How the Pats Should Handle the Samuel Negotiations

[Pat_Nasty]

Pretty much the same way they've handled the Stallworth/Washington Negotiations, by including a "prove-it" year in 2007, after which the team can opt out with no cap liability.

Basically, offer Samuel a contract in which the first year's base salary is the same as his franchise tender -- with roster bonuses making the deal closer to the "Nate Clements" level triggering in 2008. Thus, if Samuel performs like last year, showing he's worth elite CB money, the Pats have him locked up long term... and if he doesn't measure up in their eyes, they can cut him, and he'll hit the open market.

Samuel would sign this kind of deal because it would prevent the Pats from franchising him after the '07 season, and the Pats would go for this deal, because it would get Samuel in for '07 at the cap value they've already allotted to him, and give them another year to see if he's worth a big-time contract.

 

[NE39]

That is basically what the Franchise tag does, which he is on record of being unhappy about. He wants his huge up-front payment, and speculation (from Albert Breer) is that he has other teams that have told him they will pay him that kind of money. He is mad because the Pats won't trade him for less than the 2 firsts they get from the franchise tag.

I doubt he goes for that kind of deal. He wants all his money now.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Heres an idea - Trade the bum to a team stupid enough to give us a #1 draft pick and a decent LB or CB player from thier roster this year and let them put up with this sh!t from this selfish bastard.

Thats the way I handle this worthless negoitiation which is not going to go anywhere.

 

[QuiGon]

Samuel would sign this kind of deal because it would prevent the Pats from franchising him after the '07 season, and the Pats would go for this deal, because it would get Samuel in for '07 at the cap value they've already allotted to him, and give them another year to see if he's worth a big-time contract.

No, Samuel won't sign such a deal. He wants large amounts of guaranteed money right here and now.
In otherwords, a signing bonus of around $40 million. Why in the world would he sign a deal giving him no guaranteed money above the franchise tender amount but could possibly lock him up long term..? That's essentially the worst of both worlds. I am sure he would be perfectly happy taking a $40 million signing bonus from NE and getting cut after only one year, but that would probably have a bad cap effect.

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

Heres an idea - Trade the bum to a team stupid enough to give us a #1 draft pick and a decent LB or CB player from thier roster this year and let them put up with this sh!t from this selfish bastard.

Thats the way I handle this worthless negoitiation which is not going to go anywhere.

Why is this Samuels fault? The market has been set by demand from other teams for quality CB's.

If he is worth a number 1 AND a "quality" player, isn't he then worth what he is asking for?

 

[QuiGon]

Here's how they should handle the negotiations: By not showing up to the negotiations. Asante has 3 options:

1) Take the franchise tender
2) Get some team to give up 2 #1's
3) See you in 2008

 

[mgcolby]

Why is this Samuels fault? The market has been set by demand from other teams for quality CB's.

If he is worth a number 1 AND a "quality" player, isn't he then worth what he is asking for?

"The Patriots are cheap" theory, creeping back in! Gotta love it! :bricks:

 

[Pat_Nasty]

That is basically what the Franchise tag does, which he is on record of being unhappy about. He wants his huge up-front payment, and speculation (from Albert Breer) is that he has other teams that have told him they will pay him that kind of money. He is mad because the Pats won't trade him for less than the 2 firsts they get from the franchise tag.

I doubt he goes for that kind of deal. He wants all his money now.

Many, if not most, franchise tagged malcontents will usually readily play out the year under the tag, if the team promises not to use the tag on them again the next year. This is why Samuel would go for this kind of contract -- because it stipulated that if the Pats keep him after 2007, they will pay him big-time guaranteed money. Otherwise they can release him -- but they won't be able to tag him. This is why he'd take the deal.

Basically, in return for giving up the right to tag Samuel again after '07, the Pats are getting the option to trigger a long-term contract at Clements-level value.

