Jason Peters, Tom Brady, and the draft

[PatsFan37]

From the National Football Post:

I know the Bills are upset with Jason Peters, but there is a cause and effect of paying big money to outside free agents. You always have to keep in mind how the locker room will react. If you don’t take that into account, the first time something bad happens the locker room is a mess. The signings of Dockery and Walker last year are the reason why this hold out is occurring. I told this exact same thing to Bill Parcells during his last year with Dallas when he lost Flozell Adams due to injuries. Teams cannot recover from losing an offensive left tackle. There are not many great left tackles sitting on the bench in the NFL.

No one would ever enter the Patriots locker room and make more than Tom Brady. The Patriots know the importance of his role with the team and will not allow anyone to mess with that structure. This goes even for a rookie contract resulting from a draft, hence the reason for their move down. And everyone is up in arms about what might happen if the Pats lost Brady for an extended period of time. What about the Colts and Payton Manning? How do you think that would work out for Indy? The reason they make the big money is because they are worth it and they have an IMPACT on the outcome of the game.

An interesting take, though I think they moved down because they could, not out of respect for Brady. Everyone knows rookie salaries are crazy. I also loved Brady's comment recently where he was asked if he felt underpaid and he laughed and said no. Even if he is underpaid relative to other star players, he doesn't want to insult the common man and you have to respect that.

The impact of Dockery and Walker took a year. The impact of Samuels on Sheppard only took a few months. We know the Jets locker room is a mess with all the money flying around, and it's not going to get any better.

The point is, the next time you hear someone say the Pats are cheap for not paying big money to some departing free agent, or for staying out of the first few days of free agency, it's worth keeping in mind the impact outside of the cap. Having and maintaining a salary structure has value that's only visible in its absence.

When they pay the big bucks, it has to be to a player who clearly demonstrates their value on the field. T.Brady. A.Thomas. R.Moss.

 

[Rob0729]

I think they moved down because of the ridiculousness of the contracts near the top of the draft and the fact they loved Mayo.

Vernon Gholston got a 5 year, $50 million contract with $21 million in guarantees. Adalius Thomas who is an established veteran got a 5 year, $35 million contract with $20 million in guarantees. So the hottest free agent acquisition of 2007 is making less than a rookie at the same position who has never played OLB nor a down in the NFL. That is why the Pats were never going to trade up or stay where they were.

Also, word was that immediately after Mayo walked out of his interview with the Patriots, Belichick pronounced that this was the guy they were drafting.

I am sure that they are sensitive to not disrespecting Brady, but I don't think that was a big issue to why they traded down. I think it was the outrageous rookie salaries near the top of the draft and their love for Mayo which were the biggest factors.

 

[RussFrancis]

all of which most of us would pretty much agree with. But I dont think they ever had any intention of staying in that 7th spot unless Chris Long fell there. He's one guy I could have seen the brass stepping up and paying 'Brady-like' money to. Otherwise, there was really noone in this draft that seemed to make sense in that spot.

 

[BelichickFan]

Also, word was that immediately after Mayo walked out of his interview with the Patriots, Belichick pronounced that this was the guy they were drafting.

Nice, I hadn't heard that before. Can't say I'm surprised, though, I definitely was wowed listening to his post draft phone call and press conference.

 

[Rob0729]

Nice, I hadn't heard that before. Can't say I'm surprised, though, I definitely was wowed listening to his post draft phone call and press conference.

If I remember correctly, Michael Holley stated that. He was the guy who pronounced the Thursday before the draft that he thought the Pats would take Mayo. I really think he was working on inside info at the time although he claimed he didn't.

 

[K-Ro 25]

I think they moved down because of the ridiculousness of the contracts near the top of the draft and the fact they loved Mayo.

Vernon Gholston got a 5 year, $50 million contract with $21 million in guarantees. Adalius Thomas who is an established veteran got a 5 year, $35 million contract with $20 million in guarantees. So the hottest free agent acquisition of 2007 is making less than a rookie at the same position who has never played OLB nor a down in the NFL. That is why the Pats were never going to trade up or stay where they were.

Its 5 for 35 with ridiculous escalators which are almost impossible to reach which raise the value to 50 mil.

 

[patchick]

Its 5 for 35 with ridiculous escalators which are almost impossible to reach which raise the value to 50 mil.

Fair enough. But would you really take Gholston over Adalius Thomas for the same $$? Or rather, Gholston over Thomas + lower draft picks you could have traded down for? The top-end rookie salary structure is just preposterous and bad for the vast majority of players, and it's shameful that the players' union refuses to admit it.

 

[signbabybrady]

Fair enough. But would you really take Gholston over Adalius Thomas for the same $$? Or rather, Gholston over Thomas + lower draft picks you could have traded down for? The top-end rookie salary structure is just preposterous and bad for the vast majority of players, and it's shameful that the players' union refuses to admit it.

