Dansby will not be tagged and wants $30M guaranteed...

[BradyFTW!]

I don't know anything about him

If he's good get him

go go go

He's a very good ILB- he'd solidify the interior of the defense, and be an upgrade to Gary Guyton in just about every conceivable way. He isn't a pass rusher, which is somewhat of a shame since that's what we really need, which is why I don't see the Pats giving him the money that he's asking for.

Still mad that we didn't draft him over Ben Watson.

 

[RobertWeathers]

RW--
I agree with your thought on BB himself not caring about damage control, I do think however, that after some needless reoccuring negativity regarding the teams approach on loyalty, that it couldn't/wouldn't hurt to extend one of their 'leaders' regardless. I think we can all agree that they will extend Brady, and for all we know it may have been in their plans this offseason anyway. As far as BB himself caring about public perecption--not so much. But for the organization as a whole, I do believe they care somewhat, at least to an extent. It can't be extremely beneficial for FA recruting, or to a lesser degree--public perception, for our ex-players to keep stating that the team 'uses' its players at will, and isn't loyal to the players that are loyal to them.

Whether or not it happens, or has anything to do with anything, it is an interesting perception/theory regardless. I in no way believe that Brady's extension would have anything to do with Wilfork's signing--not at all, that's not what I am saying. I do believe however, that it couldn't hurt to extend Brady sooner rather than later, if they cannot reach an agreement with Vince. The general perception of the teams 'dis-loyalty' will be sky high if they cannot reach an agreement with Vince. We'll all hear about being cheap, un-loyal to our own, etc, if they tag Wilfork or cannot reach an agreement. It may get even worse should he holdout throughout camp. All of the comparisons (right or wrong) to the past players will be on every blog, NFL Network stories, local mediots, etc. This can be stifled in some regards, by rewarding 'one of their own,' etc.

From a business planning/financial planning standpoint, you always want to address your longer-term,largest expenses first- IMO that would be Brady. Does it impact Wilfork? Depending on the team's cash situation, it might. If you need to shell out a $30m bonus to Brady and $25m bonus to Wilfork AND a $25-$30m bonus to Peppers/Dansby, that is a TON of cash to dole out even if you put them all on some kind of payment schedule. From a PR standpoint, it shows the fans a deep commitment to taking care if their own. From a business standpoint, it's risky on a number of levels. With all that said, I'm sure the team would implement safeguards based on CBA, lockout etc...As far a PR control or spin....I think as long as the team wins and nothing damages the Patriots "brand" (like running a fed pen like Cinci) I don't see the Pats changing how they do business.

As far as Wilfork's demands, I was on your agreement level in the beginning. I kept asking everyone "How do you know what he wants?" etc. It seems as though his recent comments last week on WEEI, and some recent media stories are claiming that he is indeed, looking for high-end money, from the Haynesworth contract down--which from his agent's perspective etc, makes sense. I think if you read between the lines of his comments about the tag etc, and what he deems over 7 million as "OK," you'll see that he is looking for 10 million + per year. To me that's certainly top-tier money, if I had to value his worth (thank god I don't ) I'd say he's worth about 8 1/2- 9 million per.

It's top tier I guess- certainly not chump change but not Haynesworth payole. I see your position better. Is he worth 8-9m per? Only if he produces.

Now whether or not he's a 2 down player or not will differ with each person, but I view an every down player as one who rarely leaves the field. It's true he averaged more than 2 downs this year, and was used on some sub-packages etc, but he's not a 3 down player like Seymour etc. To me, that's a fact. If you're not an every down player, you're a 2 down player--for the benefit of Vince (and out of respect to you) we'll call him a 2 1/2 down player. I believe Reiss had him in the early 60%'s, so in the case of argument, you are correct--he's not a 50% player. But at the same time, my point is valid also.

He did play 65% or so of the snaps last year and would have been more if he didn't suffer leg injuries. With their D, he'd come out on the 3-rd and longs but anything less than 3nd and 6 it seemed that he stayed in there. I do thing that if they asked him to drop down to 320 or so and be a 4-3 DT, he'd so well. He can penetrate. It's a question of stamina and speed with big ole Vince to play that way.

