Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 4 5 6
Results 76 to 86 of 86

Thread: Manning is not greedy -

  1. #76
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Adopted Bronco:
    Ray Finkel
    Posts
    86,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post

    So, my question is...what kind of message does it send when we ask Manning to take a pay cut with NO concession on the part of the team...and that pay cut doesnt parlay into anything significant?

    sounds a lot better than "Hey Peyton, can you take a paycut so we can replace our current talent with lesser talent?"
    If by chance Denver signs what you call "lesser" talent and we win the SB i guess the message would be we didnt have to overspend to achieve that goal because we were able to get more rounded players who have better chemistry with the team. Also, if Denver asks Peyton to take a paycut because they want to retain someone but that player still wants more that really isnt Manning's or Denver's fault. Just because you arent enamored by the names out there in FA does not mean those type of players wont benefit Denver going forward this year.

  2. #77
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Adopted Bronco:
    Ray Finkel
    Posts
    86,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    We aren't going to find a better pass catching TE this offseason, but Thomas' game has flaws or we wouldn't have let him walk. Same goes for Franklin who has led the team in penalties during his tenure here.

    I just don't think it's as black and white as "we're definitely looking at a downgrade at all these positions." Let's see how all of the pieces fit together first. Maybe we downgrade our TE pass catching but upgrade our TE run blocking. Maybe our new guard will be a better complementary fit if he is a better pass blocker and doesn't take as many penalties.

    Also - what "concessions" were you hoping for from the team with Manning's contract? He has a limited skillset and is being paid as such.
    Well said and pretty much was i was getting at in my last post.

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northman View Post
    If by chance Denver signs what you call "lesser" talent and we win the SB i guess the message would be we didnt have to overspend to achieve that goal because we were able to get more rounded players who have better chemistry with the team. Also, if Denver asks Peyton to take a paycut because they want to retain someone but that player still wants more that really isnt Manning's or Denver's fault. Just because you arent enamored by the names out there in FA does not mean those type of players wont benefit Denver going forward this year.
    Seems like now we're just splitting hairs to prove a point. At the end of the day, WHY did we ask Manning to take a paycut with NO concession from the team? If it's for a reason other than IMPROVING the team, then please enlighten me. And if we are going to try to make the argument that we can sign cheaper free agents that will ultimately create better chemistry to improve the team, then again...what was the reason for requesting Manning to take the pay cut?

    Maybe you're right and the 5th best guard available in free agency is a better fit than the 2nd best guard...or the 7th best DT option is better than the 3rd best. who knows how it all plays out. But on the surface, the point of asking Manning to take the pay cut was in order to obtain MORE free agents at lower costs than it was to obtain/retain better (on paper) free agents.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Taysom Hill
    Posts
    40,845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post
    Seems like now we're just splitting hairs to prove a point. At the end of the day, WHY did we ask Manning to take a paycut with NO concession from the team? If it's for a reason other than IMPROVING the team, then please enlighten me. And if we are going to try to make the argument that we can sign cheaper free agents that will ultimately create better chemistry to improve the team, then again...what was the reason for requesting Manning to take the pay cut?

    Maybe you're right and the 5th best guard available in free agency is a better fit than the 2nd best guard...or the 7th best DT option is better than the 3rd best. who knows how it all plays out. But on the surface, the point of asking Manning to take the pay cut was in order to obtain MORE free agents at lower costs than it was to obtain/retain better (on paper) free agents.
    Manning was asked to take a pay cut because 1.) That's what Elways thinks he's worth. 2.) Elway thinks he can utilize that $4 million to improve the team in other areas. As with all free agency valuations, the decision was made on an absolute basis. Not a relative one. "We think you are worth $15million regardless of what we pay everyone else on the team." It shouldn't be, "Hey, you can keep your $19 mil unless we find someone more worthy of that money."

    Maybe it's to sign a long snapper, maybe it's to hold onto Rahim Moore, maybe it's to snag a yet-to-be-identified player who hits the market unexpectedly. You know that. Let's wait and see how the money is spent before we decide whether it was justified or not.

  5. The Following User High Fived Buff For This Post:


  6. #80
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    We aren't going to find a better pass catching TE this offseason, but Thomas' game has flaws or we wouldn't have let him walk. Same goes for Franklin who has led the team in penalties during his tenure here.

    I just don't think it's as black and white as "we're definitely looking at a downgrade at all these positions." Let's see how all of the pieces fit together first. Maybe we downgrade our TE pass catching but upgrade our TE run blocking. Maybe our new guard will be a better complementary fit if he is a better pass blocker and doesn't take as many penalties.

    Also - what "concessions" were you hoping for from the team with Manning's contract? He has a limited skillset and is being paid as such.
    So on paper and based on performance to date, who is the guard that is available at a cheaper cost that can be a better "compliment" to the team than Franklin? What safety is available that has the experience and skill to match even a mediocre Rahim Moore? How about DT? What guy is out there that can fill the 1 tech spot better than Knighton or at least as well as him for a lower cost?

    As far as team concessions for Manning, there are a ton of things they could have done. At the end of the day, it appears their whole pitch was that by taking a pay cut, it would allow them to make improvements to the team to give him one last hurrah. Personally...I just dont see how that is going to be accomplished considering the talent available in free agency.

  7. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    6-3/215
    Adopted Bronco:
    Mighty Quinn
    Posts
    36,768

    Default

    I think Denver needed that paycut to lessen the burden of the gauranteed money that has to be in escrow at 2:00 today.
    "Tuning ... into each other ... lift all higher”
    “I’m just different!”

    Sign Garbage Minshew.

    Draft
    1st round— Cooper Dejean CB
    2nd round— Jack Sawyer OLB
    3rd round— Will Shipley RB
    4th round— Ricky Pearsall WR
    5th round— Ladd McKonkey WR
    6th round— Cash Jones RB
    7th round— Carson Steele RB

  8. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    Manning was asked to take a pay cut because 1.) That's what Elways thinks he's worth. 2.) Elway thinks he can utilize that $4 million to improve the team in other areas. As with all free agency valuations, the decision was made on an absolute basis. Not a relative one. "We think you are worth $15million regardless of what we pay everyone else on the team." It shouldn't be, "Hey, you can keep your $19 mil unless we find someone more worthy of that money."

    Maybe it's to sign a long snapper, maybe it's to hold onto Rahim Moore, maybe it's to snag a yet-to-be-identified player who hits the market unexpectedly. You know that. Let's wait and see how the money is spent before we decide whether it was justified or not.
    At the end of the day the purpose is to improve the team. Based on what is available right now...that possibility is looking pretty bleak. But, I suppose we can hold hope that someone of value will unexpectedly be released. So glad we're gambling on that.

    At the end of the day, I dont think anyone is expecting us to sign the top guys available. But taking steps backward in terms of talent seems inevitable if the "wait and see who else gets cut" philosophy doesnt pan out.

  9. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Taysom Hill
    Posts
    40,845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post
    So on paper and based on performance to date, who is the guard that is available at a cheaper cost that can be a better "compliment" to the team than Franklin? What safety is available that has the experience and skill to match even a mediocre Rahim Moore? How about DT? What guy is out there that can fill the 1 tech spot better than Knighton or at least as well as him for a lower cost?

    As far as team concessions for Manning, there are a ton of things they could have done. At the end of the day, it appears their whole pitch was that by taking a pay cut, it would allow them to make improvements to the team to give him one last hurrah. Personally...I just dont see how that is going to be accomplished considering the talent available in free agency.
    I hear you - the talent in free agency is limited and the pool doesn't magically get deeper. But again, I just want to judge the totality of the moves in free agency and the draft before we determine whether it was a good plan or not.

  10. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Little Elm, TX
    Adopted Bronco:
    #58
    Posts
    26,171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buff View Post
    I hear you - the talent in free agency is limited and the pool doesn't magically get deeper. But again, I just want to judge the totality of the moves in free agency and the draft before we determine whether it was a good plan or not.
    Agreed. We all have to wait and see what happens. The point I was trying to make is that based on the talent available...the initial prognosis doesnt look very good.

  11. The Following 2 Users High Fived CoachChaz For This Post:


  12. #85
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Adopted Bronco:
    Ray Finkel
    Posts
    86,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post
    Seems like now we're just splitting hairs to prove a point. At the end of the day, WHY did we ask Manning to take a paycut with NO concession from the team? If it's for a reason other than IMPROVING the team, then please enlighten me. And if we are going to try to make the argument that we can sign cheaper free agents that will ultimately create better chemistry to improve the team, then again...what was the reason for requesting Manning to take the pay cut?

    Maybe you're right and the 5th best guard available in free agency is a better fit than the 2nd best guard...or the 7th best DT option is better than the 3rd best. who knows how it all plays out. But on the surface, the point of asking Manning to take the pay cut was in order to obtain MORE free agents at lower costs than it was to obtain/retain better (on paper) free agents.
    I think the reason to ask Manning to take a pay cut was to free up money. I dont think it just had to do with one particular thing or the other. Lets face it, Denver wanted Manning to come back but were also very adamant that he cut his salary because they want as much room as possible to sign FA's, draft picks, and/or retain players. But if some players (as it appears with the 3 that MO pointed out) want more money than Denver wants to spend at those positions that does not mean you still dont ask for the paycut. Im confused why any fan would be so offended that they asked him to cut his pay in the first place. Denver isnt made out of money so any time you can free up some space is nothing but a good thing no matter what.

    I guess im not too surprised that people on the board are already freaking out, this tends to happen every offseason because Denver doesnt automatically sign players they want or like. Until Elway and the Broncos give me a reason to disagree or question their mentality im just not going to freak out or throw a pity party because our star QB had to give up a little cash. If Manning is "irked" or pouting because he was asked to give up some cash than he can lick my nuts. Dude has made more than enough throughout his career and could of either retired or moved on. Im all about what is best for the Broncos, not a single player. But we havent even gotten to the draft yet and FA just started today. Its not about splitting hairs, its about having faith in the guys upstairs who are doing everything they possibly can to get this team back to the SB with the best chance to win with the right mentality to win. Having a bunch of "me" players just isnt going to cut it.

  13. #86
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Adopted Bronco:
    Taysom Hill
    Posts
    40,845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CoachChaz View Post
    Agreed. We all have to wait and see what happens. The point I was trying to make is that based on the talent available...the initial prognosis doesnt look very good.
    I hear you - the point I was trying to make is that everyone (including myself) almost universally feels that way, especially after our big scores in FA the last two years... The pool is finite and it feels uncomfortable to let all this talent go to other teams. But we haven't won any rings for winning free agency, so I'm open to the idea that we can still improve the team without landing top tier FAs.

    Or we might look back and regret not being more aggressive. Time will tell.

  14. The Following 2 Users High Fived Buff For This Post:


Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Anyone feeling greedy tonight?
    By FanInAZ in forum Broncos Talk
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-11-2012, 01:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group