Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

[Deus Irae]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

The Patriots felt they made a significant offer to Welker last fall. Most folks felt it was almost insulting. I remember one March when Jonathan was touting the significant offer they made to Adam, offering to make him the highest paid kicker in the league. Only the offer contained no signing bonus and zero guaranteed money meaning if he slipped on the soap before the first week of the upcoming season he'd be **** out of luck... The Colts on the other hand offered him a 5 year deal with a $3.5M signing bonus and $7.5M guaranteed. And he saw all of it and more. They were reportedly upset he didn't give them a chance to match that offer. Which many here spun into his being a traitor.

I've often noted that I don't think the Patriots are cheap, and I don't. I do think that they play the hard-ass needlessly, all too often, though, and there's clearly a vindictiveness in BB that can be very unpleasant at times.

 

[spacecrime]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Personally Atip,I don't think you were wrong at all.

I think Belichick thought he could get away with scrubs on the right side for way less...now that he saw that Brady is in danger of getting his bell rung week in a week out, he reluctantly stretches out and ups the ante and sees that he cant count on Sebastian and Dan as much as he thought he could earlier.

That does not mean Belichick is suddenly generous......he is getting desperate and knows the right side will eventually put Brady in a bad position for as long as Connolly and Vollmer battle injury issues.

This is all horse pucky.

First, Waters had a two year deal. He got a signing bonus to sign for two years. His job was to show up July 27 and play for what he agreed to play for.

If the Pats did ask him to take a pay cut, all he has to do is say, "No, thank you" and show up and play.

This is totally on Waters. he is the guy who refused to show up and still refuses.

The Pats don't have to offer him big bucks and aren't cheap or stupid for not offering him a raise so that he would pretty please show up at training camp. He's under contract. To say BB screwed up by not offering him more money BEFORE he held out is nuts.

 

[Danger Zone]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

I've often noted that I don't think the Patriots are cheap, and I don't. I do think that they play the hard-ass needlessly, all too often, though, and there's clearly a vindictiveness in BB that can be very unpleasant at times.

Obviously my football knowledge isn't on par with yours.. but where the hell do you see very clear, unpleasantly vindictive behavior from BB??

 

[captain stone]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

As an example, Seymour didn't start the Sunday after he buried his father.

 

[Patsrock]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Does anyone know if Waters does not show up this yr if the Pats have he right to keep him next year on the same deal.

Like the Tim Thomas situation for the Bruins(depending on lockout of course) if Thomas does not show up the Bruins will "suspend him without pay" but still get charged 5m cap hit. But the Bruins next July have the right to either let him become a UFA or make him return at a $5m cap hit.

If the NFL has a similar rule I expect Waters to show up by week 10, to make sure he becomes a UFA.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Does anyone know if Waters does not show up this yr if the Pats have he right to keep him next year on the same deal.

Like the Tim Thomas situation for the Bruins(depending on lockout of course) if Thomas does not show up the Bruins will "suspend him without pay" but still get charged 5m cap hit. But the Bruins next July have the right to either let him become a UFA or make him return at a $5m cap hit.

If the NFL has a similar rule I expect Waters to show up by week 10, to make sure he becomes a UFA.

Waters will be 36 next year......I seriously doubt he will suit up for a team again....he has made boatloads of money and has nothing further to accomplish in what may turn out to be a HOF career.

If he had agreed to play this year,I would assume it would have been his last at his age.

How Many starting offensive lineman right now are 36 or older?....probably not many.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

As an example, Seymour didn't start the Sunday after he buried his father.

I dont think he did it to be vindictive but rather to make a point that we follow the rules no matter what and dont make exceptions.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

This is all horse pucky.

First, Waters had a two year deal. He got a signing bonus to sign for two years. His job was to show up July 27 and play for what he agreed to play for.

If the Pats did ask him to take a pay cut, all he has to do is say, "No, thank you" and show up and play.

This is totally on Waters. he is the guy who refused to show up and still refuses.

The Pats don't have to offer him big bucks and aren't cheap or stupid for not offering him a raise so that he would pretty please show up at training camp. He's under contract. To say BB screwed up by not offering him more money BEFORE he held out is nuts.

Waters didn't get any signing bonus. His deal was for 2 years $3M in total salary and $2.5M in incentives. $1.75M in incentives in year 1 and he made them. Was due another $750K in incentives for 2012 which based on last season would have been LTBE.

