Notice: All forums will be retired as of May 31st, 2016 and will not be archived. Thank you for your participation in this community, and we hope you continue to enjoy other content at

Peyton Manning - 5 YRS - 90 MIL

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from gr82bme. Show gr82bme's posts

    Re: Peyton Manning - 5 YRS - 90 MIL

    In Response to Re: Peyton Manning - 5 YRS - 90 MIL:
    Grt - do you know how Manning's salary works related to the cap in each year of his contract? If not, then all you are doing is speculating. Call me whatever you wish, but I find it extremely amusing that many here were claiming manning was holding out for 25 mill (Texas Pat where are you), and now that he is signed for the same average annual salary as Brady, you are attempting to find some new avenue to fault him. How pathetic is that? For you specifically - Brady complained before his deal was up so that he could get more. I could care less and think he should have done it, but had any non-patriot done that you and many of your ilk would have called him bashed him from here to kindom come for his greed. Its no different bringing in Haynesworth. The guy may end up being great, but he's a dirtbag of a human now on a team that its fandom has called classy. Even if that guy sings in the church choir from here on out, he'll still be a dirtbag. Never classy. I am sure now, however, it simply about winning, right? Take off the pats glasses, my friend. Manning essentially shut down the haters on this board and any attempt you make to spin his deal negatively only exposes that hate even more. You're rationality meter for pro football is currently -1. Posted by UD6 Child please pull your head out of your bottom. 1. With respect to your first question, he's being paid 69 M for the first three years - or 23 per. If the cap is 120 this year, that's 19% of the overall team cap. If the cap raises 10 M next year that's about 17.6%. If the cap raises another 10 M the 3rd year of his deal, it's 16.4%. For TB (same cap assumptions), it would be 15, 13.8, and 12.8 percent respectively on those years, or about 4% less cap space per year (at 18 M per). I know you consider reporters Silver and Felger to be the best of the best, but per Peter King (he's got a flawless reputation), courteousy of his "Monday morning QB," the contract "looks to be good for both sides, with 69 M in the first three years - seems to be with the implicit understanding that PM will redo the deal in 2014. That's a significant year. It's when the salary cap could go up appreciably because the TV deals will go up appreciably." Later, King state that "....although PM is not one to grouse or insist about opening a contract early, I'm thinking about getting one last contract bump when the Colts can affort it better in 2014. Now, as I stated earlier I don't lend a bunch of credence to reporters, but to insinuate it's a "great" for cap reasons given the percentages above is not really true. Gr8 - you are not presenting very well.  Please reread my post.  I asked do you know how his salary works as it relates to the cap in each year of his contract.  The fact is cap management is significantly more complicated than simple math.  It is being reported that Manning's contract this year only counts 16 million against the colts cap, 13.3% of the limit.  I don't know how it affects future years and by your immediate mistake, its clear you don't either.   The rest of your comment is blather, which is fine as long as you remember that Brady just forced the pats to redo his deal before it was up while Manning played out the entirety of his deal.  2. I never said anything about him "getting," "wanting," etc. 25M per year. Perhaps others did, I did not. The "same annual value as TB" crapola is a folly as well (makes me think the Colts front office and the PM sycophants are the ones running our country's budget) as for the first 3 years 23 is more than 18 by a healthy margin (over 70%). You may not think he'll redo the out years, because after all, nobody has ever done that and I'm positive he'll be willing to accept a 8-9 M per year pay cut. Sure doggpoop, happens all the time. Please hold your breath on that one. Again, speculate all you, but remember Brady forced a deal before his contract was up while Manning actually played out his contract, and Manning did it without people "close to him" complaining to the media. 3. You've yet to provide a single quote from TB with respect to his contract. As my 12-year old Son would say, "epic fail mister." Don't you find it hypocritical that you are willing to speculate with evidence to the contrary about Manning but are unwilling to connect the circumstantial dots with regard to Brady.  Just admit you are wearing pats goggles and we'll call it a day.    4. With respect to Haynesworth, I agree, he's quite a piece of work. Find for me where I referred to him as "classy." Do I hope he performs well? Of course, he's on our team. Would I let him sit my Son? Heck no! I don't wear "Pats glasses" and even if I did, I'd have a pretty fair amount of reasons why: 3 SBs. What's Indy got again? One? Team-X "glasses" coming from you? Again, hypocrisy, thy name is Underdoggpoop or one of his many aliases. I didn't say you said he was classy.  My post wasn't specifically directed at you, but my point remains the same.  I expect Haynesworth will play well.  He's now got something to prove and Belichick will give him an opportunity to prove it and play him in a manner that makes him most effective.  5. With respect to my "rationality meter" for pro football - never said I was an expert, never said I knew X's and O's, never even said PM wasn't an all-world QB. And again, while you question my football rationality, you continue to post on another team's site with the sole intention of stirring the pot. And every time you get caught with your perverbial pants down, by hordes of other posters, you resort to blind, childish BS. You're the very epitome of the Lennon-McCartney line: "living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see." Well you are certainly trying to act like one by claiming you know what Mannings cap number is.  Finally, pal, i find it hypocritical for you to attempt to claim some moral high ground while wallowing in the same mud that you seem to think I reside.  How do you see yourself as somehow "better" than me while bashing Manning on a Manning thread on a pats website. I just don't get that.
    Posted by UD6

    I'll only address the last part of your response because the rest is typical doggpoop drivel.  I don't "see" myself as being better than you, I "know" I am.  Also, I'm not bashing Manning, I'm bashing his sycophants, chiefly you.  With respect to "bashing Manning on a Manning thread on a Pats website:"  statements like that are why you're so highly thought of around here, not just by me, but by the majority of posters.  Yup, save you're cab fare, you ARE that clueless.  With respect to "I just don't get that," truer words never have come from your keyboard.  Now back to the kiddie table "pal."
  2. This post has been removed.

  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from gr82bme. Show gr82bme's posts

    Re: Peyton Manning - 5 YRS - 90 MIL

    In Response to Re: Peyton Manning - 5 YRS - 90 MIL:
    In Response to Re: Peyton Manning - 5 YRS - 90 MIL : Why didn't you just "edit" it?
    Posted by BabeParilli

    Embarassingly, I don't know "how" to edit a post after I press "add your reply."  But on the good side, I'm sure underdoggpoop will let fly something really cleaver about it - LOL :)
  4. This post has been removed.