The Mankins paradox

[vyrago]

It's not about the money, it's about the respect. Mankins is very old school, and apparently feels disrespected because he believes the Patriots misled him. It apparently is a matter of honor to him.

Old school? I wish I had gone to that old school. This is, my tool is bigger than your tool school.

 

[Gwedd]

The Pats approach with Mankins has been similar to what they did with Vince Wilfork last year. They offered both less money than what the top 3 players at their position were offering, and leaked it early to the media that reasonable offers were made but the players were too greedy to accept it. It then gets fans on management's side, to demonize the player for holding out for an extra mill or two.

However, the reactions by Wilfork and Mankins have been totally opposite. Wilfork kept his cool, didn't really speak or comment, and it all ended up well. Brady is following a similar path. Mankins basically flipped out, but I can see where he's coming from.

And you know this how? The Patriots, according to published news sources, offered Mankins a top-3 contract. If by "leaked it early to the media" you mean talking $@*^'s like Felger and that crew, then I wouldn't trust a word from their lips. Perhaps you meant Florio? He hasn't met a rumour yet that he wasn't willing to pimp out as being told to him by the Gods of Football themselves.

The Patriots have been more than fair and reasonable with their offers. It's more likely that Mankins hasn't been told the full story by his agent.

Regardless, painting the Patriots as "cheap" is a constant meme by those with an axe to grind. They've never been cheap, and their record shows that plainly to anyone willing to actually, you know, examine the facts.

 

[IllegalContact]

I've been following this melodrama just like everyone else but there are 2 questions that I never see answered. I'd appreciate someone or everyone explaining it to me.

1. Mankins has stated he is all set with money. He has saved all his money from the first 5 years of his career (about $8MM IIRC), and doesn't need the money. YET, he's been offered about $7MM/yr and is pissed that it isn't $8.5MM. IF money doesn't matter, then why is he pissed?.

how do you know that's actually what he was offered? what about the guaranteed portion?

2. In his own statement he claimed that the Pats promised to take care of him after the uncapped year. Yet "after the uncapped year" isn't until 2/11. So did he misspeak, or does he just not know what he is talking about. Because the Pats DID offer to take care of THIS off season to the tune of making him one of the top 3 OGs in the league..

are you sure its AFTER the uncapped year? why would anyone say I will take care of you during a lockout? sounds pretty silly

3. Now we are starting to hear the the Pats promised to make him the TOP paid G in the league, yet no source has been mentioned on this. Is it true, or is it just another example of mediot speculation..

well......file it next to your 1st 2 unless you have actual proof that they happened, otherwise, you sound biased

4. If Mankins is EVER going to get my respect back, he is going to have to make clear, EXACTLY what he thought the Pats promised and what they actually delivered. He is going to have to state for the record that he thinks he's the BEST OG in the league, and wants to be paid as the best. Anything less isn't going to do it. THEN I might disagree with this position, but at least I would know where he stands,and I can respect that.

I don't think he gives a crap about your respect. And why are the pats automatically absolved from stating their case? on one hand you have a player who has never known to be dishonest. on the other you have an organization who has been questioned in terms of honesty. I ain't judging, but the pats are not above it all

 

[Wolfpack]

are you sure its AFTER the uncapped year? why would anyone say I will take care of you during a lockout? sounds pretty silly

Yes, that's what Mankins said and yes he did sound silly. It may have been just a slip of the tongue, but IMHO it showed Mankins doesn't really understand what is going on here and he is just following his agent's marching orders.

I don't think he gives a crap about your respect. And why are the pats automatically absolved from stating their case? on one hand you have a player who has never known to be dishonest. on the other you have an organization who has been questioned in terms of honesty. I ain't judging, but the pats are not above it all

Yeah. Right. Sure. Players (and their agents) are just the absolute models of honesty and integrity when it comes to contract negotiations.

 

[DW Toys]

Yes, that's what Mankins said and yes he did sound silly. It may have been just a slip of the tongue, but IMHO it showed Mankins doesn't really understand what is going on here and he is just following his agent's marching orders.
Yeah. Right. Sure. Players (and their agents) are just the absolute models of honesty and integrity when it comes to contract negotiations.

Cousins,
Here is the way I see it. Mankins got what he was worth on the table. His (his agent gets about 3%) agent will get about a quarter million dollars of this new payday if he can get $8m. It is about money with the agent. They are unscrupulous anyway so the difference between $6.5m and $8m is about $50,000 to Mr. Bauer. The Pats should pay him an "honorarium" of that $50k as good will and get this deal done. You think he would ever tell LM?

Seriously, I would trade him. By accident I came upon the 49ers site and it has suggested Manny Lawson and a third rounder for Mankins. I might do that. Lawson is in a squabble there but might be closer to sign.

"Lawson started all 16 games last year for the first time in his career, leading the 49ers with a career-high 6.5 sacks. Since then, San Francisco has extended the contracts of other young players the team feels are key to its future.

