Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Too big a risk of cap space?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Too big a risk of cap space?

    I haven't had a chance to read all of the long threads on Manning's visit to Denver, as a lot seems to have happened overnight here in the UK. So please forgive me if these points been raised in another thread.

    The Broncos are in the privileged position of having a lot of room under the salary cap this year. I have no problem with the Broncos having a look at any free agent or draft pick at any position if that player could upgrade the team. My concern however is that signing Manning would be a big financial risk.

    1. Nobody has seen yet whether Manning really is fit to play again.
    2. Even if he is fit to play, at what standard can he play?
    3. Can we really be certain that he can take the hits? Bear in mind that our O-line was a little flaky at times last season.
    4. Manning has played at least 50% of his games during his pro career in a dome on turf. I may be wrong, but my perception is that the Colts offense were not always quite as potent or fast when playing on the road outdoors and on grass.
    5. We have more pressing needs than at QB: FS, SS, CB, LB, DT, OL, TE, RB, WR. With the cap space that we have I think that money would be much better spent upgrading at those other positions.
    6. The Broncos started rebuilding 12 months ago. Bringing in Manning would mean that we would have to start again from scratch as we would need to bring in players on offense that fit his style of play. On the other hand the rebuilding around Tebow has already started (in week 6 last season to be precise).
    7. If we do get Manning, we would have him for just 2-3 years, assuming he remains healthy. So once Manning retires we would have to start all over again. Elway said last year that he expected the rebuilding to take 2-3 seasons. Bringing in Manning seems to me to be just a quick short term fix, and a risky one at that. Why not simply continue the process that has already begun, give Tebow the chance he now deserves, build around him and see what happens? To build a dynasty takes a long term vision, not a quick fix.
    The UK's #1 Broncomaniac

  • #2
    Honestly, this is a good thread. Nothing wrong with any of these concerns. I would be lying if i said i didnt think about it myself. Then i remembered he is Peyton Manning.
    PM me if interested in joining a Madden '12 for Xbox 360. Or visit us at xbgl720.com

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by BroncomaniacUK View Post
      I haven't had a chance to read all of the long threads on Manning's visit to Denver, as a lot seems to have happened overnight here in the UK. So please forgive me if these points been raised in another thread.

      The Broncos are in the privileged position of having a lot of room under the salary cap this year. I have no problem with the Broncos having a look at any free agent or draft pick at any position if that player could upgrade the team. My concern however is that signing Manning would be a big financial risk.

      1. Nobody has seen yet whether Manning really is fit to play again.
      2. Even if he is fit to play, at what standard can he play?
      3. Can we really be certain that he can take the hits? Bear in mind that our O-line was a little flaky at times last season.
      4. Manning has played at least 50% of his games during his pro career in a dome on turf. I may be wrong, but my perception is that the Colts offense were not always quite as potent or fast when playing on the road outdoors and on grass.
      5. We have more pressing needs than at QB: FS, SS, CB, LB, DT, OL, TE, RB, WR. With the cap space that we have I think that money would be much better spent upgrading at those other positions.
      6. The Broncos started rebuilding 12 months ago. Bringing in Manning would mean that we would have to start again from scratch as we would need to bring in players on offense that fit his style of play. On the other hand the rebuilding around Tebow has already started (in week 6 last season to be precise).
      7. If we do get Manning, we would have him for just 2-3 years, assuming he remains healthy. So once Manning retires we would have to start all over again. Elway said last year that he expected the rebuilding to take 2-3 seasons. Bringing in Manning seems to me to be just a quick short term fix, and a risky one at that. Why not simply continue the process that has already begun, give Tebow the chance he now deserves, build around him and see what happens? To build a dynasty takes a long term vision, not a quick fix.

      Think of it this way. You have a chance to get a 100% Johnny Wilkinson but you have Danny Care on your team. You don't take that chance?
      Family, country, rugby, football

      I posted in the epic Peyton's NeckBones thread and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by BroncomaniacUK View Post
        I haven't had a chance to read all of the long threads on Manning's visit to Denver, as a lot seems to have happened overnight here in the UK. So please forgive me if these points been raised in another thread.

