- Joined
- Sep 11, 2007
- Messages
- 2,886
- Reaction score
- 1,506
Not the Patriots
Correct. The Pats approximately spent to the previous year's salary cap in anticipation of the cap returning so they do not find themselves in cap hell.
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.Not the Patriots
Wrong. The third lowest payroll claim was incorrect, as admitted by the correction on page A2 in, I believe, Wednesday's Boston Globe. In accordance with the 3 most commonly-used salary instruments, the Pats rank 2nd, 9th and 12th.Yea but, did you see him wrestle the fumble away from 3-4 jets? The guy plays angry, linemen as good as him are few and far between. We need more of players like him not less. Pats have 3rd lowest payroll in the league. They HAVE to bring him back.
After giving it a little thought (very little) i'm sure a more than adequate guard could be picked up in FA and coached up
Not the Patriots
I'll be very upset with this organization of they let Mankins slip through the cracks like this. it won't make much sense at all. they need to keep brady as upright as possible in his last few years.
relaeasing mankins is doing just the opposite and makes another superbowl run a distant memory
please stop dissing logan with these questions.How is it disrespecting a player to pay him the average of the top 5 players at his position?
That's a very poor summary of each position's job.
Just to be clear, everyone understands that franchising Mankins means the Patriots have to pay him the average of the top 5 Offensive Lineman in the NFL, not just Guards.
There is no differentiation between Offensive Lineman.
I want them to pony up and pay Mankins as the best interior OL in the league because he is just that. He's this era's John Hannah. However, Mankins is and has been playing hardball and the Patriots will do the same and use every option open to them, and that obviously includes tagging him. They can afford his deal and they should get it done immediately, hopefully it doesn't go south.
“No, I wouldn’t be happy about that (franchise tag), if that’s what they choose to do, to be dealt that kind of hand,’’ Mankins said following the AFC team’s workout yesterday on a field at the Pro Bowl hotel complex. “But we’ll see what happens.’’
“I would never say the door is totally shut,’’ Mankins said, when asked to clarify his remarks. “But the way it’s looking right now, I don’t see it happening. I don’t see them trying to keep me, unless it’s with the franchise tag.’’
Asked if he still had scars from a contentious negotiation, he finally responded.
“I don’t know. I guess there is,’’ he said. “But I’ve gotten past it. I just learned it’s a business the hard way.’’
“I enjoyed playing there,’’ Mankins said, using the past tense. “The season’s over. Now it’s business time. Who knows what’s going to happen. Things could change with the CBA.
“I just know I’ll be employed. Someone will pay me.’’
yes, the tag was 9.12 last year, It was reported that the pats were willing to go 7.5 a year long term. for another 1.5mill next year the pats have him without putting out 25 mill. Good deal for the pats as i see it.
Do you have facts to back up what SB winners were paying their Gs?It is clear that the last several SB teams paid their OGs top of the league money. No top 5 cheap money for them. So, we need to do the same and pay Mankins the same as those proven winners and not waste valuable cap money on All-Pro OLBs, CBs and other insignificant positions. Example... repeat SB Champs New Orleans.