JSn
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 7,428
- Reaction score
- 1
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Do we have to cut someone when he decides to report?I assume his holdout has given us a roster exemption, but I can't remember.
If so, this would seem doubly unfair. I'd say find him an agreeable deal and just get him out of here.
Anyway, that's my question. Does someone have to go?
Do we have to cut someone when he decides to report?I assume his holdout has given us a roster exemption, but I can't remember.
If so, this would seem doubly unfair. I'd say find him an agreeable deal and just get him out of here.
Anyway, that's my question. Does someone have to go?
IF we're at 53 when he reports and I expect us to be, then yes someone needs to be cut or put on IR.
Nobody is willing to pay him the $ he wants AND give the Pats a pick they'll accept
And given the fact the highest paid guard is presently a part of the Saints line caving in under pressure this year, I expect the Saints would take a mulligan on that contract if given the opportunity.
Excellent observation. Whod a thunk it that instead of dire things happening tp the Pats with Mankins out instead it would be the SB Champ Saints in trouble with their $8M OG? I have to think that GMs around the league look at that sutuation and then pass on Logan's contract demands.
Mankins is never going to recover financially from his decision to turn down the reputed $7M in 2010 and thereafter from the Patriots, an offer that in retrospect at least Bob Kraft is now likely happy wasn't accepted.
Where is this reputed $7 million for 2010? Both the agent, and Reiss (if my memory of which reporter is correct), reported that the deal offered required Mankins to play 2010 under the tender number.
Mankins is out less than 2 million for 2010, because of the Patriots deciding to slash the tender. He'll make that up in 1-2 years, probably in guarantees, is he gets the type of deal he's looking for.
I think the point the previous poster is trying to make is that Jahri Evans' contract looks like it might be an albatross that doesn't have much effect on the market (similar to how Ghost's new contract doesn't top the insane $$$ Al Davis had to pay to keep Janikowski and Lechler).
The contract is for seven years and totals 56.7M. With an 8.1M average, it surpasses Faneca by $100,000 as the highest APY for a guard. It contains 19M of guaranteed money, although no guaranteed money after this year. It has 25.6M in the all-important category of money over the first three years.
I'm half expecting to see Mankins signed then put on IR for a serious brain cramp.
I doubt that. But if he shows up out of shape (possible) and can't pass a condition test they could put him on PUP.
Another possiblity is just cut him out right. The Patriots would be giving up the expected comp pick in the 2012 draft and he would be a FA immeadetely able to sign with any team, but the Pats would not owe him a penny.
Evans' contract isn't an outlier, though, and it's not all that different from what Mangold got. One's 7 for $55 million ($22 million in guarantees of one sort or another), the other is 7 for $56.7 million ($19 million in guarantees). Evans' deal surpassed Faneca's by only $100,000 APY, according to NFP:
On guard: the Evans deal | National Football Post
I doubt that. But if he shows up out of shape (possible) and can't pass a condition test they could put him on PUP.
Another possiblity is just cut him out right. The Patriots would be giving up the expected comp pick in the 2012 draft and he would be a FA immeadetely able to sign with any team, but the Pats would not owe him a penny.