Leverage

[DarthMonk]

I'm trying to better understand the leverage concept in terms of NFL contracts since it's been such a big issue in another thread. I'm ready to learn.

It seems to me the one who has the leverage depends on the situation. If I understand the Peyton Manning situation correctly he is owed $28M by the Colts on March 8 and a total of $63M on his contract. If they pay him the $28M he remains a Colt and they owe him the other $35M over time. If they don't pay him he is a FA. At this point he's likely to leave.

The bad part for the Colts seems to be they lose Manning and get nothing for him. (The losing-him part is probably not that big a deal anymore. He's not the 30-year-old Manning that dominated defenses weekly.) The good part for the Colts is they keep a lot of money.

The good part for Manning is he is now free to go to the highest bidder. The bad part is I don't think the bids will be very high and he never sees the $28M much less the $63M.

It seems to me that, in the general sense, a player in Manning's situation has leverage but that in this particular case, that leverage is a ghost which is extremely unlikely to come back and haunt the Colts. He's old, he's damaged goods, and no one is going to pay him a king's ransom - are they?

Am I missing something?



DarthMonk

[1niksder]

I'm trying to better understand the leverage concept in terms of NFL contracts since it's been such a big issue in another thread. I'm ready to learn.

It seems to me the one who has the leverage depends on the situation. If I understand the Peyton Manning situation correctly he is owed $28M by the Colts on March 8 and a total of $63M on his contract. If they pay him the $28M he remains a Colt and they owe him the other $35M over time. If they don't pay him he is a FA. At this point he's likely to leave.

The bad part for the Colts seems to be they lose Manning and get nothing for him. (The losing-him part is probably not that big a deal anymore. He's not the 30-year-old Manning that dominated defenses weekly.) The good part for the Colts is they keep a lot of money.

The good part for Manning is he is now free to go to the highest bidder. The bad part is I don't think the bids will be very high and he never sees the $28M much less the $63M.

It seems to me that, in the general sense, a player in Manning's situation has leverage but that in this particular case, that leverage is a ghost which is extremely unlikely to come back and haunt the Colts. He's old, he's damaged goods, and no one is going to pay him a king's ransom - are they?

Am I missing something?



DarthMonk

If you go back to the thread that you mentioned., back when it was a debate and not yet a declaration, I was saying Peyton has nothing to lose because he gambled last year.

At any rate...

He took less money than offered last year (knowing he was injuried) and signed a 5 year $90 million deal with a $20 million to sign and a $28 million option bonus in 2012. The option bonus is the leverage (either way it doesn't get paid). Go back to last year...

Manning counted around $10.4 million against the cap last season counting the pro-ration of the SB, his 2011 base of $3.4 million + $3 million in a roster bonus. If the option bonus were to be paid it would all count this season on the cap. That would be $28 million option bonus, $4 million pro-rated SB and $7.4 million 2012 base salary (roughly $39.4 million in cap space).

Had Manning (this Manning) won the Super Bowl, the Colts still wouldn't have paid him and lost almost $40 million in cap space, but Manning's performance would allow him more say in how that $28 million would be redistributed. Considering how 2011 went Manning has no leverage at all, the Colts are totally justified in not paying the bonus based on last season.

Peyton could have the leverage of the fan base (if he wanted to use it) because he is a icon in Indy. As far as his contract goes, he's out in the cold. Cutting him would cost the Colts $15 million plus in dead cap money or a savings of about $13 million if they don't pay him. The best move for the Colts would have been for Irsay to STFU and cut Manning prior to March 8th, but he's left the door open for Manning to influence the fan base. That would switch it from a contract levrage to profit leverage. Currently cutting Manning will cost the Colts nothing, cutting Manning while Manning is trying to work out something to be a Colt for life would cost the Colts in ticket sales, product sales and all up and down their profit sheets.

Manning made over $100 million in pay checks from the Colts, if he can't go into the OTA's working with the WRs he's not worth as much unless he's in the Colts OTA not working with WRs. Any new fan base will want to see results ASAP for the kind of money he'd be talking to the Colts about.

This doesn't mean Manning has no leverage IF the Colts want him back because if they're talking then they are talking about a contract that has already been signed. But the Colts have to want him back.

If they don't after saying they're willing to talk, Peyton making a attempt will effect Irsay's bottom line if he refuses after saying he was willing.

