Super Bowl

Peyton Manning Could Pay New Jersey More in Taxes for the Super Bowl Than He Earns For Playing It

The state always takes its cut


tax man's worse than a hanger on
Jeffrey Beall/Wikipedia

This year's Super Bowl, scheduled to be played this Sunday, will be held in New Jersey, even though a lot of news outlets covering the sporting event, and even the NFL, may prefer to call what's officially a "NY/NJ" Super Bowl a New York affair. The football teams that play at the East Rutherford, New Jersey stadium, the Giants and the Jets, are after all New York (or NY/NJ) teams. Sunday's televised coverage is sure to include plenty of bump shots of New York City locations and few actually from the area where the stadium is located, which is basically a swamp. Even the NYPD has gotten in on the "let's pretend this thing is happening in New York" action; promising unprecedented security at the event and deploying 200 "temporary" security cameras in midtown New York.

But one way to ascertain that, yes, in fact the Super Bowl is being held in New Jersey, is to look at whose taxman the Colorado and Washington players competing in the Super Bowl will pay. That would be dirty Jersey, and according to K. Sean Packard, a CPA writing at, Jersey will indeed treat the players dirty when it comes to taxes:

If Manning is able to play next season, his New Jersey income tax would be $46,989 on $92,000 for winning the Super Bowl, or 51.08%. If they lose and he is able to play in 2014, he will pay New Jersey $46,844 on his $46,000, which amounts to a 101.83% tax on his actual Super Bowl earnings in the state—and this does not even consider federal taxes!

Manning's tax liability would be less, Packard explained, if the 38-year-old Denver Broncos quarterback were to retire after the Super Bowl, because New Jersey looks at the total income, even when not playing in the state, and because the Broncos play the Jets next season, so New Jersey's state government gets a take of that too. The taxes paid by Manning and the other Broncos and Seahwawks players for merely competing in New Jersey in a league event, will also fall quite short of how much tax money New Jersey has wasted holding the Super Bowl.

Bilking athletes, though, is nothing new. Jamaican track star Usain Bolt, for example, is boycotting sporting events in the United Kingdom until their tax laws are loosened, while golf star Phil Mickelson was bullied by wealth redistribution  advocates for complaining about his onerous tax rate, eventually apologizing for quite rightly pointing out that onerous federal and state (for Mickelson, California) tax laws would cause him to consider drastic changes in his life. Mickelson pays 61 percent of his winnings in taxes, an uncomfortable fact tax boosters tried to deny.

NEXT: Egypt Was Not Mentioned Once in Last Night's State of the Union

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. At some point, and that point may be now, the tax rates in Blue states is going to start to affect sports teams in those cities' ability to attract free agents. Florida and Texas have no income taxes. In contrast, California has 13% marginal rates. The Heat can pay LaBron James 13% more, not just of his salary but also of all of his endorsement income and all the rest of his income, than the Lakers can.

    In the days of global marketing where no one cares what city you play in, why would any star player who had a choice sign with a team in New York or New Jersey or California?

    1. It's not uncommon at all for professional teams in Tampa to get players who were offered the same or better deals elsewhere.

      1. Theoretically the effect should be even slightly larger for the Jags as the Bucs, as they always play a game in Texas on top of the 8 tax free(ish) home-games.

        1. what Patrick said I'm shocked that a mom able to get paid $5552 in four weeks on the internet. did you read this site link ..,.,..,.,.,., jobs80
          (Go to site and open "Home" for details)

      2. Doesn't seem to help the Marlins or Jags. I think once you get a big enough contract you stop caring about the marginal tax rates, so if the Heat weren't already very good and committed to winning I'm sure Lebron would go elsewhere.

        A lot of Rays ball players have done that like Carl Crawford and soon to be David Price.

        1. Crawford left a team with very limited payroll to make a shitload more money. Tampa's advantage has to be in the 15% range, total.

          1. Plus they play in a shitty stadium, have a limited fan base and media market, and, like the Oakland As, never appear like they are ready to take the next step to winning a World Series because of their limited pay roll.

            1. That's one way of looking at it. I hate the Trop, but I otherwise think the team is admirably run. They're staying in the mix and will be back to the World Series at some point, provided that the management (front and back office) stays around.

              1. Joe Maddon is great and I do admire a team that makes smart trades and drafts well to develop their farm instead of just doing what the Yankees do and buy everything.

                But in the end I do think you need to be able to either sign a high-value free agent or retain the superstars you develop in your system to really have an edge in the playoffs.

                1. I'm not sure I agree, not in baseball. They're doing a better job than most teams of staying in the mix. You can keep young players a good long while, and if you keep a couple (Evan Longoria, for instance) and do a good job of replacing the rest, you can be successful.

                  What amazes me is how good they are at picking up players that look done in free agency and squeezing a good year out of them. Especially in the bullpen.

                  1. The key is to make the right decision on which young stars to keep long term and which to let walk or trade away.

                    While not young at the time, see St Louis and Pujols.

              2. They also have the bad luck to play in the same division as the 2 top payroll teams in baseball.

                1. 2 of the 3. The Dodgers are now ahead of the Yankees by a good margin.

      3. And the Bucs still manage to suck up the place.

        1. Well, I think that's about to end. They had a good team for a long while and probably made a mistake firing Gruden when they did. I'd have let him run out his contract, personally, but I'd have also gotten a real GM.

