Manning to Part ways tomorrow

[Southern9er]

We don't even know that the Colts asked him to restructure, and if they did, what the terms were. If they asked him to take a 50% pay cut, he'd be justified in turning it down.

Oh, and by the way, Eli didn't take a pay cut. He just restructured to free up cap space. Next time you read the article before you paste it:

The franchise quarterback still will get all of the $10.75 million, with $9 million of it being paid up front and guaranteed, according to the Newark Star-Ledger.

"oh...and by the way", next time don't be an asshole...I hope you don't talk this way face to face with people you don't know...it probably doesn't work out, well. Message boards really change the way we would respond to people dont they?

Here's what I said to remind you: "Hard to be sure w/o knowing what Irsay and Petyon talked about..."

Are we clear? You and I agree on that point, but you missed it in your haste to be a jack ass.

Next time "read" the post before you quote me...kind of like you told me to do huh?

Why is it you and many other long term posters from ESPN to here feel the need to be such fucking jerks when somebody makes a post that has mistakes or hell, maybe even misunderstandings???...Sorry if my contract knowledge and understanding of how they get paid offends you, frustrates you, but I fly airplanes for a living and have a life well beyond my interest in 49er football...get a fucking life Crimson and get off your high horse, its a message blog, but I guess this puff's up your ego to act like a douche bag, when you see the opportunity.

He's restructured...at some point, under some circumstance he's taking a pay cut, otherwise these contracts are nothing more than bragging points for the players (at ease, this is an area I openly admit to not possessing your depth of knowledge)...and NO I don't think he'd be "justified" in turning down a 50% paycut AFTER saying what he said about being a Colt and how much it means to him, otherwise I'd agree with you...without the tears and lines about wanting to be no where else. But back to my ORIGINAL point and one you slammed me for (which, interestingly we agree upon)...we don't know what was discussed.

Now...go get some quality time with your mate... Cheers! :hdn:

 

[Bemular]

"oh...and by the way", next time don't be an asshole...I hope you don't talk this way face to face with people you don't know...it probably doesn't work out, well. Message boards really change the way we would respond to people dont they?

Here's what I said to remind you: "Hard to be sure w/o knowing what Irsay and Petyon talked about..."

Are we clear? You and I agree on that point, but you missed it in your haste to be a jack ass.

Next time "read" the post before you quote me...kind of like you told me to do huh?

Why is it you and many other long term posters from ESPN to here feel the need to be such fucking jerks when somebody makes a post that has mistakes or hell, maybe even misunderstandings???...Sorry if my contract knowledge and understanding of how they get paid offends you, frustrates you, but I fly airplanes for a living and have a life well beyond my interest in 49er football...get a fucking life Crimson and get off your high horse, its a message blog, but I guess this puff's up your ego to act like a douche bag, when you see the opportunity.

He's restructured...at some point, under some circumstance he's taking a pay cut, otherwise these contracts are nothing more than bragging points for the players (at ease, this is an area I openly admit to not possessing your depth of knowledge)...and NO I don't think he'd be "justified" in turning down a 50% paycut AFTER saying what he said about being a Colt and how much it means to him, otherwise I'd agree with you...without the tears and lines about wanting to be no where else. But back to my ORIGINAL point and one you slammed me for (which, interestingly we agree upon)...we don't know what was discussed.

Now...go get some quality time with your mate... Cheers! :hdn:

I was wondering what the hell he was talking about when I read his post.

 

[threelittleturds]

NFL Network is jumping all over the Miami Dolphins being all about Peyton Manning... images of him landing in Miami and helicopters following him around.

That'd be hilarious if the 49ers beat the Dolphins out of the Manning race... the same way they did the Harbaugh race. Two years in a row?? Damn

 

[SRPnVA]

Peyton Manning Rumors: Chiefs Reportedly Have First Completed Contract In To Former Colts Quarterback

The Kansas City Chiefs have the money. Apparently they’re more than willing to spend it. Despite rumors that they would only bring in some competition for Matt Cassel, it looks like the prize of landing Peyton Manning would cause the Chiefs brass to upend those plans for something far greater. A source notes that the Chiefs are the first official team into the Manning sweepstakes with the first completed contract submitted.

The Chiefs have made the official list of suitors although word on the Dolphins is far stronger and that’s where Manning flew to on his first day. It’s going to be tough to beat the Dolphins with the talent around him, the weather and an owner ready to do whatever song and dance he must do to get him.