Leverage changes as the talks proceed but if they're not talking the guy paying the bonus has the leverage over the guy that is looking to get paid.

[DarthMonk]

Leverage changes as the talks proceed but if they're not talking the guy paying the bonus has the leverage over the guy that is looking to get paid.

... especially if the guy stands to get a lot less elsewhere while probably not ever being a meaningful threat as the leader of an opponent?

I'm thinking of my current job. I sign one-year contracts. I'm being asked to sign one by the end of March. If I don't I can be released and am owed nothing. I have leverage in as much as they don't want to have to deal with replacing me. I can probably get more money out of them and may try. They have leverage in so far as without them, I am staring at the abyss of potential unemployment with a mortgage to pay and mouths to feed. If I ask for more they may pony up or they may say "See ya." I have some leverage but I am not sure how much.

Maybe we should talk.

I could also sign the contract, find another job, then leave but I don't think it would be ethical though, in this particular case, it would probably be legal.

It seems like some of this applies to Manning. He does not have the leverage I have with regards to being replaced. They have 2 blue-chippers auditioning in a week. The Colts also do not have the leverage my employer has insofar as Manning is rich already.

I feel like his age and health take away almost all, if not all, his leverage.

Thanks for the reply. I'd love to read another one.

DarthMonk

[1niksder]

Thanks for the reply. I'd love to read another one.

DarthMonk

Here you go...Link

Cullen Jenkins is sticking with the Eagles, on a restructured contract.

Jenkins, a defensive tackle who started all 16 games for the Eagles last season, signed a five-year, $25 million contract with the team seven months ago, shortly after the lockout ended. There was no immediate word on the specifics of his restructured deal.

“We are very excited about having Cullen back on our football team,” Eagles G.M. Howie Roseman said in a statement released by the team. “Cullen made an immediate impact for us this year on and off the field. We look forward to a great future together with him an Eagles uniform.”

Jenkins had a great start to the 2011 season, with four sacks in the first three games, although he had just 1.5 sacks the rest of the season.

Like Manning's deal last year they signed the Jenkins deal knowing it would have to be reworked.

Jenkins had four years left on his 2011 deal worth about $14.5 million, now he's looking at $5.8 million this year instead of $7.5 million. That frees up about $1.7 million in space for the Fecals. At face value it looks like Cullen lost the leverage battle and it cost him. almost $2 million. But if you look at the whole restructure you see his base pay dropped from $2.5 million in 2012 but that base is now guaranteed as is his 2013 base. Neither were guaranteed in the 2011 deal, nor did the 2011 deal contain a $1 million roster bonus next year and a $2 million roster bonus in 2013.

The second year bonus is the leverage needle. In year one it's dead center, as the year goes the needle moves to indicate who is more like to end up with the money. After the year ended Jenkins seemed to do enough to earn the money, but he just hit the other side of 30. He'll receive the money but he had to agree to have other money due this upcoming year moved back and guaranteed.

In the short term it was rework this deal or lose the $5 million roster bonus by being released, or rework this deal so I get the $5 million and if they want to cut m next year I'll still get what I'm giving up now. If he makes the roster next season he'll be $1 million up on where he would have been under the 2011 deal and by 2013 this restructure will have netted him $3 million.

This year will be the only year that this restructure will help the Fecals cap situation. Unlike the Manning situation the player had the leverage because he played at a high level last season.

[The Hogster]

I have argued that thread that Peyton Manning has leverage in this case. Here's why. He doesn't have to do anything to put himself in a favorable position. The Colts have to take action. Peyton doesn't.


Peyton Manning will either (i) receive $28M on March 8th, or (ii) receive the right to negotiate with all 32 teams on March 9th or before. He's in the driver's seat because the burden is on the Colts to either pay or release him. And, either way Peyton wins.

Why does Peyton win? Because the Colts are rebuilding around Andrew Luck. The money owed on Peyton's deal is just in theory. It doesn't exist because nobody believes they are going to pay him that much given his injury and the fact that Luck is supposed to be a once in a lifetime prospect.

Most players have no leverage when under contract. Why? Because the team doesn't have to redo their deals when they OUTperform it. The team can make you play for your current Salary until you become a free agent. See Desean Jackson, Matt Forte etc. Additionally, if a player holds out, he's fined in the offseason, loses pay checks in the season, and IF he sits out too long, he loses a year of eligibility making him have to WAIT longer to become a Free Agent. The rules take the leverage from the players.