    2. This comes up in a lot of discussions about a hypothetical London NFL franchise.

      1. I would be surprised if London has taxes that much higher than New York or LA. London would have just as big of a cultural problem. NFL players are not exactly cosmopolitan people as a rule. And most of them have no interest in living overseas much less taking their families there.

        1. I just checked (which I hadn't bothered to do as I never really got into the tax aspect of these debates), and apparently the UK's highest tax bracket is 45%. That's actually lower than the US's combined state and fed max (though higher than the federal max).

          So essentially the point is that you are correct. It's higher than Texas or Florida, but lower than California or New York.

          I did just think of an issue: as US citizens, the US feds still try to tax their income overseas, don't they?

          1. Oh yes they do. But they do you the favor of letting you deduct your foreign taxes from your tax bill. They are real nice like that.

            The US is one of like three countries in the world, the other two are total third world shit holes like Yemen or Eratria, that taxes their citizens living abroad. It is absolutely one of the most disgusting things about this government.

            You can move abroad and no long cost the government any money or get any benefit from our government, but these asshole still want their money.

            1. So in this case, that would be less than the taxes in London that you can deduct so it wouldn't have an effect.

            2. I believe one is Iran. I forget who the other is.

              1. There are stories of people born to one american parent who never lived here, worked here, or made money here (here is the US for all you canuks, kiwis, and sheilas out there) that the IRS has successfully gone after for decades of back taxes.

                Fucking insane.

                1. That is me, minus the IRS going after me. But that is because Canada has a higher tax rate than the US and so the IRS leaves me alone.

                2. There are stories of people born to one american parent who never lived here, worked here, or made money here (here is the US for all you canuks, kiwis, and sheilas out there) that the IRS has successfully gone after for decades of back taxes.

                  Shouldn't be able to. Even American citizens working for American companies who stay outside the US for at least 48 (350 days? I have both in my head) weeks per year are exempt from Federal taxes.

                  1. 330 days out of the US. But that's only if you file a 673, and even then you're only exempt up to the limit of 90something thousand.

              2. It's actually just the US and Eritrea at this point, and Eritrea constantly gets called out for what bullshit it is by international bodies.

            3. Australia used to do it (don't know if they still do). But they also allowed off-setting.

          2. I don't know generally, but when I worked in Korea the US had a tax reciprocity agreement with the Korean government. My Korean taxes and pension funding were reimbursed at the end of the year and I turned around and had to file foreign earned income for it when I got back.

          3. Does that include all the VAT you pay in London?

        2. The UK has a tax around every corner. Everything has some tax or "fee" associated with it. A majority of one's income goes out the door as taxes.

          1. That's true. I didn't account for VAT in my comparison above.

            1. It doesn't include National Insurance either, I think. (Although, to be honest, what little I understand of UK taxes is from readint Tim Worstall's site.)

    3. The biggest problem is for the non-prestige franchises in those states. Playing for the Lakers in terms of personal brand is far more valuable than playing for Sacramento or Golden State because you get to attach yourself to the Lakers brand which is far more valuable. Plus, living in LA has many more attractions for the young and rich than living in Sacramento.

      And if you start to see a shift towards low income tax state franchises, the leagues will just insert a salary cap income tax exemption so those teams can gross up their players to "maintain competitive balance". This is especially true since most of the marquee franchises in all of the pro leagues exist in high tax states. The Cowboys are the only real exeption I can think of

      1. Green Bay Packers would be another.

      2. seven of the last eleven NBA titles were won by teams in zero income tax states

      3. This is especially true since most of the marquee franchises in all of the pro leagues exist in high tax states.

        I'd bet that when the Dodgers, Giants, and Lakers moved to CA the CA tax rate was lower than NY and MN. CA basically made bait-and-switch legal.

        1. I'd also add the strange case of the Minnesota North Stars. They sort of half-moved to San Jose and half-moved to Dallas.

          1. The half the moved to San Jose was originally the California Seals/Cleveland Barons (that franchise was folded into the North Stars).

    4. New York has taxes up the yin-yang, John. If this were a factor it would have been being seen a long time ago. When a team is paying someone twenty million dollars, they factor in the taxes and then count their remaining money all the way to the bank.

      1. Not necessarily Episiarch. Even ten years ago the world was not nearly as connected and pro sports much less global. So playing for the Knicks or the Lakers really did mean being a bigger star. But now the real money is in global marketing. No one in China gives a shit what team Labron James or Payton Manning play on. The value of being in a big media center gets less every year. And that value is the only thing that has kept the taxes from being a factor.

        1. Correct. See Dwight Howard leaving the Lakers (!?!) and going to play in Houston.

          1. If the athlete is sensitive to criticism, then playing in a big media center may even be a minus. Who knows what went through Howard's mind, but it's indisputable that Houston's a much easier, softer town to play for media-wise, than L.A. or, (ha, ha, ha) the North East.

            Seems to have worked so far. Now if they could only play with some consistent energy each night...

            1. Houston is a team that looks good on paper but in the playoffs is likely going to be out in the first or second round. They have serious problems which may have been worsened with the addition of Howard. I can't see them beating Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Portland, or the Clippers and they probably would be in trouble in a seven game series against Golden State. As it stands right now, they'd play the Clippers, who just have too much depth. Also, Houston does not play particularly well on the road which is a problem given that they will be a mid to low seed.

