nantucketguy
Practice Squad Player
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2009
- Messages
- 138
- Reaction score
- 0
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.I can almost guarantee that they're not getting Welker, Talib, and Vollmer no matter who restructures, much less those four plus Reed.
This has been discussed. But yes, over ten million of cap room can be had by restructuring the contracts of Brady and Mankins. This simply borrows from the future. But it is likely to happen.
However, I agree with other that we are most unlikely to re-sign all of the big three. One is probably most likely.
Why would Mankins be restructured?
He'd want top dollar; and he's been injury prone -- I see no reason why the team would extend him at his current avg pay.
Brady restructuring also means paying him 18-20 million when he's 39/40 -- which wouldn't result in much cap room being pushed forward; unless he's willing to go team friendly on 5 or 10 mil per year on an extended 2 years
"What have you done for me lately" at it's finest. Mankins never missed any game or even practice because of injury until he tore his ACL, and all of the other problems this past season were because he played on that ACL 6 months after surgery and had to push other parts of his body more to make up for the lack of strength in his knee. When a player goes six straight seasons without missing anything due to injury and then has one injury that still affects him far less than most players, then there's no way you can call him injury prone.Why would Mankins be restructured?
He'd want top dollar; and he's been injury prone -- I see no reason why the team would extend him at his current avg pay.
"What have you done for me lately" at it's finest. Mankins never missed any game or even practice because of injury until he tore his ACL, and all of the other problems this past season were because he played on that ACL 6 months after surgery and had to push other parts of his body more to make up for the lack of strength in his knee. When a player goes six straight seasons without missing anything due to injury and then has one injury that still affects him far less than most players, then there's no way you can call him injury prone.
hearing about talibs work ethic
The question should be should Brady be restructured (again) to free up cap? It's not up to him. It's entirely up to the team. Players have no say in simple restructures. Those add nothing to the existing contract nor do they add to or subtract from the players pocket. The team simply changes the way they treat existing salary or roster bonus by "converting" it to signing bonus. That allows them to spread it out over the remaining years on the deal for cap accounting purposes. The player actually gets the money at the time of the restructure, so it's in his hand up to several months earlier and is therefore also guaranteed.
Some players may be pissed internally because they know that the more that teams do to increase their cap hit on the back end the less likely they are to be here to collect that salary (becoming the dreaded cap cut casualty).
Brady wont restructure. he knows his salary affects more than just himself. out of respect for other qbs, if he changed his contract it would affect how much they would earn also. They wont reduce Brady's contract, this is his last big payout. we all know it.
The question should be should Brady be restructured (again) to free up cap? It's not up to him. It's entirely up to the team. Players have no say in simple restructures. Those add nothing to the existing contract nor do they add to or subtract from the players pocket. The team simply changes the way they treat existing salary or roster bonus by "converting" it to signing bonus. That allows them to spread it out over the remaining years on the deal for cap accounting purposes. The player actually gets the money at the time of the restructure, so it's in his hand up to several months earlier and is therefore also guaranteed.
“Renegotiate” or “renegotiation” means any change in Salary or the terms under
which such Salary is earned or paid, or any change regarding the Club’s right to trade the
player, during the term of a Player Contract
If he were to extend out to age 40, as an example, with a low salary for the last two seasons playing at ages 39 and 40, the ripple effect is very minimal on other quarterbacks simply because of the age issue. It would only greatly affect other quarterbacks of similar stature of a similar age, not necessarily all QBs in general.
Age and expectations of age-related decline are part of the salary equation. If Wes Welker were 28, he'd be locked up already and probably get exactly whatever it is he is asking for.
He may not want to extend because of the pride issue. Face it, there is no reason on Earth why he should be making less money than Peyton Manning. When the Celtics were negotiating contracts with Bill Russell. He'd say "Find out what Wilt is making. I'll sign for $1 more, but never for $1 less". Of course back then there was no salary cap. Brady's probably tempted by similar thoughts, but with the clock ticking on his time to win, his burning desire to win, and the reality of the salary cap, he might be amenable to being locked up in a contract taking him to age 40.
The question should be should Brady be restructured (again) to free up cap? It's not up to him. It's entirely up to the team. Players have no say in simple restructures. Those add nothing to the existing contract nor do they add to or subtract from the players pocket. The team simply changes the way they treat existing salary or roster bonus by "converting" it to signing bonus. That allows them to spread it out over the remaining years on the deal for cap accounting purposes. The player actually gets the money at the time of the restructure, so it's in his hand up to several months earlier and is therefore also guaranteed.
Some players may be pissed internally because they know that the more that teams do to increase their cap hit on the back end the less likely they are to be here to collect that salary (becoming the dreaded cap cut casualty).
It's quite likely they restructure Mankins though, saving $3.75M against the cap this season. The final (6th) year of his deal is currently salary only so it was set up to be restructured more than once if necessary. A simple restructure this season would only push $1.25M onto his existing final all salary only cap hit of $7M (making it $8.25M with $1.25M in dead cap if cut).
The only restructures a player has any say in are actually extensions or reductions in contract value. They aren't really restructures per say. They all just tend to get lumped into that term.
A Wilfork or Brady simple restructure this season - converting salary and in Brady's case roster bonus as well into signing bonus - poses serious problems going forward that could impact their ability to play out the existing deal because each only has 2 years remaining on their existing deal. So an amount equal to what you save this year ($3M on Wilfork and $7M on Brady) gets added on to their cap hit next year. Would make Wilfork's cap hit $14.6M in 2014 and Brady's $28.8M. Neither could be tagged in 2015 as a result because their tag would be at 120% of that number and prohibitive (roughly $17.5M and $34.5M).
It would also make it extremely hard to get any kind of extension worked out going forward because the dead cap (amortization) in that final year would make it difficult to achieve a cap friendly hit in the first year and eliminate any ability to make the remaining years remotely comfortable.
brady wont restructure. he knows his salary affects more than just himself. out of respect for other qbs, if he changed his contract it would affect how much they would earn also. They wont reduce brady's contract, this is his last big payout. we all know it.
Does the player contract or the CBA allow teams to unilaterally "re-negotiate" that way? IANAL, but my understanding is that it's a signed contract, and they can't change the terms without the player's permission.
From the CBA:
That said, I can't imagine many situations where a player would refuse to have non-guaranteed money converted to guaranteed.