        The Broncos are in the privileged position of having a lot of room under the salary cap this year. I have no problem with the Broncos having a look at any free agent or draft pick at any position if that player could upgrade the team. My concern however is that signing Manning would be a big financial risk.

        1. Nobody has seen yet whether Manning really is fit to play again.
        2. Even if he is fit to play, at what standard can he play?
        3. Can we really be certain that he can take the hits? Bear in mind that our O-line was a little flaky at times last season.
        4. Manning has played at least 50% of his games during his pro career in a dome on turf. I may be wrong, but my perception is that the Colts offense were not always quite as potent or fast when playing on the road outdoors and on grass.
        5. We have more pressing needs than at QB: FS, SS, CB, LB, DT, OL, TE, RB, WR. With the cap space that we have I think that money would be much better spent upgrading at those other positions.
        6. The Broncos started rebuilding 12 months ago. Bringing in Manning would mean that we would have to start again from scratch as we would need to bring in players on offense that fit his style of play. On the other hand the rebuilding around Tebow has already started (in week 6 last season to be precise).
        7. If we do get Manning, we would have him for just 2-3 years, assuming he remains healthy. So once Manning retires we would have to start all over again. Elway said last year that he expected the rebuilding to take 2-3 seasons. Bringing in Manning seems to me to be just a quick short term fix, and a risky one at that. Why not simply continue the process that has already begun, give Tebow the chance he now deserves, build around him and see what happens? To build a dynasty takes a long term vision, not a quick fix.
        The thing about signing manning is even if he isn't healthy, he's going to draw a lot of FA's here who will sign lower than they would have before just for a chance to play on this team because lets face it there is a good chance if he stays healthy we're playoffbound.
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          a bird in the hand

          A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

          We've heard that often enough, but we still get enamored by the greener grass on the other side and not contented with our own.

          All the teams are paying attention to is the promise that Peyton Manning will deliver the way he has delivered the last 14 years. We quietly forget:
          1 - Indianapolis released him
          2 - his injury is a very serious one. Almost life threatening!
          3 - We haven't seen him play AFTER his recovery from the injury.

          I have to see him in throwing for real...really! Lets not just pay for a reputation, lets pay for the real thing. Remember all you Tebow haters? Always wanting to see the proof of Tebow's improvement? Let's see Manning's improvement from surgery then!

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by OverseasBronco View Post
            A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

            We've heard that often enough, but we still get enamored by the greener grass on the other side and not contented with our own.

            All the teams are paying attention to is the promise that Peyton Manning will deliver the way he has delivered the last 14 years. We quietly forget:
            1 - Indianapolis released him
            2 - his injury is a very serious one. Almost life threatening!
            3 - We haven't seen him play AFTER his recovery from the injury.

            I have to see him in throwing for real...really! Lets not just pay for a reputation, lets pay for the real thing. Remember all you Tebow haters? Always wanting to see the proof of Tebow's improvement? Let's see Manning's improvement from surgery then!
            I agree there should be no talks of this until he throws in public. Its safe to assume that Tebow is more accurate than Peyton, until proved otherwise.

            Would you pick up Peyton if hes not fully recovered knowing that after another year of sitting he has the chance of regaining his full potential? If hes not 100% there's no way Manning would subject himself to more injury? But if he had the ability to sit another year, would it be worth the paycheck then?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by OverseasBronco View Post
              A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

              We've heard that often enough, but we still get enamored by the greener grass on the other side and not contented with our own.

              All the teams are paying attention to is the promise that Peyton Manning will deliver the way he has delivered the last 14 years. We quietly forget:
              1 - Indianapolis released him
              2 - his injury is a very serious one. Almost life threatening!
              3 - We haven't seen him play AFTER his recovery from the injury.

