and win today at the same time.

 

Thing is, it only makes sense to bring in a high-priced QB in the twilight of his career like Manning if you're basically loaded everywhere else. Because there's really no point in making that kind of commitment to a guy if you're going to surround him with an average cast. And that's what Indy is. If Indy had better players at positions other than QB, they wouldn't have sucked so bad regardless of who played QB.

 

That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection.

[BeeR]

Well, for starters, I think it's fair to question why you want to go back to the glory years of 2010, where they went 10-6 and got bounced in the first round of the play-offs.

I think it's even fairer to question why you think I said that. I don't know why this is so hard for some of you but I'll try one more time:

 

I think that with a healthy Manning in the upcoming year, the Colts are a playoff caliber team. Period. The cap and possible FA losses could have an impact but otherwise this is the same team that made the playoffs year after year, ie a healthy Manning carrying a half-ass (if that) D and running game, so there's little reason to think otherwise. It is you and a few others who want to hang your hat on "but they're a year older" and IMO that is weak.

 

It's a knock on the Colts because all their best players aren't as good as they used to be.

Like who? And even if not, if they are nearly as good, so what? And it seems to me that is the case overall. Saturday, Clark, etc are still playing at a high level.

 

Thing is, it only makes sense to bring in a high-priced QB in the twilight of his career like Manning if you're basically loaded everywhere else. Because there's really no point in making that kind of commitment to a guy if you're going to surround him with an average cast.

Ordinarily, I agree. But this is a unique situation and Manning a very unique QB. The Colts live and die with him. Despite being half-ass if that in so many ways, he has shown time and again he can take them to the playoffs and beyond. The running game has sucked for years and he and NEVER had a great D. Barely average if that to flamingly pathetic. So Freeney being a year older and losing a step IMO is a drop in the puddle compared to having or not having Manning. Not like the D is going to carry them, to say the least. Often it's been a liability. Yet every year there they were in the playoffs.