Logan Mankins: 'I want to be traded'

[Deus Irae]

His own agent refuted it. Didn't he say that the Patriots made him an offer? How did they not "address contract" if that is the case. It might not been the offer they liked but it certainly seems like they entered into negotiations in good faith. Nothing he said countered that.

Using your argument, the team could have said "76 years at minimum salary" and fulfilled the terms. That's clearly not was the intended nature of any agreement to "address contract". At this time, there is no evidence that Mankins claim is bogus.

 

[jmt57]

The Patriots are under no obligation to trade him just like they are under no obligation to pay him $7 million per year, or pay him what another guard makes. Mankins could be painting himself into a corner in a high stakes game of chicken if the Pats decide to call his bluff. If he sits out and the Pats don't trade him, and then there is a lockout in 2011, his value will probably decrease after not playing ball for two years. That would also mean he would have gone two years with no income at that point.

The other thing to consider is that when a new CBA is agreed upon, whether it's for the 2011 or 2012 season, the salary cap could be more stringent than what it was last year. And in that is the case then Mankins is most likely going to be offered less than what the Pats are offering right now.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Using your argument, the team could have said "76 years at minimum salary" and fulfilled the terms. That's clearly not was the intended nature of any agreement to "address contract". At this time, there is no evidence that Mankins claim is bogus.

Breer claims a league source stating "a five-year deal worth approximately $7 million per season and would place the two-time Pro Bowler comfortably among the top five paid guards in the NFL".

So there you have it.

 

[IllegalContact]

Breer claims a league source stating "a five-year deal worth approximately $7 million per season and would place the two-time Pro Bowler comfortably among the top five paid guards in the NFL".

So there you have it.

the infamous league source. these guys are wrong more than they are right.

 

[Deus Irae]

Breer claims a league source stating "a five-year deal worth approximately $7 million per season and would place the two-time Pro Bowler comfortably among the top five paid guards in the NFL".

So there you have it.

Again, that's not evidence that Mankins claim is bogus. That's the point. Mankins claim is based upon how he perceives things. There's no absolute refutation here.

People, as happens pretty much every time, have decided to just bash the player rather than using their heads. Every time a player demands to be paid what he perceives as his fair rate and the team offers less, the player is called greedy. It's just the envy of people making less money, as opposed to common sense.

If Brady demands to be paid more than Manning, as he should, and it becomes even a remotely public impasse, people here will be calling TFB greedy, too.

 

[Va_Pats_Fan]

When Polian was talking about some of the colts players, he said that since this was the last year of the CBA, if a player doesn't report by Aug 10(?), then their contract is extended a year...

Think this could effect his outlook?

 

[IllegalContact]

Again, that's not evidence that Mankins claim is bogus. That's the point. Mankins claim is based upon how he perceives things. There's no absolute refutation here.

People, as happens pretty much every time, have decided to just bash the player rather than using their heads. Every time a player demands to be paid what he perceives as his fair rate and the team offers less, the player is called greedy. It's just the envy of people making less money, as opposed to common sense.

If Brady demands to be paid more than Manning, as he should, and it becomes even a remotely public impasse, people here will be calling TFB greedy, too.

no they wouldn't. certain entities are off limits around here. you can probably do the math that mankins' $$$ is going to brady anyway

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

Again, that's not evidence that Mankins claim is bogus. That's the point. Mankins claim is based upon how he perceives things. There's no absolute refutation here.

If he can't perceive things correctly then so be it. He's upset the Patriots reneged on "dealing with" his contract. If he thinks something around 5/$35M isn't "dealing with it" then I guess he'll settle for the $1.5M his tender will be reduced to tomorrow.

 

[IllegalContact]

If he can't perceive things correctly then so be it. He's upset the Patriots reneged on "dealing with" his contract. If he thinks something around 5/$35M isn't "dealing with it" then I guess he'll settle for the $1.5M his tender will be reduced to tomorrow.

yes, the best way to guarantee that mankins will never play for the pats again

 

[Joker]

we'd like a guarantee that you take your moronic Rat troll posts out of here and back to Sewerage Central in the Meadowlands...thanx...

