Eli has the court of public opinion in his favor. He's the greatest giant many fans have ever seen and they already botched his handling.
Eli has a very unfriendly cap # this year. There is virtually no benefit to the team cutting him this year, and without some assurance of being the starting QB he is not likely to take a pay cut either. So in this case he can just refuse the idea to renegotiate. After last year's handling if I were him I would refuse.
Best case scenario is DG fixes the OL and adds some tall WRs and we're good to go. Second best case if Eli decides he really wants to play for a contender and will redo his contract terms facilitating a trade for cap relief and a pick. That is unlikely until a lot more chips fall as the league year starts - unless Eli right now is saying - get me to Denver if they are interested in me.
Why on earth would Manning waive his no-trade clause? The Giants have zero leverage. If Manning is not going to be a NYG, it is in Manning’s best interest to be released, not traded. He has zero incentive to waive his no-trade clause. The only way a trade is possible is if the Giants pay his $5 million on March 5th. But that would be crazy to do if they have decided to move on from Manning. And Manning knows that.
RE: RE: Eli has some power but is more like the monarchy vs the prime minister Â
Eli has the court of public opinion in his favor. He's the greatest giant many fans have ever seen and they already botched his handling.
Eli has a very unfriendly cap # this year. There is virtually no benefit to the team cutting him this year, and without some assurance of being the starting QB he is not likely to take a pay cut either. So in this case he can just refuse the idea to renegotiate. After last year's handling if I were him I would refuse.
Best case scenario is DG fixes the OL and adds some tall WRs and we're good to go. Second best case if Eli decides he really wants to play for a contender and will redo his contract terms facilitating a trade for cap relief and a pick. That is unlikely until a lot more chips fall as the league year starts - unless Eli right now is saying - get me to Denver if they are interested in me.
Why on earth would Manning waive his no-trade clause? The Giants have zero leverage. If Manning is not going to be a NYG, it is in Manning’s best interest to be released, not traded. He has zero incentive to waive his no-trade clause. The only way a trade is possible is if the Giants pay his $5 million on March 5th. But that would be crazy to do if they have decided to move on from Manning. And Manning knows that.
That's not necessarily true. The incentive to Eli is to keep his current contract intact. He may or may not do better than 2 years, $33MM on the open market - it's hardly a slam dunk either way, especially because of his age.
And FWIW, you have the date of the bonus wrong - it's due on 3/16. And going back to my original point, he could agree to modify that if he and his agent felt as though his current contract is worth more than a FA contract would be.
I'm not suggesting that what I'm outlining is likely; I'm just pointing out that it's not nearly as certain as you claim.
make him put the money where his mouth is, and make him rework his contract, so he isn't costing the team $20 mil a season and allows DG some flexibility to go get from FA lineman.
You'll find out just how much he wants to stay a Giant for life.
a contract in an updated contract and spread a signing bonus out throughout the years on the contract. Giving Eli some money now, but not making him a prime earner in his decreasing years before retirement.
a contract in an updated contract and spread a signing bonus out throughout the years on the contract. Giving Eli some money now, but not making him a prime earner in his decreasing years before retirement.
He's already in his decreasing years before retirement. It would be incredibly stupid to spread Elis cap hit beyond the two years left
career with the Giants and is used in the development of his replacement. He will get a shot again next year as the starter, unless Shurmur has a different agenda. Barklely and some OL help could make that come true.
a contract in an updated contract and spread a signing bonus out throughout the years on the contract. Giving Eli some money now, but not making him a prime earner in his decreasing years before retirement.
He's already in his decreasing years before retirement. It would be incredibly stupid to spread Elis cap hit beyond the two years left
Couple points: Giants are hiring solid NFL people who will build and run/coach the team correctly, and Eli probably is being told this from others. Almost like getting back to basics which is now long over due.
With that, he has a chance to add to his stats, finish up with one franchise, and also redeem himself a bit by winning games and playing well to finish up his career. Does it mean a Super Bowl, probably not.......but winning a Super Bowl is tough even if you're on a very good team.
I still think we take a QB, and Eli would be a great mentor and at the same time, be the competitor he is to retain his starting slot for a couple years, eventually turning over the reigns in his always professional way.
That's what I'm hoping for anyway lol
You have to look at this without being subjective Â
I know its hard, we all love Eli but when you pull your emotions/feelings out of it you realize the time to move on from Eli is now. Picking at #2 we are in position to find his successor. You might say, "Why can't Eli be the mentor?" he can but does Eli want to be looking over his shoulder another year? Look what happened this past season with Geno Smith.. Now imagine what it will be like with the #2 pick standing behind him.
From a contractual and salary cap standpoint, Eli isn't playing up to it. He's currently the 10th highest paid QB and we can all agree he isn't a top 10 QB. Releasing him creates 12 million in dead money but frees up 10 million this year and his 23 million cap hit for 2019 is completely off the books. And thats whats important here. We have two big contracts we're ready to dish out for Beckham and Collins. They'll both be paid amongst the highest at their position. Beckham is looking at nearly 20 million a year. The goal should be to get Eli off the books and to front load Beckhams contract while we have the young QB on his rookie deal. The #2 picks contract will be roughly 30 million with a first year cap hit of around 6 million.
From Eli's perspective, waiving the no-trade isn't a bad thing as long as he's involved. He's not getting 2-34 from anyone else. Teams like Buffalo, Jacksonville, Denver, Arizona all should be appealing to him whether he's traded or released.
Eli is smart, I'm sure he realizes the situation and sees that NYG is in position to get the future. His time here is up.
Eli stays for another year to lead the team and mentor the future starting QB.
If Rosen is drafted he'll be ready to play at some point next year and it would be awkward to have Eli still on the team. So in that scenario, I think Eli would be cut/traded and a vet who could potentially start (if Rosen wasn't ready game 1) would be signed.
Of course Eli wants to keep his contract intact. But how in the world does waiving his no-trade clause advance that goal?
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
and are likely to pick a QB, that Eli will be incapable of having a great year next year.
Newsflash...Eli has a competent GM and Head Coach coming in. Draft a good RB (does not have to be Barkley, you could get a very good one 2nd or 3rd round), fix the Offensive line with picks and FA (like the Vikings), get people on D and OBJ back healthy, and all of a sudden we have the 2016 team with a REAL offense that takes advantage of what Eli does well, instead of fitting Eli into a square peg.
So, let's say Eli turns things around and has a near MVP year...what happens?
There is no cap era precedent for the #2 pick in the draft sitting more than 1 season. None. I don't even think there's a precedent for a top 15 pick sitting more than 1 year. Alex Smith just had pro bowl caliber season, he's going to be sent packing by his playoff team in favor of last years 12th pick. That's just how it works.
