Edge Could Get Screwed By the Colts - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Edge Could Get Screwed By the Colts

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby Flux » Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:16 am

Free Bagel wrote:What the hell does it matter who's won a super bowl when you're talking about a 28 year old QB? The best players get paid the most. This guy is so obviously trying to skew the facts towards his arguement by putting unnecessary clauses on them. Kind of like the Randy Moss arguement a while back where Warpigs (no offense Warpigs, just using an example ) decided he was going to compare Moss and Priest and ignore Moss' rushing numbers and Priest's receiving numbers even though there was 600yds of difference in them.

Heck, this guy may as well be saying that Manning is making 1200% of what another QB with similar stats to him made, and just neglect to mention that the other QB played when you could buy a bottle of coke for a nickel.


Are you saying a $14.3 million increase in the signing bonus isn’t a huge difference? And its not like the previous bonus was 20 or 30 years ago, it was in 2002.




Free Bagel wrote:I still don't see why some people think Manning's contract is so outlandish. It's a natural progression for big time free agents to get record setting deals. Favre did it. Then Bledsoe did it. Then Mcnabb did it. Etc.


I honestly don’t think that his contract is outlandish. The point I am trying to get across is that the contract will hurt the team as a whole. If he would have taken a few million less, they would be able to re-sign some of those defensive players or bring some new ones in, or re-sign Edge or Harrison or whatever else.

If he wants his money that’s fine and its his decision. But I think it dramatically hurts the chances of the Colts ever winning a Super Bowl. Heck, look at the past Super Bowl champs and who their QBs were and how much they were making.

I see a recent trend in the Super Bowl champs, players and teams that aren’t me first (well maybe minus Bledsoe in 2001)

2003 – Tom Brady – cap space of less than $3.3 million
2002 – Brad Johnson – cap space of $6.8 million
2001 – Drew Bledsoe – cap space of $6.9 million – Tom Brady – cap space of $314,993
2000 – Tony Banks – cap space of $2.2 million – Trent Dilfer – cap space of $1.0 million

Johnson and Bledsoe have the highest cap values, which for the time were relatively pricey, but, they are nowhere near $17 million plus, or nowhere near 20% of the teams total cap value.

Free Bagel wrote: Now, in 2006 Manning starts earning his real money: $17 mil. If salary cap progression stays the way it has been the last 10 years, the cap will be around $90 mil at that time, although probably higher. But we'll take the low end and say $90 mil. This means that in 2006 Manning will take up approximately 18.5% of the Colts' cap space.


The cap for this year was supposed to only be 78 million or so, but every once in awhile it gets an extra jump (why we saw so many big FA signings this year)

It generally goes up 5% or less a year, so $90 million would actually be on the high end of things and its 17.7 million, not 17 million, so your 18.5% is a bit incorrect. Its still more like 20% which is a ton IMO.

And once again, I don’t think it’s a completely ridiculous sized contract, I just don’t think a team can win a championship when they delegate such a large percent of money to one player.
Image
Flux
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6113
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Carolina Culpepper » Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:22 am

Wow, I guess I've been living in oblivion out here in the Carolina's!! I had no idea that Peyton Manning was such an object of hatred. Personally I have no strong feelings one way or the other for him. Now Tony Dungy, on the other hand, is one of my favorites!!! In regards to this whole bruhaha (sp?) I simply have a few points to make:

1. No one put a gun to Edge's head when he was a rookie to sign a six year contract. That is his problem, not Mannings or the Colts. The Colts or Manning don't owe Edge anything. He signed the deal and both sides fulfilled it. The ACL injury is not a factor either way. You can't predict those things.

2. If Edge has a big year he will get big money. Either with the Colts or someone else. The ball is in his hands (literally and figurtively). His monetary reward will be up to him, not the Colts or Payton.

3. 99% of pro athletes are going to sign for all the money they can get. Why the wrath against Manning for what almost all others are doing. Do I like it - no. Do I wish some of these athletes would put a greater priority on helping their team and themselves win championships by occasionally taking less so other good players could be signed - yes. But I'm not going to bash Payton anymore than I would all the others that are doing the same.

4. It is a little early to Bash Payton, anyways. Since the possibility is out there that he may be willing to restructure after this year when Edge and Marvin are negotiating. I would say the bashing is a little early. Let's see what happens after this year.

Personally I am surprised by all this Manning bashing. I had no idea all this pent up emotion was out there against him!
Last edited by Carolina Culpepper on Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Carolina Culpepper
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 305
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Corey Chavous' Hometown

Postby Flux » Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:23 am

TheBigBakedBean wrote:
For once, I am with Bagel here. Of course Manning's salary is huge, but losing him would be the worst thing that could happen to the franchise, whereas losing Marvin or Edge would not be as devastating. Placing personal blame on him for taking such a huge contract is like complaining to a Ronald McDonald statue about too much lettuce on your Big Mac.


Im not disagreeing that losing him would kill the Colts, im saying that he is making it much much harder to build a solid team by agreeing to such a huge contract.

