Mankins could hold up NFL settlement

[patfanken]

maybe because you sort of do sound like a homer........

How exactly was ANY of my comments homerish. Where there facts I left out? Did I say Mankins didn't have the right to hold out? Of course not. I'm just a "homer" because that is a way you don't have to respond to the issues. Labeling has been a consistent tactic to avoid responding to a issue since the Regan years. I can hardly wait until the "socialist" "liberal" attacks come.

 

[DaBruinz]

mankins was not under contract, so he did not hold out.....wish to offer up any more of your cluelessness?

That's funny coming from you.

Mankins was holding out in the idea that he wasn't playing and didn't want to sign the RFA tender. Because, oh the horror. He'd have had to have a salary of 3.29 million plus whatever signing bonus he got..

There's no way that is being taken care of...

 

[DaBruinz]

LOL at another one of your 'opinions'

An "opinion" based in more fact than anything you've put up today. But, hey, you've shown a propensity for just spewing garbage..

 

[IllegalContact]

You clearly don't understand jack. I have voiced differences over the Pats front office numerous times..

As for Mankins, care to show me in the CBA where Mankins is given the right to call the Krafts "LIARS"

Care to show how an offer of almost 7 million a year is not "taking care of Mankins"?

I understand that you are enamored by your blind homage of the players, but you really need to come out from under the pile of jocks every now and then and face reality.

OH, btw, Mankins always has the choice to go play in the AFL, UFL or CFL. Nothing says he has to play in the NFL. That's fact. And one that isn't just "my opinion".

there's nothing in the CBA that says a player can't call an owner a LIAR

care to actually show the offer? some said it was 5 years at 35M while others said it was a 7 year offer that averaged 7M, but that the last 2 years of the deal were fluff and that if it went 5 years, that it would have been less than 5M per.....guess it depends on your sources.....but I am sure you only use factual ones.

mankins can also go play for 31 other teams in the NFL.......their money is just as green

 

[IllegalContact]

An "opinion" based in more fact than anything you've put up today. But, hey, you've shown a propensity for just spewing garbage..

sez you.......

 

[Rob0729]

Rob, you always think you're being objective. You pretty much never are. That's part of being a homer. Also, I'm not taking Mankins' account as fact. I'm taking the reports of Mike Reiss as accurate.

And that "permission" thing is a lame argument.

LOL! I am objective compared to you at least. That is indiputable. That is why you are the Felger of this board and the ultimate contrarian.

I do have some biases that why I said I am fairly objective. I think I am giving both sides there due at least to an extent. You take one sided accounts of the facts as facts.

Show me a link to Reiss' report and I will apologize. I quickly scanned a bunch of his stories on Mankins and most are just one side or the others' (mostly Mankin's side) and have never seen these articles you talk about.

But even in your accounts of Mankins' contract offer is biased where you say that Mankins was being offered top center money as if it was millions less a year. Nick Mangold is the highest paid center at 7 years, $55 million ($22 million guaranteed for $7.8 million a year). Jahri Evans had a deal for 7 years, 56.7 million ($25.7 million in the first three years for $8.1 million a year). Even before Mangold's contract, Jason Brown had the biggest center contract at 5 years, $37.5 million (with $20 million bonus at $7.5 million a year). So there isn't a huge difference between the top paid guard and the top paid center. Of course you make is sound like a chasm. but let's not let facts skew your argument.

 

[IllegalContact]

That's funny coming from you.

Mankins was holding out in the idea that he wasn't playing and didn't want to sign the RFA tender. Because, oh the horror. He'd have had to have a salary of 3.29 million plus whatever signing bonus he got..

There's no way that is being taken care of...

but its not a hold out.......

go learn something

 

[IllegalContact]

How exactly was ANY of my comments homerish. Where there facts I left out? Did I say Mankins didn't have the right to hold out? Of course not. I'm just a "homer" because that is a way you don't have to respond to the issues. Labeling has been a consistent tactic to avoid responding to a issue since the Regan years. I can hardly wait until the "socialist" "liberal" attacks come.

oh....I can respond

like I said.....the only tactical mistake mankins made was to not hold out while under contract just like deion branch did.......it is actually much more effective at forcing someone's hand.

 

[townes]

The only bullcrap is what you have continued to spew this entire process. It was made clear bother earlier and since then that Mankins was planning on making demands and that he wasn't happy..

As for Brady, you really should read the thread better because I made my statements clear enough yesterday.

Made clear by who?


Schefter made clear mankins had not made demands, and your fantasizing that he has doesn't change that one bit.

During this entire process i said the players were willing to make a good deal for all and weren't interested in tearing down the structure of the game, whereas people like you claimed they were out to get rid of the draft and take the game apart. beyond that the deal I said would work for all is very close to what was agreed upon in the end.

 

[DaBruinz]

Show us the demand Mankins made?


First you said it was because his name was on the suit now you backtrack when Brady's name is brought in.

You clearly have a problem with reading comprehension.

Here is what I said:

False. Mankins lent his name to be used both in the lawsuit and in the idea that he is going to want some sort of other payment/compensation for the Pats handling of his contract. Just because he didn't state any demands doesn't mean that there aren't any..

Please note the BOLD part. So, for you to say that it was because his name was on the suit is BS. It was because of a COMBINATION of the suit and that his name has been used in the idea that he's going to want extra compensation.