In this case, Peyton knows he's under contract for several years. That contract would pay him a lot of money. But, he knows that the Colts don't want to pay that contract. As a result, if he does NOTHING, he becomes a free agent.

Peyton is represented by Tom Condon. Condon knows that a team will pay Peyton for the next 3 years--a LOT of money. His new deal will include more incentives than his current one, but I guarantee that deal also includes a huge up-front bonus. That bonus will be bookended by a roster bonus on the following year. So, think about it--will a team pay Peyton a huge bonus to sign--and then release him prior to his next year's roster bonus?? Probably not. Why? Because even if he can't play this year, or isn't very healthy, the odds favor that he'd be coming into form by the time the next year's bonus is due. Thus keeping Peyton in a position with leverage.


Some people say that he should restructure his deal. I find that utterly unfounded and actually the most unwise thing he could do. It would basically allow the Colts to keep him, save face, and not have to pay him, and keep him from other teams. ALL losing options.

Tom Condon knows this, which is why you hear nothing from the Manning camp these days. They'll wait it out because they have leverage.

Check out this definition of leverage on Wiki. It sums up why Peyton has it. I suspect he wants to be a Free Agent rather than return to a rebuilding Colts franchise. He can force that position. In fact, he forced it when he signed this deal with this structure. That's the point of these big bonuses. It gives the player leverage when it becomes due.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leverage_(negotiation)

[The Hogster]

Another way to think about it is in a Buyer/Seller situation. Let's say Peyton Manning manufactures Peyton Manning Bobble Heads. He has an exclusive contract to sell his Bobble Heads through WalMart only.

WalMart has an agreement to buy his Bobble Heads at $1M per year. But, the past year, customers noticed a defect in the Bobble Heads. WalMart now wants Peyton to sell them the Bobble Heads at only $250,000 per year. AND, to make up for their lost profits, they will now be selling Andrew Luck Bobble Heads right beside Peyton Bobble Heads. In fact, WalMart is going to increase the money it spends to market Luck Bobble Heads for the next decade.

Peyton Manning says to himself. For one, I may never be able to sell my Bobble Heads to a store for $1M a year ever again. BUT, I think I can sell them for more than $250k. Besides, I want to sell my Bobble Heads at a store that only sells Peyton Manning Bobble Heads.

In this scenario, Peyton as a manufacturer has leverage. He knows that if he doesn't do anything, he's scheduled to get a $1M payment--which is more than he'd ever get elsewhere. Or, he gets released from his exclusive contract with WalMart, and is free to sign with Target, Home Depot, or whereever he wants--with the power of choice and the ability to have his product as the #1 focus.

No Manning isn't selling toys, but he's selling his services. The Colts are WalMart, and Manning doesn't want to sell his product on the cheap especially when WalMart will be investing it's focus on Luck's product. The great thing about his situation is that in order for WalMart to get what they want--to sell Luck--Manning gets what he wants--the ability to shop--and he doesn't have to do a thing to get it. Leverage.

[1niksder]

I have argued that thread that Peyton Manning has leverage in this case. Here's why. He doesn't have to do anything to put himself in a favorable position. The Colts have to take action. Peyton doesn't.

There is no way the Colts are going to add a one year cap hit of $28 million for any one player. No team in the league would, so all parties involved knew last year before the deal was signed that even if Peyton were to get $28 million in 2012 it wouldn't be in the form of a option bonus and know team would tie up that kind of money week before free agency starts.

Peyton has no leverage because he has given the Colts no reason to consider paying him all or part of that money in some other form. The Colts have the leverage because they still have the money in hand and Peyton has no guaranteed money due. The Colts a huge dead cap number to look at but it's not $28 million huge.

Peyton takes no action and becomes unemployed and saves the Colts about $7.4 million in projected cap space. He loses out all around because he's also losing on another $28.2 million in future salary (2013-2015) from the 2011 deal. This is in no way leverage for Peyton even if he wants out.


The Colts will do what they planned to do when the deal was signed.... address it prior to the new NFL year, Not paying the Bonus saves the Colts roughly $10.5 million in cap space in 2012 to be spent to upgrade their roster. If Peyton can be designated as a post Jun 1 cut not paying will save even more.




