Mankins Update: agent says "deal cannot be worked out - we disagree"

[DaBruinz]

He's franchised, hes not going anywhere. I'm sick of Mankins and his agent. Mankins was offered a contract that put him in the top three gaurds as far as money goes. His post season play is not worthy of being paid that kind of money imo.

Mankins had one bad game of post-season play. The SB in 2007 when the entire O-line played like garbage. What about the other 9 post-season games that Mankins has been in?????

 

[Deus Irae]

They tendered Mankins only after he refused their very lucrative offer. One that was close to what Jahri Evans received. Let's not change history now.

The Pats have shown that when you play out your contract and don't ask for silly, absurd money, they treat you damn well.. They've also shown that when you flap your gums to the media about the negotiations, they will just let you stew.

Their offer took the RFA tender into account, Per Reiss, requiring Mankins to play that year as part of the deal. Reiss' report lines up with what Bauer was saying about the actual value of the offer. I'm not changing history.

And, besides Brady, the Patriots treat who damn well?

Branch? No.
Samuel? No.
Seymour? No.
Wilfork? No.
Mankins? No.

Who are these players who've been treated damn well?

 

[DaBruinz]

Their offer took the RFA tender into account, Per Reiss, requiring Mankins to play that year as part of the deal. Reiss' report lines up with what Bauer was saying about the actual value of the offer. I'm not changing history.

Actually, no. The Pats sent Mankins an offer prior to the Mankins being made an RFA that Mankins refused. Then the Pats made Mankins an RFA. It wasn't until after Jahri Evans signed his deal with New Orleans that the Pats gave Mankins the offer that had the RFA tender as the 1st year.

Kraft is the one who made mention of the deal that was offered PRIOR to Mankins being tendered as an RFA.

 

[Mike in 333]

I think that as an agent this guy has probably done about the worst job for his client as could have been done. While the Pats are pretty frugal they have generally managed to do good for the players who perform and I think Mankins falls squarely into that category. Since it takes 2 sides to negotiate and since we've seen how this clown negotiates via the press or anyone else who'll quote him it's small wonder they're not able to find common ground. It makes me almost wonder if a new contract or a more lucrative extension couldn't have been signed earlier in his career if an agent with a better understanding of contract negotiations had been involved.
If he doesn't sign the tender, he won't get paid (again) for however long he decides to sit out, and could conceivably be kissing away 10 million bucks. Since the franchise number includes all of the o-line positions he benefits tremendously by having the higher tackle pay included. The likelihood of making up that 10 mil in a subsequent contract would be really iffy at best.

 

[DaBruinz]

Their offer took the RFA tender into account, Per Reiss, requiring Mankins to play that year as part of the deal. Reiss' report lines up with what Bauer was saying about the actual value of the offer. I'm not changing history.

And, besides Brady, the Patriots treat who damn well?

Branch? No.
Samuel? No.
Seymour? No.
Wilfork? No.
Mankins? No.

Who are these players who've been treated damn well?

You love re-writing history.

Branch - The Pats had tried to re-sign Branch numerous times prior to him becoming a free agent and with 2 years left on his contract. Branch refused the offers every time. Same with Givens. It was only after Branch was an arse that the Patriots treated him "poorly".

Seymour - They didn't treat him well? Guess you missed the 3 year extension that he signed with them. The one that they couldn't make official until 1 year after they had restructured the old contract.

Wilfork - They didn't treat him right? Why? Because they put the tag on him? Didn't they make Vince one of the highest paid D-linemen in history?? Yeah. That's what I thought.

Now, here is the list of players the Pats treated "Damn well".

Light, Koppen, Kaczur, Ty Warren, Mike Vrabel, Tedy Bruschi. Just to name a few.

But you keep thinking that the Pats treat their players like garbage. I'll believe in reality.

 

[ausbacker]

Their offer took the RFA tender into account, Per Reiss, requiring Mankins to play that year as part of the deal. Reiss' report lines up with what Bauer was saying about the actual value of the offer. I'm not changing history.

And, besides Brady, the Patriots treat who damn well?

Branch? No.
Samuel? No.
Seymour? No.
Wilfork? No.
Mankins? No.

Who are these players who've been treated damn well?

