Bedard: Pats and Welker $6 mill apart

[patfanken]

Clearly there are 2 sides to this issue, but the one that can't be overcome is the fact the Pats have ABSOLUTELY no reason to come off their position. Why guarantee $21MM regardless of the length (since only 2 years would be guaranteed) When you have the option to play him this year and reassess after seeing his production this coming year. If you liked what you saw, given the new receiver dynamics, and thought he'd be worth top money next year, you can franchise him again and give him his 21MM.

What's in it for the Pats to give him the money NOW when there is a possibility that his production might decline due to age, injury, or the new receiver dynamics. It would be foolish since they have the franchise option. The Pats are clearly willing to pay him top dollar as long as he's extraordinarily productive as he's been the last 5 years

The NFL has been great because, by and large, players get paid for their production year to year. However lately there has been a trend to giving longer term guaranteed contracts, with ,the players basically saying, "I want to be paid whether I'm productive or not".

Welker EARNED that $9.3MM contract.....and if he wants 20% more next year, he will have to EARN it AGAIN this season. What's wrong with that?

 

[BradyFTW!]

Clearly there are 2 sides to this issue, but the one that can't be overcome is the fact the Pats have ABSOLUTELY no reason to come off their position. Why guarantee $21MM regardless of the length (since only 2 years would be guaranteed) When you have the option to play him this year and reassess after seeing his production this coming year. If you liked what you saw, given the new receiver dynamics, and thought he'd be worth top money next year, you can franchise him again and give him his 21MM.

What's in it for the Pats to give him the money NOW when there is a possibility that his production might decline due to age, injury, or the new receiver dynamics. It would be foolish since they have the franchise option. The Pats are clearly willing to pay him top dollar as long as he's extraordinarily productive as he's been the last 5 years

The NFL has been great because, by and large, players get paid for their production year to year. However lately there has been a trend to giving longer term guaranteed contracts, with ,the players basically saying, "I want to be paid whether I'm productive or not".

Welker EARNED that $9.3MM contract.....and if he wants 20% more next year, he will have to EARN it AGAIN this season. What's wrong with that?

One downside that I don't think has been discussed: if the Pats commit to franchise tagging Welker next year, that means they can't tag Chung or Vollmer.

 

[supafly]

Clearly there are 2 sides to this issue, but the one that can't be overcome is the fact the Pats have ABSOLUTELY no reason to come off their position. Why guarantee $21MM regardless of the length (since only 2 years would be guaranteed) When you have the option to play him this year and reassess after seeing his production this coming year. If you liked what you saw, given the new receiver dynamics, and thought he'd be worth top money next year, you can franchise him again and give him his 21MM.

What's in it for the Pats to give him the money NOW when there is a possibility that his production might decline due to age, injury, or the new receiver dynamics. It would be foolish since they have the franchise option. The Pats are clearly willing to pay him top dollar as long as he's extraordinarily productive as he's been the last 5 years

The NFL has been great because, by and large, players get paid for their production year to year. However lately there has been a trend to giving longer term guaranteed contracts, with ,the players basically saying, "I want to be paid whether I'm productive or not".

Welker EARNED that $9.3MM contract.....and if he wants 20% more next year, he will have to EARN it AGAIN this season. What's wrong with that?

As a whole Ken, I think you are spot on in their feelings as a team.

However, your last sentence is possibly making the incorrect assumption that they would actually franchise him again (20% more statement) next season, which is probably not the case at all. I don't see anyway that the NEP are going to pay him almost 12 million next season. They would be looking towards another 2 yr deal most likely, which could burn the team a bit too, when you factor in this yr's 10 million dollar hit (9.4).

I agree with the possibility of playing out the year and re-assessing..BUT, the thought also comes to mind that they would be playing with fire a bit in the same sense too. Yes, you can negotiate after the last regular season game, but we're assuming that they make the playoffs, which does not give them much time at all to reach a deal before mid-February, or whenever approx. FA starts.

If we're hoping that WWW is going to stay loyal to the hometeam and that he will ignore the possibilities of making more elsewhere on the open market, then yes..it is a great idea. The problem is, that is a big "IF." Then you also have the problem of being right back to the beginning AFTER just having paid him 10 million this year too, at least that would be my worry.

 

[supafly]

One downside that I don't think has been discussed: if the Pats commit to franchise tagging Welker next year, that means they can't tag Chung or Vollmer.

I'd have to find it hard to believe that they would actually tag him again next season, considering what it'd cost, but you make a good point in bringing up Chung and Vollmer.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

One downside that I don't think has been discussed: if the Pats commit to franchise tagging Welker next year, that means they can't tag Chung or Vollmer.

