Some Perspective on Samuel

[Ring 6]

Threatened holdouts in the NFL are common, actual holdouts rare.
Under the franchise tag Samuel will make approximately 485,000 per week.

So far in his career combined, he has earned 1.75million.

When he says he will hold out the first 10 games (because he must play 6 to have the year credited) he will lose just under 3 times what he has earned in his life.

By the way, what is somewhat ignorant in his approach is that if he plays under the tag, then signs here or elsewhere next year, he will make more money in the 2 combined years than under any other scenario. In other words, he is getting almost 8 mill SALARY. He will not see 8 mill SALARY in a year for at least the first 3-4 years even on a contract that averages 10mill a year (because the signing bonus is up front and the salaries start low and grow). In essence by ACCEPTING THE REALITY that if he wants to be a free agent and not agree to a deal with the Pats, playing under the tag (even if its 2 years) only postpones his signing bonus, and ultimately earns him more money overall. Additionally, contracts escalate so the sb he would get in 08 or 09 is likely higher than in 07.
The risk Samuel takes is if he were to have a career ending injury. But heres the reality of that. Lets say he would get a 10mill sb and 3mill salary this year. Where is the real injury protection? 13 mill vs 8 mill for a guy who has earned 1.75 mil in his life.
It is a poor decision for Samuel to walk away from 8mill today, because he thinks it should be 13, and be willing to get nothing this year so he can get that 13 next year.
When your lifetime earnings are 1.75mill and there is 8mill on the table, you may gripe that you want more, but you do what your boss tells you to when it comes down to getting or not getting that 485,000 weekly check.

 

[BelichickFan]

All he has to do is get an insurance policy on a major injury and your two year scenario works fine. Unfortunately they all seem to let the mind games of respect and comparisons to other players - and with Samuel getting a 9 on the Wunderlich, when he starts thinking, bad things happen

 

[captain stone]

That's why I would be surprised if Samuel decides to hold out; the $$ he would lose, per game, would equal his average annual salary for his first 4 years in the league. I wouldn't do it, anyway.

Does this likely mean that it will all come down to: who blinks first?

 

[Ring 6]

It seems like a huge issue in the NFL is that these guys look at their rookie contract as an insult if they turn into good players. Its easy to explain why it is, but after 4 years in the league playing at a high level and having made only 1.75 mill total, when mediocre free agents get 5mill signing bonusses, they all of a sudden turn it into being disrespected for having played well for such relatively little money. It seems to be hitting us harder than most teams because we draft very well (or you could at least say we hit big on some later picks).
I wonder if the NFL should look at drastically increasing the rookie cap pool to overcome what could end up being a severe problem. To do so they would have to make accomodations for busts. For example, raise the rookie cap significantly (you'd almost have to slot contracts because this happens with guys in rounds 2, 3 and 4 mostly, since 1st rounders are all paid well, and 5th and beyond rarely turn into highly vauable guys) but give the team a cap out that if a player is cut during his rookie contract, the unamortized signing bonus doesnt count vs the cap. There is still cash risk, but not cap risk, and that way, there isnt such a wide divide between what 2nd-4th round players who start and play well earn vs other starters who were drafted in round 1 or are outside their rookie deal.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

It seems like a huge issue in the NFL is that these guys look at their rookie contract as an insult if they turn into good players. Its easy to explain why it is, but after 4 years in the league playing at a high level and having made only 1.75 mill total, when mediocre free agents get 5mill signing bonusses, they all of a sudden turn it into being disrespected for having played well for such relatively little money. It seems to be hitting us harder than most teams because we draft very well (or you could at least say we hit big on some later picks).
I wonder if the NFL should look at drastically increasing the rookie cap pool to overcome what could end up being a severe problem. To do so they would have to make accomodations for busts. For example, raise the rookie cap significantly (you'd almost have to slot contracts because this happens with guys in rounds 2, 3 and 4 mostly, since 1st rounders are all paid well, and 5th and beyond rarely turn into highly vauable guys) but give the team a cap out that if a player is cut during his rookie contract, the unamortized signing bonus doesnt count vs the cap. There is still cash risk, but not cap risk, and that way, there isnt such a wide divide between what 2nd-4th round players who start and play well earn vs other starters who were drafted in round 1 or are outside their rookie deal.