Its a perception vs reality thing. Even though the reality to getting hold of the salaries paid to top end draft picks would put more money in the pool for Vets the perception is that it takes coin out of their pocket.

The black and white side that most of us like to see is above but also think about the fact that an average NFL player only plays something like 3 years (I think the actual number is less). That means most guys don't even see a second contract so why should they give anything back on those first contracts. The guys that stick around long enough to collect second and third contracts have ample time in the league to get more dough.

A lot goes into this and I don't think it is in the Players Unions best intrest to have the rookie salary structure fixed, it may be in the best intrest of all other parties other than the short lived players but the union represents them too.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Well I think we all can agree without Mayo in the LB corp we would be scary thin at ILB right?? The FA market was thin, we got Hobson but he hasnt translated it to the field yet.....so I still wonder....
Right up til draft day I was relishing at the thought of trading our 7th pick for Terrell Suggs(all pro OLB). Yes, they would have to pay slightly more than AD $$, but he is a young, established LB. He could go outside and move AD back inside.......where he started last year.
Now all you drinking the Mayo-flavored Koolaid can think I am crazy, but as Suggs sits still unsigned I cant help but think we couldnt have gotten something done. We are exited to have a 1st rd draft pick in the LB corp, but temper that exitement til we see something on the field. He is surrounded by great talent and tuteledge, but we cant overlook the fact that it was a NEED pick as much as it was a VALUE pick. I cant help but think BB's love of older LB caused not only a slower D on the last game of the year the last few years....but caused us to reach a bit to depend on a rookie in the middle of another SB run. And every time I see Woods or Alexander on the field I KNOW Peyton Manning sees the same thing I do....

 

[patchick]

The black and white side that most of us like to see is above but also think about the fact that an average NFL player only plays something like 3 years (I think the actual number is less). That means most guys don't even see a second contract so why should they give anything back on those first contracts. The guys that stick around long enough to collect second and third contracts have ample time in the league to get more dough.

A lot goes into this and I don't think it is in the Players Unions best intrest to have the rookie salary structure fixed, it may be in the best intrest of all other parties other than the short lived players but the union represents them too.

Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting that less money go to rookies. I'm suggesting that the rookie salaries be redistributed, so that the top half-dozen players don't gobble it all up. Right now the #1 player makes 3 times as much per year as #10, and 21 times as much as #100! That's just crazily out of whack and a far less balanced distribution than veteran salaries.

How does it benefit short-term NFL players for the #1 pick to earn as much as the first half of the 2nd round put together? I'd argue that it's the short-career guys who get hurt the most by the current system, since it allots most most of them a disproportionally small slice of the pie.

 

[signbabybrady]

Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting that less money go to rookies. I'm suggesting that the rookie salaries be redistributed, so that the top half-dozen players don't gobble it all up. Right now the #1 player makes 3 times as much per year as #10, and 21 times as much as #100! That's just crazily out of whack and a far less balanced distribution than veteran salaries.

How does it benefit short-term NFL players for the #1 pick to earn as much as the first half of the 2nd round put together? I'd argue that it's the short-career guys who get hurt the most by the current system, since it allots most most of them a disproportionally small slice of the pie.

I think your first point is a fair way to look at it that a lot of people don't. A lot of people think the money should just go to the vets who have played for years but that isn't fair to guys who may come in and have their careers cut short by various circumstances.

As to you second point it doesn't benifit the short term players as a whole but it obviously benifits the short term player individually and the union should be protecting them the same as any other member. And in some ways it is fair that they get paid for their hype. A team drafts a guy number one overall and will turn around and use this guy to sell tickets and advertising but if the guy gets hurt or stinks and is gone before a second contract all he will ever see is his originall contract. On the flip side some 2nd round pick isn't going to help the orginization much unless they can do it on the field so it isn't that unfair that they need to perform first becuase they don't carry the same hype that sells.

Admittadly my arguments would be easier to make were the salaries not so disproportionate but keep in mind I am not arguing its right just that the players union has more to worry about than how much a franchise can be set back by screwing up on a number one overall.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Well I think we all can agree without Mayo in the LB corp we would be scary thin at ILB right?? The FA market was thin, we got Hobson but he hasnt translated it to the field yet.....so I still wonder....
Right up til draft day I was relishing at the thought of trading our 7th pick for Terrell Suggs(all pro OLB). Yes, they would have to pay slightly more than AD $$, but he is a young, established LB. He could go outside and move AD back inside.......where he started last year.
Now all you drinking the Mayo-flavored Koolaid can think I am crazy, but as Suggs sits still unsigned I cant help but think we couldnt have gotten something done. We are exited to have a 1st rd draft pick in the LB corp, but temper that exitement til we see something on the field. He is surrounded by great talent and tuteledge, but we cant overlook the fact that it was a NEED pick as much as it was a VALUE pick. I cant help but think BB's love of older LB caused not only a slower D on the last game of the year the last few years....but caused us to reach a bit to depend on a rookie in the middle of another SB run. And every time I see Woods or Alexander on the field I KNOW Peyton Manning sees the same thing I do....