We're not even getting into the actual likelihood that Eli has a career year with this roster next season. This is a longshot, fairy tale scenario that a lot of fans are unrealistically playing out on this board. If they take a QB at #2, Eli is not going to see the end of his deal. Probably our week 1 starter next year, but the business nature of the NFL puts him on the clock.
and have a chance with a team close to a SB, like his brother did. Not happening here with his age and fading skills. Seems like smart guys in the NFL teams can work out something as they did with his brother.
I'm guessing but the last thing the Giants FO wants is a bad divorce from Eli. They arrange a nice little payday for not making waves and keep everything in the family. IMV
and have a chance with a team close to a SB, like his brother did. Not happening here with his age and fading skills. Seems like smart guys in the NFL teams can work out something as they did with his brother.
the part I forgot is the promotional stuff he and his brother are involved in. That sweetens the deal in another market.
Of course Eli wants to keep his contract intact. But how in the world does waiving his no-trade clause advance that goal?
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
Is it really that complicated? If he forces the Giants' hand by not waiving his NTC, he could end up as a FA making less than $33MM over the next two years. That's not a desirable outcome - and it's not a coincidence that Eli is 2nd in NFL history in terms of career earnings, trailing only his brother. The Mannings do not historically leave money on the table. Allowing the Giants the opportunity to trade him keeps his current contract intact. That is the simplest part of the equation.
Additionally, as I mentioned above, while it may not be likely, it's also possible that Eli would be willing to modify the due date of his roster bonus to allow for more time for a trade to be completed (with him being involved in the process), particularly if he was concerned about what the market may bear for his services.
To say you have "never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause" is simply being willfully obtuse and coming from what is probably a desire to see Eli return to the Giants next year.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Giants will trade Eli; I'm not suggesting that they should trade Eli; I'm suggesting that they potentially can trade Eli, and that he potentially would have 33 million reasons to consent to it.
RE: I love how because the Giants have a #2 pick Â
So, let's say Eli turns things around and has a near MVP year...what happens?
I'd say that's a nice problem to have! If the Giants draft a QB, they have him under control for 4 years. If Eli has a very good year next year, they still have 3 years to figure it out. I don't think even Eli's most strident supporters believe he will still be a starting-level QB in 2021.
Of course Eli wants to keep his contract intact. But how in the world does waiving his no-trade clause advance that goal?
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
Is it really that complicated? If he forces the Giants' hand by not waiving his NTC, he could end up as a FA making less than $33MM over the next two years. That's not a desirable outcome - and it's not a coincidence that Eli is 2nd in NFL history in terms of career earnings, trailing only his brother. The Mannings do not historically leave money on the table. Allowing the Giants the opportunity to trade him keeps his current contract intact. That is the simplest part of the equation.
Additionally, as I mentioned above, while it may not be likely, it's also possible that Eli would be willing to modify the due date of his roster bonus to allow for more time for a trade to be completed (with him being involved in the process), particularly if he was concerned about what the market may bear for his services.
To say you have "never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause" is simply being willfully obtuse and coming from what is probably a desire to see Eli return to the Giants next year.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Giants will trade Eli; I'm not suggesting that they should trade Eli; I'm suggesting that they potentially can trade Eli, and that he potentially would have 33 million reasons to consent to it.
I actually prefer Manning move on. But I don't understand your point about his contract. Either a team is willing to sign him for his contract (as you suggest they would in a trade) or they won't. If they are, why wouldn't Manning get that on the open market? And if they aren't, then how does the trade work?
Eli knows that if he plays poorly to start the season or the Giants play poorly and are out of contention early he will be holding a clipboard sooner rather than later. Does he want to do that? I think that is a no. I think after all the dust settles, if the Giants take a QB at 2 he asks out. He knows the NY media. He understands after every bad game reporters are going to be at his locker asking him if he is worried about losing his job. They will be asking the coach..When do you start the new guy? If he plays great and the Giants are good he will be fine. Will he want to gamble on that being the case? I think he asks them to try to trade him to a select few teams or give him his release. The Mannings will send out feelers, he will know where he is possibly wanted.
Of course Eli wants to keep his contract intact. But how in the world does waiving his no-trade clause advance that goal?
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
Is it really that complicated? If he forces the Giants' hand by not waiving his NTC, he could end up as a FA making less than $33MM over the next two years. That's not a desirable outcome - and it's not a coincidence that Eli is 2nd in NFL history in terms of career earnings, trailing only his brother. The Mannings do not historically leave money on the table. Allowing the Giants the opportunity to trade him keeps his current contract intact. That is the simplest part of the equation.
Additionally, as I mentioned above, while it may not be likely, it's also possible that Eli would be willing to modify the due date of his roster bonus to allow for more time for a trade to be completed (with him being involved in the process), particularly if he was concerned about what the market may bear for his services.
To say you have "never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause" is simply being willfully obtuse and coming from what is probably a desire to see Eli return to the Giants next year.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Giants will trade Eli; I'm not suggesting that they should trade Eli; I'm suggesting that they potentially can trade Eli, and that he potentially would have 33 million reasons to consent to it.
I actually prefer Manning move on. But I don't understand your point about his contract. Either a team is willing to sign him for his contract (as you suggest they would in a trade) or they won't. If they are, why wouldn't Manning get that on the open market? And if they aren't, then how does the trade work?
You are the one being obtuse my friend.
Because his contract is much more favorable in trade than as a free agent since his signing bonus is fully absorbed by the Giants. His roster bonus would either transfer or not (depending on the timing of the trade), but it would essentially be either a 1 year, $16.5MM (or $11.5MM, depending on the status of the roster bonus and who assumes it), with no negative cap hit to the team that acquires Eli, and they'd have what amounts to a second-year option on the deal, at $17.5MM, with only the $5MM roster bonus for 2019 guaranteed if they chose to keep him, and no dead money at all in 2019 if they chose not to.
Conversely, if a team signed him as a free agent, it would likely include a signing bonus and additional guaranteed money which could leave a residual cap impact in 2019 if he performs poorly or gets injured, both of which are unfortunate risks due to his age (which is also why he may get less overall on the open market). Having Eli on a contract that carries no amortization of guaranteed money is a benefit to the team that acquires him.
On top of that, completing a trade ensures the acquiring team that they're getting their target, versus negotiating against an open market in free agency. For the other team, much like for Eli, the benefit here would be rooted in risk aversion.
Again, I'm not saying this is likely, just that it's possible and that benefits do exist for all parties involved should they choose to explore that option.
