They already offered him a deal that would make him the 3rd-highest paid at his position, and he not only declined but publicly trashed his boss. If he was reasonable it never would have gotten to this point.
No one knows the facts here. The terms of what the Pat's actual contract offer is pure speculation (see structure in payouts and guaranteed money). As a data point, Jahri Evans received a seven-year, $56.7 with
$12m bonus included in $19 million paid out in 2010 and a total of $25.7 million over the first three years of his new deal. That $8.6m/yr ave over the 1st 3 years of the deal.
It's been assumed that the Pats offered Mankins an ave of $7m per season. So if Mankins used the same % (33%) y1 and 1st 3 years of the total deal value, Mankins would have expected an offer around
$16.4m in year 1 and
$22.2m over the 1st 3 years.
Lets compare apples & oranges and look at Brady's contract.
– $26.5M in 2010 (Y1) - The original $6.5M in salary and old bonus, plus $4M in new money and
$16M signing bonus.
– $36.5M 2011 (Y2) – This is his 2011 earning plus 2010.
– $48.5M 2012 (Y3) – Three year total.
Wilfork received an $18m signing bonus and
was paid $18.7m in 2010
Brady's up-front cash was 22% of the deal. I really think the guaranteed money and overall deal structure are the sticking points as his agent said that the Pats offer was 20% less than Evans'. My assumption is that he is referring to either the bonus ($9.6m?), year 1 ($15.2m?)or year 3 ($20m?) totals. Could be overall I guess too ($44m)
So my "guess" is that the Pats dont view Mankins in the same catagory of "payout" as Brady and Wilfork.