              Houston's main problem is that they are a perimeter team, especially in the final few minutes when Dwight Howard becomes a serious liability because of his inability to hit free throws. Howard also turns the ball over consistently in the post because of his poor passing skills and tendency to spin into double teams. They screwed over their other good big man, Omar Asik, who had a career year last season then got shoved off to the side when Howard arrived. He's not even playing now.

              If Houston plays LA in the first round they'll go home in probably five or six games. Their best bet would be to catch fire in the second half of the season and catch San Antonio for first place in the Southwest. That way they'd end up playing a lower tier team with home court advantage, at least for the first round. I still think they're probably the sixth or seventh best team in the West right now though.

      2. New York has taxes up the yin-yang, John. If this were a factor it would have been being seen a long time ago. When a team is paying someone twenty million dollars, they factor in the taxes and then count their remaining money all the way to the bank.

        Unless a player is really bad at math, marginal tax rates matter.

        $20M NYC, $10M Texas -- make more money post tax playing in NYC.

        $20M NYC, $19M Texas -- that 0% state income tax rate makes Texas a better choice.

        Factor in the housing costs, and conceivably a state like Texas or Tennessee could attract sports talent for way less than a NYC team.

    5. There have been plenty of instances of players demanding significantly more money to play in a blue state.

      Only the endorsement money of playing in a big city is making it a really big factor.

      Many professional athletes "live" no income states like Florida and Nevada during the offseason.

    6. This day has already come in European soccer. The french clubs threw a fit over the new 75% tax.

      AS Monaco (with their new rich arab owners) has been trying to take advantage of this because they play in the French league. The french government and FA "suggested" that they move their headquarters into france to have a level paying field and they had to "donate" 50 million euros to keep their tax advantage situation.

      1. Sorry rich Russian owners in this case, hard to keep track.

        1. Doesn't France have some sort of loophole for football players, vaguely remember hearing about this.

          1. Maybe it was a proposed loophole with Hollande's new soak the rich tax.

            1. Yes, that was part of the "threw a fit," I don't believe the negotiations have gone anywhere. I believe what they come up with was that the club paid the taxes and not the player, which is just retarded.

              As the rest of the league has turned against Monaco I would assume they haven't gotten a full loophole.

              1. Watching them twist themselves into knots over this is pretty amusing though.

    7. It's no surprise LeBron and Bosh went to Miami. They took slightly lower gross salaries to play with Wade, but ended up with the same or higher net.

      It's no surprise Dwight Howard went to Houston over LA. Not just more talent, but a 13% raise due to no state taxes.

      Low Texas taxes haven't seemed to help the Dallas Mavericks land any top free agents though...

  2. If Chris Christie had spent more time on New Jersey's confiscatory tax system than he did bawling out schoolmarms he might have some conservative support during the upcoming media scandalfest.

  3. Our objective media.

    Do you think they hold a lottery to see who gets the privilege of wiping Obama's ass?

    1. I am blocked. What does it say?

      1. Mark Murray
        Obama's ending on Remsburg wasn't just a story about America -- it also was a story about Obama. Nothing has ever come easy

      2. Mark Murray, NBC News:

        Mark Murray-Verified account
        Obama's ending on Remsburg wasn't just a story about America -- it also was a story about Obama. Nothing has ever come easy

        1. Nothing has ever come easy for President affirmative action. And didn't Valarie Jerrett say Obama is so smart and everything is so easy for him that he has spent his entire life bored?

          And lets not mention that Murray works for a news agency that at least is supposed to pretend to be honest. As bad people like Walter Cronkite and even Dan Rather were, I can't even imagine one of them saying something like that. They might have thought it. But they never would have said it. These people have no shame.

          1. Obama, who has been repeatedly elected, is Mr. Affirmative Action while Clarence Thomas, who was selected for a job based largely on his race, is not.

            Got it. You can fuck anything up and turn in backwards.

            1. Obama, who has been repeatedly elected, is Mr. Affirmative Action

              Yes shreek, we know. There are lots of stupid racists out there like you who think black people are inferior and thus are okay with Obama being an idiot and voting for him anyway because you don't expect any better and want a black President.

              But we already knew that. That is probably the most sentient thing you have said in weeks. Did you finally take your meds today?

            2. Which is why Clarence Thomas should return his Nobel Prize.

          2. I have a cure for Obama's boredom. Go find out what your underlings are actually up to, so it doesn't surprise you when the next scandal breaks.

    2. Why hold a lottery? There's plenty of ass for them to wipe, they just need to get in line.

      1. If you like wiping my ass you can keep wiping my ass.

    3. Jon Gabriel and Iowahawk FTMFW.

      1. Iowahawk consistently entertains me with his commentary.

        1. Am I thie one person who thinks he's not all that funny?

  4. Mickelson pays 61 percent of his winnings in taxes, and uncomfortable fact tax boosters tried to deny.

    Lucy's back!

    1. Ever notice how sport writers always claim that players want to play in Florida or Texas because of "the warm weather"? I guess the climate has changed in Arizona and California since the last time I visited them.

      I almost never hear a sports reporter so much as mention the lack of income taxes as being even a small factor in why players seem to want to play in the South rather than the Northeast.

      Athletes sure seem to care a lot about weather.

      1. I listen to a ton of sports radio (around 40 hours a week). One topic that comes up from time to time is how the Celtics can't attract big free agents, despite spending as much money as anyone and having a great history as a winning team. They usually settle on night light and weather. You are right that I've never heard them mention the 5% income tax even once. Obviously that's not the only reason, but it's got to have an effect on the margins.

        1. It totally does. NBA players have so much money that the winters in Boston are hardly going to affect them. They can live in Florida in the off season.

          I think the other part of it is that Spike Lee poisoned an entire generation of black youth into believing the Celtics, the first major sports team ever to hire a black coach and first NBA team to have five black starters was a "white team" because they kicked the pathetic Knicks' ass and Larry Bird was part of what Lee views as the inferior race.

          There is this bizarre idea that black players can't fit in in Boston.

          1. What about Len Bias?


            1. If he had been able to get out of Washington DC sooner, he might have had a chance.

          2. The biggest faces over the past decade of Boston sports:

            Tom Brady, white

            David Ortiz, black

            Paul Pierce, black

            Seems like black players can fit in just fine.

            Plus they traded a 6 time all-star white center for a rookie black center. In the 1950s. (By the way, that trade worked out pretty well for the Celtics)

            1. I would say so too. But for some reason the image sticks.

          3. Was Babe Ruth white when they sold him to the Yanks?

            1. Trick question. Does the pope shit in the woods?

          4. Boston has a reputation as one of the most racist cities in America. One of my friends went to undergrad at Boston University and they had a separate orientation for the black students to tell them what areas of the city to avoid in order to minimize the risk of being assaulted.

            Bill Russell, the man who won more championships than any other player and who is largely responsible for all that Celtic winning tradition, had his home broken into, his bed shit in, and racial slurs smeared on his wall. Dee Brown, the Celtic's first round pick in the 90s, was snatched out of his car where he was reading his mail and held at gunpoint by the police after a store worker thought he looked kind of like someone who had robbed the store two weeks prior. Tom Ward, a black hockey player, scored the goal that ended the Boston Bruins 2012 season and was then the topic of numerous racial slurs from Boston fans on Twitter. The Boston Red Sox were the last major league team to integrate. The list goes on and on.

            Couple that with high state taxes, the weather sucking, and the fact that you'll always be in the shadow of Russell, Sam Jones, Havlicek, Bird, and so many others no matter how great you play, and I'm surprised anybody signs with the Celtics.

            1. By the way, John, the off season for the NBA, depending on how far your team advances into the finals, is basically from June or July until September (training camp begins then). In other words, your off season is the only time the weather in Boston is nice.

        2. Taxachusetts only has a 5% income tax? Hell, sign me up.

        3. It's a MUCH bigger effect.

          Because the players still have to pay taxes in so many other states, the effect of having half of your games in a no-tax state cuts the tax hassles by 50%.

      2. I almost never hear a sports reporter so much as mention the lack of income taxes as being even a small factor in why players seem to want to play in the South rather than the Northeast.

        Yeah. Matt "Money" Smith from Fox's Petros & Money Show is the only sports guy who ever mentions tax implications in free agency discussions. Money does have a pretty big libertarian streak from what I've picked up on. Oh, and he's a lock for gambling picks.

  5. So Canada finally has an excuse for why their MLB/NHL/NBA teams never win anything?

    1. Yes. No top NBA free agents want to play in Toronto, because the taxes are the highest in the league.

  6. Fuck Manning. He still has the Irsay Stink on him.

    1. And hawks shitty pizza.

    2. Yeah but he's gonna win the Super Bowl.

      1. Not if Richard Sherman has anything to say about it.

        1. This is the first time I've wanted that dick to have a good game ever.

        2. You know what Peyton has to say about it?


          1. MEDIOCRE. He's a MEDIOCRE quarterback.

            I turned on ESPN yesterday, and it was all Sherm. That dude knows how to troll.

            1. Which is worse, I wonder, being a mediocre QB or being beaten by one for the championship?

              I guess we'll find out on Sunday.

            2. It really depends on what kind of pass protection he gets. Give him enough time and he'll pick that defense apart. He's got a lot of weapons offensively.

            3. The Seahawks better not gag this. They are all that is standing between us and an entire year or more of nauseating "Payton Manning is the best of all time" ass kissing.

              Please God let Manning throw three interceptions but manage to keep it close only to have Wes Welker drop a key third down pass on the final drive that would have put the Broncos in position to kick a game winning field goal. The tears at ESPN over that would be a hundred shades of awesome.

              1. If Peyton is dumb enough to try and hit his wide receivers with Sherm and Earl Thomas on their asses, so be it. It'll be interception heaven. I can't wait.

                1. From your lips to God's ear Episiarch.

                2. That's the thing Epi: Peyton is a pretty damn smart quarterback. He knows when not to make those throws and, if you give him enough time, has the arm and the accuracy to make plays happen.

                  1. But Manning can't make a deep throw anymore Serious Man. If Seattle can after him and the refs treat the Seattle DB's even close to fairly, Manning is in trouble.

                    Look at it this way, Seattle totally punked Drew Brees. And Brees is not as good as Manning, but he is pretty close.

                    1. But Manning can't make a deep throw anymore

                      I'll just leave this here.