If Peyton can go out and get a four year $8.9 million per year deal then he's only losing the $28 million. Knowing that still wouldn't give him any leverage




Peyton priced himself out of Wal-Mart he's going to lower his price to even lower what Wal-Mart offered (had he talked to them to find out) and head over to the Dollar Store bobble heads in hand

[The Hogster]

That's where we disagree. Your Post suggests you look at free agency as "unemployment". I look at it as the freedom to bargain & choose. There is a premium on free agency. Free Agency + Interest = A Market (Peyton). Free Agency + No Interest = Unemployment (Terrell Owens).

Also, when the Colts signed this deal, they may not have expected to pay the $28M in the form of an option bonus. But, they didn't expect to have the #1 pick either. They anticipated the restructure would be to keep him in Indy at a manageable cap number. You can't look at this in a vacuum. The Colts wound up landing the #1 pick. That changed everything. Additionally, Peyton won't be able to restructure because of these circumstances. Why would he want to? You are looking at this as if there is a chance that he gets another dollar from the Colts. He's not. Even if he signed a deal for nothing but incentives. How could he meet them if Luck starts the season?

A restructure into an incentive based deal is not wise for Peyton because of these reasons: (i) Right now the $28M bonus makes Peyton untradeable, restructuring the deal would basically allow the Colts to have the ability to trade him (Trade < Free Agency) because Peyton has less leverage, less choice in a trade situation (ii) Peyton doesn't want to stay in Indy if they're rebuilding around Luck--new Coaches, New Management, New QB--why would Peyton want to be there, (iii) if he took a few million dollars now, and entered an incentive based deal--why would the Colts even allow him to reach the incentives?? They'd have every reason to just start Luck to minimize what Peyton is being paid. That's just bad business.

You seem to be looking at this in a vacuum. It's not all about the cap hit because the Colts have other players on the roster that will impact the cap depending on what happens to them. The Colts are not going to be cap strapped next year.

Peyton priced himself out of Wal-Mart he's going to lower his price to even lower what Wal-Mart offered (had he talked to them to find out) and head over to the Dollar Store bobble heads in hand

I'd never advise Peyton to restructure. You would? For what? If that is such a wise idea, why don't you think his agent is doing it??

Do you really believe you're outsmarting Manning's agent with this restructure theory?

[DarthMonk]

So far so civil.

These seem like key statements to me:

That's where we disagree. Your Post suggests you look at free agency as "unemployment". I look at it as the freedom to bargain & choose. There is a premium on free agency. Free Agency + Interest = A Market (Peyton). Free Agency + No Interest = Unemployment (Terrell Owens).

Peyton is represented by Tom Condon. Condon knows that a team will pay Peyton for the next 3 years--a LOT of money. His new deal will include more incentives than his current one, but I guarantee that deal also includes a huge up-front bonus.

I would say that, in general, free agency is freedom to bargain and choose more than it is unemployment. That is clearly the case for a young underpaid guy. Manning is old and, if the Colts give him $28M in a few weeks, overpaid.

If The Hogster is correct with his 2nd quote then he is likely correct with his assessment of leverage in this instance. On the other hand, it is possible a restructure acceptable to the Colts would net more money than the future deal he might get if and when he departs. I also think how well he is likely to play in the future and how that may or may not affect the Colts is relavant. If he were young and healthy and going to Houston he'd have a lot more leverage than he does now. Trouble is he's old, hurt, and almost definitely leaving the division.

I don't think either party (Colts or Manning) has the other "over a barrel."

Am I making sense?

DarthMonk

[1niksder]

So far so civil.

I don't think either party (Colts or Manning) has the other "over a barrel."

Am I making sense?

DarthMonk

Yes you are making sense, as it would for Manning to at least see what might be on the table in Indy

[The Hogster]

I think you are making sense Darth. I do believe in this NFL that there will be a good market for Peyton. A lot will depend on his (i) workout, (ii) physical, and (iii) progress with respect to nerve regeneration.

Peyton isn't as desperate as say a T.O. who has no leverage. As a result, you probably won't see him throwing passes to air with his shirt off anytime soon. If word gets out that Peyton can drop back and throw passes and look even close to an NFL QB, he's going to get paid.

