Question for Miguel...

[MoLewisrocks]

Just noticed you updated your Manning contract page to include your WAG at how the contract will be managed going forward. Noticed you had added a year to his deal that according to all reports does not exist - 2013. My understanding was the deal was 9 years voidable to 7, and since it was signed in 2004 it would run through 2010 unless Manning opted not to void the 2011-2012 seasons. On the Colts cap page you link to he is listed as signed through 2012.

I went to the NFLPA site to see if you picked up that 2013 salary from their records, but the site suddenly seems to have eliminated public accessability to salary data.

So are you predicting/projecting a 1 year extension? I see you have converted parts of his 2008-2010 salaries to signing bonus, but I don't see any additional signing bonus in exchange for an extension season. Or do you have information that indicates the original contract was actually a 10 year deal?

BTW my presumption has always been (and continues to be) that if they wish to restructure his deal to circumvent his impending $18-21M cap hits in the back end of this deal, they will have to cough up a substantial signing bonus to extend the deal because Manning will likely not choose to continue playing under a contract past 2010 that will have been salary only since 2008. Even if his rolling dead cap could be viewed as implicitly guaranteeing he sees most of it.

 

[pats1]

NFLPA.org changed around its site last summer, so the links were changed too. It took them a few weeks (and a few e-mails) to add the active player search back (but that was last July). Anyway, here it is:

http://nflpa.org/Resources/ActivePlayerSearch.aspx

 

[Miguel]

Just noticed you updated your Manning contract page to include your WAG at how the contract will be managed going forward. Noticed you had added a year to his deal that according to all reports does not exist - 2013..

I did so because PM said last year that he wanted to play 8 more years which would make the 2013 season his last season in the NFL.

 

[JoeSixPat]

I did so because PM said last year that he wanted to play 8 more years which would make the 2013 season his last season in the NFL.

Miguel - seems like a safe assumption that the additional year will wind up as an extention, giving them the ability to stretch out some of the salary into guaranteed money.

I guess that's what the Colts did this year to free up about $10 million in cap money by restructuring Manning's contract making salary a guarantee, stretching it into the remaining existing 2012 contract, no?

For those of us too lazy to break down all your info, could you in a nutshell, given this year's adjustment to Manning's contract, could you give us a general feel for what Manning's predicted cap hits are for the remainder of his contract?

I mean, at some point, the "trick" of converting salary to guranteed money catches up to you in a big way, and I'd think Manning's cap hit is going to be huge real soon, no?

Of course, we have both Brady and Seymour and now AD - when you have a chance, it would be interesting to see how our cap situation compares with a competitor like the Colts.

I'd expect this year, when the Pats had ample Cap Space and the Colts had very little, will be the rule, not the exception, no?

 

[Miguel]

For those of us too lazy to break down all your info, could you in a nutshell, given this year's adjustment to Manning's contract, could you give us a general feel for what Manning's predicted cap hits are for the remainder of his contract?

http://www.patscap.com/manning.gif

will be as much as I will say.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I did so because PM said last year that he wanted to play 8 more years which would make the 2013 season his last season in the NFL.

Well that's an interesting approach. It gives new meaning to dummy years. I hear Tommy wants to play until he's in his late 30's too. I guess we should consider him under contract through 2015 and just tack some more well below present day AAV salary only years on at the end of his deal and assume he's fine with that too.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

NFLPA.org changed around its site last summer, so the links were changed too. It took them a few weeks (and a few e-mails) to add the active player search back (but that was last July). Anyway, here it is:

http://nflpa.org/Resources/ActivePlayerSearch.aspx

Thanks. I had a link that worked fine until this week when the resources tab no longer offered player info...

 

[Miguel]

Well that's an interesting approach. It gives new meaning to dummy years. I hear Tommy wants to play until he's in his late 30's too. I guess we should consider him under contract through 2015 and just tack some more well below present day AAV salary only years on at the end of his deal and assume he's fine with that too.

MoLewisRocks, to help me out with my numbers,

What was the Colts' cash over cap penalty??
How much did Peyton get in a NTLBE bonus for the Colts winning the Super Bowl??

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Sorry buddy, that kind of response won't fly. Don't make up numbers and seasons to put a more reasonable spin on Manning's deal unless you clearly state that is what you are doing. 2013 does not exist for Manning and the Colts until or unless they create it.

They just hammered out a revenue sharing plan at the Owners Meetings this week. Perhaps that deals with cash over cap, which is what Jonathan Kraft has hinted this team was concerned it might.

I don't know if Peyton has any incentives in his deal, most players do, but I don't recall ever suggesting he had an NLTBE tied to the Superbowl. All I do believe I know is his 2004 deal was for 9 years at around $126M with two voidable $14M salary only seasons in 2011 and 2012, which is why it is consistently referred to as a 7 year $98M deal that runs through 2010. Maybe he won't void it, but Freeney did and I would expect Manning will as well. Polian has already dumped $3.4M in amortization into those voidable years. He can't dump any into 2013 as you suggest he may next year because the player isn't under contract for 2013 and navagating his scheduled 2008-2010 cap hits will become increasingly difficult unless they do a 3+ year extension soon. I doubt Manning will do that without seeing another $30M+ in guaranteed money locked in for those seasons. Because while he says he wants to play another 8 years he assumes he will be doing that at a high level and be compensated accordingly under an expanding cap. And he is on record saying that his business, which he runs well, is Peyton Manning Inc.

 

[NE39]

I think the adding 1-year scenario is unrealistic because I doubt Manning will go for it. One of the reasons Manning got so much front money last time was because he had them over a barrell when his franchise tender got outrageous. They needed space and had to pay him a record bonus on an extention. In hindsight, they should have done it sooner.

In the next few years Manning's cap number will be so heavy with amortized bonus that an extension will make far more sense than a restructure. Even with a restructure, his cap number will be high, so the team will probably want to extend him so more years can be added.

At that point, they will do a new deal. Given that Peyton got $34.5M up front last time, I don't see why he would ask for less than $30M+ this time around. He is still playing at a very high level, and is still pretty young. He probably only has one more big bite of the apple left in his career, and I say he goes for it.

 

[Miguel]

I don't know if Peyton has any incentives in his deal, most players do, but I don't recall ever suggesting he had an NLTBE tied to the Superbowl.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...thread.php?p=337530&highlight=LTBE#post337530
"And I would be astonished if Manning didn't have lots of little incentives in his deal including SBMVP - not with Tom Condon as his agent.
http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...wthread.php?t=50303&page=4&highlight=grossman
"Somehow I can't fathom Tom not having those incentive clauses in Peyton's deal though. Can you?"

"Not necessarily. I think we heard about Rex's windfall because of the irony that his abyssmal play is probably the single biggest reason Chicago lost."

 

[Miguel]

Sorry buddy, that kind of response won't fly. Don't make up numbers and seasons to put a more reasonable spin on Manning's deal unless you clearly state that is what you are doing. 2013 does not exist for Manning and the Colts until or unless they create it.

I am just giving my opinion on what I think that it is best for the Colts and Manning.

I guess that my definition of a WAG differs from yours

I think that saying that it is a WAG pretty much tells people that I am taking a GUESS.

 

[NE39]

I am just giving my opinion on what I think that it is best for the Colts and Manning.

Best for the Colts, not for Manning. If I'm Manning, then I don't want to put off getting a new contract. He has a chance at one more huge score, with big front money. I doubt he does anything to put that off another year.

 

[Miguel]

I have now included my WAG of MLR's WAG.

in the manning.gif.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I am just giving my opinion on what I think that it is best for the Colts and Manning.

I guess that my definition of a WAG differs from yours

I think that saying that it is a WAG pretty much tells people that I am taking a GUESS.

I think when I take a WAG at something people have every expectation it is just that. But then I haven't spent years building a reputation for veracity of detail on my own cap pages.

Again, I never said anything about NLBTE's. I said he might have incentives built in to his deal as many players so for everything from playing time to playoff appearances to post season awards. Since his cap hit is being reported as $8.2M this year it would appear he does not.