I think Chunk is an RFA, so they shouldn't have to tag him no matter what. I also don't see either of them being worth the tag after next season.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I think Chunk is an RFA, so they shouldn't have to tag him no matter what. I also don't see either of them being worth the tag after next season.

Chunk as you call him is playing in his 4th season this year. He will be an UFA in 2013. There won't be many RFA players any more due to all draftees being signed for 4 years minimum. Only UDFA's who get a 3 year deal will potentially be eligible.

And a lot can change in a season. Look what happened with Asante, and you couldn't have traded him for a bag of balls heading into 2006.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think Chunk is an RFA, so they shouldn't have to tag him no matter what. I also don't see either of them being worth the tag after next season.

The franchise tag for safeties isn't particularly high (it was $6.2 million for the Titans when they tagged Michael Griffin earlier this offseason). I don't see it happening either, as I don't think Chung is worth that kind of money, but most of the posters on this forum are much higher on him than I am.

With Vollmer, it's all about his back. If he's healthy this year, he'll be in high demand as a FA. Even if he isn't healthy, there will still be teams willing to take a gamble on him, because you generally don't find tackles with his size/athleticism/skill unless you're willing to invest a mid-to-high first round pick.

In any case, I wouldn't be surprised to see either one of them have a great season that makes tagging them a serious consideration. It would just require staying healthy and, in Chung's case, becoming less of a liability in coverage. In fact, I'd say that the odds of one of the two of them doing exactly this are pretty substantial.

 

[ThatllMoveTheChains!!!]

Chunk as you call him is playing in his 4th season this year. He will be an UFA in 2013. There won't be many RFA players any more due to all draftees being signed for 4 years minimum. Only UDFA's who get a 3 year deal will potentially be eligible.

And a lot can change in a season. Look what happened with Asante, and you couldn't have traded him for a bag of balls heading into 2006.

Derp... apparently I should've stayed in bed this morning.

The franchise tag for safeties isn't particularly high (it was $6.2 million for the Titans when they tagged Michael Griffin earlier this offseason). I don't see it happening either, as I don't think Chung is worth that kind of money, but most of the posters on this forum are much higher on him than I am.

With Vollmer, it's all about his back. If he's healthy this year, he'll be in high demand as a FA. Even if he isn't healthy, there will still be teams willing to take a gamble on him, because you generally don't find tackles with his size/athleticism/skill unless you're willing to invest a mid-to-high first round pick.

In any case, I wouldn't be surprised to see either one of them have a great season that makes tagging them a serious consideration. It would just require staying healthy and, in Chung's case, becoming less of a liability in coverage. In fact, I'd say that the odds of one of the two of them doing exactly this are pretty substantial.

All good points; I'll retract my previous statement.

 

[Ivan]

Clearly there are 2 sides to this issue, but the one that can't be overcome is the fact the Pats have ABSOLUTELY no reason to come off their position. Why guarantee $21MM regardless of the length (since only 2 years would be guaranteed) When you have the option to play him this year and reassess after seeing his production this coming year. If you liked what you saw, given the new receiver dynamics, and thought he'd be worth top money next year, you can franchise him again and give him his 21MM.

What's in it for the Pats to give him the money NOW when there is a possibility that his production might decline due to age, injury, or the new receiver dynamics. It would be foolish since they have the franchise option. The Pats are clearly willing to pay him top dollar as long as he's extraordinarily productive as he's been the last 5 years

The NFL has been great because, by and large, players get paid for their production year to year. However lately there has been a trend to giving longer term guaranteed contracts, with ,the players basically saying, "I want to be paid whether I'm productive or not".

Welker EARNED that $9.3MM contract.....and if he wants 20% more next year, he will have to EARN it AGAIN this season. What's wrong with that?

So, should they do the same with Brady? Tag him twice and tell him to go screw himself if he doesn't like it?

 

[BradyManny]

Welker EARNED that $9.3MM contract.....and if he wants 20% more next year, he will have to EARN it AGAIN this season. What's wrong with that?

I think everyone sees your point, it's obvious why the Patriots are taking the stance they are taking - but at the same time, Welker's side of the story is also rather plain to see as well.

It would easy for Wes Welker to feel like he's not being treated loyally or fairly. His POV is easy to see as well.

He's a pro, so he understands it's a business, and he's going to camp and playing and doing everything right. All the more reason the guy is the consummate Patriot and any grief fans are giving him is pretty damn out of place.

It ultimately comes down to the simple issue of whether or not you think the team should use the franchise tag as a weapon against its players.

In a lot of cases, we can see that using said tag is maybe not the fair thing to do - but how does that weigh against the team's goal of putting the best roster together?

Some here will argue it's maybe more important to do what's right. I would not. I say do what's best for the team. That's what's right.

It's a unique situation. Every negotiation is different.

 

[Ivan]

I think everyone sees your point, it's obvious why the Patriots are taking the stance they are taking - but at the same time, Welker's side of the story is also rather plain to see as well.

It would easy for Wes Welker to feel like he's not being treated loyally or fairly. His POV is easy to see as well.

He's a pro, so he understands it's a business, and he's going to camp and playing and doing everything right. All the more reason the guy is the consummate Patriot and any grief fans are giving him is pretty damn out of place.

It ultimately comes down to the simple issue of whether or not you think the team should use the franchise tag as a weapon against its players.

In a lot of cases, we can see that using said tag is maybe not the fair thing to do - but how does that weigh against the team's goal of putting the best roster together?

Some here will argue it's maybe more important to do what's right. I would not. I say do what's best for the team. That's what's right.

It's a unique situation. Every negotiation is different.

Great post......

 

[patfanken]

As a whole Ken, I think you are spot on in their feelings as a team.

However, your last sentence is possibly making the incorrect assumption that they would actually franchise him again (20% more statement) next season, which is probably not the case at all. I don't see anyway that the NEP are going to pay him almost 12 million next season. They would be looking towards another 2 yr deal most likely, which could burn the team a bit too, when you factor in this yr's 10 million dollar hit (9.4).

I agree with the possibility of playing out the year and re-assessing..BUT, the thought also comes to mind that they would be playing with fire a bit in the same sense too. Yes, you can negotiate after the last regular season game, but we're assuming that they make the playoffs, which does not give them much time at all to reach a deal before mid-February, or whenever approx. FA starts.

If we're hoping that WWW is going to stay loyal to the hometeam and that he will ignore the possibilities of making more elsewhere on the open market, then yes..it is a great idea. The problem is, that is a big "IF." Then you also have the problem of being right back to the beginning AFTER just having paid him 10 million this year too, at least that would be my worry.

You are correct. I don't think the Pats have any plan to franchise him again next season. They clearly don't think he or virtually ANY WR would be worth $12MM for a single year

I only mentioned it to make a the point that it makes no sense to give him that $21MM that most of the media jock sniffers call the "right thing", THIS year, when they have the option of doing it next year with the 2nd tag, and still have another year to make the final decision.

If Wes wants a long term deal in NE he's going have to "force" himself to accept a 100%+ pay increase and play for something in the neighborhood of $6MM/yr. BTW- I think Wes would more than make up that $6MM with off the field opportunities because he'd be playing for an elite franchise and with a HOF QB

Finally I for one do NOT expect or need Wes to remain "loyal" to anyone else but himself. However I think that in the long run, it would be better for him to remain a Patriot for the rest of his career. both for his short term football production, quality of life, and long term prospects.

 

[patfanken]

I think everyone sees your point, it's obvious why the Patriots are taking the stance they are taking - but at the same time, Welker's side of the story is also rather plain to see as well.

It would easy for Wes Welker to feel like he's not being treated loyally or fairly. His POV is easy to see as well.

He's a pro, so he understands it's a business, and he's going to camp and playing and doing everything right. All the more reason the guy is the consummate Patriot and any grief fans are giving him is pretty damn out of place.

It ultimately comes down to the simple issue of whether or not you think the team should use the franchise tag as a weapon against its players.

In a lot of cases, we can see that using said tag is maybe not the fair thing to do - but how does that weigh against the team's goal of putting the best roster together?

Some here will argue it's maybe more important to do what's right. I would not. I say do what's best for the team. That's what's right.

It's a unique situation. Every negotiation is different.

I have never been one who has thought that the franchise tag was a "weapon" for teams to use against their players. Don't forget that the player gets to be a top 5 paid player at his position. In other words he gets to be paid elite money for one year. I like that players need to keep producing at a high level in order to continue to make elite money. Some continue to play well after getting big money......some do not.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I have never been one who has thought that the franchise tag was a "weapon" for teams to use against their players. Don't forget that the player gets to be a top 5 paid player at his position. In other words he gets to be paid elite money for one year. I like that players need to keep producing at a high level in order to continue to make elite money. Some continue to play well after getting big money......some do not.