Think of it like this--even Jacksonville's owner said that he would have drafted Tim Tebow. QBs like Peyton generate tons of interest, and money. A team will sign Peyton, sell tons of #18 jerseys, luxury boxes, and season tickets. Why? Because the fan excitement and anticipation of what is to come drives up revenue.

Anyone remember the Donovan McNabb All In Campaign?? People in DC do. We saw Donovan everywhere, and people actually believed or "hoped" he would come here with a chip on his shoulder, and look like 2004 Donovan. It didn't happen, but people spent money thinking it would. That will be x100 for Peyton, and owners know this. Whatever they invest in him, they will recoup through TV deals, tickets, merchandising, vending--money will not be the problem for Peyton. Now, his health might.

[chiefhog44]

I'm gonna tell you, if Manning isn't on the Colts next year, their fan base is going to be pissed at Irsay for this whole debacle. UNLESS...Irsay makes it seem he is pulling out all the stops to keep him. I think this is going to be nearly impossible to do, and thus, gives Manning all the leverage if he keeps saying, I want to play here and I'm willing to restructure, and oh by the way, I am making big strides on coming back.

The problem here is Irsay is already in rebuilding mode and thus shown his hand to the fan base. He's fired his coaches, GM's, isn't signing any of the fre agents, and mate comments that it's time to rebuild with another QB. His statements about Peyton being a Colt if healthy is going to come back to haunt him. The owner is in a really bad position. He doesn't want Peyton back, wants to start fresh, but the fans don't. And you know what, the guy deserves it. He's such an ass.

[1niksder]

I'm gonna tell you, if Manning isn't on the Colts next year, their fan base is going to be pissed at Irsay for this whole debacle. UNLESS...Irsay makes it seem he is pulling out all the stops to keep him. I think this is going to be nearly impossible to do, and thus, gives Manning all the leverage if he keeps saying, I want to play here and I'm willing to restructure, and oh by the way, I am making big strides on coming back.

The problem here is Irsay is already in rebuilding mode and thus shown his hand to the fan base. He's fired his coaches, GM's, isn't signing any of the fre agents, and mate comments that it's time to rebuild with another QB. His statements about Peyton being a Colt if healthy is going to come back to haunt him. The owner is in a really bad position. He doesn't want Peyton back, wants to start fresh, but the fans don't. And you know what, the guy deserves it. He's such an ass.

I agree with all of this which is why Irsay has publicly said he's willing to rework the deal (92% of us don't believe him), by Peyton not even willing (or appear to be) to sit down with him takes away the little bit of leverage Peyton would have. Currently he's like that dude running around here without a leg to stand on... and having to prove he can still play at a high level. Peyton at 80% is worth more to the Colts than he would be to any team that might be interested in him. He has his outstanding contract as a starting point if he sits down with the Colts. With anybody else he only has his x-rays and hope.

[The Hogster]

I agree with all of this which is why Irsay has publicly said he's willing to rework the deal (92% of us don't believe him), by Peyton not even willing (or appear to be) to sit down with him takes away the little bit of leverage Peyton would have. Currently he's like that dude running around here without a leg to stand on... and having to prove he can still play at a high level. Peyton at 80% is worth more to the Colts than he would be to any team that might be interested in him. He has his outstanding contract as a starting point if he sits down with the Colts. With anybody else he only has his x-rays and hope.

This is backwards in my opinion. Not that it doesn't make sense in theory. But, in reality it doesn't apply because the Colts hold the #1 pick. They have the right's to draft the younger, healthier version of Peyton Manning. Manning is worth less to the Colts than he is to a team without a franchise QB. The team generally has more power than players, just like employers usually have power over employees. But, Peyton is no ordinary employee. He has leverage here. See Andrew Brandt's article explaining such.

Jim Irsay has turned the decision on whether Peyton Manning stays with the Colts into its own reality show/soap opera. Unfortunately for Irsay, he is not the party with leverage in this negotiation.
My sense is Manning will have several teams interested despite his recent medical issues. And those options may include the Redskins and Dolphins, two teams with ownership history showing a willingness to pay a premium for name brands.

Options create leverage, and leverage creates large guaranteed contracts. Will that guarantee exceed the $28 million Manning is schedule to make? That's a good question, but my sense is it would be close.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-br ... 95974.html

Who is Andrew Brandt??