 

[Born_a_Patriot]

Mcginest: Don't worry about it. Yeah you're doing the right thing.
Samuel: Yeah but...

Mcginest: Listen you had how many interceptions last year?
Samuel: 10

Mcginest: 10 You damn right you deserve the money. I still have love for the Patriots, but is just business.
Samuel: Is just that..

Mcginest: Just nothing. You have that get paid Tattoo in your arm. Is not one of those rubb offs is it?
Samuel: Nah is the real thing man.

Mcginest: Well than stop acting like a little bit*h and get your a@s here. You look great in this Browns uni. We love to have you.

Samuel: Really.

Mcginest: Absolutely. Misery loves company.
Samuel: Crap...

 

[mgcolby]

Here's an option! Tell all of the disgrunteled taged players to quit b!tching to the media and start b!tching to your Player rep. Then all of the Player reps can get together, put out a survey to each team and have all of the players vote on the Franchise tag "Yea" (they want the tag to stay) or "Nay" (they want the tag to go). If Yea wins - then STFU! If Nay wins - STFU and when the next CBA comes around make sure its not included!

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

"The Patriots are cheap" theory, creeping back in! Gotta love it! :bricks:

Glad your so good at reading crap thats not there. I never said, nor inferred, that the patriots should give in, or were cheap. I just asked why it was always the player. If Samuel wants more than the pats are willing to offer, he moves on (when he can).

Why does there have to be "fault" implied? This happens everyday in the business world...I want "A", get offered "B", go find "A" somewhere else.

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

Many, if not most, franchise tagged malcontents will usually readily play out the year under the tag, if the team promises not to use the tag on them again the next year. This is why Samuel would go for this kind of contract -- because it stipulated that if the Pats keep him after 2007, they will pay him big-time guaranteed money. Otherwise they can release him -- but they won't be able to tag him. This is why he'd take the deal.

Basically, in return for giving up the right to tag Samuel again after '07, the Pats are getting the option to trigger a long-term contract at Clements-level value.

and if he has a career ending injury next year? Even one that casts a doubt on his ability...?

 

[QuiGon]

Basically, in return for giving up the right to tag Samuel again after '07, the Pats are getting the option to trigger a long-term contract at Clements-level value.

And if he plays like crap or gets injured, they can cut him. Sure that's a great deal from the Patriots' perspective... but Samuel hasn't gained anything from your suggestion. Of course as I mentioned above, for Asante it is the worst of both worlds.

With all due respect, you're making up your own definition of the term "guaranteed money". "Guaranteed money" means guaranteed right here and now. There is no such thing as "guaranteed money" one year from now.

 

[patsgo]

Why is this Samuels fault? The market has been set by demand from other teams for quality CB's.

If he is worth a number 1 AND a "quality" player, isn't he then worth what he is asking for?

hes had one good year , the patriots have a right to franchise him per the collective bargaining agreement, samuel wants to chang the agreement, so he gets his own way, he should be mad at the team that wants to sign him because they wont give up the negotiated compensation per the collective bargaining agreement, he s a good player, and because sf is stupid enough to pay 80 million for clements doesnt mean we have to

 

[zippo59]

and if he has a career ending injury next year? Even one that casts a doubt on his ability...?

The injury excuse doesn't hold a lot of water. Yes, there are players who suffer serious injuries and never go on to play again, (Theisman, Stingley) but there are also tons of players who suffer "serious" injuries but go on to big paydays (Drew Brees, Javon Walker, Frank Gore, Edgerrin James, Charles Woodson, etc.) These injuries don't stop players from raking it in when they are on the open market. Teams will pay, most of the time regardless of injury.

And he still pockets 8 million dollars! His family is more than set for life on that alone!

It would be nice if every person could have total security in their jobs but that is just not how life works.

 

[mgcolby]

Glad your so good at reading crap thats not there. I never said, nor inferred, that the patriots should give in, or were cheap. I just asked why it was always the player. If Samuel wants more than the pats are willing to offer, he moves on (when he can).

