Patriots' OL Mankins Not In Foxboro

Discussion in ' - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Article, Jul 29, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Article Article In the Starting Line-Up

  2. Bostonian1962

    Bostonian1962 In the Starting Line-Up

    Another Me-First athlete, who the bank gets opened for, but it's not enough. He has an inflated opinion of himself. I hope we're not hearing Mankins stories all camp, because the Patriots have been around long before the all-important Mankins, and will be just fine without him.

    He ought to retire. Loser!
  3. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah Supporter Supporter

    Disable Jersey

    But Mankins is not under contract. To the Patriots or anyone right now.
  4. NEPatriot

    NEPatriot Banned

    Considering he's from California and not under contract, I would think this should come as no surprise. In an uncapped year, I would think that it might make sense to pay him.
  5. mgteich

    mgteich Veteran Supporter

    We're paying Gostkowsi for one year. We might consider the same for Mankins.

  6. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox Supporter

    #50 Jersey

    Mankins was said to have been offered very good extension. One that would have paid him extremely well. Instead, he thumbed his nose at it and made claims that the Patriots went back on their word, which they didn't.

    I think Mankins is a great Left Guard. But he's not made that next step in consistency to be ELITE ala Hannah. If he had, then maybe the Pats would have given him MORE money.
  7. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae Retired Jersey Club Supporter

    Disable Jersey

    It takes both parties, though.
  8. rodrust

    rodrust Practice Squad Player

    I don't think he gets more elsewhere if money is his sole motivator.
  9. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Pro Bowl Player

    there's two sides to every issue

    don't be blind
  10. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact Pro Bowl Player

    the key here is 'was said'

    maybe not
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2010
  11. ahmed

    ahmed Third String But Playing on Special Teams

    Exactly, why is it that every time the Pats offers a player a contract that is less than other teams would be willing to pay, the team is offering 'what they think is fair' but when a player is holding our for what 'he thinks is fair' then the player is selfish?

    If the Pats don't think that another team would offer him more than they did, they would have let him go and signed him as a free agent once he sees that the Pats give him the most money... what are the chances of that happening?

    The fact is the Pats are smart with their contracts and they realize if they paid 4 or 5 players what they would be worth on the open market, they would be in cap hell real fast and I am all for that. However, we should not hold it against the players if they don’t go along with that.
  12. MassPats38

    MassPats38 Supporter Supporter

    #87 Jersey

    Mankins doesn't need to be here if not under contract. I expect the Pats are willing to let him cool off and proceed in negotiations when he is not fighting mad over whatever his issue may be.

    The team is worse without him on the line. Every available option is a less capable patch, and likely limits offensive possibilities. Mankins loses with a hold-out as he may well get 3/8ths of a reduced figure this year and nothing next year. That means after almost a two year layoff he will attempt to offset through a long-term deal what amounts to almost $7 million in salary plus the bonus figure he would have to leave behind on a two year absence. Also, the odds of him commanding anywhere near what he wants after a layoff of that length cannot be good. The "shoot your way out of town" approach just doesn't carry the same force on the eve of a possible lock-out.

    With that said, I am still hoping this deal gets done.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page