Agreed, mostly. For most guys who get tagged, the amount of money that they make is about in the ballpark of the most money that they'll ever make in a single season. They're hardly victims, and if the players hate it so much, then they can always make some concessions and get the tag removed from the CBA. Of course, they'd probably hate the concessions that they'd have to make even more than they hate the tag, and that's why it's still there.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I have never been one who has thought that the franchise tag was a "weapon" for teams to use against their players. Don't forget that the player gets to be a top 5 paid player at his position. In other words he gets to be paid elite money for one year. I like that players need to keep producing at a high level in order to continue to make elite money. Some continue to play well after getting big money......some do not.

What you have become is someone who throws all sorts of random numbers around and then says that's what a player should accept. The tag Welker is on this year doesn't even represent the top 5 salaries at the position last season. It's now a formula of the top 5 over the last 5 years along with a cap factor. That made it roughly $2M less than top 5 or what you think he's being paid. This is a production league and he's produced. Out of the slot largely to be sure, and he is now 31 although barely, but he's been the #1 or 1a WR here consistently in his time here production wise. You want to pay him roughly half a million more per year than even they were willing to pay Branch before he walked... 6 years ago... never having topped a thousand yards.

And you seem to want players to take the field for your edification and risk their athletic careers on a purely year to year basis... That's not how it works. Sorry about what happened in your day but we've advanced as a society since... The NFL doesn't fully guarantee any deals. And nobody besides agents and the NFLPA wants that. It would bankrupt the league in short order given the nature of the game and roster size. Elite QB's get close, and elite players are now receiving roughly half of their deals in guaranteed money. But rank and file get partial guarantees too, generally in the 20-25% range, and even jags and UDFA's get something (the new CBA guarantees up to $1.5M on new deals against injury in the first two years).

If Welker has earned his $9.4M this season as you claim, then you are claiming he should be fine with risking what remains of his career for zilch when he takes the field this season. Or your alternative is to take a 40% discount on his present value if he wants a longer deal. And your rationale is he should be happy to do that because it's still twice what he made on his last deal - which of course it isn't exactly, $7.2M would be - where it turns out he was grossly underpaid and never opened his mouth. Even when they lavished a $9M per deal on another 31 year old WR 4 years ago, who historically always bit the hand that fed him, after he put up record numbers for just one lone season.

They wasted $6M on a 33 year old WR last season in one year alone... It's like Wes is suddenly being asked to make up for everyone else's mistakes.

 

[Jangles]

I understand the stance of the team.

But I think that considering how much money gets wasted on players who didn't deserve it, kicking a couple million more Welker's way seems like a no brainer.

I hope something gets worked out.

 

[ahmed]

Why is 21 mil too much? He's getting 9.5 mil guaranteed this year. This means that the difference for after this year is 11.5. If you divide that by 2 years, that's 6 guaranteed over the following 2. So, unless you are saying Welker would not be worth 6 mil each in year 2 and 3, then the guarantee issue doesn't make sense. And if the FO thinks he won't be worth 6 mil each in year 2 and 3, then they should not talk long term at all.

 

[mgteich]

2 years for $20M seems OK. Apparently the patriots are willing to guarantee only $4.5M (in addition to the $9.5M already guaranteed). Welker apparently wants all $20M guaranteed. There might be room for compromise.

The team could gain the use of the tag for 2013 by finding a way to sign a deal.

The third year seems to be the answer. Welker might get his $20M guaranteed. The question would be the salaries for the 3 years. The team is likely not willing to guarantee Welker $10M for 2013 (why would they when they can simply wait and see if Welker is worth the franchise money, risking only that they couldn't franchise someone else).

I don't see why a 3 (or even a 4 year) deal can't be structured to everyone's satisfaction. If not, I think Welker would be fine with playing for $9.4M and getting one last contract from someone else next year (with a $10M bonus or guarantee as part of the deal).

Personally, I think that Welker would be worth a lot to the patriots for 2013 and 2014.

 

[Truth]

Maybe if he caught that pass he would've caught the contract he wanted. I hope this is his last season a a Patriot. It's already bad enough that he's going to break a real champion's reception record next year. 554 catches, no rings.

EDIT: INB4 I'm personally attacked for an opinion.

 

[Clonamery]

Maybe if he caught that pass he would've caught the contract he wanted. I hope this is his last season a a Patriot. It's already bad enough that he's going to break a real champion's reception record next year. 554 catches, no rings.

EDIT: INB4 I'm personally attacked for an opinion.

No one should be attacked for having an opinion that is based upon honest feelings or thoughtful discourse, unfortunately, your opinion is based upon being a moron.

Best of luck.