Brandt is a Lecturer in Sports Business at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, teaching Sports Law and Negotiations.

After attending Stanford University and Georgetown University Law Center, Brandt has had a career on both sides of professional sports. Brandt has been a player representative, first for ProServ in Washington, DC, representing top athletes such as Michael Jordan and Boomer Esiason -- and later for Woolf Associates in Boston, representing NFL players including Matt Hasselbeck, Adam Vinatieri and Ricky Williams.

This isn't to say that the Colts don't have some leverage as well. The injury gives them a way out of the contract. But, they really have no other choice unless Peyton gives them one.

[The Hogster]

As stated prior. No restructure was agreed to as it should not have. Official release & ceremony to come today. Peyton will leave Indy with a statute in front of the Dome & hit the market to collect his money. Leverage.

[1niksder]

And the Colts can count the money that they saved... on a cash basis, the Colts would save $35.4 million (a $28 million option payment plus a $7.4 million base salary) in 2012 and $63.6 million over the next four years. That more than covers what Luck will cost. As far as the cap and dead money goes... Releasing Peyton takes his 2012 cap charge from 17M down to 10.4M (6.6M savings)

The Option bonus was the leverage.

What's the odds Peyton gets half of what he gave up for 2012 without even talking about a restructure?

[The Hogster]

And the Colts can count the money that they saved... on a cash basis, the Colts would save $35.4 million (a $28 million option payment plus a $7.4 million base salary) in 2012 and $63.6 million over the next four years. That more than covers what Luck will cost. As far as the cap and dead money goes... Releasing Peyton takes his 2012 cap charge from 17M down to 10.4M (6.6M savings)

The Option bonus was the leverage.

What's the odds Peyton gets half of what he gave up for 2012 without even talking about a restructure?

His chances are excellent. Plus, He didn't give money up. The Colts decided not to pay it. But, if indications are correct, that he's throwing like an NFL QB, then he's going to get a 3-Year deal with a lot of guaranteed money. More importantly, he's going to dictate where he goes, and have the power to choose a situation where he wasn't being phased out in favor of a younger version of himself. A restructure served no purpose other than to benefit the Colts--which is why he didn't do it, like I said. Now, he's an UFA--with a huge upside to offer a team. And, let's not forget the money that Manning will generate for his new team. I expect it to be the NY Jets, or the Dolphins. Peyton's leverage was that he didn't need to do anything to force the Colts hand--much like the article posted prior said.

Now Peyton can wish the Colts 'Good Luck'

[1niksder]

His chances are excellent. Plus, He didn't give money up. The Colts decided not to pay it.

He had a contract with $63M left on it, including $28M he knew he wasn't going to get, now he's hoping to sign a contract. The Colts decided not to pay because they had ALL the leverage.

But, if indications are correct, that he's throwing like an NFL QB, then he's going to get a 3-Year deal with a lot of guaranteed money.

Indication from what? A cell phone video from the the opposite side of the field? A video that wasn't a continuous stream, that showed one pass over 35 yards and no idea of the velocity or touch on the passes? The only indications I saw was his ability to throw down field has improved from his ability to do the same thing three months ago. He'll get a chance to actually work out for teams now that he's a free agent. He might get a few offers with a bunch of incentives but nothing like what he could have got from a team that gave him $26M last year for doing nothing, had he tried to work something with them.

More importantly, he's going to dictate where he goes, and have the power to choose a situation where he wasn't being phased out in favor of a younger version of himself.

Not at 36 years of age he won't, he'll go to a team that is looking to win now and he'll be a after-thought in a few years, with way less than a $63M contract.

A restructure served no purpose other than to benefit the Colts--which is why he didn't do it, like I said.

A option to restructure would have given PM a little bit of leverage if the restructure could have saved the Colts some cap space.... converting one fourth of the option bonus into a signing bonus and a guaranteed based in 2012 would have put more than $15M in his pocket. Instead all he has now is a opportunity to work out for teams, hope he passes those team's physicals and get a offer.

Now, he's an UFA--with a huge upside to offer a team.

That's what everybody hitting the market next week thinks and hopes suitor teams will think. In the end it's still just hope.

And, let's not forget the money that Manning will generate for his new team.