You must be confusing him with Light who got $6M signing bonus and $2M in total salary and was allowed to keep all of his signing bonus even though he retired after 1 year of a 2 year deal. Indicating that was the deal up front. Bedard reported that Waters and BB had an agreement up front that he wouldn't have to be around for off season. Not sure if that included camp but it may have. Which would again raise the question, what were they renegotiating over...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Does anyone know if Waters does not show up this yr if the Pats have he right to keep him next year on the same deal.

Like the Tim Thomas situation for the Bruins(depending on lockout of course) if Thomas does not show up the Bruins will "suspend him without pay" but still get charged 5m cap hit. But the Bruins next July have the right to either let him become a UFA or make him return at a $5m cap hit.

If the NFL has a similar rule I expect Waters to show up by week 10, to make sure he becomes a UFA.

The Patriots retain his rights for 2013 unless he shows up by week 10. That said it's unlikely this is in play with a player his age.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

As an example, Seymour didn't start the Sunday after he buried his father.

It was his grandfather and the issue was he remained away longer than the pre agreed time he was excused for without seeking additional permission. Just came back a day late.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

I've often noted that I don't think the Patriots are cheap, and I don't. I do think that they play the hard-ass needlessly, all too often, though, and there's clearly a vindictiveness in BB that can be very unpleasant at times.

No offense meant by this platitude: That's your take and you certainly have a right to it.
With that said, "clearly a vindictiveness" is an absolute -- and that is an inappropriate usage when clearly (and provably) it is speculative. You (and I) know little of what is going on behind the negotiation/cap calculation scene, and there likely is soooo much we don't hear (and what we hear can frequently be wrong). That alone makes your absolute statement quite suspect. Further, considering BB has a very clear record of being almost half machine (so to speak), an opinion that states: (A) BB assigns an X dollar value to a player/position, (B) that dollar value is without significant flexibility (C) no matter the ability of the player or how well he is liked, he will risk allowing the player to walk. (D) he believes that is in the best interest of the team (E) It makes him look uncaring if not spiteful when it is purely cold hard business.
Have their been times he was vindictive about it or is he just operating on a machine like, cold level? Neither of us know and it is clearly not a certainty either way due to an absence of so much of the facts.

 

[Shed83]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Some people simply have pride

If a team finds itself desperate and finally comes up with enough money which might have satisfied him 2 months ago, it's just another way of trying to kiss his ass because Cannon,McDonald and Thomas suck and are raw prospects as we all can clearly see.

If this is true,I don't blame him for saying no......they had thier chance to make an offer that was impossible to refuse when summer was still here.

Like I said,Waters seems prideful and stubborn and wants time with his family

Let him go peacefully.....

Well if this is the case then Brain Waters and i have a different view on pride.

My pride would make me honour a contract that i had willingly signed, nobody forced him to sign for 2 years last offseason.

Wes Welker had outperformed his contract in each of the last 5 seasons but continued to show up for work rather than demanding more money.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Well if this is the case then Brain Waters and i have a different view on pride.

My pride would make me honour a contract that i had willingly signed, nobody forced him to sign for 2 years last offseason.

Wes Welker had outperformed his contract in each of the last 5 seasons but continued to show up for work rather than demanding more money.

And fat load of good that's done him.

Teams don't honor contracts every day. I guess they have no pride. In this case they were looking to renegotiate the players contract. And at least part of that renegotiation included making $500K of his money that would have been guaranteed week 1 suddenly not guaranteed at all. Reportedly they offered him the opportunity to earn more than that back if he didn't get miss games, but the flip side of offers like that are if you do get injured your're screwed. Waters isn't a guy with a history of injury concerns. He's missed 3 games in the last decade. Not to mention here at the moment pro bowlers can be replaced by effort jags through no fault of there own. So there is that, too, that can cost you any opportunity to recoup your lost money.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

No offense meant by this platitude: That's your take and you certainly have a right to it.
With that said, "clearly a vindictiveness" is an absolute -- and that is an inappropriate usage when clearly (and provably) it is speculative. You (and I) know little of what is going on behind the negotiation/cap calculation scene, and there likely is soooo much we don't hear (and what we hear can frequently be wrong). That alone makes your absolute statement quite suspect. Further, considering BB has a very clear record of being almost half machine (so to speak), an opinion that states: (A) BB assigns an X dollar value to a player/position, (B) that dollar value is without significant flexibility (C) no matter the ability of the player or how well he is liked, he will risk allowing the player to walk. (D) he believes that is in the best interest of the team (E) It makes him look uncaring if not spiteful when it is purely cold hard business.
Have their been times he was vindictive about it or is he just operating on a machine like, cold level? Neither of us know and it is clearly not a certainty either way due to an absence of so much of the facts.