mediocre free agents, Asante, and most everyone has to put in their time before getting that big contract. it's really asante's fault for not being drafted high, maybe he should have picked a better college or marketed himself better or picked a college that highlighted his talents.

much like it takes 4-5 years to get their first big contract, it takes 3-4 yrs of college to buold your stock to get the big rookie contract. so if he's a whiner then he should have made it so he was drafted higher.

 

[BelichickFan]

I wonder if the NFL should look at drastically increasing the rookie cap pool to overcome what could end up being a severe problem.

I think they should significantly lower rookie salaries but have some kind of ERFA after 2 years with much higher minimums. Maybe a #1 pick would max out at $1M his first year but after two years there's a team option (thus, ERFA) in which any player after two years (#1 pick or undrafted) can get to, whatever, $5M or so. Then higher picks get more money the first two years but they don't get huge money until they're proven. Bust after the two years ? Team doesn't pick up the option and the player heads off to some minimum wage job.

 

[hwc]

Samuel could have improved his rookie contract at any time by negotiating a long-term extension with the Patriots. Of course, to gain that benefit, he would have to negotiate a deal that is more attractive to the Pats than trying to sign him in a bidding war as an unrestricted free agent.

 

[fgssand]

It seems like a huge issue in the NFL is that these guys look at their rookie contract as an insult if they turn into good players. Its easy to explain why it is, but after 4 years in the league playing at a high level and having made only 1.75 mill total, when mediocre free agents get 5mill signing bonusses, they all of a sudden turn it into being disrespected for having played well for such relatively little money. It seems to be hitting us harder than most teams because we draft very well (or you could at least say we hit big on some later picks).
I wonder if the NFL should look at drastically increasing the rookie cap pool to overcome what could end up being a severe problem. To do so they would have to make accomodations for busts. For example, raise the rookie cap significantly (you'd almost have to slot contracts because this happens with guys in rounds 2, 3 and 4 mostly, since 1st rounders are all paid well, and 5th and beyond rarely turn into highly vauable guys) but give the team a cap out that if a player is cut during his rookie contract, the unamortized signing bonus doesnt count vs the cap. There is still cash risk, but not cap risk, and that way, there isnt such a wide divide between what 2nd-4th round players who start and play well earn vs other starters who were drafted in round 1 or are outside their rookie deal.

OK..maybe the system needs to be tweaked or overhauled to take care of the injustice when a lower drafted players excels and far outplays his rookie deal.

However, this is NOT the fault of the Patriots, we play by the rules and that is the way things were agreed to by the players union.

It irks me to no end when Asante (and players like him) make it personal and attack the team that really helped to make the player what they have become. This is especially true with New England playing with this group of players, coaches and entire environment dedicated to winning and doing things right.

Sign the Franchise Asante, play your heart out and you'll pocket 7.8MM and I am sure will get your big contract next year (not from us though - we need our cap money for Warren & others).

 

[PatsFan37]

Josh Brown could complain about being the Seattle Seahawks’ franchise player. He could whine about not yet getting a long-term deal. He could treat the franchise tag as his sworn enemy, standard fare for NFL free agents in his position. Instead, the kicker asks a real-world question: “Where else am I going to go at the age of 28 and somebody is going to guarantee me $2 million? Nowhere.”
The Seahawks have used the franchise designation five other times since 1999: once for Joey Galloway, three times for Walter Jones and once for Shaun Alexander. Brown, a small-town guy from Foyil, Okla., doesn’t mind joining that list.
“I take it as a honor and a privilege,” he said. “There are negative connotations as far as long-term deals and what-not, but the fact is, it’s guaranteed money.”

