StaticX Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Peyton Manning has agreed in principle to a new contract that makes him the highest-paid player in NFL history. The contract is worth $99.2 million over seven years, Manning's deal,includes a record $34.5 million signing bonus. The life of the deal is nine years, but the final two will be voided if Manning, who has yet to miss a game in his professional career, simply reaches league minimum playing time standards. The NFL's co-MVP this season, when he led the Colts to the AFC championship game, can earn an additional $19 million in incentives. WOW!!! lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonobozoot Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 WTF? $100 million for 7 years!!! That's insane. But what happens to Marvin Harrison? Where does he go on his contract? :hmmm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaticX Posted March 2, 2004 Author Share Posted March 2, 2004 hmm... i dunno, but indy better have some dough left-over for Marvin, he's too good to pass up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eds Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 I dont see how you can afford to get some other players of championship quality around him with a contract that big. They had better stay in Indy if they are going to be throwing this kind of money around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Griffin Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 I know. I live in Indiana, so I am a Peyton fan. I thought he was about winning, but this new deal shows me that money is more important than getting more talent to surround youself with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BMac Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 I'm a big Manning fan and I'm glad that the team is backing him fully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxikk Veteran Posted March 3, 2004 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2004 like he would play anywhere else anyways. save some damn money, he isnt the best imo anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonobozoot Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 like he would play anywhere else anyways. save some damn money, he isnt the best imo anyways. At this rate, I would support Jon Kitna. Taking a paycut and playing as second fiddle takes a lot of guts. However, I think he is up for trade at the end of this new season coming up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatnipOligarchy Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 geez thats a huge signing bonus.. thats what happens when you have such a flexible salary cap like they have in the nfl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaClearly Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 This is just nuts. The flexible cap comment isn't exactly flexable because if Payton gets hurt or you want to trade or cut him that signing bonus comes due in full towards next years cap. So say he gets hurt in his second year and can't play anymore and lets also say that his signing bonus for his first year was 5 million than if he couldn't play the Colts would have to pay just about 30 million to him upfront which goes directly towards nexts years 65 million cap which means that you have no QB as well as 30 million less to use for players. In the NFL isn't the signing bonus that kills teams because that comes due compared to the 99.2 million. If Payton signed a contract with 10 million signing bonus and 115 million over 7 years if you decide to cut him after the first year you would owe him at most only 10 million but you don't own him what is left of that 115 million. You see what I'm talking about which is what people don't quite understand. Take a look at Keyshawn Johnson with the Bucs. He just doesn't want to be here and doesn't play for the team but to get rid of him we have to pay him 6 million so he could sit on the bench but if he didn't have that 6 million signing bonus we could just get rid of him and it doesn't make one difference if he was getting paid 3 or 300 million per year. Again the signing bonus is what kills teams and to be honest Indy is taking a very big chance that he doesn't get hurt and can't play or if he gets sick of the offense for any reason and just says he doesn't care anymore and just flops and doesn't do a good job on the field than you as a team could have a QB that plays bad everygame for 7 years. What would you do. Pay him while he sits on the bench. Pay him while he doesn't play well. Cut him and pay 30+ million off next years cap. I think these large signing bonuses are very bad because they don't give any player a reason to play if they hate the current team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lawtai Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 If a person hated their team, they wouldn't even sign the contract in the first place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jetta Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 With this kind of money flying around, it amazes me the science behind getting around the salary cap. I know of 8 people in the NFL central office that have written their own career because they know the in's and out's of the salary cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 wow...in a couple of years if he gets injured, they are screwed salary cap-wise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxikk Veteran Posted March 3, 2004 Veteran Share Posted March 3, 2004 i wanna see a career ending injury :p :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulder Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 I wonder if this makes his brother Eli that much more expensive to sign as the 1st draft pick. What do you guys think? I wonder because, yes, i am a die hard Bolt fan. :p Personally, i dont want to see them draft Eli, i want them to trade down and stock up on picks...we need all the help we can get. But then again, if he's anywhere near as good as his bro...how do you pass him up? I've read a few places that Peytons high dollar contract and signing bonus will raise the signing bonus of Eli... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.... Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 I wonder if this makes his brother Eli that much more expensive to sign as the 1st draft pick. What do you guys think? Absolutely not. That makes zero sense. If that were the case, then If Peyton had a sister, she'd be one heck of a linebacker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mulder Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 :D rotf , hey, like i said ...i read that a couple times on espn. i'm just hoping you are right, cause we have money tight owner :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warning Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 WOW! $100 million is a lot of money (surprisingly), if i had that much money, why i'd earn more than someone earning a buck an hour!!!! Can you tell i like sarcasm yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonobozoot Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 I wonder if this makes his brother Eli that much more expensive to sign as the 1st draft pick. there is no assurance that Eli goes first in the draft as the no.1 QB. He is a leading candidate along with Ben Roethlisberger from Miami(Ohio) (yeah, my univ. :yes: ). From ESPN Insider, apparently, they(SD, Arizona) were more interested in Ben. So it looks like Ben is giving Eli a run for his money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaClearly Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 The statement about a player wouldn't sign with a team he didn't like is just flat out stupid. When your dealing with 7 year deals you could love the team when you sign it but these things can and do happen that could change that instantly. A new head coach or any coach. Many bad choices in players that greatly alter that players numbers or chances at a superbowl. Those are the top things. I look at Keyshawn Johnson as a great example. When he came here he was happy but with the problems in the offense over the years he hated it. It also ended up that Parcells burned the bucs giving a verbal contract and backing out and when he did this just before Gruden what people didn't know is that Billy did this to the bucs before that time which means he did the same thing twice. Now I know flat out that Parcells told Keyshawn what to do to indirectly get out of his contract and now we see that Dallas is working out a trade to get him. Parcells wants him and he wants to go with Parcells. So we had Parcells attempt to burn us again but we got lucky because we many get something for him which we should. I hate players that hurt the teams to get what they want. They are only hurting themselves in the long run because if enough teams get burnt they won't offer anymore signing bonuses and I would be supporting this 100 percent because what good is signing a 7 year contract when players don't want to stay that long. They sign the long contract to get the bigger money bag but don't want to stay. They can't have their cake and eat it too and I think teams should start and give no more than 5 million in signing bonuses and a 7 year deal would be say 15 million per year while 3 year deals would be 8 million per year but at least with that if they can get more money somewhere else they can be able to go without hurting the team they are leaving. Hey if you want 40 million you have to earn it and I'll be damned if I as a viewer have to watch a player either flop or sit on the bench while we pay his behind because he doesn't want to be hear. I think signing bonuses should only be for players who could get hurt. 5 million should cover any player that gets hurt and can't play any longer because 5 million in the bank and the best healthcare you can get period should be fine. If a player says they need more money that would be BS because that is want more money not need when you have 90+ of americans can get by without even 5 million. Hey if you want more money you can play to get it but if you get hurt you should be happy with what I like to call a 23 million to one lotto win without getting the lotto numbers. I have a better chance of getting hit by a lightning bolt than I do of winning a 5 million dollar lotto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-=SD=- Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 Good for Manning, he deserved that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts