SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady

[Kontradiction]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Don't we have an article every year about how there is a disconnect between Brady and the Patriots? What's new this year? The fact that Brady still has one year left on his contract and the CBA is up in the air? All in all, it's just the same article from last offseason.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Here's what Polian said on Sirius NFL Radio yesterday:



When it comes to paying Peyton, Colts hide behind labor uncertainty | ProFootballTalk.com

If this is the strategy of the Colts, why is it so hard to believe that almost all teams with elite players in their final year of their contracts are in the same boat.

The Patriots have never said they won't pay Brady his market value. They have never made any indication that they will give him a lowball offer or tell him to take it or leave it. The Pats are approaching Brady the same way the Colts are approaching Manning.

Nothing in Polian's statement says, or even implies, that Manning won't become the highest paid player in the NFL.

 

[jmt57]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

The good news is that with this SI article, now every media site that we have ever heard of that covers football has published a column about the topic, using Silver's speculation as factual evidence. With that out of the way, in a few days they can return to their normal summer occupation of speculating whether or not Brett Favre will play football next fall.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Tucker speculates based on Silver's speculation derived from the comments of one "close" to Brady. Brady's non-response implies nothing, unless he has previously been open about contract negotiations. That has not been the case in the past, so Tucker appears as clueless as the other writers, even more so as he takes a shot at the organization as "messing" with him. His piece would be more informative if he offered it as what it is - a theory on why the extension with Brady has not been done to date.

If you listen to Felger and Mazz that Brady's non-response is clear indication the story is true and his response several days later that he isn't concerned about his status at the moment is a bunch of baloney.

 

[Rob0729]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

1.) Nothing Polian has said has been counter to that (at least, nothing that I've read on the subject)

2.) The Jets and their players are not the Colts and Peyton Manning.



Seymour
Law
Samuel
etc...

All "important to the team", etc...

The fact is that the Patriots have a history of screwing around with their top players, and/or ending up underpaying/being difficult when money becomes involved. It wasn't that long ago (2008) that Moss was reportedly getting annoyed with the free agent negotiations, for that matter, and the same happened with Wilfork, until the Patriots finally got that deal done. The Colts don't really have that sort of history with Manning. Now, you can bag on the media all you want, but that's not going to change the reality, and it's not just the media that views the Patriots in this light. It's not something that happens with every deal, but it happens often enough that it gets noticed. Hell, we've had at least one thread on an agent's angle regarding this sort of thing in the recent past:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...t-alvin-keels-says-ne-toughest-negotiate.html

The griping about the "disconnect" storyline is just another example of Patriots fans getting their manties in a bunch over something that they are generally proud of, just because the media has portrayed it from a different angle than the one that Patriots fans brag about. Patriots fans love to crow about how the Patriots will only pay so much, will not let players throw off the salary system, expect top players to take a little less, etc.... But, when the media notes that and spins it as "cheap" or "difficult" or some other less than 100% flattering phraseology, the Patriots fans lose their freakin' minds.

Why are you including Seymour in there? He is proof the Pats will step up to the table and pay him because the Pats gave Seymour a contract that made him the highest paid defensive player per year at the time.

So far, every elite player the Pats have wanted to retain other than maybe Samuel, they have stepped up to the plate including Brady, Seymour, and Wilfork.

They may be tough negotiators, but they do pay the players they want to keep. Every player Kraft has publically stated he wanted for the future, he has kept. Brady is far more valuable to Kraft than just his play on the field. He has no intentions of letting him leave.

 

[jmt57]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Probably because the Colts are on record as saying that Manning will become the NFL's highest paid player and the Patriots (Kraft) gave an answer that was far more equivocal.

True, Irsay did make a much more definitive statement than Kraft did. However, the whole topic of discussion started when Michael Silver of Yahoo took bits and pieces of a Kraft comment rather than the entire quote. I don't think it's quite as simple as portraying Pats fans are being koolaid drinking homers for doubting the speculation.


