- Joined
- Mar 19, 2006
- Messages
- 33,964
- Reaction score
- 14,420
AV probably a Pat next year
I'll say it once more: if nobody else is getting much over 3 million in a five-year contract, once you amortize the bonuses, I don't think AV will either. The much maligned drunk from Indy went 100% on field goals a couple years ago. Akers is damn good as well. AV is just the best "clutch" kicker in the game, maybe worth a little more based on that alone - but not much more. Let's face it, Akers hasn't had too many chances to win the Super Bowl, because the Eagles only went the one time.
I think Adam knows this (that his value is about what other elite kickers command.) I think he's also floating the idea out there that he is beyond "normal" money to see if he can get abnormal money. I don't think he can.
One more word to any and all who impugn a player's "loyalty" (I just read Bob George's column, and that's what he seems to be saying about Givens):
We as fans should wish these guys the best, and move on. The organization repeatedly talks about what a player is worth to this football team. They freely admit that a given player may be worth more to others. Especially in the case of Vinaterri, where the money can't get that huge, because of his position, you have to just step back and let it all transpire. If the Pats don't match others' money, then they weren't "worth it" to the Pats.
What bugs me about the "loyalty" approach, is that some players actually do restructure or take less to play for the Pats - not a huge amount less, but there are cases where it happens. This is the anomoly, the case you should never see happen, in the current NFL model. Troy Brown did it last year, and look where it got him. Now he's reportedly just a tiny bit bitter, and I would be too. He has done everything for this team, even to the point of playing three ways on occasions - and he's still not even thrown the tiniest bone, in terms of any sort of "loyalty bonus." Well, that's the state of the league. Sometimes, you will lose players. Sometimes, a player will give 120%, and still be judged "not worth the money." It's a business, on both sides. I would never lambast the Pats for being "cheap" (they usually spend to the cap,) or be mad at any player for being an "opportunist," just because it's a generally well paid profession.
Okay, soap box over. And who said there's no "rookie pool" of money for signing draft picks, anyway?
PFnV
I'll say it once more: if nobody else is getting much over 3 million in a five-year contract, once you amortize the bonuses, I don't think AV will either. The much maligned drunk from Indy went 100% on field goals a couple years ago. Akers is damn good as well. AV is just the best "clutch" kicker in the game, maybe worth a little more based on that alone - but not much more. Let's face it, Akers hasn't had too many chances to win the Super Bowl, because the Eagles only went the one time.
I think Adam knows this (that his value is about what other elite kickers command.) I think he's also floating the idea out there that he is beyond "normal" money to see if he can get abnormal money. I don't think he can.
One more word to any and all who impugn a player's "loyalty" (I just read Bob George's column, and that's what he seems to be saying about Givens):
We as fans should wish these guys the best, and move on. The organization repeatedly talks about what a player is worth to this football team. They freely admit that a given player may be worth more to others. Especially in the case of Vinaterri, where the money can't get that huge, because of his position, you have to just step back and let it all transpire. If the Pats don't match others' money, then they weren't "worth it" to the Pats.
What bugs me about the "loyalty" approach, is that some players actually do restructure or take less to play for the Pats - not a huge amount less, but there are cases where it happens. This is the anomoly, the case you should never see happen, in the current NFL model. Troy Brown did it last year, and look where it got him. Now he's reportedly just a tiny bit bitter, and I would be too. He has done everything for this team, even to the point of playing three ways on occasions - and he's still not even thrown the tiniest bone, in terms of any sort of "loyalty bonus." Well, that's the state of the league. Sometimes, you will lose players. Sometimes, a player will give 120%, and still be judged "not worth the money." It's a business, on both sides. I would never lambast the Pats for being "cheap" (they usually spend to the cap,) or be mad at any player for being an "opportunist," just because it's a generally well paid profession.
Okay, soap box over. And who said there's no "rookie pool" of money for signing draft picks, anyway?
PFnV