Colts To Release Manning

[Chicago76]

did the owner really say it wasnt about the money?

It's not really. It's not an out of pocket issue for Irsay anyway. It's about cap space for a rebuilding team, which is really a different issue entirely.

If there was no cap, then I guarantee you Irsay would have #18 playing under center this year with Luck learning. As it stands, the Colts have a ton of pressing needs and won't be a team capable of competing among the top 1/4 of teams for at least 2-3 years (if the rebuilding effort goes well).

The reason to cut him is twofold: 1-you save $6 million in cap space this year from the start. 2-you save a lot more than that going forward, because you essentially "rip the bandaid off". No $7 million/year pro rated bonus hit going forward.

In a capless world, the owner would still be paying the same $$$ to retain a guy like Peyton Manning, but it doesn't restrict your ability to acquire talent...which is what this really boils down to.

[Bleeding Blue]

did the owner really say it wasnt about the money?

It's not really. It's not an out of pocket issue for Irsay anyway. It's about cap space for a rebuilding team, which is really a different issue entirely.

If there was no cap, then I guarantee you Irsay would have #18 playing under center this year with Luck learning. As it stands, the Colts have a ton of pressing needs and won't be a team capable of competing among the top 1/4 of teams for at least 2-3 years (if the rebuilding effort goes well).

The reason to cut him is twofold: 1-you save $6 million in cap space this year from the start. 2-you save a lot more than that going forward, because you essentially "rip the bandaid off". No $7 million/year pro rated bonus hit going forward.

In a capless world, the owner would still be paying the same $$$ to retain a guy like Peyton Manning, but it doesn't restrict your ability to acquire talent...which is what this really boils down to.

The bolded part isnt true, the 28 million would come straight from his wallet.

[JustAwesome]

Technically, it is about the money. Irsay has to look out for the future of his team. He can't cling on to the past. He has to do whatever he feels he has to in order to keep the value of the Colts up.

[Chicago76]

did the owner really say it wasnt about the money?

It's not really. It's not an out of pocket issue for Irsay anyway. It's about cap space for a rebuilding team, which is really a different issue entirely.

If there was no cap, then I guarantee you Irsay would have #18 playing under center this year with Luck learning. As it stands, the Colts have a ton of pressing needs and won't be a team capable of competing among the top 1/4 of teams for at least 2-3 years (if the rebuilding effort goes well).

The reason to cut him is twofold: 1-you save $6 million in cap space this year from the start. 2-you save a lot more than that going forward, because you essentially "rip the bandaid off". No $7 million/year pro rated bonus hit going forward.

In a capless world, the owner would still be paying the same $$$ to retain a guy like Peyton Manning, but it doesn't restrict your ability to acquire talent...which is what this really boils down to.

The bolded part isnt true, the 28 million would come straight from his wallet.

$28 million coming straight from Irsay's pocket wouldn't be a hang up for the guy...especially when you consider the fact that that the franchise would be worth substantially more with Manning at the helm and assistance Manning would provide in mentoring Luck.

The issue is that paying that $28 million bonus would trigger a $7 million/year cap hit for the next 4 years. The Colts couldn't afford a $7 million/year cap hit on the bonus + Manning's base + Luck's base + Luck's prorated bonus hit...not while trying to field a competitive team. If it were 1990 right now, Manning never would have been released. But that's the reality of the cap these days.

Is it about money? In a cap sense, yes, but not in a cash sense.