Eli knows that if he plays poorly to start the season or the Giants play poorly and are out of contention early he will be holding a clipboard sooner rather than later. Does he want to do that? I think that is a no. I think after all the dust settles, if the Giants take a QB at 2 he asks out. He knows the NY media. He understands after every bad game reporters are going to be at his locker asking him if he is worried about losing his job. They will be asking the coach..When do you start the new guy? If he plays great and the Giants are good he will be fine. Will he want to gamble on that being the case? I think he asks them to try to trade him to a select few teams or give him his release. The Mannings will send out feelers, he will know where he is possibly wanted.
Some excellent points here....he would be "rolling the dice" for sure on things breaking his way.
I don't know the ins and out of the cap and its impact, but for the sake of argument I'll concede that there is a benefit to another team to obtain Manning's contract via trade versus free agency. I guess I don't follow how that benefits Manning... I suppose it could mean a team would be willing to pay more money to Manning for that extra benefit you are talking about that I really don't understand ... but first that would have to be priced (which I sure as heck can't do because I don't understand what it is) - but then you have to take back out the COST to the other team of the trade (the draft pick they are losing that they wouldn't lose in FA)
You also talk of the benefit to the other team in being certain of getting their target (i.e. getting Manning). But that is a reason why another team would want to make a trade (something I don't dispute), not an explanation how Manning has incentive to waive his no-trade clause.
Moreover, if Manning were to agree to waive his no-trade clause, it would be on a team by team / deal by deal basis - not an across the board "you can trade me to anyone you want" basis. Why would he ever do that?
At the end of the day, here's the reality. If the Giants try to trade Manning, the way it would work is they would have to work out a 3 way deal acceptable to the Giants, Manning and the new team. If the new team and Manning reach agreement on what they are willing to pay and Manning is willing to accept - what incentive do either the new team or Manning have to give the Giants a cut of any kind?
The only "leverage" the Giants have at that point is "Well, then we are going to pay you your roster bonus and force you to sit the bench for us out of spite." And that's just stupid.
Now, maybe if there is some benefit to the new team to obtain Manning's contract via trade - that also benefits Manning (in ways I just don't understand), then maybe that can be "priced" in terms of a future draft pick ... of what? A 7th rounder in 2025? It all seems totally far fetched to me (and, again, I admit I can't follow the contract benefits you describe nor how that gets "priced" ... are you able to price them for us so I and others can understand?)
If a team like Jacksonville comes calling, you really think he enforces that no-trade clause?
The only thing appealing about the Giants from Mannings perspective are continuity and the legacy associated with playing for 1 team. I see a few situations from a football and business standpoint that make much more sense to him...especially if they sink a large resource into acquiring his replacement.
Below is Eli's contract info. It is fairly straight forward, but for some reason there are some posters who can't figure it out. I'm not insinuating that it is you, but in an earlier thread there was a poster (GiantsLifer) who advocated that Eli take a pay cut of $7-10M. When I clarified his position that he wants Eli to play for as little as $500K and as much as $3M, he chose to couch his stance that it was his opinion. Well, it is hard to take serious any poster who can't comprehend market conditions for starting QBs. Here is one certainty, Eli Manning will not play QB for $3M/yr.
One aspect that people seem to forget/ignore is the value of the cap hit. If Eli is traded, we get to eat $12.4M in dead cap. That is a hefty chunk taken out of the cap when we will be trying to rebuild an OL and fill other holes. If he plays the season, his cap hit is $22.2M (salary, roster/workout bonuses, and amortized signing bonus). What level of compensation is it worth to the Giants to eat $12.4M in cap space? If he is released, he can be designated a 6/1 cut. The 6/1 designation allows the team to spread the cap hit over two years. The only hangup with the 6/1 designation is that the full cap hit must be allocated until 6/1 when it is reduced to half the amount. Eli's Contract - ( New Window )
with ELI. He wants to finish as a Giant and he probably will . MO
You're probably right. I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that the two highest paid players in NFL history (in terms of career earnings) are Peyton and Eli Manning.
There's dead money but it's still a net savings on the cap. More importantly, he's off the books completely in 2019 when this roster is much more likely to contend. There are financial benefits to moving on, regardless of the dead money this year.
Eli knows that if he plays poorly to start the season or the Giants play poorly and are out of contention early he will be holding a clipboard sooner rather than later. Does he want to do that? I think that is a no. I think after all the dust settles, if the Giants take a QB at 2 he asks out. He knows the NY media. He understands after every bad game reporters are going to be at his locker asking him if he is worried about losing his job. They will be asking the coach..When do you start the new guy? If he plays great and the Giants are good he will be fine. Will he want to gamble on that being the case? I think he asks them to try to trade him to a select few teams or give him his release. The Mannings will send out feelers, he will know where he is possibly wanted.
Some excellent points here....he would be "rolling the dice" for sure on things breaking his way.
I can understand him wanting to finish his career here. He will need a lot of resolve. The new media is all about clicks and hits. They are going to be on this story starting....NOW! Imagine if the new QB outplays him in the preseason? Put up with training camp and all the workouts for that? It all has to break perfectly for it to be good for him. There are SO many ways it can break badly and make it more of a shitshow than it was this season. He was almost crying in front of his locker on camera.
The benefits of certainty in the event of a trade to Eli and the acquiring team are the same, but inconsistent, if that makes any sense. Both achieve certainty and mitigate/minimize risk.
On the open market, Eli could potentially make less money than his current contract carries in new money for 2018 and 2019. That's a risk that he can mitigate by being open to the possibility of a trade (2019's new money would still be at risk, but that's not a new risk, per se - it exists even if he stays with the Giants). Of course, that same risk comes with upside - he also could make more in new money on the open market than his current contract calls for.
In free agency, the acquiring team could end up paying Eli more than his current contract calls for, or miss out on him altogether, if there are multiple suitors bidding for his services. Of course, same as above, that risk comes with upside - if the market is relatively quiet for Eli, they could score a bargain in free agency.
Obviously, the specific risks and upside for each of the parties (Eli and the potential acquiring team) are at odds with each other, however, the path to mitigating those risks can be brought into concert because the possibility of a trade simultaneously offsets the risk for both sides at the cost of the upside. It's not quite a win/win, but provides certainty. NFL teams are, by nature, risk averse (typically speaking). That's the benefit.
As I've said repeatedly, it's hardly a likely scenario, but I just wanted to detail how it doesn't have to be considered as impossible (as an absolute) as you had painted it.
