Crucial for us to sign Samuel and Gay!

[Ring 6]

BB allowed a WR and FA CB to hold him hostage for most of last off season. They say those who fail to learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them. One thing BB cannot tolerate is players making the same mental mistakes over and over. I think he will hold himself to the same standard and be pro active rather than reactive this time around. He can't afford to allow two players in consecutive seasons to hold this team up as they embark on another teambuilding endeavor. It's not fair to the rest of their teamates who deserve to know where they stand from day 1 in mini camp. They will reach some sort of understanding with Asante before camp, and likely before the draft, whether that be to take the tag off the table for another contract type season or trade him for 2007 draft picks or trade him for a player and 2008 picks.

Why, if nothing else happens, wouldn't they just have him amke is 7.79mill to play corner in 2007, then deal with the contract after the season.

I dont think there is any gamble at all in saying keep him under the tag and the risk is he holds out.
There is just no way asante Samuel is going to stay home and lose $500,000 a week. That may be more money in a month than he has made so far in his career.

 

[Terence]

Terrence, for a rookie you show a lot more street smarts than a lot of the

veteran members in this forum who are calling for the trade of Asante

by draft day. With regard to Randall Gay, I think that he has a history of

injuries dating back to college. This is why he wasn't drafted. The only

way he becomes a crucial part of the team is if we lose Asante. With

regard to Asante, we can kiss our hopes for another Superbowl away

if we lose him. Payton Manning will pick us apart in the playoffs if we don't

have Asante. We have to play a waiting game with Asante and play the

odds that he will not pass up 8 million dollars and instead hold out and

lose $500,000 each regular season game day missed.

Well thanks Jimke for the rookie compliment!

The only point that I was intially trying to make is that we are very close to winning the SB with the team we currently have in place. We have made the necessary upgrades on Offense. Without Samuel and Gay, that lessens our chances. I do not want to have to depend on some rookies to replace these 2 guys that are already system ready and proven. You guys can say what you want to say about Gay, but he has shown what he can do when he stays healthy. I really feel that he will stay healthy this year and return to his SB form. And I really feel that letting these 2 guys go will come back to haunt us just like last year when we let Branch and Givens go! Bring them both back and pay Samuel a respectable salary. He is long due! By the way, how much gauranteed money did Welker get? Can somebody tell me? Maybe we can start there with coming up with a gauranteed amount for Samuel.

 

[patriotsdynasty12189]

Rodney is NEVER healthy too then, if you put it that way. He's still our STARTER. Let's just dump all our players who got hurt more than once. C'mon. If BB didn't value Gay's talent and contribution to the team, he wouldn't have tendered him so high.

Dumbest post of the year. Gay isnt even our nickleback. He did OK in 04 when Ty Law and Poole were limping on the sideline. Why dont we just bring back Earthwind Mooreland back as well.

 

[Pats726]

And I really feel that letting these 2 guys go will come back to haunt us just like last year when we let Branch and Givens go!

Let them go??? Givens CHOSE to leave for more money...Branch did NOT want to honor his contract...What planet are you on??

 

[The 12th Man]

Dumbest post of the year. Gay isnt even our nickleback. He did OK in 04 when Ty Law and Poole were limping on the sideline. Why dont we just bring back Earthwind Mooreland back as well.

First of all, you don't even know if Gay is going to be our nickleback yet or not. For all we know, if Asante is traded, Gay can even end up as our starter. And yes, he started in the SuperBowl and proved he can hang. What we do know, is if he's healthy (and he will be this year), he'll finally get a chance to contribute to this team again nomatter if he starts, plays nickle, or dime. BB is much smarter than you (and all of us) and knows which guys are valuable to the team, hence he tendered him high showing that he wants Gay back, even though he was hurt last 2 years. So before you go insulting someone, make sure you know what you're saying.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

I'd like to see us keep both as well. Having seen what letting too many players go in one position last year, I don't want to repeat that. We were moments away from another SB! Usually, not much seperates one team from another... every little edge is important.

I say keep them both.

 

[Terence]

First of all, you don't even know if Gay is going to be our nickleback yet or not. For all we know, if Asante is traded, Gay can even end up as our starter. And yes, he started in the SuperBowl and proved he can hang. What we do know, is if he's healthy (and he will be this year), he'll finally get a chance to contribute to this team again nomatter if he starts, plays nickle, or dime. BB is much smarter than you (and all of us) and knows which guys are valuable to the team, hence he tendered him high showing that he wants Gay back, even though he was hurt last 2 years. So before you go insulting someone, make sure you know what you're saying.

