McCourty now has a choice to make

English Patriot said:

All pro guys like Revis and DMac HAVE to be paid. There is just no way around it. As for Vereen, i honestly can't put a figure on him because i don't know how he should be paid. All i know is i want him back.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

Oh and another thing, no one has a right to get between a man and his money. You are paid what you are worth and this will be DMac's first big one and he should get whatever he wants in line with other top safeties. Revis however has been shrewd for very long and has been earning a bucket for a long time and i think now he probably just wants success and accolades over the extra $ here and there. No realistic or better place than Foxborough other than Seattle (who knows what they will be once they can only pay a few of their studs).

JackBauer said:

Why? I would assume most folks (hopefully correctly) assume the FO has more sense than to let McCourty walk.

Click to expand...

The FO will let DMC walk if he is asking for is beyond what they believe his value to the team is.

robertweathers said:

I'd leave Browner alone. $4m for a starting CB is reasonable.

Click to expand...

Absolutely and I love his attitude. But if they get in a bind because of all the other guys and they have Revis and Dmac I could see them taking a chance there (trading BB) and letter Dennard or Butler man the other side. Plus you have Ryan or perhaps a FA.

Dennard is a proven starter and Butler looks liker a baller.

robertweathers said:

The FO will let DMC walk if he is asking for is beyond what they believe his value to the team is.

Click to expand...

Well, yeah. No kidding.

Given there's no indication this is the case, why should fans prepare for life without McCourty?

I am guessing McCourty has a take it or leave it offer on the table. BB will not unbalance this team money wise. This I don't think bodes well for Revis staying either.

Bruins29 said:

Absolutely and I love his attitude. But if they get in a bind because of all the other guys and they have Revis and Dmac I could see them taking a chance there (trading BB) and letter Dennard or Butler man the other side. Plus you have Ryan or perhaps a FA.

Dennard is a proven starter and Butler looks liker a baller.

Click to expand...

I'm less sold on Dennard than you are.

Big play aside, Butler had his ups and downs last year but his play that 4th qtr was very telling. That kid had zero issue with the spotlight.

robertweathers said:

It's all right here. Some players cost more than others.

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/new-england-patriots

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/denver-broncos

Click to expand...

cut amendola.

JackBauer said:

Well, yeah. No kidding.

Given there's no indication this is the case, why should fans prepare for life without McCourty?

Click to expand...

Maybe it's me but the fact that he is a FA and on March 10th will be receiving contract offers from teams that will play large sums of money for his services which could potentially be beyond the Pats value of him or contractually the terms are unsatisfactory make is very possible he will not return to the team.

Gronkowski123 said:

cut amendola.

Click to expand...

If he won't renegotiate that would be a good starting point.

IMHO, with Revis and McCourty it really comes down to what we are all mentioning.

Do you want to be the max paid player at your position (1-2 mill more than the next) and most likely play for a crap franchise (YES, Irsay and Grigson make Indy crap) or do you want to play for a perennial AFC Championship team, who makes the SB every other year on average?

I'd never be mad at a guy for taking more money, just don't lie about it.

BTW, we knew Revis was greedy from the start and history says he will not take a discount. It will honestly be a shame if Revis leaves to join someone like the Jets just for the money and plays for an awful team. Now, if he goes to BUF (No idea if they have the $), we could be in trouble.

What do you guys think about Harmon? Could BB be thinking that he will replace DMac if his asking price is too crazy? Is Harmon good enough?

robertweathers said:

Maybe it's me but the fact that he is a FA and on March 10th will be receiving contract offers from teams that will play large sums of money for his services which could potentially be beyond the Pats value of him or contractually the terms are unsatisfactory make is very possible he will not return to the team.

Click to expand...

Sure. Personally I'd rather wait and see what the Patriots do in the interim.

Deus Irae said:

If you think that not having Mankins didn't contribute significantly to those two early losses, and the poor overall play in those first 4 weeks, I've got a bridge in the desert that I'd be happy to sell you.

Your argument sucks. I'm sorry, but that's just the truth of it.

Click to expand...

I would say it. Having Logan Mankins for those first 4 games would NOT have made a difference. If you believe it you are simply being myopic.

Would the OL have been marginally better? Probably. But would he have made the difference between winning and losing those game, NO WAY. The problems that plagued the OL during that 4 game period went far beyond who was playing LG. A lot of people weren't playing well, including Brady, and the 2014 version of Logan Mankins wasn't going to make that much of a difference. Have you forgotten so soon the specter of Ordrick having his way with Mankins in 2013. Why would that have changed in 2014.

What you are doing is taking a small truth and exaggerating its importance beyond credibility. It is fair to say that in the first 4 games having Mankins on the team would have improved the OL play. But not enough to change the outcomes of the 2 losses. What you fail to mention was that AFTER those 4 games, the impact that adding Logan Mankins to the lineup would have been even less impactful.

You've been trying to justify your antipathy to the Mankins deal since the day it happened. And here we are a Superhowl later and you are STILL taking any opportunity to justify the same FAILED arguments to one of the best trades of the BB era. Have you even considered not only the contribution of Tim Wright and his 6 TD's, but the likelihood there would have been no money to sign Ayers, Branch, and Castillo.

DI, a good general knows when its time to pull back and regroup to get ready to fight the next battle. You are only wasting your resources trying to still fight this losing one.

patfanken said:

I would say it. Having Logan Mankins for those first 4 games would NOT have made a difference. If you believe it you are simply being myopic.