Below is Eli's contract info. It is fairly straight forward, but for some reason there are some posters who can't figure it out. I'm not insinuating that it is you, but in an earlier thread there was a poster (GiantsLifer) who advocated that Eli take a pay cut of $7-10M. When I clarified his position that he wants Eli to play for as little as $500K and as much as $3M, he chose to couch his stance that it was his opinion. Well, it is hard to take serious any poster who can't comprehend market conditions for starting QBs. Here is one certainty, Eli Manning will not play QB for $3M/yr.
One aspect that people seem to forget/ignore is the value of the cap hit. If Eli is traded, we get to eat $12.4M in dead cap. That is a hefty chunk taken out of the cap when we will be trying to rebuild an OL and fill other holes. If he plays the season, his cap hit is $22.2M (salary, roster/workout bonuses, and amortized signing bonus). What level of compensation is it worth to the Giants to eat $12.4M in cap space? If he is released, he can be designated a 6/1 cut. The 6/1 designation allows the team to spread the cap hit over two years. The only hangup with the 6/1 designation is that the full cap hit must be allocated until 6/1 when it is reduced to half the amount. Eli's Contract - ( New Window )
DD - I think I may have asked you this before, but I don't remember the answer or if you even knew it. With a 6/1 release, would the Giants still be on the hook for this year's roster bonus even if they designated him as a 6/1 release prior to the 3/16 bonus date?
OTC seems to suggest that they would not, but would be inconsistent with his full cap hit staying on the books until 6/1. If they do end up having to pay the bonus as a function of the 6/1 designation, it basically nullifies the benefit - the Giants would pick up an additional $1.2MM in cap room this year (compared to releasing/trading Eli prior to 3/16), but would have to eat $6.2MM in dead money next year, and would have to tie up that cap room for the first 2.5 months of free agency.
There's dead money but it's still a net savings on the cap. More importantly, he's off the books completely in 2019 when this roster is much more likely to contend. There are financial benefits to moving on, regardless of the dead money this year.
I'm aware of the net savings. I'm just supplying some overlooked information to others including baadbill who asked about particulars regarding the contract.
People need to remove emotion from the situation and look at it objectively. (I'm guilty of it.) What is the value to keeping Eli as a mentor? Is it worth a $22M cap hit? Is a 3rd/4th round pick worth eating $12.4M dead cap hit? Is a PR spin of giving Eli an opportunity with another team while designating him as a 6/1 cut worth a $6.2M cap hit for '18/'19?
Just a few objective questions that should also be in the discussion.
I'm an advocate of choosing a lane and that lane being a full rebuild, so I'm comfortable punting next season for the longterm health of the franchise. So the cold and analytical answer is obvious to me, no matter what the upfront sacrifices are. However, I do understand that the situation is a little more nuanced as well.
...If he is released, he can be designated a 6/1 cut. The 6/1 designation allows the team to spread the cap hit over two years. The only hangup with the 6/1 designation is that the full cap hit must be allocated until 6/1 when it is reduced to half the amount.
DD - I think I may have asked you this before, but I don't remember the answer or if you even knew it. With a 6/1 release, would the Giants still be on the hook for this year's roster bonus even if they designated him as a 6/1 release prior to the 3/16 bonus date?
OTC seems to suggest that they would not, but would be inconsistent with his full cap hit staying on the books until 6/1. If they do end up having to pay the bonus as a function of the 6/1 designation, it basically nullifies the benefit - the Giants would pick up an additional $1.2MM in cap room this year (compared to releasing/trading Eli prior to 3/16), but would have to eat $6.2MM in dead money next year, and would have to tie up that cap room for the first 2.5 months of free agency. Link - ( New Window )
I think I get the gist of what you are asking. Scenario is Eli is released before 3/16 when his $5M is roster bonus is due? Before a roster bonus, his dead cap is $12.4M. As a 6/1 designation, the entire dead cap hit has to be accounted for from the time he is released until 6/1. At which time, the dead cap hit is reduced by half ($6.2M) for 2018 and the remaining half charged to 2019. The roster bonus has no effect on the cap hit if the transaction occurs before 3/16.
If in some crazy scenario where the Giants choose to pay the roster bonus and workout bonus (insurance for the draft and OTAs) and then release Eli with a 6/1 designation, then the full dead cap hit has to be accounted for in addition to whatever bonus is paid. ($12.4M + $5M + $250K) Upon 6/1, the dead cap hit is only reduced by $6.2M. Roster and workout bonuses must be accounted for in the year they are paid. They are a sunk cost.
If a team like Jacksonville comes calling, you really think he enforces that no-trade clause?
The only thing appealing about the Giants from Mannings perspective are continuity and the legacy associated with playing for 1 team. I see a few situations from a football and business standpoint that make much more sense to him...especially if they sink a large resource into acquiring his replacement.
Aces - I think you misunderstand my point. If the Giants are willing to trade Manning, that almost certainly means they are going to release him if they can't trade him. Which for Manning means he gets to make his own deal. So, if Jacksonville comes calling, as you put it, then why would Manning agree to a trade (or Jacksonville be willing to trade) if both Manning and Jacksonville know they are a match - and both know that the Giants have no choice but to release Manning (unless you believe the Giants would, in spite, pay Manning his roster bonus and keep him on their roster out of spite ... which is silly)
Thank you for being patient with me. I'm still not sure I understand how Manning has any incentive to agree to waive his no-trade clause.
It seems to me that if there is a team willing to pay Manning his contract in a trade, then why wouldn't they be willing to sign Manning as a FA for the same price? And if the Giants approach Manning about a trade, isn't it then immediately clear that the Giants are not going to pay him his roster bonus if they can't trade him? So, if a team is interested in Manning - and Manning is interested in the team - and they both know it - what incentive do either of them have to do anything other than wait the Giants to release Manning?
DD - I assume the savings to the Giants are the same in dead cap savings whether they release Manning or trade him (i.e. the savings is from the fact he's not on their roster, not why, correct?)
Thank you for being patient with me. I'm still not sure I understand how Manning has any incentive to agree to waive his no-trade clause.
It seems to me that if there is a team willing to pay Manning his contract in a trade, then why wouldn't they be willing to sign Manning as a FA for the same price? And if the Giants approach Manning about a trade, isn't it then immediately clear that the Giants are not going to pay him his roster bonus if they can't trade him? So, if a team is interested in Manning - and Manning is interested in the team - and they both know it - what incentive do either of them have to do anything other than wait the Giants to release Manning?
DD - I assume the savings to the Giants are the same in dead cap savings whether they release Manning or trade him (i.e. the savings is from the fact he's not on their roster, not why, correct?)