As far as him wanting a long-term deal, that's most likely correct, and I myself would think the Pats are a bit leery of anything more than about 4 years due to his weight issues, family history etc. Most likely though, he's more interested in more guaranteed money, and a longer term deal produces more guaranteed money. If number of years were simply the issue, wouldn't the front office simply add some BS money/years to the end of the deal, in the sense of Haynesworth? IMO, that isn't the only issue, I believe they aren't aggreeing on value/dollars also--although I certainly could be wrong.

As I've said in another post that a 3yr deal would take him to 31. Obviously a 4yr would be 32. If hes cooked at 31 and have a year on the books and need to cut him, that could be a sizable cap hit (unless the renego).

 

[DaBruinz]

Brady has reached the last year of his contract every time before he got an extension from the Pats. I don't know why you think otherwise, Supafly.

As for Dansby getting 30 million "guaranteed" I could see it happening in a tiered contract.

I believe that Dansby is worth 8 or 9 million a year in this defense. Will it happen? "d%#*!@t Jim, I'm a doctor, not a psychic"...

 

[mgteich]

I have no problem with signing Dansby for big bucks, or even Peppers.

HOWEVER, my priorities are to sign our own. I'd rather re-sign/extend Brady, Wilfork, Mankins and Bodden to long-term contracts than any free agent.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Brady has reached the last year of his contract every time before he got an extension from the Pats. I don't know why you think otherwise, Supafly.

As for Dansby getting 30 million "guaranteed" I could see it happening in a tiered contract.

I believe that Dansby is worth 8 or 9 million a year in this defense. Will it happen? "d%#*!@t Jim, I'm a doctor, not a psychic"...

Yep. Even after the 01 season. TB only signed a 3-year rookie deal.

I also think Dansby would be an excellent fit for this D. Hes big. Powerful. Good speed. Very good vs the run.

I just don't know if hes worth $9m a year.

 

[PatsChamp88]

Good luck Dansby

 

[pabst37]

If they think the need another quality inside linebacker I'd rather they just draft someone like McClain or Spikes - I don't think its worth paying that much for an ILB. Draft one and use that money to get a top end pass rusher.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If they think the need another quality inside linebacker I'd rather they just draft someone like McClain or Spikes - I don't think its worth paying that much for an ILB. Draft one and use that money to get a top end pass rusher.

Thats my concern as well. My assumption is that Mayo will be an absolute monster next year (I thought his knee injury stunted his development) so do you really need two high-priced ILBs. IMO the team needs a run-stuffing hammer ala Ted J. served but I could be wrong.

IMO gotta give McKenzie a good look, but hedge your bets with another rook or a cost-effective vet presence.

 

[spacecrime]

RW--
I agree with your thought on BB himself not caring about damage control, I do think however, that after some needless reoccuring negativity regarding the teams approach on loyalty, that it couldn't/wouldn't hurt to extend one of their 'leaders' regardless.

Extentions should be made SOLELY on the basis of expected production, nothing else, so yeah, it would hurt to extend a player to avoid recurring negativity.

Such negativity isn't needless, it is a given when your philosophy is that it is better to get rid of a player a year too early than a year too late. When you do that, you will always have players, mediots and fans saying you got rid of a player too early. There is no way to avoid that given the philosophy of getting rid of a player a year too early rather than a year too late.

No system is perfect. If you follow a philosophy, there will always be decisions that taken by themselves in hindsite appear to have been wrong. But it is right to follow the philosophy if it works in the long run. And who had has a better long run than the Pats under BB?

 

[Kontradiction]

Well this pretty much means that Dansby will not be a Patriot. Hopefully McKenzie is ready to, well, actually play.

 

[patsfan-1982]

Brady has reached the last year of his contract every time before he got an extension from the Pats. I don't know why you think otherwise, Supafly.

As for Dansby getting 30 million "guaranteed" I could see it happening in a tiered contract.

