PTI (Pardon The Interruption) But You’re Going To Pay Him What ? How Much ? Get The **ck Out Of Here ! ……….
Having led the organization to their second Superbowl appearance in three years. The Indianapolis Colts’ hierarchy and front office are looking to lock up their 4 time league MVP and Superbowl MVP (SBXLI) winning quarterback, Peyton Manning to a contract extension, that could in effect net him in excess of $ 120 million dollars , if he fulfills the obligations of the contract that’s allegedly being drawn and which awaits the player’s signature at the culmination of this year’s Superbowl. Colts’ owner, Jim Irsay, the team’s GM, Bill Polian and team coach Jim Caldwell are all in accordance with this. As to what this would suggest to Manning’s teammates is only a matter of speculation and conjecture. But suffice to say ‘….Peyton is getting his just like any other player , who expects to be amply rewarded for their exploits on the field of play. Manning , himself is said to earn in excess of $ 20 million a year, in terms of commercial endorsements from corporate sponsors , alone. That supplements his NFL salary rather nicely , placing him amongst the 40 highest paid athletes on the planet.
If as expected, the player does sign the dotted line on the contract extension then he’ll not only become one of the highest paid players in the NFL . But he’ll also eclipse the contract signed by his younger brother, Eli Manning of the New York Giants. If one remembers that was also an extension that will pay Giants’ quarterback $97.5 million over six years. Netting him an average of $16.25 million per year (of that $97.5 million-$43 million was guaranteed). Now as to whether or not the younger Manning is worth that sort of money , I’ve leave that up you to decide. Granted , he’s led the team to a surprising Superbowl (SBXLII) win over the New England Patriots in 2008. But since that win, the Giants have been something of anathema as a team.
Courtesy of ESPN.com
Irsay plans to break bank for Peyton
By Len Pasquarelli , ESPN.com
MIAMI — Negotiations to extend the contract of Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning will begin in earnest after the season, Colts owner Jim Irsay confirmed on Tuesday, and the new deal is expected to make the Colts’ star the highest-paid player in NFL history and to keep him with the franchise for his entire career.
Manning’s current deal, the final two years of which have been technically voided, will expire after the 2010 season.
“You know it’s going to get done,” Irsay said during media day interviews. “I think it’s clear, and we’ll start on it this summer. That’s been the way we do things [to hammer out an extension when a player is entering the final year of his contract]. And it’ll be the biggest [contract] in history; there’s not much doubt about that.”
Irsay has said in the past that Manning will be “a Colt for life,” and he reiterated that stance on Tuesday morning.
Manning, 33, signed a contract extension for $99.2 million in 2004, and the deal included a record $34.5 million singing bonus, all of it paid up front. The final two seasons of that contract were voided because Manning met predetermined playing-time incentives, making 2010 the final year of the deal.
The Manning contract, Irsay said, “is the easy one to do, because you know it’s going to have to be the highest ever.” The Colts’ owner noted the “harder deals” are the ones involving good, but less important players, and cited former Indianapolis starters like guard Steve McKinney and linebackers Marcus Washington and David Thornton, veterans whom the Colts could not afford to pay because of the franchise’s salary structure, and were forced to sacrifice to free agency.
“It simply comes to one question, and that’s replaceability,” Irsay explained. “Everything is based on the replaceability factor. You make decisions based on who you can afford to target and keep. … Other guys you really want to [re-sign] you might have trouble doing it, because of what it costs you, and how much attention they’re getting [from other teams in free agency]. We don’t have that luxury and we’ve had to work hard.”
Team president Bill Polian said during the season that the club, because it had such high-profile players, often had to determine “how fungible” some players and positions were. But Irsay, who invested about $100 million into the club after his father, Robert Irsay, died in 1997, is prepared to make Manning a very rich man. The younger Irsay, in fact, has dipped into his own wallet in the past to fund the contracts of some key players.
Ironically, the contracts of Manning and New England quarterback Tom Brady are both up after the 2010 campaign. Irsay allowed he will “watch closely” the bargaining on the Brady deal.
“We didn’t have the luxury [of not having a salary cap],” Irsay said. “Without one, not having those [constraints], we would have done an incredible job.”