Bill can be extremely vindictive. I've never seen him show that side with a player. But he has certainly shown it with some members of the media who pissed him off. So that capacity clearly exists.

 

[DarrylS]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

There is always the underlying theme of something, Kraft is cheap, BB wants to punish so and so etc.

In the end there is usually more to the picture than meets the eye, as the mediots whine about how if BB was more forthright all of this could be avoided. Implying that BB is responsible for whatever, and the media never inflames anything that happens to this team.

Memo to Mediots, BB is probably not going to change, get over it.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

Yeah. I used to really have an issue with the way they handled players particularly when it came to negotiation. I came to understand that part of it is rooted in their need to not have to coddle players. Can't be all about ego and has to be some level of desire to win here. That said, they still tend to take it a bit too far at times and in some cases when it seems so needless. I think this was one of those cases. Both sides knew the deal going in. Year 2 was always just an option and performance and accommodation were going to be part of the equation. Why they had to poke any kind of stick into the mix is beyond me. At 36 coming off a pro bowl season Waters didn't need the reps others did. Probably wouldn't have even gotten them the way Bill managed camp and pre season this year. There isn't a guy in that locker room worth a roster spot that would have had an issue with bringing that level of player in at what he was scheduled to make or even a few dollars more for one more season because he makes the offense better than anyone else they can plug in.

 

[Shed83]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

And fat load of good that's done him.

Teams don't honor contracts every day. I guess they have no pride. In this case they were looking to renegotiate the players contract. And at least part of that renegotiation included making $500K of his money that would have been guaranteed week 1 suddenly not guaranteed at all. Reportedly they offered him the opportunity to earn more than that back if he didn't get miss games, but the flip side of offers like that are if you do get injured your're screwed. Waters isn't a guy with a history of injury concerns. He's missed 3 games in the last decade. Not to mention here at the moment pro bowlers can be replaced by effort jags through no fault of there own. So there is that, too, that can cost you any opportunity to recoup your lost money.

What are you getting at with the first comment. Im pretty sure Wes Welker has received every dime due to him for the last 5 years??

He signed his contract when he came from Miami and got paid what he was happy to sign for. Whats the issue?

The second part, That is get out clauses that are in place for a reason.

Players know this before signing - thats why players get paid a signing bonus. Lots of players earn a ton of money and get cut without playing a game.

There's a major difference in using agreed clauses to cut players and a player holding out because he doesnt want to honour a contract that he was delighted to sign 12 months earlier!! If he didnt want to agree to the offer the Pats made him this offseason then you say 'no thanks' i'll honour the contract we agreed to last season!

Another Major difference is that players will always get paid for the work they have done, they might lose out on future money but again thats in the contract they have happily signed. Oraganisations on the other hand dont always get work done for the money they have paid.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

What are you getting at with the first comment. Im pretty sure Wes Welker has received every dime due to him for the last 5 years??

He signed his when he came from Miami and got paid what he was happy to sign for. Whats the issue?

You're the one who pointed out that he fulfilled it without complaint. As we all know he in fact dramatically out performed it. And tried to do the right thing. And it landed him in the situation he is in today. Being marginalized in a contract year albeit while being paid on a one year franchise tag.

The second part, That is get out clauses that are in place for a reason.
Players know this before signing - thats why players get paid a signing bonus. Lots of players earn a ton of money and get cut without playing a game.

Waters got no signing bonus.

There's a major difference in using agreed clauses to cut players and a player holding out because he doesnt want to honour a contract that he was delighted to sign 12 months earlier!! If he didnt want to agree to the offer the Pats made him this offseason then you say 'no thanks' i'll honour the contract we agreed to last season!

The team tried to change the contract Waters agreed to 12 months ago. For all we know they told him not to report unless he was willing to do the restructure. Teams will do that to avoid being on the hook for the previously agreed to amount should the player get injured once on their property.

