Bedard Listening Thread

[SacPete1]

Until those propagating the "exit strategy" rhetoric can answer these questions, there is only one viable explanation: Kraft didn't want to put $24mm on ice, so they gave Tom $3mm as a thank-you for redoing his deal.

Brilliant! Sometimes the simplest answers are the right ones...but of course that doesn't cut it with the media.

 

[neckroll#14]

Brilliant! Sometimes the simplest answers are the right ones...but of course that doesn't cut it with the media.

Except Kraft can borrow $24m all day long for way less than the cost of $3m.. probably at 2%/yr. So the explanation of 'freeing up $24m at a cost of $3m" really doesn't make sense. There has to be a football (or maybe personal) reason for making that deal, because for financial reasons alone it wouldn't have been done that way.

 

[Oswlek]

Except Kraft can borrow $24m all day long for way less than the cost of $3m.. probably at 2%/yr. So the explanation of 'freeing up $24m at a cost of $3m" really doesn't make sense. There has to be a football (or maybe personal) reason for making that deal, because for financial reasons alone it wouldn't have been done that way.

Brady deserved a raise and Kraft would rather pay him than a bank, plus it eliminates the need for payments of principal along with the interest. Seems pretty simple to me.

 

[shmessy]

If the Ravens go into the two high safeties like they did last week, the Pats should spread them out and gun/run with Vereen and high tempo offense and then as the game goes along and the Ravens are worn down, run. Shouldn't run off the start because the Ravens want to slow down the game. Bedard proposed Ken's strategy from a few days ago.

Would feel more comfortable with this had Brady thrown to more than 2 WR's this year.

An Amendola emergence will be key to this strategy.

He may be THE crucial key to the game.

 

[letekro]

Brady deserved a raise and Kraft would rather pay him than a bank, plus it eliminates the need for payments of principal along with the interest. Seems pretty simple to me.

I'm still befuddled by this thinking. What team that would be willing to sign Brady in FA wouldn't also be willing to trade for him? And what team willing to trade for this contract wouldn't have been willing to trade for the prior one?

Until those propagating the "exit strategy" rhetoric can answer these questions, there is only one viable explanation: Kraft didn't want to put $24mm on ice, so they gave Tom $3mm as a thank-you for redoing his deal.

The cash flow idea doesn't make sense. Kraft can get cash any multitude of ways and your theory doesn't explain why Brady gave up guaranteed money. The Simmons/Barnwell theory makes a bit more sense, although it has some holes too.

 

[RIpats88]

I still feel there has to be some sort of behidthe scenes "brady if you restructure to free up te 24million because we plan to give big signing bonuses to Revis/mccourty"

 

[Tunescribe]

Would feel more comfortable with this had Brady thrown to more than 2 WR's this year.

An Amendola emergence will be key to this strategy.

He may be THE crucial key to the game.

I said this weeks ago. If Amendola comes up big in the playoff run, I want my due credit.

 

[Mike the Brit]

I said this weeks ago. If Amendola comes up big in the playoff run, I want my due credit.

I'm with Ken. Give me Gronk and Hooman, Lafell and Edelman with Blount in the backfield and go full hurry-up and I like the Pats' chances.

 

[PATS16N0]

I would rather see Wright become a huge factor in the playoffs than Amendola unless it's during a big kick return. What's Amendola going to do that Edelman can't?

He's not the swiss army knife that Hernandez was, but the two TE set we put a hurting on Cincinnati with seems to me very appealing.

 

[vyrago]

Tony Mazz: "Brady biggest prima donna left in playoffs"

Gawd I can't stand this squeaky-voiced whiny idiot!

 

[PATS16N0]

Gawd I can't stand this squeaky-voiced whiny idiot!

Yes, he's very punchable.

Just imagine if space aliens are monitoring our air waves. How embarrassing.

 

[Tunescribe]

I would rather see Wright become a huge factor in the playoffs than Amendola unless it's during a big kick return. What's Amendola going to do that Edelman can't?

I think the notion of Amendola being a factor is as part of the three-WR spread.

 

[Gronkandez]

I still feel there has to be some sort of behidthe scenes "brady if you restructure to free up te 24million because we plan to give big signing bonuses to Revis/mccourty"

If the idea was to sign those guys wouldn't they have tried to reduce Brady's cap number instead of increase it?? Like others have said, Kraft is worth somewhere near $4Billion. Coming up with $24M in cash to make a bonus payment isn't a an issue.

 

[Oswlek]

The cash flow idea doesn't make sense. Kraft can get cash any multitude of ways and your theory doesn't explain why Brady gave up guaranteed money. The Simmons/Barnwell theory makes a bit more sense, although it has some holes too.

No, the Simmons/Barnwell theory makes no sense whatsoever. When "flexibility" is your explanation and the change literally doesn't increase flexibility in any way (other than being able to cut Brady outright which is a highly dubious expectation) then you have a non-answer.

I thought the comment you quoted made it pretty clear how advantageous it was for cash flow. Everyone keeps bringing up the fact that Kraft can borrow the money at lower interest rates, but would you rather have to make payments of $8.7mm for three years or $1mm? Especially when the person your are paying is a loved one that you felt deserved a raise anyway?