                      Long story short: about half of Manning's throws throughout his career are in the 1-10 yard range, and only about 4-5% are over 30 yards, and only ~1% over 40 yards. And I suspect most QBs numbers are pretty similar. So, is that because he can't throw the long ball, or is it because modern NFL offenses don't throw it deep that much?

                    2. Piling onto Loki's comment, how many of those long throws are through the air, and how many are the receiver adding yards after the catch?

                      That said, if a QB can't throw over the top of a defense, it allows the safety to get cheat closer and shrink the space the QB/O. Coordinator have to set routes. Also, if Manning has lost a bit of zip, it makes the windows he has to throw into that much smaller.

                      Doesn't seem to have mattered much this year though.

                  2. Peyton's whole game is hitting Welker and Decker as they run up the sidelines. This is precisely and exactly what corners like Sherm love to fuck up.

                    Peyton's not stupid, but the Legion of Boom is going to be itching to absolutely destroy anything the Broncos come up with considering their weapons.

                    This is why I'm thinking either the Broncos are going to do something completely different and totally flummox the Hawks, or the Hawks are going to eat them alive.

                    1. Personally, I think the key to the game is the other way--whether Seattle can move the ball against Denver. I suspect that they can't, which is where this game will likely be decided.

                      If Manning is on, then it'll probably be a wash in the Denver offense vs. Seattle defense battle. Seattle is quite good, defensively, but some of that comes from being aggressive up front, which can be dangerous with a QB who makes such quick decisions as Manning.

                  3. He knows when not to make those throws

                    Corey Graham begs to differ.

                  4. Manning has no arm anymore. It's all country brains now.

              2. Peyton's not the best of all time. Hell he's not even the best in Broncos history. But he's the best QB on the field this season, and that's more than enough to parade in Seattle.

                1. *cancel the parade in Seattle.

                  1. You mean, rain on their parade in Seattle. And board up your shop windows.

              3. If that happened, they would still find ways to blame it all on someone else (in this case Welker), while ignoring the fact that he threw 2 picks earlier to put them in that position.

                1. True AD. Nothing is ever Manning's fault. He just never had a good team around him. He never had any good receivers or running backs. He just had bums like Marvin Harrison, Edrin James and Dallas Clark.

                  It is not like he was ever on any good teams and played on 13 different teams that won 12 or more regular season game. Manning only has one Super Bowl because he played his entire career on untalented borderline playoff teams.

                  1. Nothing is ever Manning's any great player who's a media darling's fault.

                    FTFY. They fellate whoever the latest flavor of the week/ month is. Last year it was Ray Lewis. At least Manning never killed anyone.

            4. It is funny how there are any number NFL players who have committed all sorts of crimes up to and including murder but Richard Sherman is now the league's biggest villain because he was pissed off and talked a bunch of smack during an interview conducted on the field immediately after he had just spent 60 minutes going one on one with a guy he hated.

              1. Manning could throw 50/50 with 50 TDs, and you'd still hate him. Why do you hate Peyton?

                He's not the best QB ever, but he's the best QB in the league right now. At 38. And I'd love to hate him, coming from what used to be a big rival to my school (and still is in other sports).

                1. Why do you hate Peyton?

                  I don't hate him. I dislike his fans. He has time and again proven to be a choke artist. My God, you are a Florida fan. You of all people should know that. He perfected his whole act of having great teams that get their asses kicked when they come up against an equal losing to Florida in college.

                  Manning seems to be a nice guy and is no question a HOF QB. He just isn't in the same class as about five or six QBs, depending on your opinion, who belong in the conversation as "best ever". I wish his fans in the media would just shut the hell up about him being best ever. I never had a problem with him and was sorry to see him lose to the Patriots all of those years until his media fans started saying he was the best ever. For this, I hope he loses.

                  1. He's a great passer. I'd love to say otherwise, but he is. How often is it Manning that loses games for them, anyway? Not like he is tossing picks left and right and not posting lots of yards and TDs.

                    I've heard the same shit about Marino, and he is one of the best or possibly the best QB ever.

                    1. The difference Pro is that Marino really never did have anyone around him. He never had a good running back and he never had a good defense.

                      Put Marino on some of those Colts teams in the 2000s and they would have won a lot more than one Super Bowl and Tom Brady would be talking about how great it was that one time he beat the Rams in the Super Bowl.

                      How often is it Manning that loses games for them, anyway?

                      Quarterbacks like Elway, Marino and Otto Graham put up better numbers in the playoffs than they did in the regular season. Manning has over the years played significantly worse in the playoffs. That disqualifies him from any best ever conversation. I am not saying he isn't great. He is. I am just saying he doesn't deserve to be considered as the best ever.

                    2. Quarterbacks like Elway, Marino and Otto Graham put up better numbers in the playoffs than they did in the regular season.

                      Marino's passer rating in the regular season was 86.5 and 77.1 in the playoffs.

                      Elway: 79.9(same as Kyle Orton) and 79.7

                      Manning's is 97.2 and 86.2

                    3. And you can't isolate these QBs from their teams or their competition. What Marino did, for instance, is mindboggling. Hardly any running attack and rarely any defense. Yet they won many games.

                      The playoffs should generate reduced QB ratings for QBs, simply because they face better defenses in most cases. That's not always the case, but it can also come from the luck of the draw, too.