But the Chiefs are apparently doing everything on their end to get him and take the reins of the AFC West. With Manning at the helm, winning the division would become an assumption given that the Chiefs finished within one game in a season their head coach was fired. It starts with the contract.

Peyton Manning Rumors: Chiefs Reportedly Have First Completed Contract In To Former Colts Quarterback - SB Nation Kansas City

 

[Southern9er]

NFL Network is jumping all over the Miami Dolphins being all about Peyton Manning... images of him landing in Miami and helicopters following him around.

That'd be hilarious if the 49ers beat the Dolphins out of the Manning race... the same way they did the Harbaugh race. Two years in a row?? Damn

Makes sense...he has a house in south FL...and the warm weather is better for "old folks"...

Ouch...that would hurt...:yuck:

 

[Crimsoncrew]

"oh...and by the way", next time don't be an asshole...I hope you don't talk this way face to face with people you don't know...it probably doesn't work out, well. Message boards really change the way we would respond to people dont they?

Here's what I said to remind you: "Hard to be sure w/o knowing what Irsay and Petyon talked about..."

Are we clear? You and I agree on that point, but you missed it in your haste to be a jack ass.

Next time "read" the post before you quote me...kind of like you told me to do huh?

Why is it you and many other long term posters from ESPN to here feel the need to be such fucking jerks when somebody makes a post that has mistakes or hell, maybe even misunderstandings???...Sorry if my contract knowledge and understanding of how they get paid offends you, frustrates you, but I fly airplanes for a living and have a life well beyond my interest in 49er football...get a fucking life Crimson and get off your high horse, its a message blog, but I guess this puff's up your ego to act like a douche bag, when you see the opportunity.

He's restructured...at some point, under some circumstance he's taking a pay cut, otherwise these contracts are nothing more than bragging points for the players (at ease, this is an area I openly admit to not possessing your depth of knowledge)...and NO I don't think he'd be "justified" in turning down a 50% paycut AFTER saying what he said about being a Colt and how much it means to him, otherwise I'd agree with you...without the tears and lines about wanting to be no where else. But back to my ORIGINAL point and one you slammed me for (which, interestingly we agree upon)...we don't know what was discussed.

Now...go get some quality time with your mate... Cheers! :hdn:

Now that you mention it, my wife has been out of town since Sunday, so perhaps I'm a bit more tense than usual.

I did not mean for those comments to come out quite as dick-ish as they did. A little bit, sure, but re-reading it, it's a bit stronger than I intended.

My sense from this conversation is that you have made up your mind that it is all about the money for Peyton, and are now looking for evidence that supports you. As you said - and I did realize you said it I just didn't think you were actually considering it - we don't have a clue what the Colts offered, or even if they did. Here's the thing: from the Colts' perspective, this is probably a convenient excuse to get rid of Peyton at just the right time. They have a chance to get the best QB prospect since Peyton, and having the two of them on the same team creates some tension. So now they get to delicately get rid of Peyton and go with the younger guy, which is absolutely the right call if they think Luck is a franchise QB. They will need the cap space that Manning would take up to give Luck the supporting cast he needs to be successful.

I said above that they might have only offered him 50% of what they had. I think there's a good chance that figure is still too high. He was due a $28 million roster bonus. I wouldn't be shocked if they wanted to drop that to $10 million or less, or completely restructure the contract to remove the roster bonus altogether. I can't fault Manning for deciding he didn't want a contract to play for Indy for one year, break in Luck, and then get kicked to the curb. That may not be the reality, but I think it's closer than Manning simply wanting more money. And let's be honest: money is a consideration. Sure, Manning doesn't need more money. But it's the actual funds combined with what it says about the player. I'm sure Manning will get far more than he could from the Colts somewhere else. That may not be his primary concern, but it is a concern.

Finally, I was a bit harsh about reading the article. I figure that all the regulars on here, at least, know that restructuring is not the same as taking a pay cut, and that guys routinely restructure to help their team's cap, but don't actually lose out on any money. My first thought on seeing the headline was, "Well did he actually take a pay cut." I was surprised you didn't check that, and it was rather prominently featured in the article. But again, I am sorry if I was a dick about it.

 

[clyde_carbon]

This thread is all over the place now.