Another Major difference is that players will always get paid for the work they have done, they might lose out on future money but again thats in the contract they have happily signed. Oraganisations on the other hand dont always get work done for the money they have paid.

And players are allowed to walk away just like teams are allowed to send them away. Non guaranteed contracts work both ways. Players often don't get paid enough money for the work they have done especially considering the toll it often takes on the rest of their lives. Each side makes it's risk/reward assessment and proceeds accordingly. The younger the player the greater the disadvantage he faces in assessing that. The older the player the easier it gets.

Matt Light signed a two year contract and walked away after one season and they'd paid him a $6M signing bonus he got to keep.

 

[Rob0729]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

As Deus pointed out in his post, we have no idea what a significant increase amounts to. I tweeted Shalize asking if the raise he was offered was in addition to the $2.25M he was owned including LTBE incentives. Because all the mediots keep talking about $1.4M which was just his base salary - that he was asked to reduce to $900K with the stipulation he could earn it and more back in incentives. His deal was for 2 years $5.5M including incentives. He earned his incentives in year 1. This year he would have earned the remaining $750K just by starting probably 14 games. So the question is were they offering him a chance to earn substantially more than $2.25M?? And what on earth possessed them to ask for a restructure anyway? None of his contract was guaranteed unless he made the 53 in week 1. Why wasn't that insurance enough for them? Was the whole thing some sort of crazy cover for allowing him to miss camp? Like his teamates would be pissed if a pro bowl player contemplating retirement who helped them get to the superbowl last season chose to rejoin them? Pahleeeese.

$2.25 million is only $850k more than $1.4 million. I don't think anyone would say that $850k is a substantial amount of money. I seriously doubt that SMY and Tom Curran would report that the Pats offered a lot more than the $1.4 million if it was only $850k.

My guess is that they were offering him at least $3-4 million to play this season, probably closer to $4 million. If the Pats were willing to pay Shaun Ellis $4 million to play when he was clearly on the decline and wasn't going to be more than a role player, I would think that would be the mark where they would put Waters.

If the Pats were giving him concessions to miss training camp and preseason along with a pay bump, you think they are out of line to ask him to restructure his contract to protect themselves if he leaves in the season. And let's not forget that this was a restructure that Greg Bedard reported that Waters agreed to.

From all the reports except for Jeff Howes', the Pats bent over backwards to accommodate Waters and his family situation. Yet, people are still twisting this into the Pats are screwing him.

If it was such a crappy deal that they were offering, Waters could have refused to agree to it and just show up and force the Pats to pay him the money he is owed on his original deal, cut him, or trade him. If Waters wants to play closer to home and the Pats don't want to pay him his $1.4 million as a base, this would have been his best powerplay to get the Pats to cut him and him to sign with the Texans or Cowboys probably for more money.

 

[Rob0729]

re: Brian Waters turned down "significant" pay raise

No offense meant by this platitude: That's your take and you certainly have a right to it.
With that said, "clearly a vindictiveness" is an absolute -- and that is an inappropriate usage when clearly (and provably) it is speculative. You (and I) know little of what is going on behind the negotiation/cap calculation scene, and there likely is soooo much we don't hear (and what we hear can frequently be wrong). That alone makes your absolute statement quite suspect. Further, considering BB has a very clear record of being almost half machine (so to speak), an opinion that states: (A) BB assigns an X dollar value to a player/position, (B) that dollar value is without significant flexibility (C) no matter the ability of the player or how well he is liked, he will risk allowing the player to walk. (D) he believes that is in the best interest of the team (E) It makes him look uncaring if not spiteful when it is purely cold hard business.
Have their been times he was vindictive about it or is he just operating on a machine like, cold level? Neither of us know and it is clearly not a certainty either way due to an absence of so much of the facts.

The thing is here, all the evidence shows that Belichick is being the exact opposite of vindictive. He seems to want to bend over backwards for Waters to accommodate his family situation. He reportedly has offered him a substantial raise.

At this point, we don't know if there are any bad guys in this situation. The Pats may have negotiated with Waters fairly and generously and Waters just doesn't want to leave his family barring an gross overpayment that is an offer he cannot refuse, but never expects to get.

Right now people are making up a lot of evidence and assumptions that are just not there. Curran, Bedard, and SMY have all reported the Pats bend over backwards to try to accommodate Waters and his situation. I don't know how anyone can accuse Belichick to be vindictive in this situation.