VrabelJr
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 8,112
- Reaction score
- 7,725
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.@shmessy you can dislike it, but you can't argue with the results. The team couldn't get over the hump when he was "The Guy."
Still in the post-SB glow, I'm thinking about Wes Welker and Logan Mankins, two guys that should have been on the roster in a more perfect world. I wonder how they took the latest championship, as a personal matter; and whether they have any regrets that they weren't on the team that finally brought the Lombardi home.
NFL is a business, and the players don't really have a lot of degrees of freedom in choosing their employers. Belichick is tougher to stick with than most. He has a history of cutting ties with players he values when their salary gets out of line with what he feels they can provide. Sentimentality doesn't come into play for him. And he doesn't pay for past performance, only for what he expects going forward.
To stay in Foxboro, as your play declines, you have to give money back. Bruschi took a pay cut in his last years. Troy Brown did too. Matt Light did too; and I suspect Light probably retired a year or two earlier than he really had to, once the Pats decided they didn't need him anymore. That's what it costs for core Pats players to actually finish their careers here.
Turns out, the Pats wanted to keep Welker on terms that sounded like a legitimate offer. He chose Denver instead. He could easily have played the role of Danny Amendola on the 2014 roster, if he'd been willing to put up with the likely decline in pay. Instead, he's been buried on the Denver depth chart, taking too many hits to the head, courtesy of Peyton, and seriously contemplating retirement as a result.
Mankins negotiated his contract tough and refused to cut his salary, making him a target for the Tampa trade. If he had given back some of his salary, no question he would have gotten a ring in 2014 instead of exile to the horrific Bucs. He left a serious gap on the line that we're still looking to fix.
Contrast the outcome of the Welker and Mankins contract negotiations with the Vince Wilfork deal. Wilfork is in the last years of his career, too, and he's a pale reflection of the player he was even just two years ago. But, to his credit, he pounded out a reduced contract with upside incentives (that he met and earned). And even as his play declined, the Pats valued his locker room presence enough to keep him around on those terms.
Wilfork will be asked, again, to take a pay cut this offseason. And it's hard to argue that his game hasn't declined. If his pride isn't too bruised by the idea of sinking deeper on the depth chart, and playing for less money, he could have a shot at another ring or two as the elder statesman on the team.
I am disappointed that Welker never got a ring with the Pats. He deserves one. Shockingly, Mankins never got a SB ring either, drafted in 2005. He deserves one too. His soul is still part of the team. If he'd taken a cut (I wonder how much they asked him to take), by now he would have it too.
So, I wonder if either Welker or Mankins regret it. If they had it to do over again, would they be willing to leave a million dollars on the table to stay with the franchise? Two million? Or are they satisfied with how it worked out? After all, a Championship is forever. A little taste of immortality.
I stand by what i said, Welker is no longer in the prime of his career and Mankins was getting too expensive and was starting to slip.The offense is better off without them.
Injured Gronk in SB 46<healthy Gronk in SB49.
But keep making proclamations without context.
P.S. It's obvious I'm arguing against BOTH extremes in this thread - - the rabidly anti-Welkers are just as far off as the rabidly pro-Welkers.
Welker was fantastic for the Patriots when he was here, and the divorce happened at a great time.
EIther I'm confused or other posters are confused, but in reading the post I don't think the poster is saying that Welker and Mankins should be given a ring.
I think he is just saying that it would have been nice if they were on the roster because they have made great contributions on the team while they were here and it would have been nice to include their names amongst other champions such as Brady, Ty Law, Tedy Bruschi, Gronk, Edelman, and McCourty.
I think the message is a less controversial one of 'it would be nice if they got a ring while they were here'.......
.
Stand by it all you want but the idea that subtracting really good team players make a team better is idiotic. Had you said you would take Edelman over Welker it would make sense, and if you said that the Mankins trade made sense overall I would agree with that as well, but saying Connolly is better just makes you look like you don't know what you are talking about. The truth is that they very easily could have won both of those Super Bowls with those players and suggesting they are the reason they didn't is just stupid. They won this season because the GOAT played lights out and they finally had a defense that was championship caliber, not because they don't have and Mankins and Welker.
Had they been on the team they would have been a shell of their former self, especially Welker. So the team didn't subtract, they upgraded. A better version of the patriots was created without them. Saying we would have won anyway with declining players is a real stretch.
I am sure he is talking about in primes. Nobody here thinks WW now is better than any starting WR we have. This strawman has to be put to bed already because the discussion keeps going in circles with the same muppets saying the same things.
On Mankins, yeah he probably would have been better than DC out of the gate? Over the long haul? Not sure but the trade seemed to be a good one given the end result and given the protection was pretty solid over the year.
I was one of the few people who was ok with WW leaving. Most of the board was in a uproar.
IIRC, it was reported that the Pats used some of the picked up cap space from jettisoning Mankins to pick up Branch, Ayers and Casillas.......in addition to getting the TE who caught 6 TDs this year.
Had they been on the team they would have been a shell of their former self, especially Welker. So the team didn't subtract, they upgraded. A better version of the patriots was created without them. Saying we would have won anyway with declining players is a real stretch.
IIRC, it was reported that the Pats used some of the picked up cap space from jettisoning Mankins to pick up Branch, Ayers and Casillas.......in addition to getting the TE who caught 6 TDs this year.
I do agree that the cash they gained from the Mankins deal helped them this season.