In order to read Len Pasquarelli’s article in
its entirety just click unto the link provided .
It is by no means a surprise that the Colts’ organization would want to lock Peyton Manning up to a long term deal. And if as suggested, by the owner ,Jim Irsay , that it is his intention to have the player play his entire career with the team. Then they’re now pretty much sure that this is the way that they want to reward him. Without a doubt, Manning himself, has been one of the best quarterbacks ever to have graced the NFL. But that asides, it leaves somewhat of an unsavory taste in one’s mouth when you consider that he couldn’t have done it without the full complementary of players that he’s been surrounded by. And how are they, then to be rewarded when their contracts are up for renewal or extension ? With this upcoming season (2010-11) very well being an uncapped season if the NFL , the owners and the NFLPA (Players’ Union) are unable to make an assertive effort in reaching common ground, with regard to a renewal of the collective bargaining agreement. Then the whole rationale and inner workings of a great many teams within the league could be turned upside down. As it is, NFLPA Executive Director DeMaurice Smith is itching for a fight and looking to derail the somewhat autocratic rule of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. As contentious as the two sides appear to be with regard to the ongoing negotiations and the very fact that both sides addressed the members of Congress and then met in convened meeting in-front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Nothing was accomplished , other than the usual amount of posturing and pandering by both sides. Never mind the fact that at times it looked as if the empaneled members seemed to be in awe of the NFL players who addressed them. But should we really expect anything else from these legislators ?
The hard part here is to fully comprehend how both sides were one minute all sync with one another concerning going forward. And the next accusations are being leveled by both sides against each other , as to the greed and disingenuousness shown by both sides. Neither side it appears wants to acquiesce to the others’ wishes , as they feel that it would show a sign of weakness on their part. It may well be that they aren’t overly concerned as to what the fans are indeed thinking about the situation at this juncture. A lockout, reminiscent of the labor dispute that shut down the entire NFL in in 1987 for several weeks and that led to a great deal of discord between the union and the NFL . Something along those lines once again and we’re liable to see the fans quite possibly abandon the game and the NFL altogether. But were the NFL to use replacement players as they did in ’87, and we would be liable to see the tension build up even further between the two parties. There’s nothing like a ‘bunch of greedy owners’ and ‘their self serving counterparts’ ,as in the ‘highly overpaid players’ bickering about how many more millions that they can slice off the piece of an ever diminishing slice of an already big piece of pie. One thing is for sure , neither the players or the fans will take kindly to seeing replacement players taking to the field and then calling it an NFL game. At the same time one doubts that the NFL owners and its hierarchy are stupid enough to do such a thing ?
Courtesy of ESPN.com
By Tim Graham , ESPN.com
Miami — The NFL will be in full glory this week. A marvelous Super Bowl matchup between the Indianapolis Colts and New Orleans Saints is days away.
Soon after the confetti flitters about Sun Life Stadium and the Lombardi Trophy is hoisted triumphantly, football’s showcase event will give way to uncertainties and insecurities about an imminent labor clash, one that will have significant ramifications on the 2010 season, could lead to a 2011 lockout and might even scuttle an entire season.
You’ve ignored the NFL labor situation, hoping it would fix itself before you invested one minute of your life, one ounce of worry.
“I’ll just watch football,” you thought. “I’ll concentrate on the season, the stars, the X’s and O’s. I’ll carry on as though the NFL is simply in the greatest league in the world, a game, a diversion from real-world issues — not an industry.”
Time to start paying attention to the big business, folks.
Big trouble is near.
Collective bargaining agreements, economics, uncapped seasons and revenue haggling aren’t nearly as entertaining as game highlights and chalk talk.
But if you want to follow along with what could evolve into the most important off-field storyline in recent sports history, you’ll need to learn the issues. (The NFL, league and owners are synonymous. So are the NFL Players Association, the union and the players.)
What’s on the line?
The owners and players have until March 5 to hammer out a new collective bargaining agreement, essentially the off-field rule book for an $8 billion industry. If they do not reach new terms, a host of provisos will be triggered.
Most significantly, the 2010 season will be played without a salary cap or floor, allowing teams to spend as much or as little as they wish. Two weeks ago, New York Giants owner John Mara indicated that an uncapped season appeared unavoidable. If a new CBA isn’t struck by March 2011, a lockout would be highly probable.