Lawson is in the final season of the five-year, $7.5 million deal he signed as the second of San Francisco's two first-round draft picks in 2006. His base salary of $630,000 pays him less than two of the team's other outside linebackers"

He is a more urgent need for the Pats than an OG who thinks he is the best in the game but really had only a fair 2009 the way I saw it. Lawson has been said to be superb in coverage and at 6.5 sacks, he is more the BB type OLB at 6' 5". Seems like a OLB who is just starting to get it. We are still struggling to fill that void....Murrell? Burgess? an injured Cunningham?

But at the end of the day the old issue of the Pats being cheap shows it's ugly head. Signing Mankins might be the best for the Team as a whole in future negotiations with top FAs.

Perhaps trade Mankins and sign Lawson long term might work to still resolve that and we still have a third rounder "to have and to hold"! And Mankins can go back to the fruits and the nuts of good old California and Nancy P.
DW Toys

 

[DropKickFlutie]

And you know this how? The Patriots, according to published news sources, offered Mankins a top-3 contract.

HOW do you know Mankins was offered a top 3 contract besides the fact that Pats camp keeps repeating it over and over????

Published reports are 35M over 5 years to start after the RFA year at 3M, which makes it a tad over 6M per year for 6 years, which isn't even top 10 guard money, especially 2 years from now.

 

[IllegalContact]

Yes, that's what Mankins said and yes he did sound silly. It may have been just a slip of the tongue, but IMHO it showed Mankins doesn't really understand what is going on here and he is just following his agent's marching orders.
Yeah. Right. Sure. Players (and their agents) are just the absolute models of honesty and integrity when it comes to contract negotiations.

just like the owners, right? please, have a reasonable perspective

 

[IllegalContact]

HOW do you know Mankins was offered a top 3 contract besides the fact that Pats camp keeps repeating it over and over????

Published reports are 35M over 5 years to start after the RFA year at 3M, which makes it a tad over 6M per year for 6 years, which isn't even top 10 guard money, especially 2 years from now.

their logic is that if that's what thepats offered, then that's what he must be worth.

a little simplistic, but I guess it works for some people

 

[IllegalContact]

Cousins,
Here is the way I see it. Mankins got what he was worth on the table. His (his agent gets about 3%) agent will get about a quarter million dollars of this new payday if he can get $8m. It is about money with the agent. They are unscrupulous anyway so the difference between $6.5m and $8m is about $50,000 to Mr. Bauer. The Pats should pay him an "honorarium" of that $50k as good will and get this deal done. You think he would ever tell LM?

Seriously, I would trade him. By accident I came upon the 49ers site and it has suggested Manny Lawson and a third rounder for Mankins. I might do that. Lawson is in a squabble there but might be closer to sign.

"Lawson started all 16 games last year for the first time in his career, leading the 49ers with a career-high 6.5 sacks. Since then, San Francisco has extended the contracts of other young players the team feels are key to its future.

Lawson is in the final season of the five-year, $7.5 million deal he signed as the second of San Francisco's two first-round draft picks in 2006. His base salary of $630,000 pays him less than two of the team's other outside linebackers"

He is a more urgent need for the Pats than an OG who thinks he is the best in the game but really had only a fair 2009 the way I saw it. Lawson has been said to be superb in coverage and at 6.5 sacks, he is more the BB type OLB at 6' 5". Seems like a OLB who is just starting to get it. We are still struggling to fill that void....Murrell? Burgess? an injured Cunningham?

But at the end of the day the old issue of the Pats being cheap shows it's ugly head. Signing Mankins might be the best for the Team as a whole in future negotiations with top FAs.

Perhaps trade Mankins and sign Lawson long term might work to still resolve that and we still have a third rounder "to have and to hold"! And Mankins can go back to the fruits and the nuts of good old California and Nancy P.
DW Toys

that's nice, but under the current situation, mankins is not under contract, therefor he cannot be traded

 

[Clonamery]

HOW do you know Mankins was offered a top 3 contract besides the fact that Pats camp keeps repeating it over and over????

Published reports are 35M over 5 years to start after the RFA year at 3M, which makes it a tad over 6M per year for 6 years, which isn't even top 10 guard money, especially 2 years from now.

WHO is the Pats camp? Show me links to these reports that is not some specultaive turd mediot. Otherwise all this is a wasted crapfest.

 

[bradydaman29]

"Its always about the money, and even when its not about the money, its about the money"...........Tommy Caffee

Or as Jim Rome says: If an athlete tells you it's not about the money, it's about one thing, The Money!!

 

[DW Toys]

that's nice, but under the current situation, mankins is not under contract, therefor he cannot be traded

Sign and Trade works out that issue Cousin.
DW Toys

 

[Wolfpack]

just like the owners, right? please, have a reasonable perspective

Ah, but it ain't the Patriots who have done the majority of the talking during this process, or levying personal accusations of misconduct towards the other.