Cap Savings -
The savings are the same regardless of the "why". His salary/bonuses are no longer paid and no longer need to be accounted for. This is the cap savings. But there is still the dead cap hit of the remaining amortized signing bonus. If Eli is released or traded, it is the same dead cap hit. Only if Eli is designated a 6/1 cut will there be a cap savings of half the full dead cap hit (spread out over 2 years). IMO, if Eli is released, it will be with the 6/1 designation. The only reason to not take advantage of the cap savings afforded by the 6/1 designation is if the Giants are willing to take their medicine at once and be done with it.
If a team like Jacksonville comes calling, you really think he enforces that no-trade clause?
The only thing appealing about the Giants from Mannings perspective are continuity and the legacy associated with playing for 1 team. I see a few situations from a football and business standpoint that make much more sense to him...especially if they sink a large resource into acquiring his replacement.
Aces - I think you misunderstand my point. If the Giants are willing to trade Manning, that almost certainly means they are going to release him if they can't trade him. Which for Manning means he gets to make his own deal. So, if Jacksonville comes calling, as you put it, then why would Manning agree to a trade (or Jacksonville be willing to trade) if both Manning and Jacksonville know they are a match - and both know that the Giants have no choice but to release Manning (unless you believe the Giants would, in spite, pay Manning his roster bonus and keep him on their roster out of spite ... which is silly)
I think it's a false assumption that he'll be cut if not traded. We're not talking about a late throw in pick, I'm assuming a Day 2 pick is on the table. While not my preference, the idea of keeping Manning as a mentor for a year makes a lot of sense. Hell, I think it's widely assumed as the most likely scenario heading into next season.
What I do know is what I hope for ... I hope the Giants release Â
Manning... that as a FA he finds himself a new home and plays well... that he wins another ring and that the Giants win one too before he retires...
My primary reason is selfish. As a Giants fan, I want to put all the Manning mania behind me and enjoy a new GM/HC/QB.
If Manning stays, there will be a never ending, constant stream of talk about his role... was it the right decision to keep him... should he be the starter... shouldn't the rookie play... will he be back for 2019... blah blah blah. I've had enough. I don't want to hear it anymore.
I think many on this thread need to start getting used Â
Archie thought SD's offensive line sucked and he didn't want Eli taking a beating there.
I think Eli's decision will be influenced by who they pick #1 and if the team does anything significant to fix the sorry O-line. If he doesn't see hope for the offense (and especially if they pick a QB at the top), he may very well be persuaded to waive the no-trade clause.
He has to know that if the team doesn't fix the offense HE will blamed.
Eli is thinking with his heart, but the "Old Man" (Archie) will be very influential, AGAIN in Eli's decision.
show he has a few years left in the right situation. Think he and Shurmur will bond immediately and he will get that shot. Both lifelong football guys whose histories go back generations. Know the game and what it takes to win. Think Management sees it the same way just like the fans and the players.
make him put the money where his mouth is, and make him rework his contract, so he isn't costing the team $20 mil a season and allows DG some flexibility to go get from FA lineman.
You'll find out just how much he wants to stay a Giant for life.
FU dude. Eli is best QB and one of the best people we have ever had on this team.
Eli has a very unfriendly cap # this year. There is virtually no benefit to the team cutting him this year, and without some assurance of being the starting QB he is not likely to take a pay cut either. So in this case he can just refuse the idea to renegotiate. After last year's handling if I were him I would refuse.
Best case scenario is DG fixes the OL and adds some tall WRs and we're good to go. Second best case if Eli decides he really wants to play for a contender and will redo his contract terms facilitating a trade for cap relief and a pick. That is unlikely until a lot more chips fall as the league year starts - unless Eli right now is saying - get me to Denver if they are interested in me.
Why on earth would Manning waive his no-trade clause? The Giants have zero leverage. If Manning is not going to be a NYG, it is in Manning’s best interest to be released, not traded. He has zero incentive to waive his no-trade clause. The only way a trade is possible is if the Giants pay his $5 million on March 5th. But that would be crazy to do if they have decided to move on from Manning. And Manning knows that.
Quote:
Eli has the court of public opinion in his favor. He's the greatest giant many fans have ever seen and they already botched his handling.
Eli has a very unfriendly cap # this year. There is virtually no benefit to the team cutting him this year, and without some assurance of being the starting QB he is not likely to take a pay cut either. So in this case he can just refuse the idea to renegotiate. After last year's handling if I were him I would refuse.
Best case scenario is DG fixes the OL and adds some tall WRs and we're good to go. Second best case if Eli decides he really wants to play for a contender and will redo his contract terms facilitating a trade for cap relief and a pick. That is unlikely until a lot more chips fall as the league year starts - unless Eli right now is saying - get me to Denver if they are interested in me.
Why on earth would Manning waive his no-trade clause? The Giants have zero leverage. If Manning is not going to be a NYG, it is in Manning’s best interest to be released, not traded. He has zero incentive to waive his no-trade clause. The only way a trade is possible is if the Giants pay his $5 million on March 5th. But that would be crazy to do if they have decided to move on from Manning. And Manning knows that.
That's not necessarily true. The incentive to Eli is to keep his current contract intact. He may or may not do better than 2 years, $33MM on the open market - it's hardly a slam dunk either way, especially because of his age.
And FWIW, you have the date of the bonus wrong - it's due on 3/16. And going back to my original point, he could agree to modify that if he and his agent felt as though his current contract is worth more than a FA contract would be.
I'm not suggesting that what I'm outlining is likely; I'm just pointing out that it's not nearly as certain as you claim.
You'll find out just how much he wants to stay a Giant for life.
He's already in his decreasing years before retirement. It would be incredibly stupid to spread Elis cap hit beyond the two years left
Quote:
a contract in an updated contract and spread a signing bonus out throughout the years on the contract. Giving Eli some money now, but not making him a prime earner in his decreasing years before retirement.
He's already in his decreasing years before retirement. It would be incredibly stupid to spread Elis cap hit beyond the two years left
Agreed. I'm just saying its an option.
Couple points: Giants are hiring solid NFL people who will build and run/coach the team correctly, and Eli probably is being told this from others. Almost like getting back to basics which is now long over due.
With that, he has a chance to add to his stats, finish up with one franchise, and also redeem himself a bit by winning games and playing well to finish up his career. Does it mean a Super Bowl, probably not.......but winning a Super Bowl is tough even if you're on a very good team.
I still think we take a QB, and Eli would be a great mentor and at the same time, be the competitor he is to retain his starting slot for a couple years, eventually turning over the reigns in his always professional way.