Ten characters.

 

[DarrylS]

Following up on FGSSAND what does the player owe the organization?? Since he has come to NE he has been "coached up" and the d plays to the strength of the players.. if he went to a dysfunctional team he might languish and not have achieved what he achieved here. There is nothing empirical here, as employees we all have had experiences where the company has gotten the best out of us and times when they go the worse. When the got the best I was indebted, when the got the worse I was a sore... I know it is about the money, but do not understand the childish behavior of more, more, more.. I know it is the system, but from my pea brain I think loyalty to the organization is paramount particular if they made me a better employee and increased my value.

 

[mac]

What happens is the following: after a few years of getting their bodies beat up, some players begin to see the shortness of a football career and begin to take steps to protect their investment: their bodies. At the same time, players lose their desire to play the game. The game becomes purely business. If (unlikely) Samuel misses ten games, he is still protecting his investment; in other words, his body is not getting beat up. Branch became a protect-the-investment guy. On the current Pats, Seymour is a protect-the-investment guy.

 

[Triumph]

As a fan I dont like it, but Samuel is doing the right thing for himself. The time is now to hash out a new deal. All that matters is signing bonus or guaranteed money.

IMO,Samuel has paid his dues and fulfilled his contract. I'm all for a fair new contract, but just not one like Clements got. If I'm reading that correctly, he gets 20 Mil guaranteed in the first 2 years. Assuming of course, he doesnt pull a Ricky Williams.

 

[Ring 6]

mediocre free agents, Asante, and most everyone has to put in their time before getting that big contract. it's really asante's fault for not being drafted high, maybe he should have picked a better college or marketed himself better or picked a college that highlighted his talents.

much like it takes 4-5 years to get their first big contract, it takes 3-4 yrs of college to buold your stock to get the big rookie contract. so if he's a whiner then he should have made it so he was drafted higher.

Its all well and good to say what they should think, but reality is they don't.
They guy who is a 3rd or 4th round pick and becomes a star player during his rookie contract is not going to say, "Oh well, I should have done something to get drafted higher, that guy who is backing me up really did deserve more money, because, you know, those are the rules".
We aren't talking about justifying the system, we are talking about dealing with what the system creates. Sure, we can put our head in the sand and say F those guys, they are whiners. But when that reality is you have a league where there seems to be building labor discord because those same guys don't agree with the way the system is, then you have an issue in your league.
I know, I know, we can say theres a union and they make the rules. That doesnt mean all players agree with it. Another part of the system is that Samuel has the rights to do exactly what he is doing, including holding out, demanding a trade, etc. Should we say anyone who thinks excersizing his options is just a whiner? That would shut off discussion of the issue too.


This is the part that I dont get.
OBVIOUSLY as Pats fans we side with the team. (Most do at least) That is normal. But why is it necessary to criticize the player for exercising all of his options?

The argument is that the system in place was unfair to asante Samuel. I think that is undeniable. Him making 1.75 mill in 4 years is substanitally underpaid compared to what he did on the field compared to other players who made much more.
Yes, that is the system. The argument that Samuel should shut up because thats the system is circular because his issue is the system, and in his case the system has not been good for him.

Nonetheless, he does need to get into camp and prepare for a Championship Season. Complaining to enhance his bargaining position is one thing,once we hit training camp, he needs to focus on football.

 

[Ring 6]

OK..maybe the system needs to be tweaked or overhauled to take care of the injustice when a lower drafted players excels and far outplays his rookie deal.

However, this is NOT the fault of the Patriots, we play by the rules and that is the way things were agreed to by the players union.

It irks me to no end when Asante (and players like him) make it personal and attack the team that really helped to make the player what they have become. This is especially true with New England playing with this group of players, coaches and entire environment dedicated to winning and doing things right.

