No, I meant we lose to Miami without Manning there once. If he is there we probably lose twice. (Nothing to do with if they end up being 2-14) This was what I replied to: You're probably right but I know he'd have beaten us at least once if he went there. Even if they were 2-14, one of the wins would have been against us.
I'm definitely intrigued to know why he signed with Denver and how well he will do with them. Personally, I think he would have fit best with the 9ers, but hey, as long as he didn't sign with the Dolphins.
I never said he was the reason they lost to the Giants. You brought that into the conversation. I said he played badly, especially in the 2nd half.
Denver had the most cap space by some margin and I think that I read somewhere that Manning wanted something like $31m guaranteed over the first two years of his contract.
Hard to believe he went for the money at this point of his career, but it's also hard to see why else he would go for Denver over San Francisco. He's going to be playing the entire season for the right to play home games in Denver in January? Very odd.
no, the 49ers looked to be the most talented team of his options, but that doesn't equate to it being the best fit for him. that would depend on what kind of offense they would run and how much control they would give him. who knows how much a control freak like Harbaugh would have turned over to him, so nobody can say it was a good fit for him just that it was the best team of the bunch. John Fox, on the other hand, completely changed the team to accommodate Tebow so you know he will let Peyton do whatever he wants.
We disagree on playing badly. he led them to 10 2nd half pts w/o turning it over and w/o the benfit of turnovers. Could he have done more? Sure but if he was bad he would have cost SF the game, I don't believe he cost SF the game.
That is a lot of money for a guy who didn't see the field last year. But if he is healthy and his old self, its a bargain.
Plus What are the injury protection provisions to protect the Broncos? I guess these will be leaked later today.
Ah okay. I thought Brady had the highest QB contract and then Peyton's new contract surpassed that of Brady. The new contract being the one in Indy. I wouldn't say he went to Denver just because they offered more money. We don't really know how much SF offered or if he would rather go to the AFC so the only way him and Eli meet is in the SB not the playoffs. I wouldn't jump to the conclusion immediately he chose Denver because of money because of the unusual circumstances surrounding this situation.
Although I'm sure money was an issue, Peyton is a control guy. Denver has already shown a willingness to change the offense to satiate whoever is QB which means Denver is willing to form their offense around Peyton. I saw that Denver had a whole FA strategy just for Peyton. Elway also wanted a strong passing QB and Peyton was a dream opportunity to get it.
While Brady took less earlier in his career to help sign players, Manning has taken top daollar on every contract. This last contract, because of his involvement in the union, he was urged to set the market, and then Manning topped him.
Sorry I can't find the article, but going into last year Free Agency he did say that he wasn't giving a discount.
The article I read said that Brady, as a player rep for the union felt it wouldn't be appropriate to take a hometown discount as he had in the past.
