"The bottom line is we'll get something done and when it happens just depends. I said he'd be the highest-paid player and he may already be if we go with the tag. I'd love to see him be here and break all those records as a Colt." -Colts GM Jim Irsay.
Listen man. I respect a team's ability to pay their players. And I've said many times before that I would rather see my team spending too much than being scared to spend anything. But there is a fine line between aggressively, smartly spending and over-spending. This isn't the key to success to me. Setting out with the goal to make your quarterback the highest paid player in the league isn't necessarily the key to success. Peyton's a great field general and he deserves the money, but you can't let one player dictate the way a franchise is run. During the Patriots dynasty, did they have any players that were the highest paid in the league? What about during the Steelers championship seasons this decade? The NFL has a salary cap. You can't go putting all your eggs into one player's basket. That's how you get down the wrong road. There's not a single player in the league who is worth going out of your way to pay him the highest salary of all. Especially not a 34 year old quarterback. It just doesn't make sense from a managerial standpoint. Like I said, they should pay him. He deserves it. But you can't go out of your way to say you're determined to make him the highest paid. That shouldn't matter. You need to make a move that is the smartest for your franchise. End of story.
Listen man. I respect a team's ability to pay their players. And I've said many times before that I would rather see my team spending too much than being scared to spend anything. But there is a fine line between aggressively, smartly spending and over-spending. This isn't the key to success to me. Setting out with the goal to make your quarterback the highest paid player in the league isn't necessarily the key to success. Peyton's a great field general and he deserves the money, but you can't let one player dictate the way a franchise is run. During the Patriots dynasty, did they have any players that were the highest paid in the league? What about during the Steelers championship seasons this decade? The NFL has a salary cap. You can't go putting all your eggs into one player's basket. That's how you get down the wrong road. There's not a single player in the league who is worth going out of your way to pay him the highest salary of all. Especially not a 34 year old quarterback. It just doesn't make sense from a managerial standpoint. Like I said, they should pay him. He deserves it. But you can't go out of your way to say you're determined to make him the highest paid. That shouldn't matter. You need to make a move that is the smartest for your franchise. End of story.
I completely dissagree... The fact that they came out and said that he will be the highest paid player makes the colts so much more appealing to players. That locker room is so happy right now. Say you're Pierre Garcon right now. Great rookie year, playing well doing his job. He sees that the team recognized that Peyton has done exactly what he's supposed to do and will be compensated in a fair way. ( if you don't think peyton manning, as gay as he is, is the most important player to his team then you've been drinking way too much patriot kool aid.)So Mr. Garcon now thinks "hey, if I do my job, i'll get paid fair market value."
ReplyDeleteNow think about being Brandon Meriweather. Your rookie deal is gonna run out in the next couple seasons. You've done your job and played at a pro bowl level. You think the pats are gonna pay you what you deserve, fuck no. You see logan mankins play out his rookie contract without any type of gripe, make 3 pro bowls, and be the leader of the O-Line, and what does he get? A one year 3 million dollar offer with no hope of an extension. So if you're meriweather you now have a choice to make, are you gonna battle through injuries, play hard on every down, or are you gonna dog it because you know this team won't pay you in the long run. Randy Moss said it before the season, everyone know the patriots don't pay.
I see no reason why it can be a bad thing to say hey peyton, your the best player in the league, we're gonna pay you like it.
I mean I think it's great and all that players in the Colts locker room will be motivated to play because the Colts pay, but when they go out of their way to pay a shitload to Peyton, it's natural that they won't be able to pay those other guys pro bowl salaries because all the money is tied up in Peyton's paychecks... I'm not drowned so far in the Pats kool aid to think Manning isn't the most important to his team.... he is. But at the same time I just think that's what separates the Colts from the Patriots. The Patriots don't pay superstar money, but they have it allocated in a way that they were able to win 3 rings this decade.
ReplyDeletePlus, as far as I'm aware, Peyton didn't win the Super Bowl last year. Drew Brees did. All I'm saying is that if this team wasn't good enough to win the Super Bowl (and it was due to weaknesses in the defense and basically everything except Peyton, because Peyton's the 1 part of their team that is perfect), then the strategy for getting the ring might not be to just eat up an even bigger salary just to say Peyton's the highest paid. If the only way to keep him is to make him the highest paid, then that's fine. But I just think it's retarded to pay more money than you need to pay just to say he's the highest paid player. That doesn't help your team.
If you were Peyton Manning would you accept anything less than being the highest paid player? No way. He knows he's gonna be the highest paid, the owner knows, we know, but rather than go through an annoying negotiating process that just ends with Peyton being the highest paid player anyway, they just came out and said hey, he's gonna be the highest paid now lets just work out the language in the deal.
ReplyDeleteAnd It's not really correct to say that all of their money will be tied up with Peyton. A. This is and uncapped year, if the owner wants to pay everyone 100 mil a season he could. B. even if they go back to a capped system in 2012, the cap in 2009 was 127 million. (and there will prob be an 18 game schedule which means more money for players so i'm guessing the cap would be around 150 mil) but even if it is at 127 mil and peyton is getting paid 20 mil a season thats not that big of a deal when no one else on the roster will make even close to that. C. The patriots are about to guarentee 50 mil to tom brady, so the colts aren't the only team paying out ridiculous amounts of money
And btx, They're not gonna sign him to 10 million more than everyone else... if tom makes 20 million a season then the colts will just pay peyton 21 to prove he's the best... they're not obscenly(sp.?) overpaying him
and by btx i meant btw... and thats funny because w and x are nowhere near each other
ReplyDeleteYeah true I mean I think they need to keep him and all but I just wouldn't run a team the same way personally. And I may be mistaken but I'm pretty sure the Colts don't benefit from the uncapped year, only teams that didn't go past the first round of the playoffs do. But I may be wrong about that.
ReplyDeleteThat rule that you're reffering to is about signing free agents. The colts couldn't sign an unrestricted free agent unless they lost one of equal value. They can resign their own players to whatever ungodly amount they want.
ReplyDelete