PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Are we on the cusp of Brady deal??


Status
Not open for further replies.
No, I am saying that the Patriots can extend Brady tomorrow with a $50 million signing bonus, be able to prorate it over 5 years even though they do not have to pay Brady the $50 million tomorrow. They can give Brady $30 million tomorrow, $10 million in 2011, and $10 million in 2012.
In that example, would the other 2 10mill bonusses have to be guaranteed, not be allowed to be guaranteed, or either way is fine?

Would anything else be in the way? Limits on salary due to the 30% rule, or anything else that would constrain it?
 
And the completion bonus can be voided if you somehow don't complete the conditions which are attending camp, not holding out and again, getting through the season.

Here's the CBA:
"(16) Any bonus to be paid to a player solely for fulfilling his obligations to play under his Player Contract without seeking to renegotiate and/or “holding out” (i.e., a “completion bonus”), and which bonus is otherwise guaranteed for skill and injury, except that the amount of any such completion bonus shall be calculated at its present value, computed at the one-year Treasury Note rate published in The Wall Street Journal on February 1 of the League Year in which the Player Contract is executed. Further, if any event occurs which extinguishes the player’s right to receive such completion bonus, any amount of the bonus that has previously been included in Team Salary shall be immediately added to the Team’s Salary Cap for the current League Year, if such event occurs prior to June 1, or for the next League Year, if such event occurs after such date, with the remainder of the bonus that has been allocated to Team Salary for future League Years immediately extinguished."

AdamJT13: A loophole around the NFL's 30 Percent Rule

From the above Brady can get a completion bonus in 2011 as long as he fulfill his contract obligation this year without holding out or seeking to renegotiate.

If he signs a extension this year, why would he hold out later in the year? If he signs a extension this year, why would he seek later to renegotiate?
 
In that example, would the other 2 10mill bonusses have to be guaranteed, not be allowed to be guaranteed, or either way is fine?

Would anything else be in the way? Limits on salary due to the 30% rule, or anything else that would constrain it?

They aren't seperate bonuses. Miguel is saying they agree to a $50M signing bonus but Brady has to agree to collect it in increments of $30-$10-$10 (or deferred payment over 2 years) even though it is fully guaranteed as all signing bonuses essentially are. The CBA doesn't preclude deferred payment, but it does call for interest to be paid on any deferred amounts that are not paid within the season in which they are guaranteed. Thing is, as Miguel used to ask me, why should Brady agree to do that given the difference in the present day value of money vs. deferred money even with nominal interest. What if Manning gets all his bonus money up front and then invests it in a way that parlays it into a 50-100% gain in value in 18 months while Brady has lost the ability to do so.

Last time Tom was in this position he and his agent believed they had agreed to split his bonus into two segments, both of which were fully guaranteed. Then they found out that the team was proposing that money be further segmented into an unheard of 4 or more segments over 3-4 years because they didn't think he would mind that...he did. He agreed to take his signing bonus payments in three installments due between the day he signed his deal (in June I believe) and March of the following league year. Then when his option bonus was due he agreed to take that in two installments - one on July 15th and the other on or before next July 15th. Obviously he did that to facilitate their cash flow. Manning on the other hand got the bulk of his signing bonus on the day he signed and the balance within about 90 days (Irsay was liquidating personal assets to cover that).

Another issue might be paying him these amounts in the midst of a lockout - when no one else in his union is getting a big check cut. Most of the recent contracts have used "first day of the next league year" to schedule 2nd year payments due. That could now be several months or more beyond March 2011. And then the final installment would be due within 1 calendar year if not by the start of the 3rd league year, and it would definitely require interest be paid on the deferrment. The second installment might require interest as well depending on interpretation. That interest is prescribed in the CBA and probably tied to Treasury notes, which can be a far cry from the kind of investment income these guys and their business advisors are capable of generating.

Again, Brady may decide to compromise and do whatever it takes to get some kind of deal done. But he also may not in what stands to be his last long term deal. He certainly hasn't done that to date. If in fact the team has even offered that particular option. Jonathan was on WEEI last week and he reiterated that they are concerned about how money will be treated and accounted for under a new CBA they do not yet know the terms and conditions of. And he pointed out Brady may be justifiably concerned about leaving money or terms on the table in doing a deal under the present circumstances. He also reiterated that if they can find a way to do a deal that satisfies both sides need to be treated fairly and not hamstrung going forward, they will do it. If they can't, they will deal with that too. They've obviously talked scenarios almost to death. I don't think there is any way Brady holds it against them personally as a result if between them they can't find a solution that gets his deal done before he takes the field or even this season. If that were the case I don't think he and Robert would have been out hitting the greens Sunday.

When Polian and Condon hammered out Manning's deal in 2004 they thought they had anticipated all scenarios. They found out in 2006 they had not. Had a crappy compromise CBA not been agreed to in 2006, they were informed by the management council they could no longer convert Manning's roster bonuses (or Harrisons) to signing bonus for amortization under an expiring CBA. Polian was so berserk he started threatening to sue the whole league for misleading him (in that they had approved the contract as submitted in 2004 without warning him his unwritten plan for conversion wasn't going to fly if the CBA didn't get extended). The potential existed that he would have to make wholesale roster cuts. Eventually Manning and Harrison agreed to restructure their deals and defer their compensation rather than see that happen. At the 11th hour a new CBA made the rules precluding the conversions go away and they were able to tear up the interim deals they had been forced to work out with their top 2 compensated players. I know Felger is fond of contending that there is no way guys like Jones and Snyder and Kraft ever allow any new CBA to constrict them. Unfortunately three top tier revenue guys can't control whether or not the next CBA isn't ideal for them because of the 29 beneath them, 24 of whom can make any decision that suits them and the majority of owners whom remain essentially comparative have nots.