That's what I'm hoping for anyway lol
From a contractual and salary cap standpoint, Eli isn't playing up to it. He's currently the 10th highest paid QB and we can all agree he isn't a top 10 QB. Releasing him creates 12 million in dead money but frees up 10 million this year and his 23 million cap hit for 2019 is completely off the books. And thats whats important here. We have two big contracts we're ready to dish out for Beckham and Collins. They'll both be paid amongst the highest at their position. Beckham is looking at nearly 20 million a year. The goal should be to get Eli off the books and to front load Beckhams contract while we have the young QB on his rookie deal. The #2 picks contract will be roughly 30 million with a first year cap hit of around 6 million.
From Eli's perspective, waiving the no-trade isn't a bad thing as long as he's involved. He's not getting 2-34 from anyone else. Teams like Buffalo, Jacksonville, Denver, Arizona all should be appealing to him whether he's traded or released.
Eli is smart, I'm sure he realizes the situation and sees that NYG is in position to get the future. His time here is up.
If Rosen is drafted he'll be ready to play at some point next year and it would be awkward to have Eli still on the team. So in that scenario, I think Eli would be cut/traded and a vet who could potentially start (if Rosen wasn't ready game 1) would be signed.
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
ooooohh
Newsflash...Eli has a competent GM and Head Coach coming in. Draft a good RB (does not have to be Barkley, you could get a very good one 2nd or 3rd round), fix the Offensive line with picks and FA (like the Vikings), get people on D and OBJ back healthy, and all of a sudden we have the 2016 team with a REAL offense that takes advantage of what Eli does well, instead of fitting Eli into a square peg.
So, let's say Eli turns things around and has a near MVP year...what happens?
There is no cap era precedent for the #2 pick in the draft sitting more than 1 season. None. I don't even think there's a precedent for a top 15 pick sitting more than 1 year. Alex Smith just had pro bowl caliber season, he's going to be sent packing by his playoff team in favor of last years 12th pick. That's just how it works.
We're not even getting into the actual likelihood that Eli has a career year with this roster next season. This is a longshot, fairy tale scenario that a lot of fans are unrealistically playing out on this board. If they take a QB at #2, Eli is not going to see the end of his deal. Probably our week 1 starter next year, but the business nature of the NFL puts him on the clock.
the part I forgot is the promotional stuff he and his brother are involved in. That sweetens the deal in another market.
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
Is it really that complicated? If he forces the Giants' hand by not waiving his NTC, he could end up as a FA making less than $33MM over the next two years. That's not a desirable outcome - and it's not a coincidence that Eli is 2nd in NFL history in terms of career earnings, trailing only his brother. The Mannings do not historically leave money on the table. Allowing the Giants the opportunity to trade him keeps his current contract intact. That is the simplest part of the equation.
Additionally, as I mentioned above, while it may not be likely, it's also possible that Eli would be willing to modify the due date of his roster bonus to allow for more time for a trade to be completed (with him being involved in the process), particularly if he was concerned about what the market may bear for his services.
To say you have "never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause" is simply being willfully obtuse and coming from what is probably a desire to see Eli return to the Giants next year.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Giants will trade Eli; I'm not suggesting that they should trade Eli; I'm suggesting that they potentially can trade Eli, and that he potentially would have 33 million reasons to consent to it.
So, let's say Eli turns things around and has a near MVP year...what happens?
I'd say that's a nice problem to have! If the Giants draft a QB, they have him under control for 4 years. If Eli has a very good year next year, they still have 3 years to figure it out. I don't think even Eli's most strident supporters believe he will still be a starting-level QB in 2021.
Quote:
Of course Eli wants to keep his contract intact. But how in the world does waiving his no-trade clause advance that goal?
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
Is it really that complicated? If he forces the Giants' hand by not waiving his NTC, he could end up as a FA making less than $33MM over the next two years. That's not a desirable outcome - and it's not a coincidence that Eli is 2nd in NFL history in terms of career earnings, trailing only his brother. The Mannings do not historically leave money on the table. Allowing the Giants the opportunity to trade him keeps his current contract intact. That is the simplest part of the equation.
Additionally, as I mentioned above, while it may not be likely, it's also possible that Eli would be willing to modify the due date of his roster bonus to allow for more time for a trade to be completed (with him being involved in the process), particularly if he was concerned about what the market may bear for his services.
To say you have "never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause" is simply being willfully obtuse and coming from what is probably a desire to see Eli return to the Giants next year.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Giants will trade Eli; I'm not suggesting that they should trade Eli; I'm suggesting that they potentially can trade Eli, and that he potentially would have 33 million reasons to consent to it.
I actually prefer Manning move on. But I don't understand your point about his contract. Either a team is willing to sign him for his contract (as you suggest they would in a trade) or they won't. If they are, why wouldn't Manning get that on the open market? And if they aren't, then how does the trade work?
You are the one being obtuse my friend.
Quote:
In comment 13794158 baadbill said:
Quote:
Of course Eli wants to keep his contract intact. But how in the world does waiving his no-trade clause advance that goal?
Manning simply has zero incentive to waive his no trade clause. Either the Giants want him on their roster in 2019 - in which event they pay him the $5 million roster bonus - or they don't (in which event they won't pay the roster bonus).
But there is simply no incentive for Manning to waive his no-trade clause before the March deadline. And it is very much black and white and clear cut. There is zero incentive for him to do so that I can think of (and I've never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause).
And I don't really care ... it's just that whenever I hear someone here talk about the Giants trading Manning and what "value" the Giants can get ... it's as though they still believe in Santa Claus.
Is it really that complicated? If he forces the Giants' hand by not waiving his NTC, he could end up as a FA making less than $33MM over the next two years. That's not a desirable outcome - and it's not a coincidence that Eli is 2nd in NFL history in terms of career earnings, trailing only his brother. The Mannings do not historically leave money on the table. Allowing the Giants the opportunity to trade him keeps his current contract intact. That is the simplest part of the equation.
Additionally, as I mentioned above, while it may not be likely, it's also possible that Eli would be willing to modify the due date of his roster bonus to allow for more time for a trade to be completed (with him being involved in the process), particularly if he was concerned about what the market may bear for his services.
To say you have "never heard one person come up with a likely scenario that makes sense for both the Giants and Manning where he would have incentive to waive his no trade clause" is simply being willfully obtuse and coming from what is probably a desire to see Eli return to the Giants next year.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Giants will trade Eli; I'm not suggesting that they should trade Eli; I'm suggesting that they potentially can trade Eli, and that he potentially would have 33 million reasons to consent to it.
I actually prefer Manning move on. But I don't understand your point about his contract. Either a team is willing to sign him for his contract (as you suggest they would in a trade) or they won't. If they are, why wouldn't Manning get that on the open market? And if they aren't, then how does the trade work?