Sign the Franchise Asante, play your heart out and you'll pocket 7.8MM and I am sure will get your big contract next year (not from us though - we need our cap money for Warren & others).

No one is saying anything is the Patriots fault.
remember, while the Patriots are following the rules, so is Samuel. He has done nothing in violation of his contract. IMO, he is simply posturing, by the way.
I don't know if Id say he has trashed the organization. I think he has said he is unhappy with their offer. Thats not trashing to me.
I dont think he should be obligated to want to play here for less, if other teams are offering more. I can understand the loyalty factor, and I would have it personally, but I don't begin to think that the standard of loyalty we are talking about is at all a reasonble expectation for most NFL players.

 

[patfanken]

Following up on FGSSAND what does the player owe the organization?? Since he has come to NE he has been "coached up" and the d plays to the strength of the players.. if he went to a dysfunctional team he might languish and not have achieved what he achieved here. There is nothing empirical here, as employees we all have had experiences where the company has gotten the best out of us and times when they go the worse. When the got the best I was indebted, when the got the worse I was a sore... I know it is about the money, but do not understand the childish behavior of more, more, more.. I know it is the system, but from my pea brain I think loyalty to the organization is paramount particular if they made me a better employee and increased my value.

A couple of points:

1. GJAJ, That is an excellent point that isn't brought out enough. Granted Samuel did the work and became the player he is because of hard work and developing his talent. HOWVER, you cannot discount the contributions made to his play by the coaching staff and his teammates. They aren't the REASON he became the player he is now; they are PART of the reason.

2. Andy, from the first I have agreed to your postition. Assante would be spiting himself if he didn't sign before the first game. If he had any sense at all he'd sign early enough to get into good football shape by the time the season starts, so I think a hold out of about a month should do the trick. It would protect him to a degree from injury, and save a certain amount of face, yet would still give him 3 weeks to get ready for the first game.

3. BFan, you also make a great point that should be concidered. To take the injury situation out of the equation here is what he and the Pats should do. As part of the one year agreement, Samuel AND the Pats will share the expense of an insurance policy that would give Samuel 12 million dollars if he got a perment injury in 2007. That would probably cost between $500,000, and a million. Lets say its a million. The Pats up up $500K, and Sameul puts up one game check. Now, when he signs the deal, he is guaranteed $7.2MM net, and another 12 millon if he gets hurt. That's very close to the 20 million he wanted guarateed.
Now he gets the best of both worlds.

The Pats how good faith by putting up half the money, with the only stipulation that Samuel shows up to training camp on time. It makes great sense to the Samuel camp, and helps the Pats get him to camp ontime. He is protected against catistrophic injury, yet will still be a YOUNG FA for the coming season.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

We do need perspective, as does Asante. The problem with your assessment Andy is that he's not going to get $13M this year in a long term deal. He's likely going to get $20M or more in guarantees. So for him the equation is <$8M vs. >$20M. 8..20...8...20 You don't have to be a mathmatical genius to figure this out. Same with signing a long term deal here on the terms he's likely been offered to date. $6M vs. upwards of $9M, 6...9...6...9...

Now maybe if he signs the tag and plays for $8M and gets re-tagged again next season and plays for almost $9.5M and then signs a long term deal at 28 for god knows what, he makes out like a bandit. But if he tears an ACL/MCL/PCL or some combination thereof early this season, he's likely on his own in March 2008 limping around to FA visits ala Ty Law - a lot younger sure, but with nowhere near the resume. And likley facing a prove it deal to even get back to where he left off.

The problem here is, much as it was with Deion,is there are teams reportedly willing to pay him what he wants at least absent trade compensation. He's not risking $8M for a pipe dream contract - it's out there. What most of us believe, including apparently this FO, is that represents a substantial overpay. And we would like Asante to acknowledge that and forego the chance to be wildly overpaid and just take a fair offer. Not going to happen. Realistically it ain't gonna happen with 7 out of 10 players.