              I have to see him in throwing for real...really! Lets not just pay for a reputation, lets pay for the real thing. Remember all you Tebow haters? Always wanting to see the proof of Tebow's improvement? Let's see Manning's improvement from surgery then!
              CP. GREAT point! I love Peyton Manning. But its not like he had a bum hemmoroid last season. It was a NECK injury. Then you have haters saying " well give me 50% Manning, over Tebow anyday." Not me.

              As much as i would love signing Manning, i also would worry.

              Heres a question for everyone. If you could sign Manning, or Mario Williams/Brandon Carr/Michael Bush, what woudl you do?
              PM me if interested in joining a Madden '12 for Xbox 360. Or visit us at xbgl720.com

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by OverseasBronco View Post
                A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

                We've heard that often enough, but we still get enamored by the greener grass on the other side and not contented with our own.

                All the teams are paying attention to is the promise that Peyton Manning will deliver the way he has delivered the last 14 years. We quietly forget:
                1 - Indianapolis released him
                2 - his injury is a very serious one. Almost life threatening!
                3 - We haven't seen him play AFTER his recovery from the injury.

                I have to see him in throwing for real...really! Lets not just pay for a reputation, lets pay for the real thing. Remember all you Tebow haters? Always wanting to see the proof of Tebow's improvement? Let's see Manning's improvement from surgery then!
                I'm pretty sure that the Broncos will check out all of the concerns before they sign Peyton. I'm also sure his contract will be set up to protect Denver if Peyton was to fail.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by OverseasBronco View Post
                  We quietly forget:
                  1 - Indianapolis released him
                  2 - his injury is a very serious one. Almost life threatening!
                  3 - We haven't seen him play AFTER his recovery from the injury.
                  1. The Colts released everyone.
                  2. It was not life threatening. At all.
                  3. He's Peyton Manning.

                  It's already been said that Peyton will take a performance incentive contract and I don't think he will be as expensive as some of you think.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kazmo View Post
                    1. The Colts released everyone.
                    2. It was not life threatening. At all.
                    3. He's Peyton Manning.

                    It's already been said that Peyton will take a performance incentive contract and I don't think he will be as expensive as some of you think.

                    I haven't read anything that Peyton will take a performance incentive contract. Please show me?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      My concern however is that signing Manning would be a big financial risk.

                      Financial risk for whom? Are you writing the checks? In Mr. Bowlen's own words, he desires a "great" season and is willing to pay for it. Given the overall lack of talent at the QB position of this franchise, the pros far outweigh the cons (even in terms of money). Manning costs you no draft picks. Manning's addition causes no alteration to the plans to obtain the most and best talent available, in fact he makes the addition of talent easier.

                      1. Nobody has seen yet whether Manning really is fit to play again.

                      Peyton Manning isn't coming back to con some team out of money. He is coming back to win a championship and has the medical and professional backing to say that, medically speaking, he is where he should be.

                      2. Even if he is fit to play, at what standard can he play?

                      I am a believer in Tebow's current (business) value and future (football) potential but I would also venture to say that a Peyton Manning that is 50% of his former self would be an improvement to Denver's offensive production level (i.e., see our QB production in the KC game - remember well, we backed into the Division Title and playoffs).

                      3. Can we really be certain that he can take the hits? Bear in mind that our O-line was a little flaky at times last season.

                      Manning is no closer to being removed from the game due to a hit than any other player. The fact is that our OL provided very good protection and would look even better when the QB gets the ball out of his hands when he should.

                      4. Manning has played at least 50% of his games during his pro career in a dome on turf. I may be wrong, but my perception is that the Colts offense were not always quite as potent or fast when playing on the road outdoors and on grass.

                      The offense that Manning operated in Indy is not the problem nor would it be a problem, indoors or out.

                      5. We have more pressing needs than at QB: FS, SS, CB, LB, DT, OL, TE, RB, WR. With the cap space that we have I think that money would be much better spent upgrading at those other positions.