                    4. Reading Camping's cited QB ratings, it's painfully obvious that football really needs something like WAR to try and attempt some normalization across different eras of the sport. Elway getting a 79.9 in the 80s-90s was a whole lot harder than Orton doing it a few years ago, but the raw stats don't reflect that.

                      Anyone bothered to look at the distribution of passing stats within each year and determine which QBs had years with higher SDs from the mean?

                    5. Elway getting a 79.9 in the 80s-90s was a whole lot harder than Orton doing it a few years ago

                      Montana managed a 118.4 with San Fran in an even earlier career. Never even had a season at or below Elway's rating.

                    6. I've heard the same shit about Marino, and he is one of the best or possibly the best QB ever.

                      "4 Super Bowl rings, bitch!" - Joe Montana (not a real quote, obv.)

                      Manning an Brady are basically this generation's Marino and Montana. Manning will have all the numbers and records, but Brady will probably have more rings by the time they both retire. And football pundits will argue for the next 100 years about which was better.

                2. I also lost a ton of respect for him in 09 when the Colts were undefeated and decided not to go for 16-0 and rest their starters. Say what you want about Brady, but Brady had the balls to go for 16-0 and try and win every game when the opportunity arose.

                  And don't tell me that was the coach's decision. Manning was the Colts. If Manning had threatened to go public with his desire to go for it, the coach would have caved.

                  1. Manning didn't decide to pull the starters after the unbeaten start; that was a Dungy decision and not a sharp one. I doubt Peyton saw some gain in sitting out the last couple of games PLUS the bye week, not at the end of the year when momentum and continuity are huge.

                    Manning's your blind spot; you seem to hate him because the fanbois get a bit much. The guy is pretty good and he is on most short lists of best ever, for what those are worth. If it was titles, then Terry Bradshaw should be at or near the start of the conversation but all I hear is how the Steelers were loaded, as if the Niners only had Montana and as if Unitas had nothing but scrubs on the Colts, and so forth.

              2. I think Sherman is kind of a dick and is nowhere near as great as he says he is (the front seven of Seattle has a lot to do with his success), but this whole affair is silly.

                1. What the fuck are you talking about? Sherm's stats are heads and tails above anyone else's. He's a highly charismatic shit-talker who backs up his shit-talking with action. There's a fucking reason QBs don't throw near him unless they get desperate: because he will fuck their shit up.

                  As he said to Brady, u mad bro?

                  1. I think he's very good, but the pass rush is a big part of that.

                    I have a feeling they're about to lose, too, which is unusual, since I usually expect the better defense to win. Of course, the fact that you'll suffer as a consequence could be influencing reality as well. God hates you, as you know.

                    1. Luckily God is a figment of my imagination, ProL, and Sherm isn't.

                    2. Your imagination? I'm still not convinced you aren't a fictional construct of SugarFree's.

                    3. I have a feeling they're about to lose, too, which is unusual, since I usually expect the better defense to win.

                      The weather looking a lot nicer for Sunday than earlier projected---43/29 with no snow and only 5-10 MPH wind---might help with that feeling, ProL. I'd still take the 'Hawks +2.5 and the under 47.

                    4. What, no polar vortex to make the game a giant mess? I'm surprised.

                    5. Me too. The forecast has changed a lot over these last two weeks, and snow's forecasted for Monday, so who knows?

                      Bet the NFL is sacrificing every goat in the tri-State area to keep the weather halfway decent though.

                    6. We're all just incidental characters in SugarFree's sucrose-deprived imagination.

                    7. I've long suspected this. I am a neosolipsist--there are just two entities, me and SugarFree.

                    8. *scratching my head, wondering why a figment of my imagination would make such a ludicrous claim*

              3. Sherman is awesome. Usually it's wide receivers who think they're the greatest. Glad to see a DB (and a Stanford guy) talking smack and backing it up.

                But I'm still picking Denver.

                1. Fucking offenses. Fuck them and their special rules.

                  1. And fuck Manning for bitching so much after the 2004 AFC championship game that he got the rules changed to benefit the offense even more.

                    (Or for bitching in the 2010 preseason that changes to the positioning of the officials that would increase their safety wouldn't allow him to run his pwecious widdle offense the way he wanted.)

                2. Usually it's wide receivers who think they're the greatest.

                  Sherman started out as a wide reciever in college. Explains a lot.

            5. He's a MEDIOCRE quarterback.

              Richard Sherman's a MEDIOCRE cornerback in the same way that Mannin's a MEDIOCRE QB.

      2. The fact that he's even IN the Super Bowl is one more piece of evidence that Satan rules the Universe.

        1. Other reason to hate Manning- dude has a face that looks like a foot.

          1. What do you have against the fivehead?

    3. The Irsays only left Baltimore in the middle of the night because the state legislature threatened to take the team by eminent domain.

      The next morning, there was nothing for the state to take.

      1. Apologists for the antichrist are no better than the antichrist.

  7. Maybe the Players Assoc. should just tell the NFL they won't participate in any Super Bowl held in some tax shithole state. I don't feel sorry for Manning or these other rich players but I'll bet Our Glorious Leader doesn't pay taxes on that portion of the POTUS salary he earns every time he brings his act to New Jersey or New York or California or Hawaii.