Thank you 12th Man!

 

[AzPatsFan]

Refer to my previous post on Gay. Rodney hasn't done much for us since 2004 either, yet he's our starting SS. Injuries happen all the time in football.

Why does every one still call Rodney a starter? He isn't any longer.

The truth is the starting Safety tandem is Geno Wilson 27, and James Sanders 25. The first reserves are both ex-veteran starters, Artrell Hawkins,30, and Rodney Harrison, 35.

This is just like the situation at CB where the starters ar Asante Samuel 27, and Ellis Hobbs 26. The first reserves are both ex-starter veterans, Chad Scott, 33, and Randy Gay 27.

That has been the REALITY for two seasons...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Why, if nothing else happens, wouldn't they just have him amke is 7.79mill to play corner in 2007, then deal with the contract after the season.

I dont think there is any gamble at all in saying keep him under the tag and the risk is he holds out.
There is just no way asante Samuel is going to stay home and lose $500,000 a week. That may be more money in a month than he has made so far in his career.

Because they can't know for sure that nothing else will happen. I believe you were among the many who contended Deion would not hold out beyond mini camp, and scolded those who were making a mountain our of a mole hill, and then camp opened and he did, but it still didn't matter since there was no such thing as a distraction for this team...only that proved to be wrong too. And they ended up trading him anyway on the eve of the season after other guys in the unit spent a full TC trying to learn his position as well as the one they were intended to fill, and we all saw how that impacted the team early on.

People (including Deion) keep saying there is no correlation because Samuel is being offered almost $8M to play this season. Well Deion had that exact option too, as part of a 3 year $19M sitting on the table that could have been sweetened if his agent would have simply agreed to listen. Yet he held out even as he was fined to the point he had lost over half a million in 2006 before week one even arrived. And that resolve alone, staying away from an entire camp (which Asante can do without oweing anyone a nickle) and stating he would not report for the season was enough to punch his ticket out of town. The same way it will punch Asante's ticket if he sticks to his guns.

This HC who will pre-emptively put players on IR rather than have his team get caught up in waiting for or planning on them, and who got burnt by waiting an entire camp for his last holdout, isn't going to wait into the season for Asante to show up in time to still earn more than the organization apparently thinks the player is worth for a full season in a long term deal.

And Asante isn't exactly destitute. He's made over $2M in the last 4 years in his contract alone. Then he's likely made another million in playoff shares and he's likely pulled in another nice chunk of change in supplemental pool earnings based on his contract and regular season playing time. Knowing he can report at any time and and be fully guaranteed the remainder of his tag salary, and that if he holds out for a few weeks he can potentially engineer a trade as Branch did that will net him at least double that tag in signing bonus from another team without risking injury by stepping on the field is pretty decent incentive for a guy whose already earned upwards of $3M+ in the last 4 years. If Asante is nearly the gambler off the field he is on it, or has nearly the stones Deion had with nowhere near the insurance sitting in his back pocket, his showing up to play is not a given.

And as for signing him, you persist in trying to make a case that those of us who acknowledge this teams financial discipline are somehow playing the cheap card. Nothing could be further from the truth. We just take them at their word. They set a value and stick to it. They also articulate their position very clearly in that they believe you cannot stack a roster with top tier players at multiple positions who insist on signing only market value top tier contracts. And while they manage their cap with an eye to being in position to sign/retain/pay any player they choose, they also acknowledge the caveat that there will be a tradeoff/consequence down the line where where another player or players cannot be retained or acquired as a result. You think they bargain shop to afford top tier talent. They say they expect their top tier players to be reasonable and leave a dollar on the table so they can afford to attract and acquire a better quality middle class to surround them. What they bargain shop for is undervalued quality to better fill out the roster.

And yet they continue to attract talent like Thomas with undermarket deals and retain talent like Brady and Seymour and Koppen on team friendly deals. It's not the money these players are attracted to, although they certainly want to be reasonably well compensated comparatively speaking. It's the culture of winning that attracts certain players, and those are the kind of players this organization is most interested in acquiring or retaining. Winning is not just about talent in the NFL, because there's lots of that languishing in this league.

