I don't know why you are making this such a personal thing when someone disagrees with you on this subject.
But since you're going personal, you joined here 2 years ago, so maybe you never heard of Drew Bledsoe
You obviosuly never heard of Bernie Kosar and the crap Belichick's kids had to take in Cleveland when BB demoted him for Testaverde.
We all love TB right now and there isn't another QB I'd rather have on the planet. But in 2016 or 2017, if he is faltering and the team is losing, then I would fully want to explore the options.
I'm not sure how comfortable I am comparing Drew and Kosar to Tom (not speaking skill here, purely status) but I agree that everyone on both sides should be open to alternatives.
My dispute with the Barnwell/Simmons group is that this restructure doesn't appear to facilitate that in any way. Brady was just as tradeable before the restructure as he is now, and anyone willing to sign Brady would be willing to trade. Rather than expanding, Tom's market value has remained unchanged.
In the absence of this, the only alternative explanation is that Brady's camp has a handshake agreement to be released rather than traded if he time comes up in NE. It seems somewhat sensible on the surface - it theoretically gives Tom more control over his destination - but it requires a far more clandestine unspoken contract than the one Letekro has objected to.
Frankly, I'd probably even quibble over the fact that Tom would need to be released. If such a handshake agreement exists, Bill could just allow Tom to make his selection and then trade him for less than optimal capital, which is still more than they would receive if released. And if Tom can control his direction via a trade as easily as he can on the open market, it negates the need to restructure in the first place.
My speculation relies on one assumption:
1) The team was planning on giving him a raise
That's it. The "handshake agreement" assumption regarding not being released isn't even necessary since Tom's value on the open market is higher than his current contract. But if you want to add that in, be my guest.
The Simmons/Barnwell speculation relies on several assumptions:
1) There is a team that would be willing to sign Tom who wouldn't be willing to trade him.
2) There is a team that would be willing to trade for the new contract that wouldn't have traded for the prior one.
If those are not met, then these will suffice
3) There is an unwritten agreement to release Tom rather than try to trade him.
4) There is a team that would sign him but wouldn't trade for him.
5) Bill/Bob wouldn't just be willing to trade Tom at a discount and allow him to control where he goes that way.
I'd love to hear a sound rebuttal, but I hope to receive more than "it just makes more sense", with a specific focus on how exactly this contract provides more flexibility and what assumption I've laid out is incorrect.
OK, that's it. I think I've finally whipped this horse but good.