Honestly, if Colin Kaepernick really is Baalke and Harbaugh's guy, there's absolutely no reason not to go after Manning and instead settle with Alex.

 

[wartyOne]

This thread is all over the place now.

Honestly, if Colin Kaepernick really is Baalke and Harbaugh's guy, there's absolutely no reason not to go after Manning and instead settle with Alex.

Maybe Smith has more than what we've seen, but how many players "break out" in their 8th season? I agree with the sentiment that if Kaepernick is the guy, it makes no sense to settle on Smith instead of targeting and acquiring Manning.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Here's my problem with the whole "equity" line of thinking that Harbaugh has talked about a bit: it simply doesn't apply. Willis has a huge salary this year, as well he should. Bowman is playing for peanuts. In the NFL today, you need a good-to-great QB, and that shoots equity to hell. Even if we develop Kaepernick, if he is that guy, at some point we'll have to pay him that way.

I can understand not going after Manning, but as said, only if we question Manning's ability to play and stay healthy or if we're entirely sold on Smith. I don't see that either of those things are true here.

 

[clyde_carbon]

Maybe Smith has more than what we've seen, but how many players "break out" in their 8th season? I agree with the sentiment that if Kaepernick is the guy, it makes no sense to settle on Smith instead of targeting and acquiring Manning.

I wanna give them the benefit of the doubt, but it just doesn't make any sense.

You're gonna give Alex a 3 or 4 year contract anyways. If you're willing to give Alex 8 or 9mil per year, you should as hell be ready to give Manning 14 or 15mil per year.

If Alex's improvement stagnats or he regress, you have CK.

If Manning isn't the same player or gets injured, you have CK.

I think everyone agrees that this team is much better with Manning than it is with Alex.

If we sign Alex and Manning goes somewhere else (God forbid Arizona) and lights it up, how bad do we look for not persuing him?

If we sign Manning and let Alex walk, I doubt it will come back and bite us in the ass.

And finally, if Colin Kaepernick is "the future" anyways, I don't understand how we can't take a chance on Manning to see if we can make a push for the SB.

Do we know something about Manning's health that these other teams don't? I doubt it. Can Harbaugh really not co-exist with a HOF QB? The only legitimate reason I can think of is that they're scared to hurt Alex's psyche if we make a push for Manning and don't land him. I really hope Alex feeling's aren't the reason we're not going after Manning.

 

[Bemular]

This thread is all over the place now.

Honestly, if Colin Kaepernick really is Baalke and Harbaugh's guy, there's absolutely no reason not to go after Manning and instead settle with Alex.

I don't understand this. If Colin is the future then why delay that future by signing Peyton for what will likely be more money? Why not try to sign Kaepernicks back-up (Alex) for less money? Or let go of Alex and reject Manning and sign a back-up or a #3.

If we lose Smith and sign Manning and Peyton gets hurt again he will likely retire. If we sign Manning and he stays healthy for 2-3 more years then we delay the arrival of Kaepernick and if he is our future we would then risk losing him before we even find out.

IMO, if Colin is our future then does it not make more sense to sign Alex on the cheap knowing he will be an excellent back-up QB. Peyton is not backing up anyone and if he gets hurt - he's done as well.

Now, if Colin isn't our future and Baalke & Harbaugh know this then it would make sense to go after Manning.

 

[michaelwarner]

This thread is all over the place now.

Honestly, if Colin Kaepernick really is Baalke and Harbaugh's guy, there's absolutely no reason not to go after Manning and instead settle with Alex.

This made me laugh Clyde. I literally was just thinking that this thread had a little ADD thrown in it.

 

[clyde_carbon]

I don't understand this. If Colin is the future then why delay that future by signing Peyton for what will likely be more money? Why not try to sign Kaepernicks back-up (Alex) for less money? Or let go of Alex and reject Manning and sign a back-up or a #3.

If we lose Smith and sign Manning and Peyton gets hurt again he will likely retire. If we sign Manning and he stays healthy for 2-3 more years then we delay the arrival of Kaepernick and if he is our future we would then risk losing him before we even find out.

IMO, if Colin is our future then does it not make more sense to sign Alex on the cheap knowing he will be an excellent back-up QB. Peyton is not backing up anyone and if he gets hurt - he's done as well.

Now, if Colin isn't our future and Baalke & Harbaugh know this then it would make sense to go after Manning.