 

[Deus Irae]

If he can't perceive things correctly then so be it. He's upset the Patriots reneged on "dealing with" his contract. If he thinks something around 5/$35M isn't "dealing with it" then I guess he'll settle for the $1.5M his tender will be reduced to tomorrow.

Your claim that his perception is incorrect is just your uninformed opinion. Neither you nor I know the details of the contract offer.

Also, Breer is reporting that the tender offer has already been reduced. Care to bet that Mankins doesn't sign that $1.5 million dollar tender any time soon?

 

[jmt57]

When Polian was talking about some of the colts players, he said that since this was the last year of the CBA, if a player doesn't report by Aug 10(?), then their contract is extended a year...

Think this could effect his outlook?

Yeah, I was just about to ask about that. As I recall players have to report by August 10th this year or they lose a year of eligibility. In the past the cutoff date was week ten. On the other hand, if the next CBA reverted back to the old terms in terms of amount of service needed to become an unrestricted free agent, it wouldn't matter to Mankins. The only reason he was a restricted free agent rather than an unrestricted free agent this year was due to the uncapped year rules.

Was it that, or if a player does not report by August 10th then they automatically get an extra year added to their contract? I can't recall, does anyone know for sure what's in the CBA regarding that?

 

[Sciz]

"I don't think (Wayne) will stay away from training camp because there is a rule this year in the uncapped year that if you do not come in by Aug. 10, you get an extra year tacked onto your contract," Polian said. "So, that is the last thing he wants. He's got two years to run on his contract. So, I presume he will be in."

Idk what any of that means, so interpret it for me!

 

[mgteich]

"does not report" ??????????

I guess we need the contract language. I would expect Mankins to protect his rights, and sign and/or show up at the last minute. I presume that he can then walk out for awhile with the normal daily penalties. The patriots can indeed "force" a very unhappy and vocal Mankins to play for the 2010 season if Belichick really thinks that it is good for the team. I suspect that team is smarter than that and will sign him to a one-year contract as they did with Samuel. If not, they will trade him. I do not see him playing the 2010 season for $1.5M, but stranger things have happened.

Yeah, I was just about to ask about that. As I recall players have to report by August 10th this year or they lose a year of eligibility. In the past the cutoff date was week ten. On the other hand, if the next CBA reverted back to the old terms in terms of amount of service needed to become an unrestricted free agent, it wouldn't matter to Mankins. The only reason he was a restricted free agent rather than an unrestricted free agent this year was due to the uncapped year rules.

Was it that, or if a player does not report by August 10th then they automatically get an extra year added to their contract? I can't recall, does anyone know for sure what's in the CBA regarding that?

 

[Deus Irae]

Yeah, I was just about to ask about that. As I recall players have to report by August 10th this year or they lose a year of eligibility. In the past the cutoff date was week ten. On the other hand, if the next CBA reverted back to the old terms in terms of amount of service needed to become an unrestricted free agent, it wouldn't matter to Mankins. The only reason he was a restricted free agent rather than an unrestricted free agent this year was due to the uncapped year rules.

Was it that, or if a player does not report by August 10th then they automatically get an extra year added to their contract? I can't recall, does anyone know for sure what's in the CBA regarding that?

"I don't think (Wayne) will stay away from training camp because there is a rule this year in the uncapped year that if you do not come in by Aug. 10, you get an extra year tacked onto your contract," Polian said. "So, that is the last thing he wants. He's got two years to run on his contract. So, I presume he will be in."

Idk what any of that means, so interpret it for me!

Wayne is already under contract, which is why the situation applies to him. Mankins is a free agent who's unsigned, since he hasn't signed his tender. The situation doesn't apply to him.