If the principles saw this as the life and death matter that some fans and mediots want to portray it as, these contracts would have been done before camp or before pre-season or before week 1. Obviously based on what we have seen and heard in NE, Indy and even NO, the principles don't share that sense of urgency. It seems to be more important to fans and media, but what they think doesn't matter. The deals may get done before the year is over, or they may not since players routinely decide not to take a less favorable long term deal when they are that close to potential FA (and in this case an unfettered deal). Many fans and most mediots are rather Favresque drama queens though so they tend to manufacture a crisis in advance of one actually existing.

If it were me I'd probably always take the bird in hand. But that's because I haven't already banked $80-140M not even counting my tens of millions of off field earnings...
 
If it were me I'd probably always take the bird in hand. But that's because I haven't already banked $80-140M not even counting my tens of millions of off field earnings...

Some guys...always crying poor mouth
 
I think it makes sense for both sides to have a deal done before Brady steps on the field, but it's not going to happen. There hasn't been talk of movement on either side. If it's not done by week 1 then it won't happen until the end of the season.

I'm sorry, when exactly was the last press release the Patriots issued about the status of contract negotiations with any players? Or when did BB or ownership really say anything substantive on this subject?

We still don't know any details of BB's contract (although there are rumors around which are now treated as fact in terms of the length of the contract). We'll know something substantive about TB's new contract when it is announced and not before. Theories about when that will be are irrelevant. Theories based on lack of information are useless.
 
Regarding the topic of a Brady deal, Bert Breer is still holding onto his theory that Manning and Brady's deals are different in this video, though at least he is no longer simply comparing the two player's 2010 salaries this time. Now his major point is that if manning gets a contract first, it will drive Brady's price up dramatically.

Same, but different
 
Thing is, as Miguel used to ask me, why should Brady agree to do that given the difference in the present day value of money vs. deferred money even with nominal interest. What if Manning gets all his bonus money up front and then invests it in a way that parlays it into a 50-100% gain in value in 18 months while Brady has lost the ability to do so.

Last time Tom was in this position he and his agent believed they had agreed to split his bonus into two segments, both of which were fully guaranteed. Then they found out that the team was proposing that money be further segmented into an unheard of 4 or more segments over 3-4 years because they didn't think he would mind that...he did. He agreed to take his signing bonus payments in three installments due between the day he signed his deal (in June I believe) and March of the following league year. Then when his option bonus was due he agreed to take that in two installments - one on July 15th and the other on or before next July 15th.

If in 2005 Brady agreed to split the $26.5 million to 5 payments over 2 years and 2 months it is certainly reasonable to presume that he would accept a similar payment structure in 2010.
 
Another issue might be paying him these amounts in the midst of a lockout - when no one else in his union is getting a big check cut. Most of the recent contracts have used "first day of the next league year" to schedule 2nd year payments due. That could now be several months or more beyond March 2011. And then the final installment would be due within 1 calendar year if not by the start of the 3rd league year, and it would definitely require interest be paid on the deferrment. The second installment might require interest as well depending on interpretation. That interest is prescribed in the CBA and probably tied to Treasury notes, which can be a far cry from the kind of investment income these guys and their business advisors are capable of generating.

Given that Tom's current contract used explicit dates - "Brady received $5 million of his $14.5 million signing bonus May 4. He'll receive $5 million July 15 and the remaining $4.5 million March 31, 2006" I see no reason why a deferred signing bonus payment has to use the first day language. I believe that the first day language is used in conjunction with roster bonuses and option bonuses. I am NOT talking about those type of bonuses.
 
In that example, would the other 2 10mill bonusses have to be guaranteed, not be allowed to be guaranteed, or either way is fine?
100% guaranteed.

Would anything else be in the way?

Not that I know of.

Limits on salary due to the 30% rule, or anything else that would constrain it?
Signing bonus proration is not included in the 30% rule.
 
Kraft has already handed Wilfork $18M in bonus money and Bodden is estimated to have gotten $6M. The rookies and other signings and what they likely set aside earmarked for Mankins probably totals another $20M+. $45M or so in bonus money. Kraft doesn't have the net operating income to pay out $95-100M in cash over cap in one season. About the only owner who does is Snyder. The most recent 2009 Forbes guesstimates had our 2008 operating income at $70M. Indy was at $56M.

If the Patriots salary cap number is at around $125 million, in order for Kraft to pay out $100M over that in cash that would mean that he would have to spend $225 million in cash. If $50 million is going to Brady, you are in effect saying that the other 52 players have received $175 Million in cash that year. Please either back up the assertion or retract it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Friday Patriots Notebook 4/26: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots QB Drake Maye Conference Call
Patriots Now Have to Get to Work After Taking Maye
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf and Jerod Mayo After Patriots Take Drake Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/25: News and Notes
Patriots Kraft ‘Involved’ In Decision Making?  Zolak Says That’s Not the Case
MORSE: Final First Round Patriots Mock Draft
Slow Starts: Stark Contrast as Patriots Ponder Which Top QB To Draft
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/24: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/23: News and Notes
Back
Top