You're taking the piss right? There's a point where the Patriots assign a value to the position and performance. Just because that doesn't meet the financial requirements the player has set doesn't make it a bad dealing or not treating someone well does it?

Ridiculous notion.

 

[Deus Irae]

Actually, no. The Pats sent Mankins an offer prior to the Mankins being made an RFA that Mankins refused. Then the Pats made Mankins an RFA. It wasn't until after Jahri Evans signed his deal with New Orleans that the Pats gave Mankins the offer that had the RFA tender as the 1st year.

Kraft is the one who made mention of the deal that was offered PRIOR to Mankins being tendered as an RFA.

The deal involved the RFA year. Again, per Reiss. I'm not going to argue this point with you. Reiss is considered the gold standard by most around here, and it's his report. Until something else comes out, I'll take Reiss' word.

 

[LuthierJr]

9.8% unemployment rate.

$52,000 average income

Take your $10,000,000, be happy Logan and tell your imbecile of an agent to GFY.

P.S. Mankins is a hell of a lineman and I want him here long term if the Pats can afford it.

 

[Deus Irae]

You're taking the piss right? There's a point where the Patriots assign a value to the position and performance. Just because that doesn't meet the financial requirements the player has set doesn't make it a bad dealing or not treating someone well does it?

Ridiculous notion.

You mustn't have bothered reading DaBruinz' post. You can't possibly have done so and made your post as part of the response with any thought of it being accurate or logical. To re-post the relevant portion of DaBruinz' comment:

The Pats have shown that when you play out your contract and don't ask for silly, absurd money, they treat you damn well.. They've also shown that when you flap your gums to the media about the negotiations, they will just let you stew.

Samuel had to threaten to sit out
Branch had to sit out rather than take an onerous contract that's no longer even valid in the league
Seymour had to hold out
Wilfork had to go public with complaints
Mankins has had to go public

 

[upstater1]

Mankins doesn't owe the Patriots anything; neither he nor his agent could control who drafted him, and there's no clause in any contract about gratefulness. If they're going to offer him a contract below market value, he'll find a place to play that the market is willing to pay him at. Arguing that the agent lacks professionalism is ridiculous - an agent's profession is to maximize his own income by maximizing that of his client's. There isn't anything remotely shady about this. Mankins is the best guard in the league - a fact that would be true no matter what team he played on - and deserves to be paid like it. If the Patriots aren't willing to do that, then we'll have to live with the consequences.

I think you are very wrong on this. Yopu think there's bad blood only on one side? The stuff this guy continues to say about Kraft being a cheapskate is costing his client money. He sucks as an agent.

 

[ausbacker]

You mustn't have bothered reading DaBruinz' post. You can't possibly have done so and made your post as part of the response with any thought of it being accurate or logical.

I read it. I disagree with you given you have no sound foundation for your argument other than opinion whereas the opinion of others who disagree with you is apparently incorrect.

The course the players took is of their own doing.

 

[Keegs]

the guys proven himself to be a turnstyle in the playoffs, screw him and his agent.

this....................

 

[Deus Irae]

I read it. I disagree with you given you have no sound foundation for your argument other than opinion whereas the opinion of others who disagree with you is apparently incorrect.

The course the players took is of their own doing.

And thus you prove my point about not having read his post.

 

[JackBauer]

Mankins is the best guard in the league

Nah. I like Mankins and everything, but he's not the best in the league.

 

[ausbacker]

And thus you prove my point about not having read his post.

I read his post as I read the dialogue between the both of you. I disagree with yours because as DaBruinz has made mention, you enjoy re-writing history to service your self. You've given no thought to the process itself and zeroed in on the notion of who have they treated well without giving any credence to the situations the players created for themselves.

According to you, it can be assumed that it's the big bad Patriots, never the players at fault in contract negotiations (or a combination of both). The players the Patriots wanted to extend got extended and rewarded financially and with long term deals. To me, that is the definition of being looked after. You've also failed to address that there is usually more than 1 contract negotiation ongoing at any given time.

But please, continue with telling me what I have or haven't read.

 

[Wretch]

Samuel had to threaten to sit out
Branch had to sit out rather than take an onerous contract that's no longer even valid in the league
Seymour had to hold out
Wilfork had to go public with complaints
Mankins has had to go public

The players and the owners operate within a system that allows for RFA tenders, and franchise tags on the part of the owners. The players got true free agency earlier in their careers and have the ability to sit out half of a season and still have the season count towards free agency. The players primary weapon in these negotiations is to either shoot their way out of town or sit out.