                      A lot of needs yes, but none more than at QB. It is QB league and we have Tim Tebow who is not an adept passer and Adam Weber who is fresh off the practice squad. I call that issue premier among our pressing needs. By virtue of how much time the Front Office has spent investigating QBs (last year and this year), I'd say they would agree.

                      6. The Broncos started rebuilding 12 months ago. Bringing in Manning would mean that we would have to start again from scratch as we would need to bring in players on offense that fit his style of play. On the other hand the rebuilding around Tebow has already started (in week 6 last season to be precise).

                      Incorrect. Players that fit Manning's "style of play" are no different than the caliber of players sought by every other NFL team. To think that Denver should build "around Tebow" is meaningless as if last year proved anything, it went to show that you can not win championships without being able to pass efficiently. NFL offenses start and end with their level of QB play and we currently need help in that department. Again, refer to the offensive struggles last year highlighted by the inability to efficiently pass the ball.

                      7. If we do get Manning, we would have him for just 2-3 years, assuming he remains healthy. So once Manning retires we would have to start all over again. Elway said last year that he expected the rebuilding to take 2-3 seasons. Bringing in Manning seems to me to be just a quick short term fix, and a risky one at that. Why not simply continue the process that has already begun, give Tebow the chance he now deserves, build around him and see what happens? To build a dynasty takes a long term vision, not a quick fix.

                      The NFL is about winning today and tomorrow, a what have you done for me lately attitude. It isn't kind but it is what it is. To think that Tebow should be allowed to have a blank check to learn on the job (despite having extreme troubles at being an efficient passing QB) is shortsighted at best and foolhardy at worst. Manning costs you no draft picks, does not alter your rebuilding plans, further allows you to draft to immediate needs, and, if healthy, would significantly increase your chances to win today and tomorrow. Quick fix or not, its a fix that this franchise needs to do everything possible to make happen.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Remember there are so many ways to structure a contract to reduce the cap hit I am not really worried about it.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by OmaBronco View Post
                          My concern however is that signing Manning would be a big financial risk.

                          Financial risk for whom? Are you writing the checks? In Mr. Bowlen's own words, he desires a "great" season and is willing to pay for it. Given the overall lack of talent at the QB position of this franchise, the pros far outweigh the cons (even in terms of money). Manning costs you no draft picks. Manning's addition causes no alteration to the plans to obtain the most and best talent available, in fact he makes the addition of talent easier.

                          1. Nobody has seen yet whether Manning really is fit to play again.

                          Peyton Manning isn't coming back to con some team out of money. He is coming back to win a championship and has the medical and professional backing to say that, medically speaking, he is where he should be.

                          2. Even if he is fit to play, at what standard can he play?

                          I am a believer in Tebow's current (business) value and future (football) potential but I would also venture to say that a Peyton Manning that is 50% of his former self would be an improvement to Denver's offensive production level (i.e., see our QB production in the KC game - remember well, we backed into the Division Title and playoffs).

                          3. Can we really be certain that he can take the hits? Bear in mind that our O-line was a little flaky at times last season.

                          Manning is no closer to being removed from the game due to a hit than any other player. The fact is that our OL provided very good protection and would look even better when the QB gets the ball out of his hands when he should.

                          4. Manning has played at least 50% of his games during his pro career in a dome on turf. I may be wrong, but my perception is that the Colts offense were not always quite as potent or fast when playing on the road outdoors and on grass.

                          The offense that Manning operated in Indy is not the problem nor would it be a problem, indoors or out.

                          5. We have more pressing needs than at QB: FS, SS, CB, LB, DT, OL, TE, RB, WR. With the cap space that we have I think that money would be much better spent upgrading at those other positions.

                          A lot of needs yes, but none more than at QB. It is QB league and we have Tim Tebow who is not an adept passer and Adam Weber who is fresh off the practice squad. I call that issue premier among our pressing needs. By virtue of how much time the Front Office has spent investigating QBs (last year and this year), I'd say they would agree.