Why does there have to be "fault" implied? This happens everyday in the business world...I want "A", get offered "B", go find "A" somewhere else.

But in the business world they don't have franchise tags. So Samuel can't just get offered B and then go find A somewhere else unless that somewhere else agrees to the terms set forth in the CBA.

How is a person supposed to derive what you stated above out of what you wrote prior?

Why is this Samuels fault? The market has been set by demand from other teams for quality CB's.

If he is worth a number 1 AND a "quality" player, isn't he then worth what he is asking for?

Now, maybe I'm the only one with a reading comprehension defficiency, but that doesn't equal what you stated in this post. In the context of this thread, your post implies that the Pats should give Samuel what he is asking for. Which harkins back to the "Pats are cheap" theory.

 

[QuiGon]

Why does there have to be "fault" implied? This happens everyday in the business world...I want "A", get offered "B", go find "A" somewhere else.

Ah, but that doesn't exactly tell the whole story now does it..? Asante wants "A" but, by virtue of the collective bargaining agreement his union signed in good faith, he has agreed to play for "B". That doesn't free him to seek "A" somewhere else.

EDIT: He's actually perfectly free to seek as much money as he wants to in another line of work. If Microsoft offered him $50 million guaranteed to program computers he could take that position and the Patriots wouldn't even get a microchip to be named later. But if he wants to play in the National Football League, he has agreed to be bound to the terms set forth in the CBA.

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

hes had one good year , the patriots have a right to franchise him per the collective bargaining agreement, samuel wants to chang the agreement, so he gets his own way, he should be mad at the team that wants to sign him because they wont give up the negotiated compensation per the collective bargaining agreement, he s a good player, and because sf is stupid enough to pay 80 million for clements doesnt mean we have to

I wasn't disputing what has happened, just the posters argument. If AS is "good" enough to demand a 1 and a good player, why isn't he good enough to demand that type of contract? Can't have it both ways..

 

[patfanken]

A couple of points:

1. Forget about anthing but the GUARANTEED money. That is all that matters. When you do that the situation clears up nicely. Here are the options with all money mentioned beign GUARANTEED.

a. He takes the $8MM and becomes a FA next season
b, He take the $12MM on the LT deal the Pats offerred at $6MM/yr average
c. He holds out for the $20MM Clement deal at about $8/MM/yr average.

Thats it, guy.....and btw, I'm tired about hearing about the freakin' "Market" being set. Because if it has, it has told us nothing that we don't already know. The high end of the elite market is Clement, the Low end is Bly, and the Pats offerred him a somewhat better Bly deal. He wants the Clement deal, and I don't think the Pats will give it to him. NOR do I believe anyone else will either, despite what the media is trying to leak, especially since the KNOW that the Pats will need significant compensation to let him go.

 

[QuiGon]

A couple of points:

1. Forget about anthing but the GUARANTEED money. That is all that matters. When you do that the situation clears up nicely. Here are the options with all money mentioned beign GUARANTEED.

a. He takes the $8MM and becomes a FA next season
b, He take the $12MM on the LT deal the Pats offerred at $6MM/yr average
c. He holds out for the $20MM Clement deal at about $8/MM/yr average.

Thats it, guy.....and btw, I'm tired about hearing about the freakin' "Market" being set. Because if it has, it has told us nothing that we don't already know. The high end of the elite market is Clement, the Low end is Bly, and the Pats offerred him a somewhat better Bly deal. He wants the Clement deal, and I don't think the Pats will give it to him. NOR do I believe anyone else will either, despite what the media is trying to leak, especially since the KNOW that the Pats will need significant compensation to let him go.

IMHO, if he were a UFA, someone would give him that type of deal. And I have no doubt someone would offer him more than the Pats have.

Unfortunately for him, he is bound by the terms of the CBA his union negotiated and agreed to in good faith.