A lot of people have been fooled into believing that Mankins is some golden boy man of integrity, when really he's behaving just like any other spoiled brat athlete who wants more money. And yes folks, it is about the money.

 

[Pats726]

I would be pissed too if I played out a crappy 6 year deal (while players in the same cohort were re-signed earlier), then the team RFA'd me, then offered me something that two years from now won't even be top 10 guard money when you average it out over 6 years.

Get your facts straight..it was NOT the Patriots who RFAd. him (a team DOSE NOT do that...lol) it was the CBA that changed it..IF he has ANY beef with that..go squack to the NFLPA about it...NOT much of a case at all...poor poor multi millionaire...wah!!!!!

 

[RIP#40]

I've been following this melodrama just like everyone else but there are 2 questions that I never see answered. I'd appreciate someone or everyone explaining it to me.

1. Mankins has stated he is all set with money. He has saved all his money from the first 5 years of his career (about $8MM IIRC), and doesn't need the money. YET, he's been offered about $7MM/yr and is pissed that it isn't $8.5MM. IF money doesn't matter, then why is he pissed?

2. In his own statement he claimed that the Pats promised to take care of him after the uncapped year. Yet "after the uncapped year" isn't until 2/11. So did he misspeak, or does he just not know what he is talking about. Because the Pats DID offer to take care of THIS off season to the tune of making him one of the top 3 OGs in the league.

3. Now we are starting to hear the the Pats promised to make him the TOP paid G in the league, yet no source has been mentioned on this. Is it true, or is it just another example of mediot speculation.

4. If Mankins is EVER going to get my respect back, he is going to have to make clear, EXACTLY what he thought the Pats promised and what they actually delivered. He is going to have to state for the record that he thinks he's the BEST OG in the league, and wants to be paid as the best. Anything less isn't going to do it. THEN I might disagree with this position, but at least I would know where he stands,and I can respect that.

Re: #4. I'm sure he's worried about getting your respect. His lawyer is probably preparing a letter so that you will know EXACTLY what he was expecting.

 

[Deus Irae]

Get your facts straight..it was NOT the Patriots who RFAd. him (a team DOSE NOT do that...lol) it was the CBA that changed it..IF he has ANY beef with that..go squack to the NFLPA about it...NOT much of a case at all...poor poor multi millionaire...wah!!!!!

Actually, it was the Patriots that "RFA'd" Mankins. The Patriots were under no obligation to tender Mankins. The CBA simply allowed them to do that after 5 years of service time instead of the 4 years it had previously been.

And the "poor poor multi millionaire" argument is crap, given that the owners that were crying poverty over the CBA, and decided to opt out of it so that they can increase their personal take, are billionaires.

 

[BSR]

Actually, it was the Patriots that "RFA'd" Mankins. The Patriots were under no obligation to tender Mankins. The CBA simply allowed them to do that after 5 years of service time instead of the 4 years it had previously been.

And Mankins had no obligation to ask for the top three guard money. The point is that the RFA is a fact of the CBA and not some patriots construct. Blaming them for using it is as silly as saying that Mankins should give up his rights under the terms of that agreement.

 

[Deus Irae]

And Mankins had no obligation to ask for the top three guard money. The point is that the RFA is a fact of the CBA and not some patriots construct. Blaming them for using it is as silly as saying that Mankins should give up his rights under the terms of that agreement.

I'm sorry, but that's just nonsense. Equating the decision not to punish a person over a clause in the CBA that wasn't even in effect before the opt out with trying to get what you consider fair value is just ludicrous.

 

[IllegalContact]

Ah, but it ain't the Patriots who have done the majority of the talking during this process, or levying personal accusations of misconduct towards the other.

A lot of people have been fooled into believing that Mankins is some golden boy man of integrity, when really he's behaving just like any other spoiled brat athlete who wants more money. And yes folks, it is about the money.

right, but just because the pats don't talk don't mean they don't have a sizeable hand in the problem.

I'm not fooled by anything. I don't believe mankins should be making half of what even has been 'turned down', but then again, I don't believe bob kraft should be charging half of what he charges to see a game.

all of it is about money. always has been. there's no golden boy in this, but if mankins is of dishonorable character, what the hell does that make belichik?

 

[BSR]

I'm sorry, but that's just nonsense. Equating the decision not to punish a person over a clause in the CBA that wasn't even in effect before the opt out with trying to get what you consider fair value is just ludicrous.

It wasn't like they penciled it into the CBA after the fact. It has always been there and it has always been considered a possibility. And it isn't a punishment any more then anyone else with a restricted free agent status has been "punished". Again, why is it fair for the Patriots to give up rights granted to them by the CBA but not for Mankins to do the same? That is the part that is nonsense.

Here is a questions for you, how is Mankin's predicament so much different then the next crop of first round draftees that will quite possibly have to deal with a much reduced rookie salary pool, that their predesessors of one draft class didn't half to deal with? Its not fair to them either. Are teams going to be bad guys for adhering to those rules?