Silver's Yahoo column:
Contrast that with the comments Kraft made to reporters in March at the NFL owner meetings in Orlando about a potential Brady extension: "Great things happen in life if you're flexible and not rigid. ... We're balancing a lot of different factors in an unknown environment. We're not sleeping. It's just complicated."

Original Globe column:
"Let's put it like this, Tom Brady is going to be a part of this franchise. He wants to be. We want him. Great things in life happen if you're flexible and not rigid. We have to find a way to satisfy him and the team, and have a team that can win, big-time. That's what it's about. So we're balancing a lot of different factors in an unknown environment. So we're not sleeping. It's just complicated, and it's complicated for everybody. We hope we do a satisfactory job. But we'll figure it out one way or the other."

In addition Silver chose to ignore this comment from Kraft:
“We’re very lucky to have him as our quarterback and we want him to be our quarterback for a long time into the future,’’ Kraft said. “Everything he represents is pretty special. He’s a winner. We’re privileged to have him a part of the New England Patriots organization.’’

 

[Rob0729]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

True, Irsay did make a much more definitive statement than Kraft did. However, the whole topic of discussion started when Michael Silver of Yahoo took bits and pieces of a Kraft comment rather than the entire quote. I don't think it's quite as simple as portraying Pats fans are being koolaid drinking homers for doubting the speculation.


Silver's Yahoo column:
Contrast that with the comments Kraft made to reporters in March at the NFL owner meetings in Orlando about a potential Brady extension: "Great things happen in life if you're flexible and not rigid. ... We're balancing a lot of different factors in an unknown environment. We're not sleeping. It's just complicated."

Original Globe column:
"Let's put it like this, Tom Brady is going to be a part of this franchise. He wants to be. We want him. Great things in life happen if you're flexible and not rigid. We have to find a way to satisfy him and the team, and have a team that can win, big-time. That's what it's about. So we're balancing a lot of different factors in an unknown environment. So we're not sleeping. It's just complicated, and it's complicated for everybody. We hope we do a satisfactory job. But we'll figure it out one way or the other."

In addition Silver chose to ignore this comment from Kraft:
“We’re very lucky to have him as our quarterback and we want him to be our quarterback for a long time into the future,’’ Kraft said. “Everything he represents is pretty special. He’s a winner. We’re privileged to have him a part of the New England Patriots organization.’’

Actually Kraft has been as definitive as Irsay has with Manning that a deal will be done between the team and their franchise QB. Unlike Irsay, Kraft hasn't talked the money aspect of it. I don't know how Kraft could be any clearer that the Pats are committed to get a deal done with Brady. They obviously know the ballpark dollars and cents and if Kraft was afraid of that, he wouldn't be so definitive.

 

[mgteich]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

The Krafts treat the patriots as a business, with little need for loyalty for employees. The players and their agents understand this reality and act accordingly. These methods have certainly worked well for the patriots in the Kraft era. Personally, I see very little loyalty to players. The only players that might be exceptions are Bruschi and Bledsoe.
=======

For better or worse, the colts have a different strategy and methodology entirely. Their system has worked for in the Manning era.
==========

It seems that the patriots understood their situation last year with regard to free agents and the CBA situation. They decided to dump Seymour, re-sign Wilfork and re-sign Bodden.
It is not at all clear what they will do in order to re-sign Mankins and/or Brady. Nothing would surprise me.
==========

From Brady's prespective, he has no real problems. He can make decisions with his own best interests in mind, with no qualms about anything else. He could even decide to "retire" at some point to spur negotiations. In any case, the ball is in the court of the patriots.
==========

And yes, the stories are very much more relevant this year than last. Brady is entering his contract year. The patriots can choose to renegotiate now or face an ugly situation after the season. But then, the patriots have been here before, with Law, and with Samuel.

1.) Nothing Polian has said has been counter to that (at least, nothing that I've read on the subject)

2.) The Jets and their players are not the Colts and Peyton Manning.



Seymour
Law
Samuel
etc...

All "important to the team", etc...

