RE: Asante... is this the calm before the storm????

[DaBruinz]

Its been a few weeks (maybe 8) since Asante was saying how disgruntled he was with the way things were going in negoatiations. His agent told him not to take it public but he did anyways. However, since then, we haven't heard anything. We probably wouldn't have heard anything this week because of the tragic loss of Marquise Hill.

But I wonder if anything is cooking.... I hope it is. As much as I think that Asante over-rates himself, I would prefer to have him here on a decent extension than on a 1 year deal.

 

[zippo59]

If Samuel is going to raise a stink it would not be now. He has little leverage now and the closer the season get's the more leverage he will get.

I think he would be an idiot to leave that much money on the table...but to answer your question, his reprting is anything but a slam dunk.

 

[BelichickFan]

My guess is nothing is happening. He'll sign the one year deal and play hard for next year's big contract. Then the Patriots have to decide whether to franchise and trade him or just let him walk.

 

[zippo59]

My guess is nothing is happening. He'll sign the one year deal and play hard for next year's big contract. Then the Patriots have to decide whether to franchise and trade him or just let him walk.

I bet if he does sign the tender he'll try to get them to promise not to franchise him next year before he does.

 

[BelichickFan]

I bet if he does sign the tender he'll try to get them to promise not to franchise him next year before he does.

And they'll refuse, it takes away the option to tag and trade.

The Patriots have something to lose here, but Samuel has more to lose.

 

[PATSNUTme]

I would be very surprised if this does not go to the second or third week of TC. How often have we seen the tagged guy on other teams do that? Many times.

 

[BelichickFan]

I would be very surprised if this does not go to the second or third week of TC. How often have we seen the tagged guy on other teams do that? Many times.

There's nothing for it to go to at that point. After July 15, or thereabouts, he can't sign a new contract, it's sign the Franchise Contract or holdout.

 

[cstjohn17]

Its been a few weeks (maybe 8) since Asante was saying how disgruntled he was with the way things were going in negoatiations. His agent told him not to take it public but he did anyways. However, since then, we haven't heard anything. We probably wouldn't have heard anything this week because of the tragic loss of Marquise Hill.

But I wonder if anything is cooking.... I hope it is. As much as I think that Asante over-rates himself, I would prefer to have him here on a decent extension than on a 1 year deal.

It is a good question, personally I think the negotiations are as dead as a doorknob. The sides cannot come together on the terms.

The next chapter in the process according to my Franchise Player manual he will start making some noise as July 15th approaches. After that he will be quiet, shallow his pride and show up for camp towards the end of the pre-season.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

There's nothing for it to go to at that point. After July 15, or thereabouts, he can't sign a new contract, it's sign the Franchise Contract or holdout.

Not true. That is when the alternate options kick in. Sign him to a one year deal in lieu of the tag that stipulates he can't be tagged again or trade him for something of value that likely won't help you this season, or the unlikliest of all rescind his tag and let him become a FA on the eve of the season.

If Bill really wanted to trade him for a draft pick he would have done it in April. If Bill were willing to let him walk this season he wouldn't have tagged him. That leaves working out a long term deal which, given the money Asante is reportedly looking for in bonus and guarantees isn't gonna happen, or working out a deal whereby he plays this year in a well compensated contract season and the door is left ever so slightly open that they can get a deal done with him between the last week in December and the opening of FA in March 2008. It's a longshot to get them resigned, but Seattle did so with Sean Alexander by simply agreeing not to re-tag him and promising to revisit working on an extension at the end of the season.

 

[JoeSixPat]

the posturing and drama through camp will happen... count on it

whether that translates to an actual holdout is another question

 

[Vern]

whether that translates to an actual holdout is another question

Assante cannot hold out because he is already a Free Agent. He has an offer from the team, but is under no obligation to sign it.

I've already seen this mischaracterized as a hold out in the press and it's just not true. Samuel is in the same state as Chad Brown or Patrick
Pass or any number of other free agents you think you might still want the Pats to sign. The only difference is the franchise tag, which gives the Pats compensation if Samuel, as a free agent, signs elsewhere.

After July 15, he can either sign with the team or not be under contract nor play for any other team in the NFL. And if he decides not to sign, that is NOT a hold out, but a free man deciding whether he wants to work or not -- simply deciding not to sign a contract. That is very, very different than reneging on a signed contract because you are suddenly unhappy about it.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Assante cannot hold out because he is already a Free Agent. He has an offer from the team, but is under no obligation to sign it.

I've already seen this mischaracterized as a hold out in the press and it's just not true. Samuel is in the same state as Chad Brown or Patrick
Pass or any number of other free agents you think you might still want the Pats to sign. The only difference is the franchise tag, which gives the Pats compensation if Samuel, as a free agent, signs elsewhere.

After July 15, he can either sign with the team or not be under contract nor play for any other team in the NFL. And if he decides not to sign, that is NOT a hold out, but a free man deciding whether he wants to work or not -- simply deciding not to sign a contract. That is very, very different than reneging on a signed contract because you are suddenly unhappy about it.