Neither Mankins nor his agent can legitimately blame the Patriots for using the system to their advantage, just like the Patriots can't complain about Mankins sitting out half the year if he chooses.

If Mankins or his agent don't like the system there is always the CFL or UFL, but those leagues don't $10 million a year.

 

[Fixit]

The deal involved the RFA year. Again, per Reiss. I'm not going to argue this point with you. Reiss is considered the gold standard by most around here, and it's his report. Until something else comes out, I'll take Reiss' word.

And I'll point out...again...what I said in another thread. Reiss' source for Mankins' contract offer was Bauer himself. You keep clinging to this belief that Reiss' info backs up Bauer's contention, when in reality Bauer is backing himself up through Reiss. Breer said something different (with actual numbers attached), and his source wasn't the player's agent. No one knows for sure what the numbers were, and either way Mankins was going to make a lot of dough, but you hitched yourself to Bauer's wagon for no other reason than to be you.

I also flat-out stated in the other thread that you would ignore that bit of information, and you were never heard from again. Imagine that.

PS According to Curran, Bauer also said that the Pats asked him if they'd be interested in a deal similar to Jahri Evans'. He said he was asked this on May 4th. Evans' deal wasn't announced until May 5th. But he's an honest fella, for sure.

 

[FCB02062]

Just another example of Krafty being cheap:, too busy counting the interest from that AFC Championship game that never happened...average playoff ticket price, what, $125 lowball? Figure 50,000 people paid for their AFC Championship game tix, right? Let's do the math, shall we??? 50,000 x 125 = 6,250,000! Krafty was SITTING on that dough when he could have simply refunded $ to people. A 6 month cd at 2% would get Krafty Bob about a cool 65K, although I'm sure with his economic stature and pull he'd get some investment vehicle that would pull better than 2% for six months (the amount of time he's sitting on OUR money as season ticket holders)....

 

[Deus Irae]

I read his post as I read the dialogue between the both of you. I disagree with yours because as DaBruinz has made mention, you enjoy re-writing history to service your self. You've given no thought to the process itself and zeroed in on the notion of who have they treated well without giving any credence to the situations the players created for themselves.

According to you, it can be assumed that it's the big bad Patriots, never the players at fault in contract negotiations (or a combination of both). The players the Patriots wanted to extend got extended and rewarded financially and with long term deals. To me, that is the definition of being looked after. You've also failed to address that there is usually more than 1 contract negotiation ongoing at any given time.

But please, continue with telling me what I have or haven't read.

1.) I don't re-write history. I'm going by what's been reported. If Reiss changes his report, I'll change what I'm writing.

2.) This isn't about "fault" in contract negotiations. As I've stated repeatedly, the Patriots were within their rights to take the actions they did. It is about good/bad moves. The Patriots, who are known to be hardasses in negotiations (this used to be a source of pride for Patriots fans during the SB years), took that approach here when it wasn't needed and wasn't warranted.

3.) Using your definition of "looked under", an offer for a 4 year deal at veteran minimum would be sufficient.


So please, get on the ball more before you jump in.

 

[Rob0729]

Their offer took the RFA tender into account, Per Reiss, requiring Mankins to play that year as part of the deal. Reiss' report lines up with what Bauer was saying about the actual value of the offer. I'm not changing history.

And, besides Brady, the Patriots treat who damn well?

Branch? No.
Samuel? No.
Seymour? No.
Wilfork? No.
Mankins? No.

Who are these players who've been treated damn well?

Seymour and Wilfork were paid handsomely by the Patriots. Seymour was the highest paid d-lineman when they resigned him. Wilfork has no complaints being the highest paid 3-4 NT in the league (well, except for Albert Haynesworth who was signed by the Redskins as a 4-3 DT). Just because the Pats had to franchise Wilfork when they gave him a very fair deal doesn't mean anything. Just because they traded away Seymour doesn't mean they didn't treat him well.

Also, Branch had a year left on his contract when he held out. The Pats were under no obligations to give him anything.

You can really only make a case for Mankins and Samuel.