View Full Version : Why did the Colts cut Manning?

03-21-2012, 02:18 AM
Just found out about this today! And I see he's been signed up by the Broncos. Hmmm.....

Anyone can fill me in?

Silver King
03-21-2012, 03:13 AM
The Colts owed him a $28 million dollar bonus. Seeing as Manning missed all of last season with a neck injury and endured several operations, there's no telling if that money would have been wisely spent.

In addition, the Colts are expected to choose Andrew Luck with their first-round draft choice, thus replacing an aging quarterback with a much younger one that shows great promise for the team's future.

03-21-2012, 03:34 AM
Hmmm... so it came down to economics. Fair enough.

Is Luck gonna do any good with that team though?

03-21-2012, 04:07 AM
It's going to be interesting to see how Luck shakes out with the Colts. It's going to be a rebuilding process, because as this past season showed, that Colts team wasn't terribly good without Peyton, and as good as Luck has been in college, he's still going to need some time to develop as a pro. Meanwhile, he'll be saddled with a sub-par supporting cast while following in the immediate footsteps of a future Hall of Famer.

03-21-2012, 04:15 AM
With Manning missing all of last season, it was apparent that the Colts had serious problems on both sides of the ball which is how we went crashing from division leader, perennial playoff team to winning the first pick in the April draft (a team gets that if they're at the bottom - Indy won only 2 games last season).

A lot of factors went into the decision, including a new General Manager and Head Coach. Peyton has done a lot for Indianapolis, on and off the field. I'm a staunch fan of the Colts but, since the team will be in complete re-building mode, I'm pulling for Peyton and the Broncos to get him a second, if not third ring. It's terribly sad to see a lot of favorite players leave but, unfortunately in this salary cap era, it makes it very difficult for team owners to hang onto even their legacy players. Manning's neck injury is also an area of concern.

03-21-2012, 02:05 PM
Personally, I hope the Colts stink for the next decade. Manning gave them some great years, and now they've booted him out.

03-21-2012, 04:10 PM
No, Jim Irsay (team owner) did not "boot" him out. The two worked together for years to take Indianapolis from a basketball city to a football city. They spent weeks trying to work out a deal but the cap made it difficult to keep Manning and get the support he would need on the team for another run at the Superbowl. Indianapolis fans are pretty upset, understandably, because we're also losing a lot of favorite veterans along with Manning. However, blame the salary cap that is supposed to prevent "super teams" from dominating the NFL. This was not a situation of a hard-hearted owner casting off his franchise quarterback just because he got a little injury.

Peyton had three, possibly four, procedures on his neck last year. There is some question of his arm strength. There is also a chance that one bad hit and he's done for the season again. The Broncos have room in their salary cap and a solid team already so that they can afford to take the gamble that he'll be fine. The Colts don't have nearly the wiggle room and had to choose between trying to keep our veteran offense together under a legendary quarterback (who might go down to injury) to try for another Superbowl or start the rebuilding effort now with some very promising young quarterbacks in the upcoming draft. It would have been almost impossible to afford to keep Manning and still draft one of the top tier young quarter backs. That's one of the things the salary cap was designed to prevent. Yes, the Colts could have had both quarter backs but there would have been little money left to pay any other members of the team.

I, for one, would have loved to see the Colts draft Luck or Griffin, keep Manning and let him mentor the new QB; possibly moving into an Offensive Coordinator and then Head Coach role. But that's what I wanted to see. It may be that Manning has other post-career plans and has no interest in coaching. It may be that he didn't want to mentor his replacement or that the new QB didn't want to sit behind him on the bench for two or three years.

This rebuilding was going to happen eventually. It does for every team. Even with Manning back at full strength, it was going to be difficult for the Colts to make a run for the Superbowl next year. This way, Peyton has a real chance with a team that already has a great defense in place. Something the Colts don't have right now and probably won't for a few years. Not being privy to the discussions between Jim Irsay and Peyton Manning, we also don't know what they tried to work out. The Colts have a new General Manager and Head Coach that are both defensive minded. It may be that Manning wasn't comfortable with some of the concepts that they developing for the team.