 

[jmt57]

Well, I would take that to mean if a player does not report by August 10th they get an extra year added on to their contract, so players like Reggie Wayne or Revis with the Jets would want to be sure to report by then because they have a year or two remaining on their contracts. However, an RFA like Mankins who does not sign his tender technically is not under contract, so that 'extra year' being tacked on to his contract would simply be for this 2010 season, right?


Edit: Deus summed up in three quick sentences what took me six lines to spew out . . .

 

[PATSNUTme]

Again, that's not evidence that Mankins claim is bogus. That's the point. Mankins claim is based upon how he perceives things. There's no absolute refutation here.

People, as happens pretty much every time, have decided to just bash the player rather than using their heads. Every time a player demands to be paid what he perceives as his fair rate and the team offers less, the player is called greedy. It's just the envy of people making less money, as opposed to common sense.

If Brady demands to be paid more than Manning, as he should, and it becomes even a remotely public impasse, people here will be calling TFB greedy, too.

It's not about being greedy. Everyone should go after as much as they can get. So if TFB wants to be the highest paid QB in the NFL, then more power to him if he can get it.

But even TFB should not come out in public, though the media, and say that he was lied to and wants to be traded. That when the line is crossed between contract negotiation and public whining.

I stop at the Irving station in my town every morning to pick up a paper. The local contractors are there every day asking each other where the work is. How do you think a guy like Mankins looks to them? Or, the guy who may sacrifice some things to hold on to his season ticket, which helps pays Mankins salary?

 

[mgteich]

It is not at all clear what adding a year will mean if the RFA limit is the 4th year iin 2011.

Well, I would take that to mean if a player does not report by August 10th they get an extra year added on to their contract, so players like Reggie Wayne or Revis with the Jets would want to be sure to report by then because they have a year or two remaining on their contracts. However, an RFA like Mankins who does not sign his tender technically is not under contract, so that 'extra year' being tacked on to his contract would simply be for this 2010 season, right?


Edit: Deus summed up in three quick sentences what took me six lines to spew out . . .

 

[Deus Irae]

It's not about being greedy. Everyone should go after as much as they can get. So if TFB wants to be the highest paid QB in the NFL, then more power to him if he can get it.

But even TFB should not come out in public, though the media, and say that he was lied to and wants to be traded. That when the line is crossed between contract negotiation and public whining.

I stop at the Irving station in my town every morning to pick up a paper. The local contractors are there every day asking each other where the work is. How do you think a guy like Mankins looks to them? Or, the guy who may sacrifice some things to hold on to his season ticket, which helps pays Mankins salary?

I disagree with your characterization. Anything else I could say would be a response regarding those contractors and people complaining, and it would be taken personally by posters, so I'll just leave it at that.

 

[BPF]

Well, I would take that to mean if a player does not report by August 10th they get an extra year added on to their contract, so players like Reggie Wayne or Revis with the Jets would want to be sure to report by then because they have a year or two remaining on their contracts. However, an RFA like Mankins who does not sign his tender technically is not under contract, so that 'extra year' being tacked on to his contract would simply be for this 2010 season, right?


Edit: Deus summed up in three quick sentences what took me six lines to spew out . . .

The NFL's RFA problem hits home - Extra Points - Boston.com

What's next? Well, once the 24-hour window for teams to cut the tenders passes, the next financial motivator for Mankins or Vincent Jackson or Donald Penn or whomever else is Week 1, when the game checks start rolling in. Each week, you lose a game check thereafter, and then Week 10 is the real drop-dead date for the player to avoid being right back where he started in 2011.

Mankins wants to be traded - Extra Points - Boston.com

If Mankins doesn't sign his tender, he doesn't risk fines for skipping minicamp, which starts tomorrow, or training camp. He also wouldn't be subject to the 30-day rule, which states that players under contract must report by Aug. 10 (30 days to the NFL opener) to accrue the season towards free agency.

Mankins really wouldn't have to show until Week 10, though he would lose chunks of salary with each regular season game sat out, to have the season count towards free agency.