The fact is that the Patriots have a history of screwing around with their top players, and/or ending up underpaying/being difficult when money becomes involved. It wasn't that long ago (2008) that Moss was reportedly getting annoyed with the free agent negotiations, for that matter, and the same happened with Wilfork, until the Patriots finally got that deal done. The Colts don't really have that sort of history with Manning. Now, you can bag on the media all you want, but that's not going to change the reality, and it's not just the media that views the Patriots in this light. It's not something that happens with every deal, but it happens often enough that it gets noticed. Hell, we've had at least one thread on an agent's angle regarding this sort of thing in the recent past:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/336962-kinda-cool-agent-alvin-keels-says-ne-toughest-negotiate.html

The griping about the "disconnect" storyline is just another example of Patriots fans getting their manties in a bunch over something that they are generally proud of, just because the media has portrayed it from a different angle than the one that Patriots fans brag about. Patriots fans love to crow about how the Patriots will only pay so much, will not let players throw off the salary system, expect top players to take a little less, etc.... But, when the media notes that and spins it as "cheap" or "difficult" or some other less than 100% flattering phraseology, the Patriots fans lose their freakin' minds.

 

[mgteich]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Manning will get pretty much what he wants. The colts are built around Manning and everyone understands this. The team is run accordingly. I have absolutely no doubt that Manning will have a new, "outrageous", contract with the colts, with little serious problems in the negotiations.

Nothing in Polian's statement says, or even implies, that Manning won't become the highest paid player in the NFL.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Yet another opinon piece echo with not a single new fact. None.

What are the facts?

1. Kraft has only spoken in a positive manner about signing Brady

2. The Colts are in a similar position with Manning

3. Both team owners correctly indicate that CBA uncertainty is complicating and delaying these major business decisions

4. When the Pats deem a player essential, they pay him, e.g. Wilfork

5. When the Pats deem a player to be asking well above their percieved price, it's apparent, e.g. Samuel

6. The entire blizzard of articles is a function of Silver's unnamed source plus the added perceptions and opinions of writers seeking eyeballs

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

True, Irsay did make a much more definitive statement than Kraft did. However, the whole topic of discussion started when Michael Silver of Yahoo took bits and pieces of a Kraft comment rather than the entire quote. I don't think it's quite as simple as portraying Pats fans are being koolaid drinking homers for doubting the speculation.


Silver's Yahoo column:
Contrast that with the comments Kraft made to reporters in March at the NFL owner meetings in Orlando about a potential Brady extension: "Great things happen in life if you're flexible and not rigid. ... We're balancing a lot of different factors in an unknown environment. We're not sleeping. It's just complicated."

Original Globe column:
"Let's put it like this, Tom Brady is going to be a part of this franchise. He wants to be. We want him. Great things in life happen if you're flexible and not rigid. We have to find a way to satisfy him and the team, and have a team that can win, big-time. That's what it's about. So we're balancing a lot of different factors in an unknown environment. So we're not sleeping. It's just complicated, and it's complicated for everybody. We hope we do a satisfactory job. But we'll figure it out one way or the other."

In addition Silver chose to ignore this comment from Kraft:
“We’re very lucky to have him as our quarterback and we want him to be our quarterback for a long time into the future,’’ Kraft said. “Everything he represents is pretty special. He’s a winner. We’re privileged to have him a part of the New England Patriots organization.’’

I have no idea whether there's a "disconnect or not". Frankly, I won't really worry about it even if it turns out the be true. There's no way in hell that the owners will sign a new CBA that doesn't keep some method of 'franchising' top players for at least a season or two in order to ease into a new system, so Brady's not going anywhere no matter how disconnected he might feel. Teams just won't allow a Brady or Manning to be lost in that manner.

However, the attacks that posters here make towards the media every time a story comes out which is not 100% ballwashing of the Patriots just get ridiculous.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

1.) Nothing Polian has said has been counter to that (at least, nothing that I've read on the subject)

2.) The Jets and their players are not the Colts and Peyton Manning.



Seymour
Law
Samuel
etc...

All "important to the team", etc...

All were either moved (let go, traded, let walk) due to their salary requirements not being justified by their play on the field in the eyes of the Patriots Management.