I believe that Dansby is worth 8 or 9 million a year in this defense. Will it happen? "d%#*!@t Jim, I'm a doctor, not a psychic"...

your post gets 5 stars. just for haveing a star trek. quote. in it

 

[supafly]

Brady has reached the last year of his contract every time before he got an extension from the Pats. I don't know why you think otherwise, Supafly.

As for Dansby getting 30 million "guaranteed" I could see it happening in a tiered contract.

I believe that Dansby is worth 8 or 9 million a year in this defense. Will it happen? "d%#*!@t Jim, I'm a doctor, not a psychic"...

Umm, no I don't believe he has ever reached the last yr of his contract--and this article from Reiss' blog (actually from today) proves my point 100 %. It's right there in paragraph 6, in the very last line.

As I said to RW in the next post, I believe Reiss has posted this several times before, most recently in one of his mailbags from the past 3-4 weeks, also today's ESPN blog. If I'm wrong, I'm going to conveniently blame it on him--so I'll apologize in advance if he/I are wrong.

Respectfully,
supafly

http://http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots

 

[supafly]

Yep. Even after the 01 season. TB only signed a 3-year rookie deal.
I also think Dansby would be an excellent fit for this D. Hes big. Powerful. Good speed. Very good vs the run.

I just don't know if hes worth $9m a year.

As I respectfully stated to DaBruinz, here is a direct quote from Reiss' blog from today (coincidently, because my post was yesterday) that proves he has NEVER entered the last year of his contract.

If I'm wrong, apologies to you and DaBruinz, but I'm going with Reiss on this one. Come to think of it, I may have gotten this info from one of his past mailbags, so if I'm wrong, then he's wrong too--and I'm taking him down with me damnit!!

http://http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots

 

[supafly]

your post gets 5 stars. just for haveing a star trek. quote. in it

Although I'm not too familiar with Star Trek, it's nice to see DaBruinz lighthearted, and in a good mood

That's the DB I love right there

I'll give it 5 stars too, just for that reason.

 

[supafly]

Extentions should be made SOLELY on the basis of expected production, nothing else, so yeah, it would hurt to extend a player to avoid recurring negativity.

Such negativity isn't needless, it is a given when your philosophy is that it is better to get rid of a player a year too early than a year too late. When you do that, you will always have players, mediots and fans saying you got rid of a player too early. There is no way to avoid that given the philosophy of getting rid of a player a year too early rather than a year too late.

No system is perfect. If you follow a philosophy, there will always be decisions that taken by themselves in hindsite appear to have been wrong. But it is right to follow the philosophy if it works in the long run. And who had has a better long run than the Pats under BB?

Good point about the system not being perfect, etc. And yes, it's much better to follow the philosophy if it works in the long run--I agree wholeheartedly. I'm not questioning the system at all, and I wouldn't ever. Mostly because I do not believe that I could do better, and I am a very humble and patient person.

Right, wrong, or indifferent--my theory (more like a minor prediction) that Brady will be extended this league year, is primarily based on the assumption that they already want to extend him anyway. My only point is that it 'couldn't/wouldn't hurt to extend one of their leaders' in the face of some adversity. (Again, this is based on the fact that he would eventually be signed again anyway.) That adversity would be the failure to come to terms with another one of their loyal players, Wilfork, who has gotten more vocal lately about his situation. With Wilfork coupled with Seymour, Samuel, Branch, and McGinest, not to mention Moss' recent comments today, those are 6 (!!!) Pro-Bowl players who are all stating the same thing. It's not like this is Brock Williams and Willie Andrews coming out, these are/were, and always will be great Patriots, and players everyone around the league and media pay major attention to. Yes, it is getting to be common public perception that if you come to Foxboro, you will not be treated properly--and in some players' minds that will seem like the team itself is not loyal. Not only is it not really good for anyone involved, it's not even true.

I agree with your statement, it would hurt to extend a player based only on the fact that it'd avoid negativity--not only would it hurt, it'd be plain old stupid. But that isn't what I am saying at all.

I am simply predicting (right or wrong) that some in the front office could see the possible extension of Brady as some proof that they do indeed, take care of their loyal players.