Asante said a while ago it wasn't just about the money. He lied, like so many of them do. When you tatoo youself with GET PAID, it's all about the money. They valued him as a $4.5M+/- player last fall based on their $7.5M signing bonus offer. They have upped their offer to around $6M. If the market values Samuel at over 50% more than that ($9M), then they are likely overvaluing the player. If the player now wants $30M in signing bonus and guarantees, he is delusionally overvaluing himself in an overheated market. Belichick has long held he is not responsible for what other GM's pay their players. What he was saying is he isn't bound to alter his value judgements based on someone elses talent or market assessment resulting in what he believes is an overvaluation of talent.

I don't see them closing a $3M AAV gap or likely a $10M+/- gap in bonus and guarantees substantially between now and the end of July. I also don't see the player simply backing off his demands. That being the case, I would just as soon trade the player now as trade him in August or even wait to see if he doesn't show up by mid September. I never felt that tagging him would represent any ascession of value. I always believed that it would simply represent a sound business decision to control the rights to a player others might currently be dramatically overvaluing. Had Samuel not been an unsignable UFA and a CB, they likely would have tagged Graham - although they had no intention of ever paying him 50% more than they believed he was worth, either.

 

[frankiesfly]

Everybody seems to be talking about getting the 1st round pick for Samuel and the 2nd round pick for Gay. My hope is that we re-sign both of these guys back. Having Samuel and a healthy Gay would be critical for us this year. This would really prevent us from having any glaring holes to fill for our Superbowl run. If we loose them both then we would have to replace our #1 CB and probably our #1 nickel. Remember Gay was the starting CB in our second superbowl victory (I think) and did a darn good job too. If he remains healthy this year, he would probably the comeback player of the year for our team. If we can do this, then we can really focus on drafting a LB and then start taking the best player available approach.

I totally agree with you. I think Gay is a really good player, and hope he can return to us and stay healthy. I think it's crucial for both of them to be signed also. I know there are a lot of people here that would take a good pick for Samuel, but i don't think there is a pick out there worth Samuel. There is no way a first year CB is going to come in and fill Samuel's shoes, it's just not going to happen. How agressive the Pats were in the Free agency market, the team wants to win now. Not next year or the year after, but now. A pick is only going to get us future not present, and thats what the team is looking for. Thats why Samuel will be signed. If Gay werre to leave it wouldn't have the impact as if Samuel left. I think we are still superbowl bound if Gay leaves. Hobbs hopefully will get better, and probably will without a big cast on his arm. I think thats what caused him to get called on pass int. so much. Gay will be a big loss to the team, but think we will beable to manage without him. We defenitly need Samuel.

 

[JackBauer]

Actually, I am concerned about our strong safety position and hope we upgrade that position in the draft. And to be perfectly honest with you, if Rodney was a free agent I don't know if the Pats would resign him unless he took the veteran minimum. He has been too injury prone the last two years for him not to be a concern.

In fact, look for the Pats to push James Sanders in the preseason to take the step to the next level to try to take Rodney's starting job. Don't be suprised if the Pats take a strong safety on the first day of the draft to try to replace Rodney too. I don't think Rodney is guaranteed a starter job this season. It would be tough for him to lose it, but there is a possibilty he will.

I disagree. I think it's far more likely they draft a FS or someone who can play both positions, as I believe Sanders is the putative future starter at SS.

 

[Pats726]

