What do we do with Mankins ?

[SanAngeloState]

If you franchise him, you take the risk that he signs it, you can't trade him (because of contract demands) and then you are stuck paying him 9m a year for a one year rental of a disgruntled player who doesn't want to be here.

 

[DW Toys]

Wouldn't option D be let him play under the tender... then franchise him? then trade him in the offseason?

Bingo. Best option.
DW Yoys

 

[WhiteWesWelker88]

Connolly-Mankins age difference what is it?

 

[ahmed]

I was afraid his absence would really hurt the OL but Connolly has filled in nicely so far. The only problem is when (god I hope not) the inevitable Neal injury kicks in, we are really thin.

The good thing is we know we don't need to pay him 7 million a year to have a good OL.

 

[mgteich]

Yup, Belichick is a hero for not paying $7M for an OG. If a Neal injury sometime this year is inevitable, I trust that you will enjoy watching Ohrnberger (who couldn't even make the team at the start of the season). Oh, did I mention that no one else wanted him for their 53 either?

I was afraid his absence would really hurt the OL but Connolly has filled in nicely so far. The only problem is when (god I hope not) the inevitable Neal injury kicks in, we are really thin.

The good thing is we know we don't need to pay him 7 million a year to have a good OL.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wouldn't option D be let him play under the tender... then franchise him? then trade him in the offseason?

The franchise number for guards also includes tackles, meaning it would be millions more than what Mankins was likely asking for.

 

[mgteich]

While I agree with your point that the franchise price would be more than what Mankins would ask for, it is NOT clear that there would be ZERO teams willing to trade for him before the draft. After all, we franchised a quarterback for $14M. He hadn't started a game since high school. We did get a reasoonable draft choice for his one year contract.

The franchise number for guards also includes tackles, meaning it would be millions more than what Mankins was likely asking for.

 

[SanAngeloState]

Yup, Belichick is a hero for not paying $7M for an OG. If a Neal injury sometime this year is inevitable, I trust that you will enjoy watching Ohrnberger (who couldn't even make the team at the start of the season). Oh, did I mention that no one else wanted him for their 53 either?

Ohrn-bust. He better improve. Disgrace that they drafted a guard that high if he is in face a bust.

 

[cstjohn17]

Wouldn't option D be let him play under the tender... then franchise him? then trade him in the offseason?

Yep, that is it. See you in week 10 Mankins and then welcome to club Franchise. Maybe they even sign him to an extension. Based on how Connolly has played I have no problem with him taking over for Neal.

2011 O Line
LT - Light (I would re-sign him, I think he would not break the bank and although he is not perfect he generally performs at a very high level)
LG - Mankins
C - Koppen (Consider drafting his replacement in the 2011 draft)
RG - Connolly
RT - Vollmer

 

[ahmed]

Yup, Belichick is a hero for not paying $7M for an OG. If a Neal injury sometime this year is inevitable, I trust that you will enjoy watching Ohrnberger (who couldn't even make the team at the start of the season). Oh, did I mention that no one else wanted him for their 53 either?

I never said BB is a hero. In fact I get irked by people who worship our front office blindly but I always thought 7 million for OG was too much. However, I was not happy with the Mankins situation. They should have either gotten a deal done or brought it more reliable insurance as we all know, Neal never has a complete season and we are scarily thin at G. That said, I am glad the OL is playing as well as they are playing now.

 

[jmt57]

The franchise number for guards also includes tackles, meaning it would be millions more than what Mankins was likely asking for.

Aren't they changing that, or is that something that won't happen till beyond 2011?

 

[Deus Irae]

Aren't they changing that, or is that something that won't happen till beyond 2011?

I believe it's a CBA issue, so only time will tell.

 

[satz]

Wouldn't option D be let him play under the tender... then franchise him? then trade him in the offseason?

No because Franchise tag is also a tender. So he has to sign it to be traderd.
so he can come in on Game 1 and sign the Franchise tag.

If he is pissed now think how pissed he will be then.All he has to do is tweak an ankle and refuse to play. the 9 million is fully gaureented or better still ask for 12-13 million a year to be traded.

so how many teams are willing to give 12-13 million contract and a draft pick for him?.

 

[SanAngeloState]

No because Franchise tag is also a tender. So he has to sign it to be traderd.
so he can come in on Game 1 and sign the Franchise tag.

If he is pissed now think how pissed he will be then.All he has to do is tweak an ankle and refuse to play. the 9 million is fully gaureented or better still ask for 12-13 million a year to be traded.

so how many teams are willing to give 12-13 million contract and a draft pick for him?.

I think this is exactly right. The team risks being stuck with a highly paid unhappy malcontent who can't be traded. How is that a win? I almost think they'll just revoke the tender. He's a FA at the end of the year if they don't franchise, so they'll get a supplemental pick. If they let him go now, they'll get a supplemental pick as well. But probably not as high as the deal he signs for the remainder of the year won't be as large maybe.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

As to Mankins, he Pats are simply leting time pass right now. Should a OG go down to injury, they'll have to act and in frantic mode. I'm no longer sure that Mankins needs to actually report and play by game 10 to qualify as a 2011 UFA; maybe the new CBA will revert to the old years of indentured servitude and Viola! he's a UFA. It seems to me that he's the one in control once he decided that 2010 money was not a priority to him.

 

[ivanvamp]

We may not like how Mankins has handled the situation, but he's a darn good offensive lineman. At that time of the year, the OL will likely be pretty banged up. It wouldn't be a bad thing, football-wise, to add a Pro-Bowl caliber lineman who is fresh as a daisy to the line.

Make him play his butt off or threaten him with the franchise tag, which he most definitely would not like.

 

[ALP]

what happens if he returns week 10, but we dont let him play???

 

[BlueThunder]

2 questions.....


What exactly is he looking for $$$$ wise?


and


Who is going to meet his demands???


If some team wants to overpay for an OG...let them

 

[Patriot_in_NY]

Let's trade him to Seattle for a 1st and then welcome him back with open arms around 2015.

Totally game with that....... Cuz he'll basically have wasted 4 years of his career, and will actually be humble about his "role" on the team when he returns.

Did you see Branch's presser yesterday. Someone asked him if the trade required him to "alter" his current deal (i.e. $$). He was real quick to say, oh yeah, absolutely, there won's be any issues there. The between the lines was clearly........ I wanna be here more then they need me here.

The bigger question is that I'm not sure the Patriots could really "afford" a 3rd 1st rounder, do you?

 

[furry]

It would be a colossal waste of money, but I swear after the way he has behaved the nasty side of me wouldn't mind seeing him hit with the franchise tag and missing two years of football