The fact is that the Patriots have a history of screwing around with their top players, and/or ending up underpaying/being difficult when money becomes involved.

No. The media classifies it as "screwing around" because they are clueless as to what tough negotiations are.

It wasn't that long ago (2008) that Moss was reportedly getting annoyed with the free agent negotiations, for that matter, and the same happened with Wilfork, until the Patriots finally got that deal done.

And what about all the players they've given contract extensions to beside these guys. Light, Koppen, Neal, Brady, Vrabel, Bruschi, etc. The mediots over-look those as if they didn't exist.. And, the mediots also ignore things like during Seymour's last negotiation with them, the team had to WAIT until the 365 days since the last re-structuring had been accomplished before they could finalize the deal. And they agreed that Seymour didn't have to show up until it was done. That was an AGREEMENT between Seymour and the Team. Yet, most of the mediots claimed he was holding out. Which wasn't the truth.

The Colts don't really have that sort of history with Manning. Now, you can bag on the media all you want, but that's not going to change the reality, and it's not just the media that views the Patriots in this light. It's not something that happens with every deal, but it happens often enough that it gets noticed. Hell, we've had at least one thread on an agent's angle regarding this sort of thing in the recent past:

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/336962-kinda-cool-agent-alvin-keels-says-ne-toughest-negotiate.html

The griping about the "disconnect" storyline is just another example of Patriots fans getting their manties in a bunch over something that they are generally proud of, just because the media has portrayed it from a different angle than the one that Patriots fans brag about. Patriots fans love to crow about how the Patriots will only pay so much, will not let players throw off the salary system, expect top players to take a little less, etc.... But, when the media notes that and spins it as "cheap" or "difficult" or some other less than 100% flattering phraseology, the Patriots fans lose their freakin' minds.

The mediots portray it from a NEGATIVE angle and, many times, it's not the truth. In fact, I can't remember a time when the mediots actually said something GOOD about the fact that the Patriots, many times, take a pro-active stance in signing extensions for players who have shown their worth.

 

[jmt57]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

And yes, the stories are very much more relevant this year than last. Brady is entering his contract year. The patriots can choose to renegotiate now or face an ugly situation after the season. But then, the patriots have been here before, with Law, and with Samuel.

I don't think it's quite as simple as 'make a deal now or face an ugly situation later'. It's really a very unique situation this year, so we can't really compare this to what has happened in the past when a team either extends a contract early or waits till the contract ends. There's (a) the 30% rule, (b) teams don't know if there will even be football next year, and (c) teams don't know what the salary cap will be, or if there will be a cap, if there is football next year.

All of these things are additional considerations that a team needs to take into account, that they would not have to think about when extending a player in previous years.

 

[DaBruinz]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

I have no idea whether there's a "disconnect or not". Frankly, I won't really worry about it even if it turns out the be true. There's no way in hell that the owners will sign a new CBA that doesn't keep some method of 'franchising' top players for at least a season or two in order to ease into a new system, so Brady's not going anywhere no matter how disconnected he might feel. Teams just won't allow a Brady or Manning to be lost in that manner.

However, the attacks that posters here make towards the media every time a story comes out which is not 100% ballwashing of the Patriots just get ridiculous.

What is just as ridiculous is your rush to paint the mediots in a good light every time they say something negative, regardless of it's truth..

 

[mgteich]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

So, life is hard! There are those who get big bucks to make the best of business situations. There are decisions to be made and consequences of those decisions. There are lots of contracts being signed in the nfl this year. The patriots have choices to make. I agree that the situation is not a simple one, but then, Kraft should do even better when situations are more difficult.

I don't think it's quite as simple as 'make a deal now or face an ugly situation later'. It's really a very unique situation this year, so we can't really compare this to what has happened in the past when a team either extends a contract early or waits till the contract ends. There's (a) the 30% rule, (b) teams don't know if there will even be football next year, and (c) teams don't know what the salary cap will be, or if there will be a cap, if there is football next year.

All of these things are additional considerations that a team needs to take into account, that they would not have to think about when extending a player in previous years.

