Wes Welker: Contract talks with Pats have gotten worse

[Patriot_in_NY]

I think Welker is beginning to understand that the system is more valuable to him then he is to the system. He understands that going elsewhere may mean more money, but it probably means less production and less of a chance to win it all (unless he goes to 1-2 other specific teams with a legit shot to win always).

His signing his tag is obviously a concession that he is wiling to come back off his "demands" a bit. Maybe Dieon has told him what live outside NE is like.

 

[KY Pats Fan]

I think he just "commented" his way into being traded. BB doesn't like it when players discuss contracts publicly (i.e. Seymour, Moss, etc.) I'd bet he's gone by training camp for a first next year's draft.

 

[BSR]

I think he just "commented" his way into being traded. BB doesn't like it when players discuss contracts publicly (i.e. Seymour, Moss, etc.) I'd bet he's gone by training camp for a first next year's draft.

I'll take that bet.

 

[Sangreal95]

I love Wes Welker as a player, but he is not an elite wide receiver. I never look at him and think he can take it to the house on any play, especially when far away from the endzone. Elite wide receivers should be able to generate that threat. That is where elite pay comes into play. The real threat of scoring long yardage touchdowns is what elite wide receivers need to bring to the table. Welker has never scored over 9 touchdowns in a season.

With all the receivers in play (especially Lloyd and Gaffney) whop can line up on the perimeter and take it deep being paired with the two young tight ends I really think the Patriots would not miss a beat and be even harder to defend without him.

Where this all gets tricky is that I believe people are mixing a great emotional story with reality. Welker is the quintessential little engine that could. He is the good soldier. He is the Hollywood story of the hero who did everything right and wins in the end. This is not hollywood.

There was a fullback in the 90's named Larry Centers who had production close to a wide receiver. Wes reminds me more of him than a Randy Moss or Calvin Johnson.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I think he just "commented" his way into being traded. BB doesn't like it when players discuss contracts publicly (i.e. Seymour, Moss, etc.) I'd bet he's gone by training camp for a first next year's draft.

There's a lot of things in your post that I don't agree with, but I'm sure that other people will cover most of them. The one that might fly under the radar is that nobody would give a first round pick for Welker right now. He's a 31 year old WR who is currently franchise-tagged.

 

[Deus Irae]

Mankins had to hold out half a year and only got something like $1M in salary. When you factor that into the total deal it's not such a home run.

If memory serves, the money Mankins is getting at the top of his deal is more than he lost when the Patriots started screwing around with the RFA stuff, and that's true even though he sat almost half a season. And the RFA/Franchise tags are different situations, even as the oddity of that season made that RFA different from the normal RFA situations.

The Patriots made that situation acrimonious when they didn't need to, and it cost them both in terms of losing Mankins' services for a while and in terms of money in the deal.

 

[condon84]

The reality is that Welker's a 31 year old WR who benefits playing in a system tailor-made for a player of his skill-set. Beyond what he can control, there are other factors like Hernandez and Gronk who operate in the same area of the field where Welker is the most effective and are younger and I would presume have been pegged by our FO as major building blocks going forward.

$16 million for two years sounds about right.

 

[mayoclinic]

If memory serves, the money Mankins is getting at the top of his deal is more than he lost when the Patriots started screwing around with the RFA stuff, and that's true even though he sat almost half a season.

You are correct. Mankins' original RFA tender was around $3.1M, which the Pats legally reduced to half that amount ($1.54M) when he failed to sign it. Add in the holdout, and Mankins ended up playing 8 games in 2010 for les than $800K. But his 6 year deal signed last August included a $20M signing bonus. I would guess that made up for playing for essentially peanuts.

The Patriots made that situation acrimonious when they didn't need to, and it cost them both in terms of losing Mankins' services for a while and in terms of money in the deal.

I don't know if we'll every know exactly how the situation deteriorated, but the Pats clearly didn't like Mankins going public with allegations that the team lied to him. Reducing his contract seemed in part like a move to show who held the upper hand. Once Mankins reported and played well and things settled down, cooler heads prevailed on both sides. I'm just guessing, but I think Mankins attending Myra Kraft's funeral on July 26 helped re-establish him as a member of the "Patriot family", and 2 weeks later the Pats ended up giving Mankins a huge amount of up front money, which must have gone a long way towards soothing any lingering wounds on his part.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Seems more like Giselle's style to me.

