Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

    Manning is the king of the pick 6...
    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

    ------

    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

    -John Wooden

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

      http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...-not-in-denver

      Reports are Manning wants to play next season... even if it's not in Denver...

      Meanwhile, rumors are circulating that as long as Brock doesn't soil his hat that Denver might not reinsert Manning back into the lineup even if healthy.

      This is the scenario Irsay wisely (IMHO) sought to avoid....
      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

      ------

      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

      -John Wooden

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

        Originally posted by Bball View Post
        http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...-not-in-denver

        Reports are Manning wants to play next season... even if it's not in Denver...

        Meanwhile, rumors are circulating that as long as Brock doesn't soil his hat that Denver might not reinsert Manning back into the lineup even if healthy.

        This is the scenario Irsay wisely (IMHO) sought to avoid....

        "I'm told he currently intends to play next year, even if it's not with the Broncos," Florio said during NBC's pregame show on Sunday night.

        http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...-not-in-denver

        Everyone knows that Manning is obviously a complete control freak. A quote like that isn't leaked to one of the premier insiders in the NFL unless Manning himself signs off on it. Manning controls everything and this is a textbook example of what Irsay meant when he said that Manning is a politician. This was strategically leaked just hours after Osweiler won his first start.....and done so on the highest rated overall television program on the country. Manning wanted to get maximum attenion.

        Sorry, but that's just classless on the part of Manning and his camp. It's deliberately giving the finger to what Osweiler and the team accomplished without Peyton. Instead of Broncos country talking about the solid win, everyone's debating over what they're going to do with Peyton and where he will be playing next year.

        He just needs to hang it up before he seriously embarrasses himself. It was a hell of a comeback after getting his neck drilled into.....something a lot of people doubted he could do. Leaking news about playing for another team just hours after Osweiler had the biggest day of his career is just a crappy move and is not something that a good teammate would do. And some people thought that Manning would co-exist with Luck here. LOL.
        Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-23-2015, 04:54 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

          Is Manning currently sitting because it was his (or his doctor's) choice? ...Or was it the horrendous game he had that basically got him benched last week, and the team taking the decision out of his hands?

          Manning has played hurt before. Heck, reports said he wanted to come back for the Colts' final game(s) and just play on redzone plays in his neck surgery season. I'm not saying a healthy Manning might not be fine to start, but I'm not sure we'll ever see a healthy Manning again. Or if an aging Manning realizes what he can and cannot do physically (regardless of what his heart or mind is saying).
          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

          ------

          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

          -John Wooden

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

            Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
            "I'm told he currently intends to play next year, even if it's not with the Broncos," Florio said during NBC's pregame show on Sunday night.

            http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...-not-in-denver

            Everyone knows that Manning is obviously a complete control freak. A quote like that isn't leaked to one of the premier insiders in the NFL unless Manning himself signs off on it. Manning controls everything and this is a textbook example of what Irsay meant when he said that Manning is a politician. This was strategically leaked just hours after Osweiler won his first start.....and done so on the highest rated overall television program on the country. Manning wanted to get maximum attenion.

            Sorry, but that's just classless on the part of Manning and his camp. It's deliberately giving the finger to what Osweiler and the team accomplished without Peyton. Instead of Broncos country talking about the solid win, everyone's debating over what they're going to do with Peyton and where he will be playing next year.

            He just needs to hang it up before he seriously embarrasses himself. It was a hell of a comeback after getting his neck drilled into.....something a lot of people doubted he could do. Leaking news about playing for another team just hours after Osweiler had the biggest day of his career is just a crappy move and is not something that a good teammate would do. And some people thought that Manning would co-exist with Luck here. LOL.
            I say this all the time, but I think Florio is a complete hack. He floats stuff like this out there all the time. Did anyone see Dungy's reaction to it? Dude was shocked at what he heard. Wasn't acting, true shock, and then Dungy even refuted it. I'm gonna believe Dungy on this one. Florio is terrible.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

              Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
              I say this all the time, but I think Florio is a complete hack. He floats stuff like this out there all the time. Did anyone see Dungy's reaction to it? Dude was shocked at what he heard. Wasn't acting, true shock, and then Dungy even refuted it. I'm gonna believe Dungy on this one. Florio is terrible.
              A hack? I don't know about that. His site has routinely broken some of the biggest NFL news over the years.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                I say this all the time, but I think Florio is a complete hack. He floats stuff like this out there all the time. Did anyone see Dungy's reaction to it? Dude was shocked at what he heard. Wasn't acting, true shock, and then Dungy even refuted it. I'm gonna believe Dungy on this one. Florio is terrible.
                Well keep in mind that Manning didn't know if Orsweiler was going to win or not. Once Orsweiler won and started getting dap for that win, Manning had to act quickly to get his name back in the news. When all of this was going on, Dungy was sitting in Rockefeller Center, so I'm not surprised that he wasn't in the loop.