I want to keep Samuel on the team, biut I also wanted to keep Givens, Branch, Law and others...BUT it is not the 70s when one can keep players..where there is no salary cap... And that I think is the one big factor..what is the COST of keeping him.
Will it be easier to win a Super Bowl if he was on the team? yes, it would be, but the question is it crucial. He is not as important as a Brady or Seymour, that is clear. I do think they CAN win a Lombardi without him.
Football is a team game and because a 'replacement' corner is not as good as Samuel does not translate into the D necessarily being weaker. Get a good pass rush on a QB and average corners are that much better.
No as for Samuel, no, making an example of him is not smart at all. Everything he has done, is doing is perfectly legitimate and I respect that. And free agents who have left, even Vinatieri, did that within the rules and I think MOST fans do not have a large problem with that. Branch though is a different story...as what he did was quite unfair with his refusal to negotiate, his lying to fans and his general tactics. If someone had said make an example out of Branch, I would agree more, but that is another story.
So let us look at what the Patriots are doing. Whether they franchesed him as a pure business move (to get something instead of nothing) or did that so they could negotiate a long term deal and have his services for a year (at a high amount of money) OR a combination, they do not agree with Samuel on a long term contract number. THAT is clear. The Pats WILL pay him almost 8 mil for a year, but NOT 8 mil/year for an extended period of time. They might be wishing to see if Samuel has a year like last or not and to deal with a long term contract after next year. That is quite reasonable, but obviously those that say to pay him what he wishes do NOT agree with teh Patriot's front office. If the two parties agreed, there would be a contract and this would be over with.
One has to wonder why Samuel came out in teh press like he did?? Other teams know what he is asking as he can negotiate with them, so one has to think this was done to somehow make leverage with the front office via sympathy from the fans. In this case, it has not happened and in fact, the fans have voiced their displeasure, which is their option. Whether what he said was posturing or his true thoughts is not known as is the real numbers between him and the team. we know they do not agree and that is really all.
As for the game Samuel is playing, and negotiations are in fact a big one, it is one where one can lose as well as win. At this point, teams can prmise the world to him, but be nothing but hollow promises. If they are willing to pay him what he wants, they can sign him and compensate the Patriots; it is that simple. No team has done that, so my guess is that many of the teams are basically peddling hollow words to make the situation between him and the Pats a bit harder. Samuel can have a deal done easily with another team, but my guess is that that will not happen. Instead, Samuel may try to force a trade, where teh teams will give up less. I don't think other players will see that as a team undervaluing them at all, but that other teams MAY over pay and over value and if a trade can be worked out, then all the better. I think this is a lot different than if the Patriots did not negotiate and basically traded him quickly as in this case, it is Samuel who has mentioned wanting a trade. I do not know if thr Patriots wish to trade him or not or if they are REALLY that far off in their negotiations. I HOPE a deal can be made or a trade, if both parties agree that a deal will not happen. At least they are talking and negotiating which is a big step to get to an agreement. The Patriots may sign a vet like James and may draft a top rookie and whether Samuel is with the club, it may not matter as much. If he does, there will be better depth if not, they will be ready for his departure. The thing Samuel must be wary of is that if he does not sign the tag and threatens to hold out and/or cause prooblems, that tag could be removed. If the Patriots feel they are OK with a vet and or rook AND if they feel that negotiations with him are at a real stalemate and he will only be causing problems, that could happen. he will be a free agent, thr Pats will have that much more money to spend and he will not be receiving the almost $8 mill. If this is done later rather than sooner, it may not be a seller's market and he could lose out big time, maybe not even making what he would have. It is all a gamble for him as well. Do I think that will happen? No, but it does enter as a possibility. The same may be said for a holdout, but I do not think that will happen either.
I hope a long term deal with him CAN be worked out, but that remains to be seen. What is wrong with paying him long term as a top cornerback?? Maybe the front office doesn't think he is in that elite few OR that they do not value that as much as other teams OR?? They haven't come to that agreement with him which is why the impasse. Where would I spend the money, instead of spending it on him? I'm not the GM, but I might look at extending some of the other players. But I do not see Samuel in the high elite class of cornerbacks; not just yet...and I think THAT may be what the FO thinks as well.

 

[FilPats]

I doubt if the Pats can re-sign Asante. It looks like another hostage taking situation.
From another forum:

Posted by nykrb on Apr-12 5:47 PM

Gotta give Asante credit, he kept his mouth shut, and said he was happy, until AFTER all the good CBs were off the FA market... once Harper and the others were signed, it was time to pull the gun out and point it to the Pats' head.

 

[patsfan-1982]

samuel is great but no one will give us the 2 frist rond picks we want for him and i think he will play as far as gay if some one give us a 2rond pick for him but they wont take it hes not ty law and he never plays and hes just a nickel back elis hobbs is are starter

 

[Clonamery]