What remains to be determined is the level of determination or depth of resolve on each side to prevail only on their terms. Or their wililngness to reach a compromise or accommodation that is the best they can manage under the circumstances.

Many here believed last year that Branch would cave and the team would never give in to a trade. Turns out they were wrong. At the end of the day, when the season is upon us, Belichick blows the whistle on all this crap and does what it takes to insure his team moves on. Whether in this case that will be acquiessing to the players demands or parting company with him for something else of value remains to be seen. I really doubt he will persue option C, do nothing and let him show up whenever he decides to, although I could be wrong. And if he did that it would only be because he believed he would represent value here in week whatever - not gathering splinters on the bench.

So, the thing is, for everything we think we know about Asante, I think he knows that about this FO too.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I think BB does perceive value in Asante showing up by week 10 at the latest. It's likely that injuries will have whittled away at CB depth. Having Asante healthy and playing for a contract into the playoffs is of serious value. I do NOT expect any team to offer us something substantially better than a single #1 (i.e. no additional Day one pick) and therefore BB won't take the depth gamble. He most likely needs to beat the Colts to go to the SB.

 

[MrBigglesWorth]

Its all well and good to say what they should think, but reality is they don't.
They guy who is a 3rd or 4th round pick and becomes a star player during his rookie contract is not going to say, "Oh well, I should have done something to get drafted higher, that guy who is backing me up really did deserve more money, because, you know, those are the rules".
We aren't talking about justifying the system, we are talking about dealing with what the system creates. Sure, we can put our head in the sand and say F those guys, they are whiners. But when that reality is you have a league where there seems to be building labor discord because those same guys don't agree with the way the system is, then you have an issue in your league.
I know, I know, we can say theres a union and they make the rules. That doesnt mean all players agree with it. Another part of the system is that Samuel has the rights to do exactly what he is doing, including holding out, demanding a trade, etc. Should we say anyone who thinks excersizing his options is just a whiner? That would shut off discussion of the issue too.


This is the part that I dont get.
OBVIOUSLY as Pats fans we side with the team. (Most do at least) That is normal. But why is it necessary to criticize the player for exercising all of his options?
The argument is that the system in place was unfair to asante Samuel. I think that is undeniable. Him making 1.75 mill in 4 years is substanitally underpaid compared to what he did on the field compared to other players who made much more.
Yes, that is the system. The argument that Samuel should shut up because thats the system is circular because his issue is the system, and in his case the system has not been good for him.

Nonetheless, he does need to get into camp and prepare for a Championship Season. Complaining to enhance his bargaining position is one thing,once we hit training camp, he needs to focus on football.

We criticize because we are fans and the only investment we have is emotionally is with the team and very little with the player in regards to the player unless we like him, but absoultely none with his financial status.

People follow teams nowadays and a micro percentage follows players.

 

[PATSNUTme]

I agree with AJ's points and that is why I think Asante's hold out will end the week before the first pre-season game. He will lose about $450,000 per game for each game he 'holds out" during the season. He just won't do that,IMO.

One point that hasn't been made is tha he is going to benefit this year by playing in back of what should be an awesome front seven. He should have a monster year playing in back of those guys. His value will be even greater to other teams in 2008 if he does.

 

[patchick]

However, this is NOT the fault of the Patriots, we play by the rules and that is the way things were agreed to by the players union.

By that reasoning, doesn't it follow that this is NOT the fault of Asante Samuel, he's playing the rules and that is the way things were agreed to by the NFL owners?

You can have conflict without fault. Based on the current state of rumors, it sounds like Samuel has a couple of offers to his liking and MAYBE an offer of a first-round pick in trade to boot. The Patriots would prefer their starting CB, but won't pay him what team X has offered. That's a naturally ugly and acrimonious situation, leading to a lot of growling and posturing. Once the season's underway, though, that offer likely disappears and all Samuel gets from sitting out is a huge financial loss. I'd be astonished if his agent let him sit out more than a game.