How did we get here?
The players got the upper hand on the owners in 2006, the last time they hashed out a CBA. The players were able to renegotiate what revenues were considered a part of the financial pie, from which they would receive about 60 percent.
The salary cap skyrocketed from $80 million per team in 2005 to $102 million the next year. In each subsequent season, the cap climbed to about $109 million, $116 million and $128 million for the 2009 season. The salary floor — the amount of money teams are forced to spend — was $112 million this season, or $32 million more than the highest ceiling under the previous CBA. By doing so, the owners froze the percentage of revenues dedicated to player costs at 57.5 percent.
In 2008, the owners voted unanimously to exercise a clause that allowed either side to opt out of the CBA one or two years early.
What does the league want?
The owners’ objective is to retain more revenues, because they’re assuming virtually all of the risk in this business venture. Their mission statement is that they want to provide long-term stability and growth opportunities, but their margins are thinning because of the U.S. economy. Sponsorship dollars are scarcer. There were 22 blackouts this season, up from nine in 2008. Money has been sunk into stadiums and practice facilities.
At the top of the league’s wish list is an 18 percent rollback in salaries and a rookie salary cap that would redirect money to proven talent rather than players who might not have what it takes. Another way for the owners to grow the revenue pie would be expanding the regular season to 18 games.
What does the NFL Players Association want?
Maintaining the status quo would be just fine with the players.
What would an uncapped year mean in 2010?
It sounds like an uncapped year would favor the players, because it gives the impression that freewheeling owners would start throwing money around in their quest for a Super Bowl title. But the uncapped year is a bit of a misnomer. It’s true there wouldn’t be a salary cap. Deep-pocketed teams such as the Dallas Cowboys, Washington Redskins and New England Patriots could spend as much as they want. But in reality there would be no financial limitations at all. Teams would have no salary floor to maintain, although minimum individual player salaries still would need to be met. The salary floor for 2009 was about $108 million.
How would the uncapped year affect free agency for the upcoming season?
These changes would be unfavorable for the players. The requirement to be eligible for unrestricted free agency would jump from four years to six. Rather than being allowed to hit the open market, 212 players would be restricted free agents instead. Teams have the right of first refusal on restricted free agents and would receive draft compensation if they chose not to match the offer.
Some of the bigger names who would have been unrestricted but would not be in an uncapped year include Denver Broncos receiver Brandon Marshall and outside linebacker Elvis Dumervil, San Diego Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson and linebacker Shawne Merriman, Houston Texans linebacker DeMeco Ryans and Cowboys receiver Miles Austin.
Click on the above link shown to read Tim Graham’s piece
in its entirety.
For the Colts as an organization they’ve been somewhat fiscally prudent but at the same time when one sees in large part one player taking up in excess of 1/3 of a team’s salary in order for that player to re-sign and remain with the team. One has to ask the question how much is enough when it comes to the players and their ever burgeoning need to earn even more ? It’s OK in the good times when the money is said to be plentiful a bullish economic times. But when there’s an acute crisis within their midst what would it suggest that the NFL and their teams ought to be doing ? If they can’t seemingly show some constraint and then expect the fans to make the outlay to see their games. Then surely there’s something amiss with the whole business concept and template with which the NFL continues to operates under ?
At age 33 , it could well be that Peyton Manning could play another decade in the NFL. And with the proposed contract that’s being offered that scenario seems to be all but a certainty. As to whether not it’s a 6 year $100 million contract or something akin to 10 years $150 million-$180 million remains to be seen. The one thing you can be sure of , is that the print and tv media will not let this story go. If anything it will become the piece’ de resistance for the likes of ESPN/ABC Sports , Fox Sport, NBC Sports , CBS Sports and the vast coterie of sports’ reporting organizations across the landscape. Money can be the ‘root of all evil’ but it can also come as a blessing in disguise. Somehow , for someone of Peyton Manning’s stature , I’m not so sure that it really matters or not. I get the feeling that if he were asked to simply play a game of ‘tag football’ in a playground , he’d still derive the same amount of pleasure as he does playing in the NFL.
What are your thoughts on the matter ?