For myself, I'll be rooting for the Colts to have a good season as a rebuilding team. I'll also be rooting for the Broncos and Peyton Manning to win a Superbowl or two in the few years he has left in his career as a quarter back.

03-21-2012, 04:11 PM
Hmmm... so it came down to economics. Fair enough.

Is Luck gonna do any good with that team though?

So the Colts are relying on good Luck?

Umm... I'll go away now.

03-21-2012, 05:43 PM
Thanks ET. That was very interesting.

03-21-2012, 06:49 PM
You are very welcome, mirandashell.

03-21-2012, 11:47 PM
No, Jim Irsay (team owner) did not "boot" him out.

Yes they did. Manning had a contract with the Colts which they had felt in earlier years was to their advantage. They wanted him to take a pay cut, and when he wouldn't do it, they booted him out. The rest is propaganda.

03-22-2012, 12:09 AM
Yes they did. Manning had a contract with the Colts which they had felt in earlier years was to their advantage. They wanted him to take a pay cut, and when he wouldn't do it, they booted him out. The rest is propaganda.

True, but that's the business of the sport. The Colts needed to blow up the franchise--they have more issues to address than quarterback and need to clear some cap space for the rebuilding process--and Peyton will possibly benefit from a fresh start with a team that isn't quite so terrible as Indy proved itself to be overall this past season.

03-23-2012, 11:30 AM
Yes they did. Manning had a contract with the Colts which they had felt in earlier years was to their advantage. They wanted him to take a pay cut, and when he wouldn't do it, they booted him out. The rest is propaganda.

$28 million dollars is "propaganda"? They were contractually obligated to pay him that amount on March 6 (or thereabouts) if he remained under contract, whether he ever played another down, or not. I'm not a big fan of Jim Irsay or owners in general, who tend to act like spoiled brats with pockets full of money, but to keep Manning under those circumstances would have been insane. Irsay tried to negotiate a deal that would soften that obligation, but Manning was intransigent (and why not?). It was a stupid contractual obligation to begin with.

Manning didn't handle the situation very well, if he intended to stay with the Colts. Which I actually doubt. I thnk both Irsay and Manning were looking for a way to part with grace, and in the end, that wasn't done too badly.

The Colts were the worst team in the league last year, and it wasn't just because Peyton Manning was injured and missed the season. If he'd been healthy, and played, instead of going 2-14, they would have gone about 5-11. They just plain weren't very good. They jettisoned several other veteran players as well, notably Peyton's buddy Dallas Clark, who was also injured, but who still might have some use for another team, and why not the Broncos?

Manning now, for the first time since he was a rookie, faces a cast of players, notably receivers, he's never worked with before. No quarterback in the history of the league has ever done more play alteration at the line of scrimmage than he does. The new guys around him aren't going to be comfy with that, at least at first. I predict lots of false start penalties. And the timing with receivers will need a lot of work. Plus Denver last year was pretty shoddy at protecting the quarterback, no matter if it was Orton or Tebow. They could win the division again, because it's filled with crappy teams, but I wouldn't bet my house on great success.

And five years??????????? Name me one quarterback in league history who has been truly successful at age 42. My fear is seeing Peyton Manning turn into Bret Favre his last three years. Or worse.

Peyton Manning is a first-ballot lock for the NFL Hall of Fame. His only real gripe is that his little brother now has one more SuperBowl ring than he has. Is anybody here willing to bet much on the possibility of him winning another with the Broncos?

I give him two years, after which John Elway will be deep in Regretsville.


03-23-2012, 07:45 PM
The man hasn't played for a full season and the bonus was coming up. No matter what he has done in the past or will do in the future, he had become a very expensive bench-warmer.