And I would never WAG Manning to sign an extension that ended with 3 flat salary years at $10M. I think his new deal will be much like his old deal with veteran minimum or thereabouts salaries for 2008-2011 but double digit roster bonuses due in 2010-2011 and out year salaries at least equal to those in his old deal ($14M). I also think it's likely Polian tacks on a additional season (2014) beyond which Manning has not stated a firm intention of playing so as to expand his amotrization dumping options in the preceding 4 seasons. And I expect as a result they will likely end up with something in the vacinity of double digit dead cap to be absorbed when Manning actually does retire.

 

[Miguel]

Again, I never said anything about NLBTE's. I said he might have incentives built in to his deal as many players so for everything from playing time to playoff appearances to post season awards.

Given that Manning never went to the Super Bowl before, posting "And I would be astonished if Manning didn't have lots of little incentives in his deal including SBMVP - not with Tom Condon as his agent" is, IMO, saying that Manning had a NTLBE SB MVP in his contract.

 

[Miguel]

I also think it's likely Polian tacks on a additional season (2014) beyond which Manning has not stated a firm intention of playing so as to expand his amotrization dumping options in the preceding 4 seasons.

What happened to "2013 does not exist for Manning and the Colts until or unless they create it?? Or do you have a different standard for my post than you do yours??

 

[Miguel]

And I would never WAG Manning to sign an extension that ended with 3 flat salary years at $10M. I think his new deal will be much like his old deal with veteran minimum or thereabouts salaries for 2008-2011 but double digit roster bonuses due in 2010-2011 and out year salaries at least equal to those in his old deal ($14M). I also think it's likely Polian tacks on a additional season (2014) beyond which Manning has not stated a firm intention of playing so as to expand his amotrization dumping options in the preceding 4 seasons. And I expect as a result they will likely end up with something in the vacinity of double digit dead cap to be absorbed when Manning actually does retire.

In other words, you expect a 32-year old Manning to get around the same deal as a 28-year Manning AND the Colts with over 7 years to plan for Manning's retirement to end up with a 10 million plus dead money hit for Manning.

I will change my WAG of your WAG.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

In other words, you expect a 32-year old Manning to get around the same deal as a 28-year Manning AND the Colts with over 7 years to plan for Manning's retirement to end up with a 10 million plus dead money hit for Manning.

I will change my WAG of your WAG.

Considering the cap in your opinion will likely have doubled in that 10 year period, absolutey I do.

I'm only giving my WAG at a TBD Manning deal in response to your WAG at what you thought I was thinking, and clearly stating it will require an extension to ever exist. You allowed it to appear on your .gif as if 2013 already existed absent an extension. You are well aware that folks hereabouts, as well as in Indy, believe that when it comes to all things cap you are a the man (as you are) - and stickler for accuracy even when guesstimating. And most assume you would never create via omission of a little detail like your use of a year that doesn't yet exist, something to mislead them into thinking that Manning's contract was designed all along so as to not require a full blown restructure to avoid dead cap hell on it's completion. Because they don't necessarily appreciate that you <heart> the cap guru and talent he manages his cap to collect from the AFCS almost as much as you love your Pat's. I on the other hand figured out your divided loyalties long ago palsy walsy.

They don't bother me, BTW. I just think if they color your perceptions they deserve to be acknowledged. I make no bones about the fact that I believe Belioli's approach is a better one over the long haul, and Polian's will leave a mess for someone to clean up once he and Dungy move on (and I think Dungy will move on sooner rather than later which could exacerbate that situation). And Jim Irsay is no Bob Kraft who I believe will be better equipped to deal with the aftermath of his guru's and his HOF QB.

 

[Miguel]

I'm only giving my WAG at a TBD Manning deal in response to your WAG at what you thought I was thinking, and clearly stating it will require an extension to ever exist. You allowed it to appear on your .gif as if 2013 already existed absent an extension. You are well aware that folks hereabouts, as well as in Indy, believe that when it comes to all things cap you are a the man (as you are) - and stickler for accuracy even when guesstimating. And most assume you would never create via omission of a little detail like your use of a year that doesn't yet exist, something to mislead them into thinking that Manning's contract was designed all along so as to not require a full blown restructure to avoid dead cap hell on it's completion.

I thought that everyone would realize that with my giving the current parameters of the deal AND my use of the WAG label, they would realize that I was taking a guess. Geez!!!!