                This all fell together way too perfectly to be a coincidence. Orsweiler wins and starts getting a lot of credit......then right before the most watched show on television, a big name insider just happens to say that Manning wants to play next season? Come on, that's just obvious Manning PR wizardry there. Nothing gets said about Manning's intentions unless Manning wants it said. Like Irsay said, he's a masterful politician. I think it's 99.99999% certain that Peyton was behind that, and if so it was pretty poor etiquette on his part.

                Don't forget that Manning and Farve are amazingly tied for the most wins all-time by a starting quarterback (186 each). It has to drive Manning absolutely insane that he's getting benched when he's just one game away from breaking that record. There's also the fact that they play the Pats this week, which you know he wants to be a part of.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                  Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                  ............ they play the Pats this week, which you know he wants to be a part of.
                  Yeah, that's not gonna happen. Saw that Brock gets the start again this week.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                    Originally posted by PacerDude View Post
                    Yeah, that's not gonna happen. Saw that Brock gets the start again this week.
                    If Manning himself feels he can play this week you can bet there's some behind the scenes drama going on and private and public manipulation will be at play with Manning pulling the strings.

                    Like I said, we're into the territory that Irsay wanted to avoid with Manning so close to his expiration date and coming off of a major surgery with a murky prognosis.
                    I had a friend tell me that the general populace in Denver isn't as Manning-centric as Indiana, so as bad as this situation could get, I'm still not sure it wouldn't have been worse in Indy. Let alone if Indy would've passed up Luck to trade for a king's ransom and let Manning play out his career in Indy. A lot of the people that were pining for Manning to stay would be flipping their position as our QB future lost focus in just 3-4 short years. And still there'd be those that couldn't/wouldn't let go of Manning and would be chanting "One more year" even if he announced his own retirement, on his own terms, from a wheelchair.
                    Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                    ------

                    "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                    -John Wooden

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                      People creating a controversy where there isn't one. Peyton is in North Carolina seeing a doctor for his foot. He's clearly resting right now. Brock will start until Peyton is right.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                        Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                        People creating a controversy where there isn't one. Peyton is in North Carolina seeing a doctor for his foot. He's clearly resting right now. Brock will start until Peyton is right.
                        Peyton was right as he'll be the rest of the way to start the year and he sucked.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                          Originally posted by ilive4sports View Post
                          People creating a controversy where there isn't one. Peyton is in North Carolina seeing a doctor for his foot. He's clearly resting right now. Brock will start until Peyton is right.
                          There was definitely a controversy there. Hours after Brock O. got the first win of his career, Mike Florio appears on the highest rated television show in the US and says that Manning will play elsewhere in 2016 if not for Denver. That's just not some sort of coincidence that happens out of nowhere. That was a masterful Manning PR move designed to take attention off of Brock O. and put it back on him. Clever PR, but it wasn't being a good teammate if he was behind it.
                          Last edited by Sollozzo; 11-28-2015, 07:26 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                            Peyton Manning providing scouting report to Broncos' starting QB Brock Osweiler
                            By Troy E. Renck

                            http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci...os-starting-qb

                            Peyton Manning appeared in the locker room Wednesday wearing a green Manning Passing Academy shirt. He is forever a quarterback. But exactly when he will be throwing the football again remains an open-ended question.

                            Manning will spend seven to ten days in a walking cast, which he wore on Wednesday, followed by strengthening exercises. He will not play this week or next week. His return depends on how the torn plantar fascia in his left foot responds to rest and rehab.

                            The Broncos seem to have tipped their hand to the severity of Manning's injury by signing quartback Christian Ponder on Wednesday. He will serve as a third-stringer behind Brock Osweiler and rookie Trevor Siemian. Ponder provides protection for a potential extended absence by Manning.

                            After receiving a second opinion from noted foot and ankle specialist Dr. Robert Anderson on Monday, Manning elected for a non-surgical treatment. The Broncos believe Manning has a chance to return and contribute, otherwise they could have placed him on the season-ending injured reserve to make room on the roster for Ponder.

                            "Absolutely," coach Gary Kubiak said. "He's doing everything he can to come back. We keep going week to week, but he's doing everything possible to get back."

                            Manning, 39, attended team meetings and part of practice on Wednesday, a pattern he's expected to follow until he recovers. He spoke with Osweiler, providing insight on how the New England Patriots might defend him.

                            "Peyton has been great to me," Osweiler said. "He's talking me through all of his past experiences against the Patriots. He was helping me out at practice, asking me questions. I love having him around. It's a great brain to pick."

                            Manning faces a difficult recovery given the nature of his injury. A full rupture releases the pain. As does surgery. Both require six to eight weeks recovery time, which would place Manning's availability this season in jeopardy. The walking cast immobilizes the left heel. When the cast is removed, Manning will require time to regain strength.