And that money he generates for a new team helps the new team, what does it do for Manning? About as much as not talking to th Colts did I'd say

I expect it to be the NY Jets, or the Dolphins.

Neither team is going to give him $63M over 4 years unless it's backloaded, meaning they won't payout the last few years wihout re-working it in a few years..... He'll be even closer to 40 by then

Peyton's leverage was that he didn't need to do anything to force the Colts hand--much like the article posted prior said.

The Colts leverage was take less or get nothing here Mr. Manning. In the end the Colts will move on as planned with Luck and Peyton will simply move out.

Now Peyton can wish the Colts 'Good Luck'

They'll need it... And Peyton needs to find a new job.

Time will tell... but Manning won't get anywhere near what he would have gotten in Indy anywhere else, he'll be LUCKY to get have the value of the 4yrs/$63M he just LOST

[The Hogster]

Dude, I posted an article from Andrew Brandt who is a Lecturer in Sports Business at the Wharton School at UPenn. He teaches Sports Law and Negotiations at an Ivy League School AND has experience as an agent and attorney in the National Football League. In that article, he explains in plain English why Peyton had all the leverage. And, he was right. Like I said all along. And, like Tom Condon did. You wanted him to restructure--which is why you do what you do. But at some point, you have to realize that 2+ 2 is 4 no matter how long and hard you yell otherwise.

Give it a rest. You're wrong again. Yet you think you can post incessantly to change that fact. I tried to help you understand what leverage means here. Sit back, eat crow, and watch Peyton Manning get paid and go to a team that is a contender--not a rebuilding scrap job with Andrew Luck at QB. You can't be as dense as your posts suggest. A restructure was unwise which is why it wasn't done. Send Tom Condon an email, and maybe he'll let you learn why in the coming days.

In the meantime, here are more facts for you to ignore from sources other than you. This is from Andrew Brandt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-br ... 95974.html

Jim Irsay has turned the decision on whether Peyton Manning stays with the Colts into its own reality show/soap opera. Unfortunately for Irsay, he is not the party with leverage in this negotiation.
My sense is Manning will have several teams interested despite his recent medical issues. And those options may include the Redskins and Dolphins, two teams with ownership history showing a willingness to pay a premium for name brands.

Options create leverage, and leverage creates large guaranteed contracts. Will that guarantee exceed the $28 million Manning is schedule to make? That's a good question, but my sense is it would be close.

Whatever you say now is moot. We debated this before we had the benefit of hindsight. I told you what would happen, and I'm telling you again now. Give it up. Peyton is about to get paid--A LOT. He was never going to see the remainder of the Colts deal. And, with the turn of events (cleaning house, getting #1 pick) you can't craft an intelligent reason why Manning would have even wanted to stay. Meanwhile, Peyton Manning is already in Miami where Steven Ross is already ready to make it rain Millions on Peyton.

Adam Archuletta II

If you don't believe me, all you have to do is read, or turn on your TV. Step outside of your own opinion for once. There's some pretty cool stuff going on around you if you just open your eyes.

[1niksder]

He's got the options to find a lesser paying job in a town away from where he's been for more than a decade or he can retire. Those options replace the options of trying to save talk to his employer of more than five years about keeping his job or getting fired.

He had better options when he didn't have any leverage. You don't understand and won't admit it if you did. You can quote who you want and post as many resumes of those that you think are stating facts when they're simply doing the same thing we are (stating their OPINION). I wasn't the one that brought the post back up after the Colts said they weren't paying the $28M... everybody knows he wasn't getting the $28M. Now what does he have? Hope... that's it... hope he can throw like he use to, hope he'll get a offer from a team he really wants to play for... He doesn't need the money so it won't matter to him but in the end that's what it'll be about and he left most of it in Indy.

Get back to me AFTER he's signed something close to what he won't be getting what he would have with the Colts. If he doesn't get at least what his release saved the Colts this season then it'll be obvious he should have at least talked to them... Even if he had simply did it to call Irsay's bluff.

Time will tell

[The Hogster]

I just heard a weird rumor that you're not kidding.