You are the one being obtuse my friend.
Because his contract is much more favorable in trade than as a free agent since his signing bonus is fully absorbed by the Giants. His roster bonus would either transfer or not (depending on the timing of the trade), but it would essentially be either a 1 year, $16.5MM (or $11.5MM, depending on the status of the roster bonus and who assumes it), with no negative cap hit to the team that acquires Eli, and they'd have what amounts to a second-year option on the deal, at $17.5MM, with only the $5MM roster bonus for 2019 guaranteed if they chose to keep him, and no dead money at all in 2019 if they chose not to.
Conversely, if a team signed him as a free agent, it would likely include a signing bonus and additional guaranteed money which could leave a residual cap impact in 2019 if he performs poorly or gets injured, both of which are unfortunate risks due to his age (which is also why he may get less overall on the open market). Having Eli on a contract that carries no amortization of guaranteed money is a benefit to the team that acquires him.
On top of that, completing a trade ensures the acquiring team that they're getting their target, versus negotiating against an open market in free agency. For the other team, much like for Eli, the benefit here would be rooted in risk aversion.
Again, I'm not saying this is likely, just that it's possible and that benefits do exist for all parties involved should they choose to explore that option.
Some excellent points here....he would be "rolling the dice" for sure on things breaking his way.
You also talk of the benefit to the other team in being certain of getting their target (i.e. getting Manning). But that is a reason why another team would want to make a trade (something I don't dispute), not an explanation how Manning has incentive to waive his no-trade clause.
Moreover, if Manning were to agree to waive his no-trade clause, it would be on a team by team / deal by deal basis - not an across the board "you can trade me to anyone you want" basis. Why would he ever do that?
At the end of the day, here's the reality. If the Giants try to trade Manning, the way it would work is they would have to work out a 3 way deal acceptable to the Giants, Manning and the new team. If the new team and Manning reach agreement on what they are willing to pay and Manning is willing to accept - what incentive do either the new team or Manning have to give the Giants a cut of any kind?
The only "leverage" the Giants have at that point is "Well, then we are going to pay you your roster bonus and force you to sit the bench for us out of spite." And that's just stupid.
Now, maybe if there is some benefit to the new team to obtain Manning's contract via trade - that also benefits Manning (in ways I just don't understand), then maybe that can be "priced" in terms of a future draft pick ... of what? A 7th rounder in 2025? It all seems totally far fetched to me (and, again, I admit I can't follow the contract benefits you describe nor how that gets "priced" ... are you able to price them for us so I and others can understand?)
The only thing appealing about the Giants from Mannings perspective are continuity and the legacy associated with playing for 1 team. I see a few situations from a football and business standpoint that make much more sense to him...especially if they sink a large resource into acquiring his replacement.
One aspect that people seem to forget/ignore is the value of the cap hit. If Eli is traded, we get to eat $12.4M in dead cap. That is a hefty chunk taken out of the cap when we will be trying to rebuild an OL and fill other holes. If he plays the season, his cap hit is $22.2M (salary, roster/workout bonuses, and amortized signing bonus). What level of compensation is it worth to the Giants to eat $12.4M in cap space? If he is released, he can be designated a 6/1 cut. The 6/1 designation allows the team to spread the cap hit over two years. The only hangup with the 6/1 designation is that the full cap hit must be allocated until 6/1 when it is reduced to half the amount.
Eli's Contract - ( New Window )
You're probably right. I'm sure it's a complete coincidence that the two highest paid players in NFL history (in terms of career earnings) are Peyton and Eli Manning.
Quote:
Eli knows that if he plays poorly to start the season or the Giants play poorly and are out of contention early he will be holding a clipboard sooner rather than later. Does he want to do that? I think that is a no. I think after all the dust settles, if the Giants take a QB at 2 he asks out. He knows the NY media. He understands after every bad game reporters are going to be at his locker asking him if he is worried about losing his job. They will be asking the coach..When do you start the new guy? If he plays great and the Giants are good he will be fine. Will he want to gamble on that being the case? I think he asks them to try to trade him to a select few teams or give him his release. The Mannings will send out feelers, he will know where he is possibly wanted.
Some excellent points here....he would be "rolling the dice" for sure on things breaking his way.
On the open market, Eli could potentially make less money than his current contract carries in new money for 2018 and 2019. That's a risk that he can mitigate by being open to the possibility of a trade (2019's new money would still be at risk, but that's not a new risk, per se - it exists even if he stays with the Giants). Of course, that same risk comes with upside - he also could make more in new money on the open market than his current contract calls for.
In free agency, the acquiring team could end up paying Eli more than his current contract calls for, or miss out on him altogether, if there are multiple suitors bidding for his services. Of course, same as above, that risk comes with upside - if the market is relatively quiet for Eli, they could score a bargain in free agency.
Obviously, the specific risks and upside for each of the parties (Eli and the potential acquiring team) are at odds with each other, however, the path to mitigating those risks can be brought into concert because the possibility of a trade simultaneously offsets the risk for both sides at the cost of the upside. It's not quite a win/win, but provides certainty. NFL teams are, by nature, risk averse (typically speaking). That's the benefit.
As I've said repeatedly, it's hardly a likely scenario, but I just wanted to detail how it doesn't have to be considered as impossible (as an absolute) as you had painted it.
One aspect that people seem to forget/ignore is the value of the cap hit. If Eli is traded, we get to eat $12.4M in dead cap. That is a hefty chunk taken out of the cap when we will be trying to rebuild an OL and fill other holes. If he plays the season, his cap hit is $22.2M (salary, roster/workout bonuses, and amortized signing bonus). What level of compensation is it worth to the Giants to eat $12.4M in cap space? If he is released, he can be designated a 6/1 cut. The 6/1 designation allows the team to spread the cap hit over two years. The only hangup with the 6/1 designation is that the full cap hit must be allocated until 6/1 when it is reduced to half the amount. Eli's Contract - ( New Window )
DD - I think I may have asked you this before, but I don't remember the answer or if you even knew it. With a 6/1 release, would the Giants still be on the hook for this year's roster bonus even if they designated him as a 6/1 release prior to the 3/16 bonus date?
OTC seems to suggest that they would not, but would be inconsistent with his full cap hit staying on the books until 6/1. If they do end up having to pay the bonus as a function of the 6/1 designation, it basically nullifies the benefit - the Giants would pick up an additional $1.2MM in cap room this year (compared to releasing/trading Eli prior to 3/16), but would have to eat $6.2MM in dead money next year, and would have to tie up that cap room for the first 2.5 months of free agency.