What don't you understand about that? If Colin Kaepernick is their guy, as in the future, then there's no reason to settle for a mediocre QB for the next three years.

You either go with Kaepernick, or you make a push for the HOF QB and make Kaepernick sit until Manning is gone.

Even if they don't think CK will be ready for a few years, why not pay Manning that extra 5mil per year over Alex for the next 3 years and see what happens?

 

[Bemular]

What don't you understand about that? If Colin Kaepernick is their guy, as in the future, then there's no reason to settle for a mediocre QB for the next three years.

You either go with Kaepernick, or you make a push for the HOF QB and make Kaepernick sit until Manning is gone.

Even if they don't think CK will be ready for a few years, why not pay Manning that extra 5mil per year over Alex for the next 3 years and see what happens?

The answer lies in our interpretations of "the future" - to me the future is 2012 not 2015.

If the future is 2012 then quite honestly signing either Smith or Manning would make no sense at all - save the space and draft or buy a back-up on the cheap and let the future begin.

If the future begins in 2015 and we can be reasonably certain Manning will meet or exceed our expectations until 2015 then signing Manning would be smart.

 

[clyde_carbon]

The answer lies in our interpretations of "the future" - to me the future is 2012 not 2015.

If the future is 2012 then quite honestly signing either Smith or Manning would make no sense at all - save the space and draft or buy a back-up on the cheap and let the future begin.

If the future begins in 2015 and we can be reasonably certain Manning will meet or exceed our expectations until 2015 then signing Manning would be smart.

Even if you think 2012 is the future, who's the better QB in 2012, Manning or CK? Manning or Alex?

If CK is their guy, whether that's in 2012 or 2013 or 2014, why offer a mediocre QB a three or four year contract? And if you think Alex is gonna keep improving and is gonna develop into a good QB, why aren't you giving him the 5 years he's asking for?

If we go with Alex Smith and his development stagnates and/or he regresses, you have CK, who's supposedly the future anyways.

If we go with Peyton Manning and he gets injured or flames out, you have CK, who's supposedly the future anyways.

If they truly believe CK is the guy regardless, then there's no reason why we shouldn't inquire about Manning and try to make a heavy superbowl push the next two or three years. Isn't that what we're trying to do with Alex anyways? Doesn't Manning give us a better chance at that?

 

[Bemular]

Even if you think 2012 is the future, who's the better QB in 2012, Manning or CK? Manning or Alex?

If CK is their guy, whether that's in 2012 or 2013 or 2014, why offer a mediocre QB a three or four year contract? And if you think Alex is gonna keep improving and is gonna develop into a good QB, why aren't you giving him the 5 years he's asking for?

If we go with Alex Smith and his development stagnates and/or he regresses, you have CK, who's supposedly the future anyways.

If we go with Peyton Manning and he gets injured or flames out, you have CK, who's supposedly the future anyways.

If they truly believe CK is the guy regardless, then there's no reason why we shouldn't inquire about Manning and try to make a heavy superbowl push the next two or three years.

This is all about managing risk & reward along a timeline.

At different points along the timeline, which begins in Sept 2012 and ends in Sept 2015, there are essentially three alternatives each of which culminate in CK becoming our starter. Those three scenarios are as follows:

A) Forego both Smith & Manning
B) Forego Manning in favor of Smith
C) Forego Smith in favor of Manning

The closer to Sept 2012 on the timeline the more "A" is the correct answer.
The closer to Sept 2015 on the timeline the more "C" is the correct answer.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Peyton Manning - QB - Colts

The Denver Post reports that Broncos officials will meet with free agent Peyton Manning on Friday night in Denver.
Writes Broncos beat reporter Mike Klis, "this is getting serious, folks." The meeting in Denver is Manning's first official free-agent visit, so the Broncos are absolutely getting aggressive. Whether Manning and his representatives -- who also rep in-place Broncos starter Tim Tebow -- will have as much interested is to be determined. Klis reports Manning wants to "make a decision by Tuesday," the formal start of free agency. One source told the Post that Manning will also make official visits to the Cardinals and Dolphins. So the three favorites to sign Manning have emerged: Denver, Arizona, and Miami.
Related: Dolphins, Broncos, Cardinals
Source: Denver Post
Mar 9 - 1:24 PM

Player Outlook
Game Log
Career Stats
Draft Advice

Peyton Manning - QB - Colts

ESPN's Adam Schefter reported on SportsCenter that, in the "estimation of many people around the league," the Dolphins are losing steam in the sweepstakes for free agent Peyton Manning.
Without providing detail, Schefter cited the same reasons that drove away Jim Harbaugh and Jeff Fisher. "I think there are certain circumstances that prevented certain people from choosing Miami," Schefter said. "And I think that those factors will come into play with Peyton Manning." Added Schefter, "I think their chances right now are dwindling some. ... Miami doesn't seem to have an advantage that it did a few days ago, in the estimation of many people around the league."