[Deadskins]

Dude, I posted an article from Andrew Brandt who is a Lecturer in Sports Business at the Wharton School at UPenn. He teaches Sports Law and Negotiations at an Ivy League School AND has experience as an agent and attorney in the National Football League. In that article, he explains in plain English why Peyton had all the leverage. And, he was right. Like I said all along. And, like Tom Condon did. You wanted him to restructure--which is why you do what you do. But at some point, you have to realize that 2+ 2 is 4 no matter how long and hard you yell otherwise.

Give it a rest. You're wrong again. Yet you think you can post incessantly to change that fact. I tried to help you understand what leverage means here. Sit back, eat crow, and watch Peyton Manning get paid and go to a team that is a contender--not a rebuilding scrap job with Andrew Luck at QB. You can't be as dense as your posts suggest. A restructure was unwise which is why it wasn't done. Send Tom Condon an email, and maybe he'll let you learn why in the coming days.

In the meantime, here are more facts for you to ignore from sources other than you. This is from Andrew Brandt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-br ... 95974.html

Jim Irsay has turned the decision on whether Peyton Manning stays with the Colts into its own reality show/soap opera. Unfortunately for Irsay, he is not the party with leverage in this negotiation.
My sense is Manning will have several teams interested despite his recent medical issues. And those options may include the Redskins and Dolphins, two teams with ownership history showing a willingness to pay a premium for name brands.

Options create leverage, and leverage creates large guaranteed contracts. Will that guarantee exceed the $28 million Manning is schedule to make? That's a good question, but my sense is it would be close.

Whatever you say now is moot. We debated this before we had the benefit of hindsight. I told you what would happen, and I'm telling you again now. Give it up. Peyton is about to get paid--A LOT. He was never going to see the remainder of the Colts deal. And, with the turn of events (cleaning house, getting #1 pick) you can't craft an intelligent reason why Manning would have even wanted to stay. Meanwhile, Peyton Manning is already in Miami where Steven Ross is already ready to make it rain Millions on Peyton.

Adam Archuletta II

If you don't believe me, all you have to do is read, or turn on your TV. Step outside of your own opinion for once. There's some pretty cool stuff going on around you if you just open your eyes.

First of all, that quote from Brandt is over two weeks old. Secondly, you don't even understand what Brandt is saying. He's saying that once the Colts cut Peyton, THEN he will have leverage. Thirdly, even he is questioning whether or not Peyton could recoup the lost income. He says it's a good question, but he feels that the new offers might come close. Lastly, just because Condon did not negotiate with the Colts doesn't mean he didn't think that might have been an option, or ever council Manning that he should consider that. Perhaps Peyton want's out of Indy and told Condon not to negotiate. But you could never consider that, right?

[The Hogster]

@Deadskins

DUH genius. You obviously haven't read this thread. Not that I expected you to before commenting though. I posted the article on Febuary 23rd when it came out. And, I understand quite well what he is saying. If you had a basic grasp of tense you would understand the following quote from Brandt:

Brandt wrote [b]Two Weeks Ago: [/b]

Unfortunately for Irsay, he is not the party with leverage in this negotiation.

The article was written 2 weeks ago. The word IS means presently. We learned this in elementary school. Accordingly, he was saying Peyton was the party with leverage at the time he wrote the article--which was before he was released. As for whether Peyton didn't want to stay in Indy, that's been my point that he didn't. Thanks for making it for me. I'm sure you didn't mean to because to you guys you look at the poster rather than the post in order to decide which side of the facts you come down on. Geez this is sad.

GTFOH

[Deadskins]

@ the Hogster
Yeah, I read it when you posted it two and a half weeks ago too. And my opinion was the same then. Seems you are the one who doesn't understand tense.

My sense is Manning will have several teams interested despite his recent medical issues. And those options may include the Redskins and Dolphins... Options create leverage.

See, he was saying that once Peyton has options, then he will get the leverage. At the time he said it, Peyton didn't yet have those options. Do you get it now?

Also, I love how you didn't address my other points. Typical Hogster BS

[Deadskins]

@ the Hogster
Yeah, I read it when you posted it two and a half weeks ago too. And my opinion was the same then. Seems you are the one who doesn't understand tense.

My sense is Manning will have several teams interested despite his recent medical issues. And those options may include the Redskins and Dolphins... Options create leverage.

See, he was saying that once Peyton has those options, then he will get the leverage. At the time he said it, Peyton didn't yet have those options. Do you get it now?

Also, I love how you didn't address my other points. Typical Hogster BS