                            The test arrives when Manning practices again. He has proven to be one of the league's toughest players — this is the first time he's missed games for anything other than neck surgery. But this goes beyond any pain threshold as the injury can compromise his ability to compete at an acceptable level.

                            Manning first injured the foot against Green Bay and aggravated it on the artifical turf at Lucas Oil Stadium. Leading up to the game against the Kansas City Chiefs, teammates were uncertain if Manning would play because he didn't practice until late in the week.

                            They haven't given up on seeing Manning again.

                            "It could be beneficial down the road if we have both Brock and Peyton. They are different. And you never know what's going to happen," tight end Virgil Green said. "We just want to see Peyton get healthy."

                            Manning's injury prevented his 17th matchup with 38-year-old Tom Brady. Brady has gone 11-5 against Manning.

                            "There's nobody that has more respect for Peyton than me outside of probably his parents and his brothers," Brady said. "If anybody can appreciate what he's accomplished it's me. He's just been remarkable in every part of his career. He's been a tremendous player. It's unfortunate."

                            Troy E. Renck: trenck@denverpost.com or @troyrenck
                            Terrible teammate

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?




                              That's a Denver Post writer who covers the Broncos.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Peyton Manning 2015-2016 Thread. The Final Year?

                                http://www.9news.com/story/sports/nf...rock/76326960/

                                Why is national sports media want to twist information whether Peyton wants to play in 2016 or beyond for Broncos or elsewhere if it's not coming directly from him? What are your personal thoughts on hearing this ridiculous rumor? I just hope Denver media have better respect for Manning and the Broncos compared to those who are coming from National outlets. Nouri M. Marrakchi

                                Nouri - The report was delivered by Mike Florio, who is a giant in the NFL media industry. He primarily gathers reports from others and re-blogs with his own commentary on the website Pro Football Talk.

                                His gig as an NFL Insider on NBC's Sunday Night Football has raised his profile to gargantuan proportions. He has gathered his sources over the years.

                                I was surprised by the report. Let me preface this by saying I do know when Peyton Manning first signed his five-year, $96 million deal with the Broncos in 2012, his plan was to complete that contract. Prior to the 2014 season, he went on record with me saying his goal was to complete the contract.

                                When in March of this season he took a pay cut from $19 million to $15 million for the 2015 season, but left his non-guaranteed $19 million salary intact for 2016, his intention was to play two more years. He said as much during an offseason press conference back on April 28 when asked if he was looking at this season as his farewell tour: "I wouldn't call it that. That's not how I see it."

                                However, recent events have clearly thrown Manning a curveball. He has not responded well to injuries as he has in the past. Injuries are negatively affecting his performance. Which is what happens to aging players.

                                After he slumped in the second half of last season, Manning did contemplate retirement. He wasn't thinking that way through seven games last season when he had 22 touchdowns against 3 interceptions. At that point it was clear he could play for 2 ½ more years.

                                But his second-half slump last season did cause some personal reflection. He will do so again after this season.

                                But I don't think he'll give it much thought until then.

                                Since his April presser, Manning has brushed off such inquiries about his future. He almost always dismisses big-picture, deep-thought questions. He compartmentalizes like no one else this side of Bill Belichick.

                                Even when Manning was throwing four touchdowns and 400 yards nearly every game in 2013, he never talked about the pace he was on to set records. He would only review the last game and give his thoughts about the next game.

                                By going about it one day at a time, one game at a time, he wound up breaking all those records in 2013.

                                The Manning I know would not give serious thought about next year or the possibility of playing for another team in 2016. But it's not like we meet for beers once a week.

                                Florio felt strongly enough about his information to go with the report. I'm not dismissing the possibility Manning will play next year, even if it's for another team. It's not the way I'd bet, but I don't think Manning has given it serious thought one way or the other.

                                I'll ask Manning about it this week, but I was told he was insulted by the report. He arranged to see foot specialist Dr. Robert Anderson in North Carolina to check out his plantar fasciitis in his left foot because he wants to help the Broncos this year.


                                Do you find it immature of Peyton Manning not congratulating or making any comment on Brock's first NFL win? I thought Peyton was a classier act than that. Lisa Thomas

                                Lisa -Manning did congratulate Osweiler. Manning is a class act.

                                It's incredible all these sidebar stories on Manning. They are all so irrelevant. Whether or not Manning congratulates Osweiler (he did) is irrelevant. Whether or not Manning travelled to Chicago (he didn't) is irrelevant. Whether or not Manning plays next year, and for another team, as of today, is irrelevant.

                                All that's relevant is Manning didn't play against the Bears and Osweiler did. It's relevant that Osweiler is starting this week against the Patriots. It's also relevant whether or not Manning dresses as Osweiler's backup for the game. He may.

                                All that other stuff is gossip. We all know gossip is fascinating. It generates a great business. But it has no bearing on whether the Broncos win the Super Bowl this season.
                                Small snippet of a Q/A with a Broncos Writer for the Denver Post

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X