    1. To paraphaze Moe Szyslak: Hey, hey! NJ may have high taxes and may be a shithole, but I... uh... what was the third thing you said?

  8. A guy who gets paid millions to throw a ball around while running around in tight pants has to pay a shitton in taxes?

    Cry me a fucking river.

    1. You must have taken a wrong turn on your way to Slate or the Hufflepost.

      1. Nah. I just don't give a shit about sports. Never have.

    2. Yes, because I'm sure at your job you have a 300 pound man running at you trying to hit you as hard as they can and an average career length that's under three years, with high likelihood of injuries that may last a lifetime. Seriously, most of these guys have an amazingly short window of time to make as much money as they can, and you're ok with them being taxed like hell (in the case of Manning in this article possibly over 100%) just because you think their job isn't hard?

      1. yes, but it's not inherently productive. You're falling for the often thrown out liberal equivalence of "it's hard, so it must deserve a lot of money"

        He said he doesn't care if a millionaire gets taxed a lot, because the millionaire can afford it, and that's all.

        I'd agree, in fact, if I were in charge, I'd raise taxes like crazy on the rich. Then again, I'd do it to actually balance the budget by also cutting spending, to make sure the country survives in the long term.

  9. Yeah, all that nonsense about how these high earners got to where they are through nterprise, hard work and individual skill; what a crock.


    1. I would ask - "as between Manning and the state of NJ, who did *more* to earn that money?"

      Cosmically speaking, we can say that a football player is no more deserving than a helpless leper, and that it's the duty of the rich to help "the beggar at the gate," but what does this have to do with the right of the NJ government to compel people to surrender a disproportinate amount of money to government coffers? Is New Jersey somehow more compassionate than jurisdictions who have more respect for people's property?

      1. Point taken, but I feel compelled to point out that NJ, nor any other jurisdiction has any such right as only individuals have rights.

        It is a power that NJ has granted to itself know why.

    2. Exactly. That free ride to the state-run University of Tennessee, where you learned to play QB? You didn't pay for that!

      That privately run Manning QB academy? Oh wait...

  10. Sure Peyton may have to pay more in taxes than he earns for winning the Super Bowl, but that's the price of the glamor of playing in New Jersey.

    1. And actually the title is misleading, as he won't pay more in taxes for playing in the Super Bowl than he does for playing the Super Bowl. He will pay more in taxes than he makes in the Super Bowl, but for playing the Super Bowl plus another game versus the Jets.

    2. Nothing says glamor like Secaucus. The place is like Monaco on the Hudson.

      1. "so...the fucking bank job away in Seacaucus, Im in the middle of the weeds, laying down..."

  11. I get a refund for the city income tax that's withheld from my paycheck for the 60-70 days a year I work out of the office. (There's no local tax at home compound.) It's not pro sports money, but it is a nice little check every year.

    1. But it's your money. Tax refunds are never "a nice little check". They're an interest-free loan to the state.

  12. I thought you paid taxes to your state of residence, not where you work. I've been TDY a lot, and for months on end to different states. but I always paid income tax to my resident state.

    1. A while back my wife was living in Maine and working in Massachusetts. She paid income tax to both states.

      1. They couldn't build a wall to keep the Massholes from escaping to freedom. So they had to do something.

        1. Convenience of the employer theory is one of the biggest bunch of bullshit around, especially in this day and age.

          A NY employer opens an office in North Dakota where they work remotely, no NY tax for those employees. North Dakota employee individually remotely works from North Dakota, NY tax applies.

    2. Depends on the state. Most state tax non-residents, and they usually get that credited to their home state taxes. For a handful of days, almost none of the states are coming after you with the exception of athletes and other whales. Those usually get hammered for playing a couple of hours or working a day in the office.

      A while back I remember reading about a NY based CEO whose secretary kept careful track of the hours he spent inside the state so he could sail under the non-resident/resident threshold.

  13. Fun fact: Manning would likely have been the top pick of the 1997 NFL Draft had he come out, in which case he would have gone to the Jets. He decided to stay school for his senior season (at least partially for that reason) and ended up going #1 in 1998 to Indy.

  14. When the proggies tell me about how rich people like Manning "didn't earn" or "don't deserve" all that money, I'm just going to say, "the only relevant question is whether he deserves the money more than New Jersey deserves it. Manning at least gets paid for doing something people want, never mind whether cosmically it's enough or too much, what did the state of New Jersey do to earn so much of his money?"

    1. I'll grant some basic infrastructure, cops, courts, fire dept, etc., but many jurisdictions manage to provide these without draining people dry.

    2. If you think about the less glamorous guys on the team it could be a stronger argument. Obviously none of the starters are making peanuts, but most of the linemen aren't making anything close to Manning. And they are still going to get hit with the NJ tax.

      1. Left tackles get premium dinero.

      2. They all make the same pay in the postseason.

  15. Not that I want or encourage a hat tip here, but surprised that you didn't, Ed, given it would have catapulted your status from grudgingly tolerated to bonerific amongst the laity here abouts. Since I like you, I'll give you another chance:

    How Do Hitmen Operate?

  16. Phil Mickelson was bullied by wealth redistribution advocates for complaining about his onerous tax rate.

    Never complain. Just move to Florida and pay less, and say you wanted to be closer to your aged grandparents, or whatever.

