Mitch:
So, my friend, it has come to this. Tomorrow, the Colts will release Peyton Manning and free themselves of the $28 million millstone they had hung around his neck. (Is it too early to make neck puns? I think not). Being a Pats fan, I've always had very strong and very negative feelings about Peyton. But really, this must suck for him, his wife, his kids, and just about everyone except their creepy Tweeting owner. And yes, I understand he'll probably cry tomorrow and say Peyton asked for this and whatever, but man. Wow. Joe Montana got traded, Peyton Manning is getting cut.
Wow. Your thoughts?
Grant:I think this is officially the start of the Apocalypse my good friend. I hope you have built your bomb shelter and filled it with Hot Pockets and Simpsons DVD's because this is the last thing anyone would have ever expected. You may disagree with me on this one, but I feel 100% confident in saying that this was a mistake by the Colts. Yes, keeping him, and his $28 million dollar iffy neck, could be a huge risk. However, there are too many good reasons to keep him that stand out when I look at the situation as a whole. 4 MVP's + 1 Championship + Perennial Pro Bowler = GUY YOU NEVER CUT!
Mitch:
My good, poor old misinformed friend, I wholeheartedly disagree. Now, as I said, I despise the Colts. Everything about them fills me with blue-colored vomit. But, sickening as it is, I think they made not only the right call, but the only call there was to make. 28,000,000 + 4 neck surgeries + not playing for a year + Andrew Luck (who I hear will be making like 15,000,000 this year, so add that to Peyton's bonus money plus $7 mill salary and that's 50,000,000 to 2 guys! Insane!) = cut ties with HOF player. I know it sucks, but what other choice is there? I just can't see you telling Luck, "Hey, you're ready, but sit for a couple years and let Peyton have one last hurrah." It just doesn't make sense. Does it?
Grant:
No it does not. In fact I would be remiss if I didn't note that nostalgia and loyalty are probably an NFL owner's worst enemies. Yet, that being said, there are a few players that deserve the chance to come back even though the inherent risk is huge. As a Patriots fan, realizing all that Tom Brady has done for the Patriots, the guys who played with him, and THE FANS, you have to admit that if the roles were reversed you would hope that they gave the guy another shot to play instead of casting him off in favor of a young guy with potential. I am appealing more to sentiment than logic obviously. I am not saying that Andrew Luck will not be great someday but he hasn't done anything yet so let's not get ahead of ourselves. If Manning can in fact play up to his old level, he gives the Colts the best chance to win out of almost any QB in the NFL or college. The question then remains as to whether the Colts want to win or just rebuild?
I believe the Colts have a number of good pieces in place to be good again soon, especially if Luck turns out to be the stud he appears to be in college. However, any time that Luck can spend with the QB who has run the offense (literally single handedly run it himself) and won a Super Bowl with it, the better Luck and the Colts will be. The money is an issue, but who is to say that Luck would be opposed to sitting for a year if he could learn from one of the best to ever play? As good as Sam Bradford, Joe Flacco, and Matt Ryan have been, I am still inclined to think that if a QB can learn from a Hall of Famer for at least a year that they will improve and learn much quicker.
Mitch:
My good friend, I do like that quote. In fact, " nostalgia and loyalty are probably an NFL owner's worst enemies" should definitely be a song title. Let's write that onto our next album, k?
Anyways, I do agree....with some. If this were Tom Brady getting cut, I would be screaming bloody murder, no matter the cap ramifications or anything else. Tommy could literally have his legs severed at the knee and still, if the Pats cut him, I would blow a gasket.
And again, I agree that if Luck had to sit one year behind Peyton, that would have been totally OK. But think about this, friend: Nobody knows how healthy Peyton is. Nobody. (Well, except maybe Peyton). Yeah, we have 27 seconds of grainy footage. So you're OK to dish out one million per SECOND of that Duke video? To me, that's not worth it. And say they do sign Peyton for the year, give him the bonus, and he's great. Then what? Make Luck sit another 2-5 years? By the time he'd play, his prime is half-over.
The Colts made the right, if not painful, move.
This is a toughie. It's like having to pick between Montana and Young in the last year of Montana's contract. Can you really go wrong with either one? I am assuming that Luck = Young so that could be a logical fallacy in the first place. Young actually played second fiddle for a while too.
I agree with you in one regard...letting Manning play out the remainder of his contract would have been a big mistake. I disagree , however, that it was the right move whether you look at it from a business standpoint or not.
Therefore, I propose a solution that would have the potential to placate both sides of this issue. In order for this solution to have any vailidity you have to agree with me that Peyton Manning loves the Colts and Indianapolis. I believe this is evident in his expressed desire to stay with the team. I you still don't agree than read this article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/
I believe that if the Colts had wanted to do this right, they should have done the following:
1. Restructure Manning's contract so that he would have at most 2 years left with the team. 1 year would be ideal but I feel that 2 would work.
2. Try to convince Manning to take less money, even $10 million a year, so that they can start rebuilding right. Clearly Manning doesn't mind taking one for the team so I don't feel it is as far fetched as it sounds.
3.Make it explicitly clear that starting in the 2013 season that Andrew Luck is their starting QB whether Peyton decides to stay with the team or not. As a Colts fan, I would think that one year of Luck's career with some playing time mixed in here and there in his rookie year is not too much to ask for.
I know it is probably a long shot but should they have pursued this course, they could have given Manning a year to prove he has got it again. This leaves Manning in a favorable position and makes fans happier. It also gives Luck one year of prep time and learning.
Mitch:
Dare I begin my rebuttal with an extended Sports Guy quote? Yes, I dare.
Let's say Indiana offered Paul George straight up for Pierce — something that's actually conceivable because Indiana is $14 million under the cap right now (and could contend this spring with a short-term Pierce/George upgrade). You're running the Celtics. That trade saves you $12.9 million plus another $8.9 million in luxury tax money in 2012, then puts you $38 million under the cap heading into the 2012-13 season. It doesn't totally ruin this year's season and makes you better defensively. It gives you two-thirds of a pretty sweet under-27 core: Rondo and George. Really, it's a logical deal except you'd be crapping on a future Hall of Famer who just gave you 13 great years, wanted to retire with Boston and planned on going down as one of the six or seven best Celtics ever. That's why Boston would say no, just like the Colts would say no if they had a chance to release Peyton Manning and build around Andrew Luck.
(Hey, wait a second … )
Anyways, I like your thinking, I really do. But I just can't find it in me to believe Peyton, the uber-competitive dude (who usually choked in big games, but still) would be willing to take your proposed deal. I think the lower money, sure. But thinking he has Luck right there? Would he even acknowledge him? I can see Peyton going to someone like Jeff Saturday and pulling a Michael Corleone/Fredo: "Listen Jeff, I don't ever want to see Luck. Ever. If there's a quarterbacks meeting, you make sure he's not there. If there's a charity event, Luck gets 'sick.' Understand?"
I just think Peyton's too competitive. He doesn't want a cap on his progression. What if, by 2013, Peyton is league MVP with a Super Bowl the previous season? You can't bench him. As crazy good as he is, and as hard as I hear he works, I could see him playing for years and years if he's still healthy. At a high, high level. What then?
No comments:
Post a Comment