I love how everyone sees no problem in making character judgements or personality assumptions based on what perceptions they've been given of Manning by the media. Don't forget that everyone - save for Bronco-haters - loves John Elway and he did the same thing that E-Cry did.


This has absolutely nothing to do w/ Eli. Where are you getting that idea from? I certainly hope you arent referring to me in that statement

I bet you people saying Manning is hurting his team and he is only in it for himself and that he doesn't exemplify strong morals are the same people that run around repeating everything from last night's episode of Dave Chappell.

I guess it's "cool" to hate the Mannings these days.


huh? if anything I am not a puppet. youre the one who is now making judgements ;-7

Find something better to discuss for 4 pages...


if its so ridiculous to discuss in your opinion why even comment?
Image
Flux
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6113
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Flux » Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:43 am

maddog wrote:Flux, I agree he'll need to restructure, but in the next two years, no he shouldn't. If 2006 rolls around and he hasn't restructure, then fine, he's a greedy pompous jerk. But its 2004, so I don't see how we can apply something that hasn't happened to an argument against Manning.


My whole reasoning is that when the Colts try and sign someone for more than a 1 or 2 year deal at this point, they have this $17.7 million obstruction just sitting there. It would be extremely hard to give say Harrison or Edge or a veteran or quality FA a contract at the end of this year that would have him make more than a couple million for the years that Manning will be making $15-18 million. If they go ahead and put up money for these players, they are really limiting who and what they can pay for the rest of their team. Say they do give Harrison a contract that’s for $8 million, that right there plus Manning’s contract is taking $25.7 million of the $84 or so million cap space. Now you have over 30% of your money tied up w/ 2 players.

It just hurts the team in trying to sign quality players to improve, and they especially need it on defense. There is no guarantee that Manning will restructure it. So they could sign these guys and just cut them I suppose if Manning refuses, but it also makes it less attractive to go there.

maddog wrote:I think if anything, Marvin Harrison, who if his contract gets any bigger this year will be making money on par with Manning. For a 32 year old WR, 8 million against the cap is a lot more than 8.3 million for the top rated QB in the game. Personally, looking at his age and the amount of money he's currently being paid, I don't think the Marvin could get the Colts to sign him to a higher paying contract regardless of Manning's contract.


I agree, but I also don’t see him taking a drop in his salary either. He is still a top 2 WR in this league

maddog wrote: From reading the two articles you posted I believe there were a few things you left out though. Both articles mention how the Colts use homegrown talent to replace veterans. The one specifically mentions how the Colts in recent years havent done much if anything in free agency. So their lack of big free agent signings on defense this year shouldn't come as any surprise.


It may not be a surprise, but its something they need to do to get to the next level (at least in my opinion). Every year their D takes a hit and gets just a little bit worse in the process.

maddog wrote: Also, Marcus Washington, who seems to be the all-important LB they lost this year. He's replaced by David Thorton ( http://www.colts.com/sub.cfm?page=article7&news_id=2065 ), who had 150+ tackles last year, 100 of them which were solo. Compared to Washington's meager 82, 57 of which were solo, it seems like the smarter move to avoid a bidding war with the Redskins, and upgrade at strong-side LB from within.


Ahhhh, yes Thorton will be replacing Washington on the strong-side. BUT Thorton is moving from the weak-side and who is replacing him on that side? Cato June who is in his 2nd year and has 9 total tackles to his name. So now you have a Thorton playing a new position and a guy with 9 career tackles. June could do well for all I know, but the D would look better on paper if Washington were returning.
Image
Flux
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6113
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby maddog60 » Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:49 pm

TheBigBakedBean wrote:
maddog60 wrote:If 2006 rolls around and he hasn't restructure, then fine, he's a greedy pompous jerk.


What, exactly, is this based on? How is he a pompous jerk for seeking the highest compensation for all of his hard work and excellence at what he gets paid to do? Oh, wait a second...it looks like you agree with me:

maddog60 wrote:I would say his cap cost is minimal for his level of play at the QB position.


OK - so if his salary is justified by his performance on the field, then that's obviously not the problem. The problem must be, then, that he has put his team in a terrible salary cap position. Oh...wait a second, that's not the problem, either:

maddog60 wrote:I think they're perfectly fine in terms of cap room, but they have been mentioned as one of the less wealthy teams.


So what, then, Sir MadDog, is the problem here? How, exactly, is Manning a pompous jerk? Statements such as these should require substantiation, not contradiction...

Somebody get this guy to take the bar exam, quick!


BakedBean: Go read the first 3 pages, I am and have been since page one defending Manning, and providing evidence that his contract is not the reason Edge and many others were let go.

I do feel however if he weren't to restructure the contract it would hurt the Colts. However, I think making that assumption would be as absurd as making the assumption that Tom Brady will refuse to take the field all next year. Sure he "could" do it, but the overwhelming probability is the opposite (in Manning's case that he will restructure).
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 4:35 hours
(and 42 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact