Leverage

Talk about the AFC, NFC, the NFL Draft, College Football... anything football that has no Washington Redskin relevance.
**********
User avatar
Posts: 16741
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:30 pm

The Hogster wrote:Yeah, that's exactly what this thread shows. That's exactly why it's called "Leverage" Leverage for how we could get the rumors of him coming to Washington to stop. Oh, got it now.
ROTFALMAO


This thread was started because someone wanted to have a discussion without being belittled by you,

You being you, you made this thread about the same thing all the other spin off threads are.

You're the one that brought up leverage it just took the rest of us a little while to figure out you didn't know the meaning of the word.


Here's a tweet you'll love

Phillip B Wilson
‏ @pwilson24

Manning said he hoped he could stay with #Colts, but understands the biz. He told me to pass along to the fans how much he appreciated them.




The Hogster wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
The Hogster wrote:168 on the LSAT.
Passed the Virginia Bar
Passed NFLPA Agent Certification
46 on the Wonderlic


Here's a fact, I don't remember my LSAT score, but it was higher then the average of the incoming law class at #1 Yale and I only took it for fun. The wife of a bud I rented a room from during college was taking it to actually go to law school. I took a couple practice tests with her and it was fun, so I took the exam. You were in the bottom 25th percentile at Yale.

I turned down UVA for my MBA and went to Michigan where I graduated with high distinction, top 10% of the class. My GMAT also was above most of the incoming Yale class who are #1 in business scores as well.

Just the facts. Maybe that's why I only work for myself. Well, and my wife...


My post was SARCASM. Not an invitation to read your Resume. Nobody cares. :oops:


Sarcasm or lies... ?.

As he expressed as his farewell presser last month, he said, “Tell the fans I appreciated them, too.”

I reasoned that if I was going to pass along that message to his fans, well, you have to write about the call.

I told Manning I was late to change my position on keeping him, that I had held out hope for the longest time, but realized in the end that the money and the risk was too great. He didn’t hold it against me. He said he always had the same hope that he could stay.

I wished him well.

As he acknowledged, the Colts are moving in a new direction and it’s part of the business.

As someone who strives to be professional, I am human and will choose to be a bit sentimental about this. I’ll always remember the phone call.

As I said to him, it was a first-class way to say farewell.


Sounds like Mr Manning knew who had the leverage and who had to go find a new job
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

#######
Posts: 7172
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:37 pm

1niksder wrote:

Peyton priced himself out of Wal-Mart he's going to lower his price to even lower what Wal-Mart offered (had he talked to them to find out) and head over to the Dollar Store bobble heads in hand


Did you write this? What did you mean? Can you say that you were right with the benefit of hindsight?

What's the odds Peyton gets half of what he gave up for 2012 without even talking about a restructure?


Did you write this? What did you mean? Can you say that you were right with the benefit of hindsight?

He might get a few offers with a bunch of incentives but nothing like what he could have got from a team that gave him $26M last year for doing nothing, had he tried to work something with them.



Did you write this? What did you mean? Can you say that you were right with the benefit of hindsight?

Answer these
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16741
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Thu Apr 12, 2012 6:06 pm

The Hogster wrote:1niksder wrote:

Peyton priced himself out of Wal-Mart he's going to lower his price to even lower what Wal-Mart offered (had he talked to them to find out) and head over to the Dollar Store bobble heads in hand


Did you write this? What did you mean? Can you say that you were right with the benefit of hindsight?

What's the odds Peyton gets half of what he gave up for 2012 without even talking about a restructure?


Did you write this? What did you mean? Can you say that you were right with the benefit of hindsight?

He might get a few offers with a bunch of incentives but nothing like what he could have got from a team that gave him $26M last year for doing nothing, had he tried to work something with them.



Did you write this? What did you mean? Can you say that you were right with the benefit of hindsight?

Answer these


I haven't shied away from anything I said, the bottom line is he got a one year deal until he can prove he can play in future years. A player with the leverage you said he had doesn't do that deal... event if you were their agent and had any leverage they don't do that deal.

You had no real opinion you just made statements, and until $18M becomes more than $23M you were wrong.

He went from a deal with 4 years and $63M left on it to one year $18M... let me know when that $18M becomes at least half of what he left on the table, because $18M is all he got.

You had the benefit of hindsight and you still don't get it.
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

#######
Posts: 7172
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:59 pm

:roll: More non-answers, thanks.
Last edited by The Hogster on Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

#######
Posts: 7172
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:00 pm

One basic concept you just ignore, don't grasp, or disagree with is that the Colts were not going to honor Peyton's old contract. You can't have it both ways. On one hand, you say he didn't get what he had on the old deal. On the other hand, you (i) admit that the Colts were not going to pay him the money owed on that deal which is why you believe he should have restructured.

So, let me ask it this way. Do you really think that (even if Peyton wanted to go back to Indy--which nobody thinks he did) that he and the Colts could have restructured the deal in such a way that paid him all of the money he was owed?? Or even $23M in 2012?

Better yet, do you think your proposed, restructure is something realistic?? Something that either party would want?? Why would the Colts want to have $23M tied up in a lameduck QB?? Why would Peyton want to play there with no talent, no coaching staff and his replacement breathing down his neck? Why would the Colts want to have a QB controversy if Peyton didn't play well, or if Luck didn't play well? Why would they want to have money tied up in 2 QBs on a team that's been blown up and has needs at basically every position?? Do you really think what you propose is realistic or even close to realistic?

If you believe that, then that is why this debate is pointless. It's unrealistic. I'm dealing in reality. It seems as if you're dealing with theory or made up figures. Anyone could say, he should have restructured his contract to get X--but give me a break. In order to have a man to man debate, we both have to be dealing with the circumstances that occurred here--in reality. If what you proposed was the smart thing to do, or the best thing for Peyton, Tom Condon would have done it.

But, dude. What you are saying redundantly ignores reality to the point of being downright implausible. Two things you continually ignore are: (i) Peyton has an injury, and (ii) the Colts wound up with the #1 pick the same year that the next Peyton Manning is in the draft. Given that, why would a restructure have been smart?

None of these circumstances apparently mean anything to you. You continue advocating a theoretical restructure that would not have been in the best interests of anyone. None of your suggestions were taken and Tom Condon is one of the best NFL agents there is. Is that a coincidence to you? Or are you genuinely convinced that the secret, intelligent solution is in your posts, but somehow didn't cross anyone else's mind?
Last edited by The Hogster on Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16741
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:36 pm

The Hogster wrote:One basic concept you just ignore, don't grasp, or disagree with is that the Colts were not going to honor Peyton's old contract. You can't have it both ways. On one hand, you say he didn't get what he had on the old deal. On the other hand, you (i) admit that the Colts were not going to pay him the money owed on that deal which is why you believe he should have restructured.

So, let me ask it this way. Do you really think that (even if Peyton wanted to go back to Indy--which nobody thinks he did) that he and the Colts could have restructured the deal in such a way that paid him all of the money he was owed?? Or even $23M in 2012?

Better yet, do you think your proposed, restructure is something realistic?? Something that either party would want?? Why would the Colts want to have $23M tied up in a lameduck QB?? Why would Peyton want to play there with no talent, no coaching staff and his replacement breathing down his neck? Why would the Colts want to have a QB controversy if Peyton didn't play well, or if Luck didn't play well? Why would they want to have money tied up in 2 QBs on a team that's been blown up?? Do you really think what you propose is realistic or even close to realistic?

If you believe that, then that is why this debate is pointless. It's unrealistic. I'm dealing in reality. It seems as if you're dealing with theory or made up figures. Anyone could say, he should have restructured his contract to get X--but give me a break. In order to have a man to man debate, we both have to be dealing in reality.

But, dude. That ignores reality to the point of being downright implausible. Two big reasons why your manufactured, theoretical posts make no sense is because it ignores two things that occurred in real life (i) Peyton has an injury, and (ii) the Colts wound up with the #1 pick the same year that the next Peyton Manning is in the draft.

None of these circumstances apparently mean anything to you. You continue advocating a theoretical restructure that would not have been in the best interests of anyone. None of your suggestions were taken and Tom Condon is one of the best NFL agents there is. Is that a coincidence to you? Or are you genuinely convinced that the secret, intelligent solution is in your posts, but somehow didn't cross anyone else's mind?


If you had took the time to read what I posted before throwing the idea away sight unseen, you would have the answers to these questions. Questions others asked and had answered at the time I posted the idea of Manning talking the Colts.

You say it wouldn't have been in the best interest of anyone when, had you read the thread benefits for both parties were explained, Peyton's were obvious and many members asked why the Colts would even want to do it.

You say I took made up numbers, but as I stated in post you obviously didn't read the numbers came from the contract that was being re-negotiated, using made up numbers wouldn't have been a negotiation it would have been a new contract. His 5 years $96M is made up numbers.


If you missed all that, I'll be the last to re-explain it to you.

The questions you're asking explains why this is pointless. It's hard to say it was a debate when in the end you still don't know what the talking points were.

I can't even laugh at you... Wow
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

#######
Posts: 7172
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Thu Apr 12, 2012 9:42 pm

Exactly. Another non-answer. Another useless retort. Nothing to see here. Good Luck 1niksder.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16741
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Thu Apr 12, 2012 10:10 pm

The Hogster wrote:Exactly. Another non-answer. Another useless retort. Nothing to see here. Good Luck 1niksder.


You're asking questions that have already been asked and answered, what part of that is confusing you?

Had you read what you were responding to months ago, you wouldn't be asking these questions and getting frustrated because I won't answer them again.


There's plenty to see here, we see you for who you are again. You can't figure out where you went wrong... it's because you couldn't keep it civil.

It went from a thread in Hogwash to being split off and moving parts of the original thread to the smack forum. That wasn't enough so another member started a new thread in AtL to try to get a understanding of the discussion and you brought your opinion of other people's opinion of what Manning should do into this one. Still not enough for you, you started another thread in smack (totaling three in smack).

Now you make it obvious that you didn't even read what you were calling outrageous and simpleminded.


I can believe you went through all this and don't even know what my answers to these question were while we were going back and forth.

I'm definitely done with you on this topic.....

Now I have to run off to find stupid people to apologize to. :explode:
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

#######
Posts: 7172
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Postby The Hogster » Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:06 am

Yawn
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16741
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Mon Apr 23, 2012 10:03 am

We’ve now gotten to the truth. (We’ve determined that we indeed can handle the truth, and we think you can, too.)

It’s a surprisingly simple deal, based on a review of the information and communications with a source having direct knowledge of the negotiation process. Manning gets an $18 million fully guaranteed base salary for 2012. Though he doesn’t get a signing bonus, he’ll receive $6 million of the $18 million base salary as an advance.

Then, if Manning is on the Broncos’ roster on the final day of the 2012 league year, his base salaries of $20 million in 2013 and $20 million in 2014 become fully guaranteed.

In other words, the Broncos can cut Manning at any point after Super Bowl XLVII and before the last day before the start of the 2013 league year and limit the contract to a one-year, $18 million investment. And so, just as the Colts faced a $28 million decision in March 2012, the Broncos will face a $40 million decision in March of 2013.


Didn't get a signing bonus but he did pocket $6M upfront.
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

Return to Around the League