Yes - he can sit out the entire season if he wants to.

I think you're going to be awful frustrated because most fans and reporters are indeed going to refer to that as a "hold out"

 

[SpiderFox53]

Yes - he can sit out the entire season if he wants to.

I think you're going to be awful frustrated because most fans and reporters are indeed going to refer to that as a "hold out"

I disagree. Most fans will refer to it as a hold out, but any good reporter will not. ESPN does not qualify as "good" reporting.

 

[BelichickFan]

Yes - he can sit out the entire season if he wants to.

He can and he'll be Franchised again. Right now the $9M or so counts against our cap for 2007 - if he sits out that's credited to 2008 as it was unspent so all it would cost us to Franchise him again is the credited amount + 20%. We'll have prepaid most of it. Then he can sit out again if he wants and take his chances on the open market after not playing for two years.

 

[Vern]

Yes - he can sit out the entire season if he wants to.

I think you're going to be awful frustrated because most fans and reporters are indeed going to refer to that as a "hold out"

The second part I get. Hell, I watched FSN last night and Bryan Morrey (formerly of PFW!) was still going on about how he'll "sit out ten games" which is totally inapplicable to Samuel since he's already a FA and has no reason to try to establish an accrued season like Branch last year. If he sits, it will be as long as he wants.

Point being, it's a different dynamic not being able to sign a FA than it is having someone under contract making a stink. One of the differences is that three or four other franchise tagged FAs will be in the same situation. What happens with them will sort of set the market in terms of the impact on the club. I can't think of a franchise player who actually sat out. All they can do is withhold services which is not that much of a negative compared to the kind of damage a true hold out or protest can do, such as Porter on the Raiders last year, or what Branch was about to do in 06.

 

[BelichickFan]

The technicalities of whether it's a hold out, sitting out, retiring, taking a year off, whatever, bore the crap out of me. Who cares what it's called. Is he playing, is he home, is he traded, that's all that matters.

 

[DaBruinz]

Assante cannot hold out because he is already a Free Agent. He has an offer from the team, but is under no obligation to sign it.

if you are going to get TECHNICAL, then you should include that Asante (one S, not two) is a Franchised Free Agent at this point.

I've already seen this mischaracterized as a hold out in the press and it's just not true. Samuel is in the same state as Chad Brown or Patrick
Pass or any number of other free agents you think you might still want the Pats to sign. The only difference is the franchise tag, which gives the Pats compensation if Samuel, as a free agent, signs elsewhere.

After July 15, he can either sign with the team or not be under contract nor play for any other team in the NFL. And if he decides not to sign, that is NOT a hold out, but a free man deciding whether he wants to work or not -- simply deciding not to sign a contract. That is very, very different than reneging on a signed contract because you are suddenly unhappy about it.

Because of the semantics of the Franchise Tag, Samuel is guaranteed the 7.79 million when he signs. True, he doesn't have to sign, but because of that guarantee and because it counts against the cap, it is considered a hold-out if he doesn't sign. Now, the reason he hasn't signed so far is because he is HOLDING OUT for more money. Hence why it would be considered a hold out since, after July 15th, he can only sign with the Patriots.

 

[Pujo]

or the unlikliest of all rescind his tag and let him become a FA on the eve of the season.

That's not an option. Once Jul 15 passes, he cannot sign anything other than the 1 year franchise tender, with any team.

 

[Jimke]

There is no incentive for either party to negotiate until July 15th

approaches. At this point in time, Asante has to make the decision

whether he wants to pass up a large lump sum signing bonus. If time

runs out and he is stuck with the one year contract, he runs the risk

of getting injured or having a sub par season.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

That's not an option. Once Jul 15 passes, he cannot sign anything other than the 1 year franchise tender, with any team.

No, that's not true. The team can rescind the tag any time they want prior to his signing it. The only problem is that gives the player what he wants - he immediately becomes a UFA. In the past that wasn't always in the players best interest as FA money had dried up. Not the case since the new CBA was signed. Plenty of teams are still sitting on lots of cap space.

Also, after July 15th he can sign a one year deal OTHER than the franchise tag with this team. He just can't sign a long term deal with them. He could still sign a long term deal with another team if he were traded.

In 2005 Shaun Alexander refused to sign his tag with Seattle and refused to report to camp. About a week into camp he and the Seahawks agreed to a seperate and distinct 1 year deal that guaranteed him the same salary he'd have received had he signed his franchise tag tender PLUS it stipulated he would not be tagged in 2006. I believe Nate Clements did the same in Buffalo last season. The Seahawks re-opened negotiations later in the season and were able to re-sign Alexander to a long term deal after the last week of the 2005 season (when they are allowed to revisit franchised player contracts) and before 2006 FA commenced. The Bills apparently had neither the intention to or the means to re-sign Clements, so he simply became a UFA in 2007.