 

[RobertWeathers]

As I respectfully stated to DaBruinz, here is a direct quote from Reiss' blog from today (coincidently, because my post was yesterday) that proves he has NEVER entered the last year of his contract.

If I'm wrong, apologies to you and DaBruinz, but I'm going with Reiss on this one. Come to think of it, I may have gotten this info from one of his past mailbags, so if I'm wrong, then he's wrong too--and I'm taking him down with me damnit!!

http://http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots

No need for apologies, supafly. It's all good. The important thing is to make sure we all understand each other's position and get the facts right.

According to patscap.com, Brady signed a 3 year rookie deal which ran to the conclusion of the 2002 season. You are right though on the second deal. The next deal expired at the end of the 2006 season and brady was "up'ed" in 2005 essentially two full contract years left on the 2nd deal.

 

[supafly]

No need for apologies, supafly. It's all good. The important thing is to make sure we all understand each other's position and get the facts right.

According to patscap.com, Brady signed a 3 year rookie deal which ran to the conclusion of the 2002 season. You are right though on the second deal. The next deal expired at the end of the 2006 season and brady was "up'ed" in 2005 essentially two full contract years left on the 2nd deal.

Here is another direct quote, this time from Albert Breer. As I stated before, Reiss is in agreement with me also--as you saw the link.

This is the quote from Albert Breer: (and the link)

"What about the quarterback? Brady’s deal expires after the 2010 season, and this is the closest he’s come to the end of a contract since becoming a Patriot in 2000. He signed a four-year extension in 2002 with two years left on his rookie deal, then inked a six-year deal in 2005 with two seasons left on that accord.

http://http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2010/01/12/puzzling_status/?page=2

I don't suppose it matters that much, but as you said, we have to get our information correct. I made a statement, was questioned by several people, and am simply doing my best to prove myself right. As you've seen now, that's 2 accredited journalists (Reiss and Breer) who are backing me up.

Let me know what you think, as I said before, it doesn't matter too much one way or the other--but I stated the fact that Brady has never reached the last year of a contract, and am simply backing it up with facts and quotes from various sources. If Miguel's around, maybe he can clarify. I hate to even suggest his cap page being wrong, as that would be somewhat dis-respectful and rude--but if Reiss AND Breer are in accordance, I am sticking with them.

Regardless, thanks for the response.

Respectfully,
Supafly (dan)

 

[patsinthesnow]

30 mil guaranteed, wow. Mayo had identical stats at about 50% health.

After Jerod Mayo's rookie contract is up, he might be the highest paid linebacker in the league.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Here is another direct quote, this time from Albert Breer. As I stated before, Reiss is in agreement with me also--as you saw the link.

This is the quote from Albert Breer: (and the link)

"What about the quarterback? Brady’s deal expires after the 2010 season, and this is the closest he’s come to the end of a contract since becoming a Patriot in 2000. He signed a four-year extension in 2002 with two years left on his rookie deal, then inked a six-year deal in 2005 with two seasons left on that accord.

http://http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2010/01/12/puzzling_status/?page=2

I don't suppose it matters that much, but as you said, we have to get our information correct. I made a statement, was questioned by several people, and am simply doing my best to prove myself right. As you've seen now, that's 2 accredited journalists (Reiss and Breer) who are backing me up.

Let me know what you think, as I said before, it doesn't matter too much one way or the other--but I stated the fact that Brady has never reached the last year of a contract, and am simply backing it up with facts and quotes from various sources. If Miquel's around, maybe he can clarify. I hate to even suggest his cap page being wrong, as that would be somewhat dis-respectful and rude--but if Reiss AND Breer are in accordance, I am sticking with them.

Regardless, thanks for the response.

Respectfully,
Supafly (dan)

No. In the grand scheme of life it means absolutely nothing.

But I need to question Breer on Brady's rookie deal. It's right here in Miguel's site and also via cbsports.com...

Miguel's UNOFFICIAL Patriots Salary Cap Information Page

 

[condon84]

Karlos Dansby for $30 million guaranteed.

Something about that just doesn't seem right.