 

[BelizePats]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Michael Silver has been quoted more times in the last week than he ever has in his career, which is the exact result he was hoping for when he wrote that piece of crap last week. He has actually managed to become a part of the story now.
This whole thing is like Spygate in that its taken on a life of its own, fed by sloppy, poor, lazy journalists.
Its really just a clear example of how much, and the extent to which, both BB and the Patriots are despised nationally. Just like Spygate was!

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Why are you including Seymour in there? He is proof the Pats will step up to the table and pay him because the Pats gave Seymour a contract that made him the highest paid defensive player per year at the time.

Do you mean the Seymour that had to hold out to get his contract adjusted, or the Seymour who recently got traded the year his contract was coming to an end and he was going to be wanting one final mega-contract?

So far, every elite player the Pats have wanted to retain other than maybe Samuel, they have stepped up to the plate including Brady, Seymour, and Wilfork.

Your take on "stepped up to the plate" and mine seem to differ. Signing a top player and then cutting him/trading him when they are still playing at a high level isn't what I consider "stepped up to the plate".

They may be tough negotiators, but they do pay the players they want to keep. Every player Kraft has publically stated he wanted for the future, he has kept. Brady is far more valuable to Kraft than just his play on the field. He has no intentions of letting him leave.

They don't pay at the same level as other teams. It's not just the media that says this. The players themselves say this. Hell, Moss has said this quite publicly this year, even while still being under contract. You, and the rest, can keep on railing against this all you want, but it's not going to change the truth, and it's certainly not going to change the perception. I have no problem with the team keeping to a structure. I, personally, don't consider the team cheap, although I think it does display an excessive rigidity at times, both contractually and in general.

However, when you have a rigid structure that doesn't easily accommodate elite contracts for elite talent, and doesn't facilitate easy negotiations, you're going to get a reputation for being cheap and a pain in the ass, whether that reputation is 100% accurate or not. The Patriots are reaping what they sow, both for good and for ill, and it's obvious that BB & company are quite willing live with that, so I don't really see why the fans can't handle it as well.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

What is just as ridiculous is your rush to paint the mediots in a good light every time they say something negative, regardless of it's truth..

I don't believe that there is a single individual, group, business or anything else that I don't question, including myself. That certainly includes the media, as you should well remember, given my position on Spygate, just to point to one glaring example.

 

[Mangold74]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

The one difference with at least Revis is that the Jets did state publically that giving him a new deal was a top priority and he is frustrated with their offers so far which based on rumored contracts are well below his value. But overall I agree with you.

What does an unbiased outsider consider his value? Is it the 16 million that crazy Al gave his corner or is more along the going right for top free agent corners like Samuel and Clemens of around $10 million a year. Can it really be more then $16 million? Your talking about paying 13 to 15% of your cap to a non quaterback or pass rusher. Revis is a great young player but A) he's under contract for 3 more seasons B) Al had to pay a premium to keep a player that wanted nothing to do with Oakland and C) paying QB money to a CB is probably going to set you up for major salary cap issues down the road. At some point if he's really asking for more then $16 million a year the Jets will have to consider making him play out the three 3 seasons or trading him for multiple picks.

 

[eagle eye]

Re: SI Today on "disconnect" between Pats and Brady.

Yet another opinon piece echo with not a single new fact. None.

What are the facts?

1. Kraft has only spoken in a positive manner about signing Brady

2. The Colts are in a similar position with Manning

3. Both team owners correctly indicate that CBA uncertainty is complicating and delaying these major business decisions

4. When the Pats deem a player essential, they pay him, e.g. Wilfork

5. When the Pats deem a player to be asking well above their percieved price, it's apparent, e.g. Samuel

6. The entire blizzard of articles is a function of Silver's unnamed source plus the added perceptions and opinions of writers seeking eyeballs

Thats exactly whats going on, but the forumiots just like the mediots just don't even bother with your post because they would have nothing to talk about otherwise.

This whole thread is guys trying to start a fire with only one crucial ingredient and thats air.