That's an enormous difference, no matter how big your bank account is.

 

[BradyManny]

I've always been a vocal Bedard fan, but his Brady contract remarks combined with his Boyer comments shows a disappointing string of remarkably unscientific remarks from the guy we previously called the "wet blanket of REASON".

When presented with two explanations for something - and one is mundane and sensible, and one is exciting but not sensible, most mediots choose the latter. I didn't expect Bedard to fall into that trap.

 

[Rob0729]

Would feel more comfortable with this had Brady thrown to more than 2 WR's this year.

An Amendola emergence will be key to this strategy.

He may be THE crucial key to the game.

I don't care who he throws to. Many years when the Pats had successful spread offenses Brady only had two WRs he threw to (see 2011). Both Gronk and Vereen are capable of lining up anywhere on the field as receiving options.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

No, the Simmons/Barnwell theory makes no sense whatsoever. When "flexibility" is your explanation and the change literally doesn't increase flexibility in any way (other than being able to cut Brady outright which is a highly dubious expectation) then you have a non-answer.

To play Devil's advocate for a moment, Brady might be able to torpedo a trade by failing to report/take a physical. I would imagine that if they decide to move on from Brady before his contract is up, they will allow him to negotiate a trade.

I thought the comment you quoted made it pretty clear how advantageous it was for cash flow. Everyone keeps bringing up the fact that Kraft can borrow the money at lower interest rates, but would you rather have to make payments of $8.7mm for three years or $1mm? Especially when the person your are paying is a loved one that you felt deserved a raise anyway?

That's an enormous difference, no matter how big your bank account is.

That's an apples-to-oranges comparison. In the $1M scenario, Kraft is paying the $8M out of his own pocket, so he's actually $300K further in the hole than in the $8.7M scenario you envision.

 

[letekro]

No, the Simmons/Barnwell theory makes no sense whatsoever. When "flexibility" is your explanation and the change literally doesn't increase flexibility in any way (other than being able to cut Brady outright which is a highly dubious expectation) then you have a non-answer.

I thought the comment you quoted made it pretty clear how advantageous it was for cash flow. Everyone keeps bringing up the fact that Kraft can borrow the money at lower interest rates, but would you rather have to make payments of $8.7mm for three years or $1mm? Especially when the person your are paying is a loved one that you felt deserved a raise anyway?

That's an enormous difference, no matter how big your bank account is.

Kraft is a businessman of the highest order with the highest caliber of advisers. What you are proposing is an uneconomic decision (paying 27 million when he could have paid 25 million even assuming very high borrowing costs) with only (speculative) cash flow benefits. I have done work for people like Kraft and they watch every single penny. I'm discounting that theory entirely on that basis. Even more importantly, your theory doesn't explain why Brady converted 24 million in guaranteed money to unguaranteed money. They would not have done this, and then have a convoluted handshake deal about never cutting him or trading him, just so Bob could be in a better cash flow position. Why on earth would Brady (who is also represented by very, very smart people) do that?

 

[Oswlek]

Kraft is a businessman of the highest order with the highest caliber of advisers. What you are proposing is an uneconomic decision (paying 27 million when he could have paid 25 million even assuming very high borrowing costs) with only (speculative) cash flow benefits. I have done work for people like Kraft and they watch every single penny. I'm discounting that theory entirely on that basis. Even more importantly, your theory doesn't explain why Brady converted 24 million in guaranteed money to unguaranteed money. They would not have done this, and then have a convoluted handshake deal about never cutting him or trading him, just so Bob could be in a better cash flow position. Why on earth would Brady (who is also represented by very, very smart people) do that?

"Hey dad?"

"Yes Jonathan?"

"I was thinking about all the money we have going out this offseason and I have an idea"

"Go on..."

"Well, with regard to Tom's $24mm, we have to talk to him about a raise anyway, so rather than escrow or finance, why don't we talk to him about a simultaneous restructure?"

This is not an outlandish scenario, no matter how to try to position it. There is also no reason to think Tom wouldn't agree to a handshake deal given his his stature with the team and Kraft's obvious affinity for him. Really, the question should be reversed. You're question rightly asks why Tom would give up certainty which makes the Simmons/Barnwell conclusion that he wants to be let go a bizarre leap.

No, the Grantland theory is absurd and nonsensical.

 

[Gronkandez]

"Hey dad?"

"Yes Jonathan?"

"I was thinking about all the money we have going out this offseason and I have an idea"

"Go on..."

"Well, with regard to Tom's $24mm, we have to talk to him about a raise anyway, so rather than escrow or finance, why don't we talk to him about a simultaneous restructure?"

This is not an outlandish scenario, no matter how to try to position it. There is also no reason to think Tom wouldn't agree to a handshake deal given his his stature with the team and Kraft's obvious affinity for him. Really, the question should be reversed. You're question rightly asks why Tom would give up certainty which makes the Simmons/Barnwell conclusion that he wants to be let go a bizarre leap.

No, the Grantland theory is absurd and nonsensical.

Kraft isn't the one who makes football decisions. Belichick makes the personnel decisions and most people agree he doesn't let personal feelings affect negotiations. If their production slips they generally get shipped out of town.
We don't know all the underlayings of this deal at this point.