  17. "the area where the stadium is located, which is basically a swamp"

    Also, Dude: swamp is not the preferred nomenclature; 'wetlands', please.

    "'round these here parts, we a just a calls it a *shithole*"

    Also, don't even start with that "NY/NJ" shit. We got it bad enough without having to strap on your fucking problems. Accept the fact that the City rents your shitty swamp for our football teams to play on, and stop with this bullshit fantasy notion that "you have a football team". Even if NJ claimed fractional partnership in the Jets, you'd still be a minority partner to Long Island/Staten Island, which is fucking pathetic. also, what, you want glamor shots of Newark for the TV? Good luck with that 'revitalization' thing you got going.

    Seriously, as shitty as NYC sinks into a progressive dystopian nightmare, there is one thing we can always be proud of: We Are Not New Jersey.

  18. This is about much more than sports.

    One of the reasons we were able to win ww2, and win it big, was because relatively speaking, we were a free country . The brightest, the most ambitious, the most talented, the most capable fled repressive and stifling regimes all over the world and flocked here. That lesson of history seems lost on the current crop of fuckwits who think of themselves as top men and their pathetic sycophants.

    1. Also, its a pretty fucking sad day when I find myself going, "Damn, Phil Mickleson... I *feel* for you! WE SHALL OVERCOME!"

      Normally I'm more agnostic about pro golfers. But having to *apologize* for looking out for yourself? FUCK YOU, CALIFORNIA.

      1. I am not a sports guy. I know nothing about Mickelson or what kind of man he is.

        When he protested he earned my respect.

        1. Here's all you need to know about Phil.

          With Phil, the smiles are fake but the boobs are real. With his wife, it's the opposite.

    2. Actually, the new narrative is that we won because of the huge sense of comradeship and self sacrifice made to the altar of government.

    3. Think about what we did--we converted a very flexible and juggernaut of an industrial nation into a massive war machinery-producing enterprise. Without that underlying freeish market, the war would never have been won. Even the Russians would've been overwhelmed without massive U.S. aid.

      That lesson, of course, is totally lost now. It was the government and TOP MEN all the way through.

      1. Paul Johnson's description of this in Modern Times is pretty damn awe inspiring. We were chugging out frigates at a rate other nations produced tow trucks and bulldozers. Of course, later generations would learn the wrong lesson from this, and become wistful for the efficiency of a government that never existed.

  19. I'm incredibly confused how this works. 101% tax rate means he wouldn't get any out of state tax credit and they would tax him based on national income. Seems like there is something missing.

  20. The Denver Post is reporting that Manning is planning on cutting hours at his Papa John's restaurants to make up the difference. He might even have to sell 2 of his stores, leaving him with only 19 locations.

  21. I'm totally late to the party so no one will read this, but it's fucking stupid to have to pay taxes to a state that you play a game in. I'd be like: "I'm sorry, the check was cut in Dallas so I will be keeping my motherfucking money. You want a cut, you can get in line with the rest of the assholes."

    Of course then I'd end up in jail with Wesley Snipes for tax evasion, but it would be worth it to see the look on their faces.

  22. what Steven said I'm shocked that a mother able to profit $9317 in 4 weeks on the internet. official website W? o? r? k? s? 7? 7? .? ?? ?? ??

  23. my neighbor recently bought a stunning gold Lexus GS 350 Sedan just by parttime work from a laptop... navigate to this site W? o? r? k? s? 7? 7? .? ?? ?? ??

  24. my best friend's sister makes $66/hour on the laptop. She has been without work for five months but last month her pay was $14280 just working on the laptop for a few hours. you can try here W? o? r? k? s? 7? 7? .? ?? ?? ??

  25. like Justin implied I'm alarmed that a mom can make $8280 in four weeks on the computer. Get More Information ?????? http://www.works77.???m

  26. Owen. true that Justin`s story is astonishing, on monday I got a great new BMW 5-series after earning $7046 this past 5 weeks and over ten k lass-month. without a doubt its the most rewarding I've had. I began this 8-months ago and right away began to bring home more than $73 per-hour. browse around this website ?????? http://www.works77.???m

  27. yeah, I'm confused how this works

    My understanding is that NJ's income tax doesn't go above like 11% or something. Are there special clauses for windfall incomes, like playing in a game?

  28. my best friend's sister-in-law makes $70 /hour on the computer . She has been without work for 7 months but last month her check was $12532 just working on the computer for a few hours. you can look here


  29. Hello,

    Are you a man or a woman you have been looking for a loan? To expand your business or setting up your own business or to pay off your debt or house rent if so then we are your answer, We offer loan from 5,000.00 to the maximum of 500,000,000.00 dollars with any duration that you can afford and any type of loan requested by the customer must be such as:

    * Personal Loan
    * Business Loan
    * Private loan

    And More.....

    immediately after filling the loan application form you can immediately return back to us, following data:


    Loan Amount Needed: ___________________________
    Sex: ___________________________________________
    Marital Status: _________________________________
    Country: ________________________________________
    State: ________________ Age: _________________
    Telephone No:________________________________
    Loan Duration:__________________________
    monthly Income:______________________________
    Occupation: ______________________
    Purpose of loan: _________________________
    Religion: _____________________________________

    Contact Us Back Via Our Company Mail:

    Mr Rafel

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.