I want to keep Samuel on the team, biut I also wanted to keep Givens, Branch, Law and others...BUT it is not the 70s when one can keep players..where there is no salary cap... And that I think is the one big factor..what is the COST of keeping him.
Will it be easier to win a Super Bowl if he was on the team? yes, it would be, but the question is it crucial. He is not as important as a Brady or Seymour, that is clear. I do think they CAN win a Lombardi without him.
Football is a team game and because a 'replacement' corner is not as good as Samuel does not translate into the D necessarily being weaker. Get a good pass rush on a QB and average corners are that much better.
No as for Samuel, no, making an example of him is not smart at all. Everything he has done, is doing is perfectly legitimate and I respect that. And free agents who have left, even Vinatieri, did that within the rules and I think MOST fans do not have a large problem with that. Branch though is a different story...as what he did was quite unfair with his refusal to negotiate, his lying to fans and his general tactics. If someone had said make an example out of Branch, I would agree more, but that is another story.
So let us look at what the Patriots are doing. Whether they franchesed him as a pure business move (to get something instead of nothing) or did that so they could negotiate a long term deal and have his services for a year (at a high amount of money) OR a combination, they do not agree with Samuel on a long term contract number. THAT is clear. The Pats WILL pay him almost 8 mil for a year, but NOT 8 mil/year for an extended period of time. They might be wishing to see if Samuel has a year like last or not and to deal with a long term contract after next year. That is quite reasonable, but obviously those that say to pay him what he wishes do NOT agree with teh Patriot's front office. If the two parties agreed, there would be a contract and this would be over with.
One has to wonder why Samuel came out in teh press like he did?? Other teams know what he is asking as he can negotiate with them, so one has to think this was done to somehow make leverage with the front office via sympathy from the fans. In this case, it has not happened and in fact, the fans have voiced their displeasure, which is their option. Whether what he said was posturing or his true thoughts is not known as is the real numbers between him and the team. we know they do not agree and that is really all.
As for the game Samuel is playing, and negotiations are in fact a big one, it is one where one can lose as well as win. At this point, teams can prmise the world to him, but be nothing but hollow promises. If they are willing to pay him what he wants, they can sign him and compensate the Patriots; it is that simple. No team has done that, so my guess is that many of the teams are basically peddling hollow words to make the situation between him and the Pats a bit harder. Samuel can have a deal done easily with another team, but my guess is that that will not happen. Instead, Samuel may try to force a trade, where teh teams will give up less. I don't think other players will see that as a team undervaluing them at all, but that other teams MAY over pay and over value and if a trade can be worked out, then all the better. I think this is a lot different than if the Patriots did not negotiate and basically traded him quickly as in this case, it is Samuel who has mentioned wanting a trade. I do not know if thr Patriots wish to trade him or not or if they are REALLY that far off in their negotiations. I HOPE a deal can be made or a trade, if both parties agree that a deal will not happen. At least they are talking and negotiating which is a big step to get to an agreement. The Patriots may sign a vet like James and may draft a top rookie and whether Samuel is with the club, it may not matter as much. If he does, there will be better depth if not, they will be ready for his departure. The thing Samuel must be wary of is that if he does not sign the tag and threatens to hold out and/or cause prooblems, that tag could be removed. If the Patriots feel they are OK with a vet and or rook AND if they feel that negotiations with him are at a real stalemate and he will only be causing problems, that could happen. he will be a free agent, thr Pats will have that much more money to spend and he will not be receiving the almost $8 mill. If this is done later rather than sooner, it may not be a seller's market and he could lose out big time, maybe not even making what he would have. It is all a gamble for him as well. Do I think that will happen? No, but it does enter as a possibility. The same may be said for a holdout, but I do not think that will happen either.
I hope a long term deal with him CAN be worked out, but that remains to be seen. What is wrong with paying him long term as a top cornerback?? Maybe the front office doesn't think he is in that elite few OR that they do not value that as much as other teams OR?? They haven't come to that agreement with him which is why the impasse. Where would I spend the money, instead of spending it on him? I'm not the GM, but I might look at extending some of the other players. But I do not see Samuel in the high elite class of cornerbacks; not just yet...and I think THAT may be what the FO thinks as well.

Excuse me, could you repeat?

 

[shakadave]

Being a team player has absolutely nothing to do with contract negotiations.

It is much worse for the future of the organization if players feel they will not be rewarded for what they do, that the team expects them to take less for the honor of being here, than that players think the team pays what the market is.

Players will be rushing to exit, not lining up to be part of the organization that 'understands' players who expect the team to pay them their value are ***holes.

Here's another way to look at it:

There is no question that filling up our roster with players paid a bit below their "market value" puts a better team on the field than paying those same players at market value until we run out of money and then finishing out the roster with stiffs.

Putting a better team on the field increases our chances of winning a Super Bowl.

Some players appreciate this point, and are willing to accept a bit less, not "for the honor of being here" (a phrase which mocks the alleged arrogance of the Patriots' management) but for a better chance at a championship. AJ, you like to defend players for insisting on fair market value, but if a team payed everyone fair market value (which tends to mean "as much as any other team would offer in free agency") then that team would have a harder time winning.

I'm not saying that every player will arrive at this unselfish decision, but I am saying that those who do, help the team, and Asante is not one of these players, and so Asante does not help our team in this particular way.