I’ll admit… A healthy Peyton, undoubtedly among the best QB’s of all time, combined with the likes of McCoy, Jackson, Maclin, Celek, etc. does sound appealing, but I don’t think John Smallwood really thought this one all the way through.
Some of my favorite lines:
Heck, if Manning is the quarterback, the Eagles might actually find a reason to re-sign diva game-breaking wide receiver DeSean Jackson.
Wait. So… the Eagles wouldn’t have a reason to sign DeSean with Vick as the QB, but they would with Peyton? If anyone can explain that one to me, please help me out.
If 2012 is truly about winning the Super Bowl, the Birds can’t be worried about the possible damage to Vick’s psyche and/or ego if Manning is brought in: Let them compete for the job.
Here’s my interpretation of how that phone call would go from Howie Roseman to Peyton’s agent: “Hey Tom, it’s Howie. (pause)… Yeah, the kids are great. Yours? (pause) Wonderful. So listen Tom… We’re interested in Peyton. We’d like him to come in and compete with Michael Vick for the starting QB job of the Philadelphia Eagles. How’s that sound? (click)… Hello? Tom? You there?”
The Eagles gave Vick a chance to resurrect his career and rebuild his fortune. Asking him to beat somebody out for his job would not be too much. It would probably make him better.
That logic is comical, and it’s not the first time I’ve seen it. Let’s get one thing crystal clear: When the Eagles signed Michael Vick a few years ago, they did so because they thought he could help their football team, period. All the other stuff about helping a troubled man get his feet under him again in society was nice and all, but all of that was secondary. Does Vick owe the Eagles a certain level of gratitude for being the team that went out and took a chance on him, when he was otherwise taboo? Sure. But to expect him to be (for lack of a better way of putting it) your bitch, for the duration of his time in Philly is probably unrealistic.
Sign Manning on faith and wait to see if he is cleared to play. If he is, then trade Vick.
If Manning isn’t healthy enough by OTAs, go on as planned; Vick will get over it.
Ha, sure he’ll “get over it.” Just because. I mean… “Computer Michael Vick” never gets mad whenever I sign Peyton Manning in Madden. I’m sure “Human Michael Vick” will be just fine. Also, never mind that if they traded Vick, the Eagles would incur a cap penalty of $5.6 million (h/t to Sam Lynch of IgglesBlitz). But that’s just a detail to be overlooked when we’re throwing out hypotheticals.
The questions concerning Manning’s health are what would make this such an irresistible play for the Eagles.
The Colts can’t risk $28 million on Manning, but no other team would have to spend close to that amount to sign him as a free agent. Manning knows he won’t have the leverage to get what his substantial resume would normally command.
It won’t be that big of a financial risk.
Define “close” to that $28 million amount. Does that mean $22 million? $20 million? $18 million? $16? What? Do those lower numbers mean that he’s not 100% healthy, because that’s the only reason I could see Peyton giving a discounted rate. If he’s truly “healthy,” which would be the only way you’d want him in the first place, why wouldn’t he demand that $28 million once again? Plus, I’m pretty sure that if a team like the Eagles that have a QB that’s one year removed from being the MVP runner-up could be interested in a “healthy” Manning, you can probably make an argument that at least 20 other teams out there could make a compelling case for a similar risk/reward move as well. That’s sort of the definition of “leverage.”
If Manning continues his career, it won’t be about money. It’ll be because of his desire to win another Super Bowl.
Money? Bah! Who wants that stuff? Hell, maybe Peyton will play for the league minimum.