 

[clyde_carbon]

This is all about managing risk & reward along a timeline.

At different points along the timeline, which begins in Sept 2012 and ends in Sept 2015, there are essentially three alternatives each of which culminate in CK becoming our starter. Those three scenarios are as follows:

A) Forego both Smith & Manning
B) Forego Manning in favor of Smith
C) Forego Smith in favor of Manning

The closer to Sept 2012 on the timeline the more "A" is the correct answer.
The closer to Sept 2015 on the timeline the more "C" is the correct answer.

But you're completely discounting CK now. By all accounts CK is the future of this team. He's the insurance policy, whether Alex regresses or Manning gets injured.

That's why going after Manning, even if it might be more risky than going with Alex, makes so much sense. If Manning is Manning, then we're the favorites to win it all. If he gets injured, we have our insurance policy.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Schef confirms PM is en route to Denver for his first visit.

 

[BINGO]

Schef confirms PM is en route to Denver for his first visit.

Peyton in, Tebow out?
11:34 AM ET
Tim Tebow | Broncos

UPDATE: Refreshing this post from yesterday in light of the report from Jeff Legwold of the Denver Post that the Denver Broncos' interest in Peyton Manning is greater than many people think. The bottom line is that if Denver does land Manning, it makes sense to see if there is another team out there that would be interested in Tim Tebow.

---

A report on Wednesday afternoon from Mike Klis of the Denver Post indicated that the Broncos were planning to contact the agent for free agent QB Peyton Manning -- [Editor's note: Yeah, still sounds weird] -- in order to gauge the future Hall of Famer's interest in joining the club. It's not a shoo-in that Peyton's interested, and there's also been some debate as to whether the Broncos really should be. Klis' colleague Mark Kiszla offered three reasons why the Broncos shouldn't make this happen.

But if it does, what happens to Tim Tebow?

Throughout this offeason, the Broncos brass has indicated that Tebow would enter training camp (and likely, the season) as the team's No. 1 QB. But there's no question that Manning would unseat Tebow were he to be acquired. This hypothetical scenario would present the Broncos with three options: a) keep Tebow on the roster as a QB, backing up Manning; b) turn him into an H-back, as some indicated they should do after he was drafted; c) sell him off to the highest bidder in trade.

It's that third suggestion that is most intriguing, as there's a new owner of a particular NFL team that lamented his team's non-drafting of Tebow in remarks earlier this offseason. That man is Shahid Khan, the new owner of the Jacksonville Jaguars, a franchise that plays about 70 miles from where Tebow's legend first blossomed at the Univ. of Florida.

To be clear, this is not saying that the Jags are definitely interested in Tebow -- we haven't been led to believe this from anything we've heard -- but here's a hypothetical scenario: the Broncos get Peyton, Denver offers Tebow for a second-round pick. Which team says no to that?

In addition to Tebow's heroism on the field, as a marketable commodity, his appeal to a team playing in Northern Florida cannot be understated. And for the new owner of a team that has had issues selling out its stadium, Tebow's presence would help in that regard, as well as potentially giving the franchise a higher profile, which would in turn get them in nationally televised games more often.

Again, this is all hypothetical, but just something to ponder as the Manning pursuit by Denver continues.

- Tim Kavanagh​

Bill Williamson
Their feelings on Tebow haven't diminished with the pursuit of Peyton

"The Broncos have said Tebow will go to training camp as the starter. I don't think their interest in Manning is an indication the Broncos are searching for a reason to get out of their commitment to Tebow. The opportunity to sign Manning is a unique one. I think Manning is one of the few quarterbacks Denver could bring in as its starter this season that wouldn't cause fan backlash. Everyone would have to understand the reason why he is being brought in. However, if Denver's pursuit of Manning doesn't go anywhere, I think the Broncos will still give Tebow this season to prove himself."