You're forgetting that the Ravens slapped the franchise tag on Suggs. I don't know that they'd have taken just the #7.

As for value/need, most of the Pats' first-round picks have been values at positions of need.

 

[signbabybrady]

You're forgetting that the Ravens slapped the franchise tag on Suggs. I don't know that they'd have taken just the #7.

As for value/need, most of the Pats' first-round picks have been values at positions of need.

Hence O'Connell is the highest QB selected...I am sure there have been some QBs rated higher on their board than some players selected but they had no need for the QB

 

[amazinPats]

From the National Football Post:An interesting take, though I think they moved down because they could, not out of respect for Brady. Everyone knows rookie salaries are crazy. I also loved Brady's comment recently where he was asked if he felt underpaid and he laughed and said no. Even if he is underpaid relative to other star players, he doesn't want to insult the common man and you have to respect that.

The impact of Dockery and Walker took a year. The impact of Samuels on Sheppard only took a few months. We know the Jets locker room is a mess with all the money flying around, and it's not going to get any better.

The point is, the next time you hear someone say the Pats are cheap for not paying big money to some departing free agent, or for staying out of the first few days of free agency, it's worth keeping in mind the impact outside of the cap. Having and maintaining a salary structure has value that's only visible in its absence.

When they pay the big bucks, it has to be to a player who clearly demonstrates their value on the field. T.Brady. A.Thomas. R.Moss.

Excellent observations. Have to agree that locker room attittudes are important.

 

[patchick]

I have to say, Lombardi and the whole National Football Post are a breath of fresh air. They offer original thoughts (*gasp!*) and manage to be provocative with ideas, rather than just poking sticks into wasps' nests to hear the buzzing.

 

[rusH1023]

I think they moved down because of the ridiculousness of the contracts near the top of the draft and the fact they loved Mayo.

Vernon Gholston got a 5 year, $50 million contract with $21 million in guarantees. Adalius Thomas who is an established veteran got a 5 year, $35 million contract with $20 million in guarantees. So the hottest free agent acquisition of 2007 is making less than a rookie at the same position who has never played OLB nor a down in the NFL. That is why the Pats were never going to trade up or stay where they were.

Also, word was that immediately after Mayo walked out of his interview with the Patriots, Belichick pronounced that this was the guy they were drafting.

I am sure that they are sensitive to not disrespecting Brady, but I don't think that was a big issue to why they traded down. I think it was the outrageous rookie salaries near the top of the draft and their love for Mayo which were the biggest factors.

I know it's been said a million times, but that quote above is exactly why I wish the NFL would take a cue from the NHL on the way it manages rookie contracts. Disgusting IMO.

 

[Truck]

I know it's been said a million times, but that quote above is exactly why I wish the NFL would take a cue from the NHL on the way it manages rookie contracts. Disgusting IMO.

But no one is forcing teams to spend so much on rookies; The Jets could've offered Thomas that money and left Gholston unsigned if they thought Thomas was a better deal. Or they could've traded down for 2 lower first picks. They choose to pay Gholston cause they think his cost/benefit expectation is better than any available free agents. Likewise for every other team who signed a rookie.

 

[Deus Irae]

The draft money argument is a sham anyway. Teams are given amounts to spend by the NFL based upon where they are drafting and how many picks they have. For teams to then complain about what's being spent is the height of idiocy. The money is already a sunk cost.

 

[jeffbiologist]

You're forgetting that the Ravens slapped the franchise tag on Suggs. I don't know that they'd have taken just the #7.

As for value/need, most of the Pats' first-round picks have been values at positions of need.

Well, they wouldnt/didnt because they thought they could sign him to a long term deal. They DIDNT. I am going to be tracking progress of both from here on out as it was a deal that would have helped BOTH teams. If Suggs ends up leaving next year as a FA getting the 7th pick in the draft(or a guy like Mayo) for 5 years will be measured against his production.
Or better put, if we had had a first rd pick instead of Asante for that one FRANCHISE year...you gotta take the pick.

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

The black and white side that most of us like to see is above but also think about the fact that an average NFL player only plays something like 3 years (I think the actual number is less). That means most guys don't even see a second contract so why should they give anything back on those first contracts. The guys that stick around long enough to collect second and third contracts have ample time in the league to get more dough.

I don't see that in itself a reason not to fix rookie salaries. If they fail at football, (GASP!) they can always GET A REGULAR JOB!!! Just because you are a football player shouldn't guarantee a payday.