It's been over 24 hours since it was first reported and 8 since the tweets and articles this morning. If it was UNTRUE that Mankins wasn't going to ask for extra payment/compensation, then he should have come out and said so.

Brady's name has not been tied in any manner to any extra benefits/compensation.

And, as pointed out to your tongue-washing buddy, Deus, the named plaintiffs have no grounds for wanting extra compensation since the case has not even gone to trial.

 

[IllegalContact]

Made clear by who?


Schefter made clear mankins had not made demands, and your fantasizing that he has doesn't change that one bit.

During this entire process i said the players were willing to make a good deal for all and weren't interested in tearing down the structure of the game, whereas people like you claimed they were out to get rid of the draft and take the game apart. beyond that the deal I said would work for all is very close to what was agreed upon in the end.

don't you know?

DaBruinz is Da man!!!!

what he says? d%#*!@t, it goes!!!!

and you're an idiot if you disagree in any way

LMFAO

 

[townes]

You can't point to anything from Mankins because he hasn't made any demand, just like Brady. Just because others speculate that he could doesn't mean he has any more than it would had they said it about Brady.

As for whether they should I disagree with Deus and don't think any of the plaintiffs should derail a deal for their own personal gain, and i don't believe any will. If one did I would criticize it but what i won't do is claim someone who has made no demands has made them absent proof they did.

 

[DaBruinz]

nice you can talk for other people and their money......

I am not talking for other people and their money. I'm saying what Mankins walked away from because he was so worried about the "salary" number. Also, for me to be talking for his money, that would require me telling Mankins how to spend it. And I'm not doing that.

Instead of addressing what is said, you show you can't be bothered and really don't have a point.

3.29 million AND his signing bonus w For One year. Is that really "not taking care of him"?

 

[DaBruinz]

you've been robbing people of time for a hell of alot longer, but who's counting. (just your worthless opinion)

have you figure out what a 'hold out' means yet? (always have. But I am not so obtuse that I can't understand that there are different meanings that aren't necessarily the standard ones)

I corrected you post for you.

 

[The_Riddler]

yeah.........just put connolly in there......

no, wait

Re-up Light at 1/5 of Logan's cost and move him inside to play next to Solder, there's plenty of options not to mention Cannon in due time and FA. No one needs Mankin's BS, freakin sick of it ! He plays on the interior of the offensive line, I mean give me a break, and he acts like he's an impact, pass-rushing OLB worthy of impact money. No way Logan...........

 

[townes]

Please note the BOLD part. So, for you to say that it was because his name was on the suit is BS. It was because of a COMBINATION of the suit and that his name has been used in the idea that he's going to want extra compensation.

It's been over 24 hours since it was first reported and 8 since the tweets and articles this morning. If it was UNTRUE that Mankins wasn't going to ask for extra payment/compensation, then he should have come out and said so.

Brady's name has not been tied in any manner to any extra benefits/compensation.

And, as pointed out to your tongue-washing buddy, Deus, the named plaintiffs have no grounds for wanting extra compensation since the case has not even gone to trial.

That was incoherent. Once again just because some idiot tweets that mankins could derail a deal it doesn't make it reality. If he makes demands that screw the deal then shriek and cry then, claiming you have the right to do so because Borges wishes it to be is absolutely idiotic.

 

[DaBruinz]

beats living in the owners underwear.......

Wouldn't know. Care to enlighten everyone?

 

[townes]

Re-up Light at 1/5 of Logan's cost and move him inside to play next to Solder, there's plenty of options not to mention Cannon in due time and FA. No one needs Mankin's BS, freakin sick of it ! He plays on the interior of the offensive line, I mean give me a break, and he acts like he's an impact, pass-rushing OLB worthy of impact money. No way Logan...........

Couldn't disagree more, Mankins is a rare player and may be the best interior OL of this era. I didn't get to see Belichik discuss Mankins during the best of series on the NFL network but i would be willing to bet his comments were effusive, and that's rare for Belichik. Make him the highest paid at OG and get on with free agency.

 

[DaBruinz]

there's nothing in the CBA that says a player can't call an owner a LIAR (You're right.. there is no code of conduct rules in the CBA that allows teams to fine players over conduct detrimental to the team.. err.. wait.. I think that many of the Bengals players can attest otherwise.)

care to actually show the offer? some said it was 5 years at 35M while others said it was a 7 year offer that averaged 7M, but that the last 2 years of the deal were fluff and that if it went 5 years, that it would have been less than 5M per.....guess it depends on your sources.....but I am sure you only use factual ones.

None of the sources claimed that the last 2 years of the 7 year deal were "fluff".

5 year extension worth 35 million with the RFA year as well is the contract I saw. So, for all intents, it was a 6 year deal at over 38 million. That's over 6.3 million per year. With him getting his signing bonus immediately..

mankins can also go play for 31 other teams in the NFL.......their money is just as green

No. Mankins can only play for any of the 31 other teams in the NFL if they sign Mankins to a deal, the Pats choose not to match AND the teams reach a deal on compensation. Otherwise, Mankins is stuck on the Pats.

 

[DaBruinz]

but its not a hold out.......

go learn something

It is a hold out. Just not the standard accepted term.

I know plenty of things. There are plenty of things I don't know as well.