Would the OL have been marginally better? Probably. But would he have made the difference between winning and losing those game, NO WAY. The problems that plagued the OL during that 4 game period went far beyond who was playing LG. A lot of people weren't playing well, including Brady, and the 2014 version of Logan Mankins wasn't going to make that much of a difference. Have you forgotten so soon the specter of Ordrick having his way with Mankins in 2013. Why would that have changed in 2014.

What you are doing is taking a small truth and exaggerating its importance beyond credibility. It is fair to say that in the first 4 games having Mankins on the team would have improved the OL play. But not enough to change the outcomes of the 2 losses. What you fail to mention was that AFTER those 4 games, the impact that adding Logan Mankins to the lineup would have been even less impactful.

You've been trying to justify your antipathy to the Mankins deal since the day it happened. And here we are a Superhowl later and you are STILL taking any opportunity to justify the same FAILED arguments to one of the best trades of the BB era. Have you even considered not only the contribution of Tim Wright and his 6 TD's, but the likelihood there would have been no money to sign Ayers, Branch, and Castillo.

DI, a good general knows when its time to pull back and regroup to get ready to fight the next battle. You are only wasting your resources trying to still fight this losing one.

Click to expand...

Ken this is my point that I was trying to make. In a vacuum a move where you lose the best player in the deal whether it is a trade or replacing a player lost in free agency, it always looks "bad".

But you have to think about the replacement of a player + all the other players that you are able to add to the team and how that culminates on the field. Some like DI, just want to grind their axes and not see that the Pats will be fine if they lose McCourty or if they retain him. The key is the man making the moves, which is BB.

patfanken said:

I would say it. Having Logan Mankins for those first 4 games would NOT have made a difference. If you believe it you are simply being myopic.

Click to expand...

No, I'm simply being correct. If you can't figure out that having no depth when Stork wasn't ready to play led to the disaster on that OL, that's on you. Even a blind man could see it.

You've been trying to justify your antipathy to the Mankins deal since the day it happened. And here we are a Superhowl later and you are STILL taking any opportunity to justify the same FAILED arguments to one of the best trades of the BB era. Have you even considered not only the contribution of Tim Wright and his 6 TD's, but the likelihood there would have been no money to sign Ayers, Branch, and Castillo.

Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? My posting here in this thread wasn't about Mankins, and I'm not the one who brought him up. My posting was about McCourty v. Harmon. The other poster brought up Mankins.

Read threads. THEN post.

I didn't hear about McCoruty until I got home about an hour ago. I have to admit, I'm a bit surprised. However I'm also surprised that so many of you (and I've only read the last 3 pages) are assuming that this means he's gone. It could just mean that they didn't tag him because they already have the basis of an agreement already worked out and will announce by the end of the week. That's one reasonable conclusion.

It could be that McCourty wants to see what's out there. I see BB offering him, something in the range of $8MM/yr, and McCourty wants to see if someone will blow him away....if not he'll come back. That's one reasonable conclusion.

Another might be that we have all over valued McCourty's play. Maybe its very good, but not elite, and BB feels he can get 90% of the production from Harmon or Ryan, at 30% of the cost. (BTW- I'm one of those who think he IS elite.....but what do I know. ) That's another reasonable conclusion.

One of the problems with winning the superbowl is that all your players suddenly become worth more on the open market. Its a simple fact of life. The other fact is when you draft well and have a lot of good players, that too, is going to cost you more. When both those situations coincide, there are going to have be some very hard choices to be made.

But let's see how it plays out before we make a lot of assumptions that we will regret later.

Nunchucks said:

Pretty sure this means McCourty will end up playing somewhere else.

The truth is that Revis makes McCourty a little bit redundant. You do not need a rangy cover safety when you have a corner that can take away one half of the field.

Click to expand...

I don't really understand that reasoning. Revis doesn't take away half the field, not when offenses primarily run with more than 2 receivers. He takes away one receiver. But just because Revis takes away the #1 receiver doesn't mean that he takes away the slot on the same side. So a FS with very good range is still very usefull.

First I think we should wait until the exclusive period ends before we determine that McCourty is even going to hit UFA. If anything I view him not being tagged as a sign that they will agree to a long term deal within the next few days.

Second if he does hit UFA I think it is very likely he would bring any offer back to the Patriots and give them a chance to match it, similar to what happen with Edelman last season.

The hysteria is an overreaction just like last season with Edelman, 2013 with Vollmer, etc.

Wrath Mania said:

Oh God.

I can already see this board spinning McCourty right into the Welker villain club.

"HE LEFT FOR THE MONIES. TRAITOR."

Can we please- please- avoid that with him? He's been a great player here and was a key piece of a title club EDIT: Not to mention he's been a class-act. Realistically the Patriots are in a very tough spot this offseason capwise, it was always possible either Revis or McCourty (or, worst case, both) didn't come back.

Shalise Manza Young claims the Patriots and D-Mac haven't even spoken as of late, so I mean, that might tell you where the Patriots stand; unless they're waiting to solve the Revis code, but surely they'd talk with McCourty in the meantime?

Click to expand...

They might just let all of the other teams in free agency do the work for them on his contract, then just change a few minor details in it and have him sign that. It saves them a boat load of time and allows them to focus their efforts elsewhere.. let all the other front offices do the work.

Bruins29 said:

Dennard is a proven starter and Butler looks liker a baller.

Click to expand...

Dennard couldn't even make a game day active roster in 2014. That's a far cry from "proven starter".