Yeah, guess he should have caught "the damn ball." :singing:



(That's a joke, lest the humor-deprived get out their flame throwers.)

 

[PatsFanSince74]

If memory serves, the money Mankins is getting at the top of his deal is more than he lost when the Patriots started screwing around with the RFA stuff, and that's true even though he sat almost half a season. And the RFA/Franchise tags are different situations, even as the oddity of that season made that RFA different from the normal RFA situations.

The Patriots made that situation acrimonious when they didn't need to, and it cost them both in terms of losing Mankins' services for a while and in terms of money in the deal.

Interesting observation. So, what do you think, Deus? Is this a case of the Pats ******* up a negotiation or a case of them not wanting to overpay for a 31 yo with other options around or a case of Welker being unreasonable?

I'll be honest and admit I have no idea. What I do know is that the whole thing puzzles me, and bothers me.

 

[Jangles]

This is very disappointing

2 years, 16 mill is a total slap in the face.

 

[lurker1965]

8 Mil per is nice, but 2 years kinda sucks for Welker.

Why?

No seriously. I know that is the common perception of players and fans, but let's look at the scenario as he sees it.

He does 2 years at 8 mil a year and does awesome. He then negotiates another big time contract. Instead of four years with one signing bonus he gets two two year deals with two signing bonuses.

Now let's look at the worst case scenario.

In year one he does OK, but not 8 million. In year two he is obviously in decline and everyone is saying "8 mil?" With a four year contract he is cut instead of getting paid his 8 mil. With a two year he negotiates based on his new lower production or retires.

Why would any player want longer years in a sport where the team can cut you and limit the length of the deal anyway has always been a mystery to me. Perhaps all their agents are secretly working for the owners.

 

[Deus Irae]

Interesting observation. So, what do you think, Deus? Is this a case of the Pats ******* up a negotiation or a case of them not wanting to overpay for a 31 yo with other options around or a case of Welker being unreasonable?

I'll be honest and admit I have no idea. What I do know is that the whole thing puzzles me, and bothers me.

I think that opening with 2/$16m was an insult to someone who would obviously be able to make more than that on the open market and would be able to get just under $21 million in 2 years under the franchise tag. I think that the Patriots now offering less, if true, is a disgrace and a bad negotiating tactic because of the message it sends to other players. Then again, I also think Welker was an idiot for signing his tender.

As for overpaying Welker, I'll go back to what I've been maintaining on this. Given how woefully underpaid Welker was in his last contract, I've got no sympathy for the "don't want to overpay" argument. If the Patriots had gone to Welker and worked out an extension last year, they could have probably gotten Welker into the fold long term, paid Welker more along the lines of what he was worth last year, and gotten the extra years for less than he'll likely cost after this year's WR salary bonanza.

 

[wizwor]

I think that opening with 2/$16m was an insult to someone who would obviously be able to make more than that on the open market and would be able to get just under $21 million in 2 years under the franchise tag. I think that the Patriots now offering less, if true, is a disgrace. Then again, I also think Welker was an idiot for signing his tender.

As for overpaying Welker, I'll go back to what I've been maintaining on this. Given how woefully underpaid Welker was in his last contract, I've got no sympathy for the "don't want to overpay" argument. If the Patriots had gone to Welker and worked out an extension last year, they could have probably gotten Welker into the fold long term, paid Welker more along the lines of what he was worth last year, and gotten the extra years for less than he'll likely cost after this year's WR salary bonanza.

There is a difference between what Welker and the FO think he should be paid. The two sides have agreed to resolve the difference according to the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. The CBA says the Pats can franchise Welker and they have. They can do it again next year. He has to learn to deal with that. Welker had the option to not sign the tender. He obviously thought it was in his interest to sign it. Now he has to play. He does not have to be quiet or pretend to be happy. In fact, he does not have to play well. It may be that complaining and not playing well make him less valuable to the Patriots, but not to other teams. In this case he will surely be traded. There's not much more to this than that. If he had caught that ball, he'd have his long term contract. No doubt in my mind about that. Too bad he didn't.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I think that opening with 2/$16m was an insult to someone who would obviously be able to make more than that on the open market and would be able to get just under $21 million in 2 years under the franchise tag. I think that the Patriots now offering less, if true, is a disgrace and a bad negotiating tactic because of the message it sends to other players. Then again, I also think Welker was an idiot for signing his tender.