                          6. The Broncos started rebuilding 12 months ago. Bringing in Manning would mean that we would have to start again from scratch as we would need to bring in players on offense that fit his style of play. On the other hand the rebuilding around Tebow has already started (in week 6 last season to be precise).

                          Incorrect. Players that fit Manning's "style of play" are no different than the caliber of players sought by every other NFL team. To think that Denver should build "around Tebow" is meaningless as if last year proved anything, it went to show that you can not win championships without being able to pass efficiently. NFL offenses start and end with their level of QB play and we currently need help in that department. Again, refer to the offensive struggles last year highlighted by the inability to efficiently pass the ball.

                          7. If we do get Manning, we would have him for just 2-3 years, assuming he remains healthy. So once Manning retires we would have to start all over again. Elway said last year that he expected the rebuilding to take 2-3 seasons. Bringing in Manning seems to me to be just a quick short term fix, and a risky one at that. Why not simply continue the process that has already begun, give Tebow the chance he now deserves, build around him and see what happens? To build a dynasty takes a long term vision, not a quick fix.

                          The NFL is about winning today and tomorrow, a what have you done for me lately attitude. It isn't kind but it is what it is. To think that Tebow should be allowed to have a blank check to learn on the job (despite having extreme troubles at being an efficient passing QB) is shortsighted at best and foolhardy at worst. Manning costs you no draft picks, does not alter your rebuilding plans, further allows you to draft to immediate needs, and, if healthy, would significantly increase your chances to win today and tomorrow. Quick fix or not, its a fix that this franchise needs to do everything possible to make happen.

                          Here, Here.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by OmaBronco View Post
                            .

                            1. Nobody has seen yet whether Manning really is fit to play again.

                            Peyton Manning isn't coming back to con some team out of money. He is coming back to win a championship and has the medical and professional backing to say that, medically speaking, he is where he should be

                            3. Can we really be certain that he can take the hits? Bear in mind that our O-line was a little flaky at times last season.

                            Manning is no closer to being removed from the game due to a hit than any other player. The fact is that our OL provided very good protection and would look even better when the QB gets the ball out of his hands when he should.

                            I agree with everything you've said except for these two. Just because he is medically cleared to play does mean anything. The real problem is whether or not he has the ability to play. Manning himself has stated he has a lot of work to do. When one loses control of a muscle group and has to be rehabilitated, that person has to start from scratch...Your muscle memory is almost completely impaired, especially after cervical fusions. The guy could not even flex his tricep muscle in his throwing arm, what makes you so sure he can sign his signature the same way...let alone throw a perfect accurate pass. These muscles have atrophied significantly. With rehab he may be able to strengthen the muscles back to normal, however the chances that he regains neural imput to every part of every muscle is very unlikely. Muscles don't just have a cable that you plug in and say move. Every muscle fiber is innervated independently, which is how humans have the ability for such fine motor skill. If any of these neuronal fibers are impaired, he will NEVER throw the same again. Could he figure out a different way to throw? Im not saying he can't. But the chances of him being 100% is almost nil.


                            The second thing is he is no closer to being re-injured compared to everyone else. Absolutely not true. Not only should he be worried about getting hit, he is also extremely vulnerable just from doing normal basic function such as THROWING or RUNNING. If he turns his head in an awkward manner, he can dislodge a screw or any of the hardware...because these vertebrae are now fused together with a plate, he won't have the range of motion in his neck like before. He could become paralyzed for life if he gets hurt again. I have no idea why he wouldn't just retired...unless he can get a nice fat paycheck.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Its going to be a matter of muscle strength, not potential paralysis upon taking a hit. From all accounts, it will be a process that will require patience.

                              A good story on the issue: http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports...g0R_story.html

                              Again, for the Broncos, IMHO the risk of whether PM is able to play again at a high level is worth the cost given the needs, talent level, and cap space of the franchise.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X