Link - ( New Window )
I'm aware of the net savings. I'm just supplying some overlooked information to others including baadbill who asked about particulars regarding the contract.
People need to remove emotion from the situation and look at it objectively. (I'm guilty of it.) What is the value to keeping Eli as a mentor? Is it worth a $22M cap hit? Is a 3rd/4th round pick worth eating $12.4M dead cap hit? Is a PR spin of giving Eli an opportunity with another team while designating him as a 6/1 cut worth a $6.2M cap hit for '18/'19?
Just a few objective questions that should also be in the discussion.
...If he is released, he can be designated a 6/1 cut. The 6/1 designation allows the team to spread the cap hit over two years. The only hangup with the 6/1 designation is that the full cap hit must be allocated until 6/1 when it is reduced to half the amount.
DD - I think I may have asked you this before, but I don't remember the answer or if you even knew it. With a 6/1 release, would the Giants still be on the hook for this year's roster bonus even if they designated him as a 6/1 release prior to the 3/16 bonus date?
OTC seems to suggest that they would not, but would be inconsistent with his full cap hit staying on the books until 6/1. If they do end up having to pay the bonus as a function of the 6/1 designation, it basically nullifies the benefit - the Giants would pick up an additional $1.2MM in cap room this year (compared to releasing/trading Eli prior to 3/16), but would have to eat $6.2MM in dead money next year, and would have to tie up that cap room for the first 2.5 months of free agency. Link - ( New Window )
I think I get the gist of what you are asking. Scenario is Eli is released before 3/16 when his $5M is roster bonus is due? Before a roster bonus, his dead cap is $12.4M. As a 6/1 designation, the entire dead cap hit has to be accounted for from the time he is released until 6/1. At which time, the dead cap hit is reduced by half ($6.2M) for 2018 and the remaining half charged to 2019. The roster bonus has no effect on the cap hit if the transaction occurs before 3/16.
If in some crazy scenario where the Giants choose to pay the roster bonus and workout bonus (insurance for the draft and OTAs) and then release Eli with a 6/1 designation, then the full dead cap hit has to be accounted for in addition to whatever bonus is paid. ($12.4M + $5M + $250K) Upon 6/1, the dead cap hit is only reduced by $6.2M. Roster and workout bonuses must be accounted for in the year they are paid. They are a sunk cost.
The only thing appealing about the Giants from Mannings perspective are continuity and the legacy associated with playing for 1 team. I see a few situations from a football and business standpoint that make much more sense to him...especially if they sink a large resource into acquiring his replacement.
Aces - I think you misunderstand my point. If the Giants are willing to trade Manning, that almost certainly means they are going to release him if they can't trade him. Which for Manning means he gets to make his own deal. So, if Jacksonville comes calling, as you put it, then why would Manning agree to a trade (or Jacksonville be willing to trade) if both Manning and Jacksonville know they are a match - and both know that the Giants have no choice but to release Manning (unless you believe the Giants would, in spite, pay Manning his roster bonus and keep him on their roster out of spite ... which is silly)
It seems to me that if there is a team willing to pay Manning his contract in a trade, then why wouldn't they be willing to sign Manning as a FA for the same price? And if the Giants approach Manning about a trade, isn't it then immediately clear that the Giants are not going to pay him his roster bonus if they can't trade him? So, if a team is interested in Manning - and Manning is interested in the team - and they both know it - what incentive do either of them have to do anything other than wait the Giants to release Manning?
DD - I assume the savings to the Giants are the same in dead cap savings whether they release Manning or trade him (i.e. the savings is from the fact he's not on their roster, not why, correct?)
It seems to me that if there is a team willing to pay Manning his contract in a trade, then why wouldn't they be willing to sign Manning as a FA for the same price? And if the Giants approach Manning about a trade, isn't it then immediately clear that the Giants are not going to pay him his roster bonus if they can't trade him? So, if a team is interested in Manning - and Manning is interested in the team - and they both know it - what incentive do either of them have to do anything other than wait the Giants to release Manning?
DD - I assume the savings to the Giants are the same in dead cap savings whether they release Manning or trade him (i.e. the savings is from the fact he's not on their roster, not why, correct?)
Cap Savings -
The savings are the same regardless of the "why". His salary/bonuses are no longer paid and no longer need to be accounted for. This is the cap savings. But there is still the dead cap hit of the remaining amortized signing bonus. If Eli is released or traded, it is the same dead cap hit. Only if Eli is designated a 6/1 cut will there be a cap savings of half the full dead cap hit (spread out over 2 years). IMO, if Eli is released, it will be with the 6/1 designation. The only reason to not take advantage of the cap savings afforded by the 6/1 designation is if the Giants are willing to take their medicine at once and be done with it.
Quote:
If a team like Jacksonville comes calling, you really think he enforces that no-trade clause?
The only thing appealing about the Giants from Mannings perspective are continuity and the legacy associated with playing for 1 team. I see a few situations from a football and business standpoint that make much more sense to him...especially if they sink a large resource into acquiring his replacement.
Aces - I think you misunderstand my point. If the Giants are willing to trade Manning, that almost certainly means they are going to release him if they can't trade him. Which for Manning means he gets to make his own deal. So, if Jacksonville comes calling, as you put it, then why would Manning agree to a trade (or Jacksonville be willing to trade) if both Manning and Jacksonville know they are a match - and both know that the Giants have no choice but to release Manning (unless you believe the Giants would, in spite, pay Manning his roster bonus and keep him on their roster out of spite ... which is silly)
I think it's a false assumption that he'll be cut if not traded. We're not talking about a late throw in pick, I'm assuming a Day 2 pick is on the table. While not my preference, the idea of keeping Manning as a mentor for a year makes a lot of sense. Hell, I think it's widely assumed as the most likely scenario heading into next season.
My primary reason is selfish. As a Giants fan, I want to put all the Manning mania behind me and enjoy a new GM/HC/QB.
If Manning stays, there will be a never ending, constant stream of talk about his role... was it the right decision to keep him... should he be the starter... shouldn't the rookie play... will he be back for 2019... blah blah blah. I've had enough. I don't want to hear it anymore.
Archie thought SD's offensive line sucked and he didn't want Eli taking a beating there.
I think Eli's decision will be influenced by who they pick #1 and if the team does anything significant to fix the sorry O-line. If he doesn't see hope for the offense (and especially if they pick a QB at the top), he may very well be persuaded to waive the no-trade clause.
He has to know that if the team doesn't fix the offense HE will blamed.
Eli is thinking with his heart, but the "Old Man" (Archie) will be very influential, AGAIN in Eli's decision.
You'll find out just how much he wants to stay a Giant for life.
Thank you.