As for overpaying Welker, I'll go back to what I've been maintaining on this. Given how woefully underpaid Welker was in his last contract, I've got no sympathy for the "don't want to overpay" argument. If the Patriots had gone to Welker and worked out an extension last year, they could have probably gotten Welker into the fold long term, paid Welker more along the lines of what he was worth last year, and gotten the extra years for less than he'll likely cost after this year's WR salary bonanza.

So, you take "Door A," The Pats ****ed up, with a capital F. That certainly explains the facts better than any other option. Observing this management over the years, they don't make many personnel mistakes but when they make them, they are doozies.

The cynic in me, of course, is 150% convinced that if he had caught that "damn ball" the contract would have been done a long time ago.

Thanks.

 

[Jangles]

Why?

No seriously. I know that is the common perception of players and fans, but let's look at the scenario as he sees it.

He does 2 years at 8 mil a year and does awesome. He then negotiates another big time contract. Instead of four years with one signing bonus he gets two two year deals with two signing bonuses.
.

That is the worst idea I've ever heard.

At least from the players perspective

 

[West Philly Patriot]

So, you take "Door A," The Pats ****ed up, with a capital F. That certainly explains the facts better than any other option. Observing this management over the years, they don't make many personnel mistakes but when they make them, they are doozies.

The cynic in me, of course, is 150% convinced that if he had caught that "damn ball" the contract would have been done a long time ago.

Thanks.

I really hope as a pats fan, that one football play that gets made or not doesn't dictate contract negotiations that will effect the team for multiple years. That's not a shot at you, but a lot of people are saying this and as a person that thinks Welker should have made that catch its ridiculous everytime I hear it.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

There is a difference between what Welker and the FO think he should be paid. The two sides have agreed to resolve the difference according to the terms of a collective bargaining agreement. The CBA says the Pats can franchise Welker and they have. They can do it again next year. He has to learn to deal with that. Welker had the option to not sign the tender. He obviously thought it was in his interest to sign it. Now he has to play. He does not have to be quiet or pretend to be happy. In fact, he does not have to play well. It may be that complaining and not playing well make him less valuable to the Patriots, but not to other teams. In this case he will surely be traded. There's not much more to this than that. If he had caught that ball, he'd have his long term contract. No doubt in my mind about that. Too bad he didn't.

I can't argue with on the facts, but I can't help but think that it didn't have to end up like this. The Pats should have managed this situation better, even if they are operating within their rights. The Patriots organization isn't in the habit of giving "Thanks for the Memories" contracts, but Welker was significantly underpaid initially; they should have found a way to make the situation right without violating their principles. Bob and Jonathan Kraft have gotten richer than Croesus off of these players in terms of the Market Value of their team; Welker has been an important part of that wealth-creation process. They should have done better by him.

As for your final comment (bolded by me above), yeah, it would have been kind of hard not to give him a contract after erecting a larger-than-life, bronze statue of that catch outside Gillette.

 

[TyronePoole]

there's also something to be said for abusing his loyalty to the team. Clearly Wes likes it here, loves playing with Brady and co. and wants to be a Patriot. The Pats using that fact to squeeze every last dime from him is pretty ugly business, along with the poor message it sends to other players that loyalty is 100% a one way street. Especially when using his show of loyalty in not protracting this thing as an opportunity to drop the offer on him. That's just slimeball stuff. If I'm a player coming onto the Pats I'm asking myself if that loyalty is something I want to bother with at all.

 

[Deus Irae]

So, you take "Door A," The Pats ****ed up, with a capital F. That certainly explains the facts better than any other option. Observing this management over the years, they don't make many personnel mistakes but when they make them, they are doozies.

The cynic in me, of course, is 150% convinced that if he had caught that "damn ball" the contract would have been done a long time ago.

Thanks.

I think that the Patriots have a negotiating system that has a lot of good points, but also has a couple of major problems in terms of how it impacts the players at the top.

I think they know about the problems and don't really care that those problems are there, because they largely view loyalty as a one way street.

I think they'll start to care about those problems once Brady is gone and they no longer have the pull of "We got Tom Brady, and that means that we go to the Super Bowl seemingly every other year" to bring in and/or keep players.