Here's why Mankins is a goner

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

he's not my boy

I'm just not some yahoo who thinks the BB regime is always right, that's all.

It's their job to make efficient roster decisions. If Dan Connolly comes through, they will look like geniuses. If he doesn't people will forget soon enough anyway.

I just found it strange the difference in philosophies when it came to dealing with wilfork (they go out and waste a 2nd pick on brace as a just in case, but didn't think to come up with an OG in day 1 or 2 with a much more ominous situation looming with mankins)

for this to have come out the way it has, there is a substantial portion of the story not being told right now, or people simply don't believe that mankins was lied to even though he was. which is what happens when acrimony shows up instantly the way it did. people don't flip out this way if they're not given some kind of misrepresentation. It would not be the first time for this organization

Logan, is that you?

It's amazing when in the same thread, the Douche Awry makes more sense.

How exactly do you make this statement, "people simply don't believe that mankins was lied to even though he was"?
Were you in the talks?

The Pats didn't spend Day 1 or 2 pick on a guard?

Do you watch? Heard on Connolly?, the guy everyone is praising for great play? So what with early round picks? I guess all 6th round QB picks are losers.

Brace wasted with one season? Dumb

 

[Wolfpack]

I'm getting sick of all these pathetic attempts to paint Mankins as some sort of high minded man of principle. He is just another greedy athlete, not unlike the countless others we've seen in the past. He is doing what he is doing for money, pure and simple. He is playing his game, and the Patriots are playing theirs.

Oh, and BTW... the people who think he can take 2 full years off and just stroll back onto some team's roster somewhere like nothing ever happened are living in fantasyland. Missing training camp is something a player can overcome. Missing a couple years isn't.

 

[Deus Irae]

Until a new CBA is agreed upon that changes the existing rules, or until in the event of a decertification the last best offer replaces the CBA and it in fact reverts to 4 years, he would remain under the Patriots control provided he doesn't report by week 10 and secure his year of service credit. Because his situation doesn't change until a new league year commences. I believe this CBA has been in existence since 1993 and each successive CBA is just a collectively bargained amended version of that original CBA. In effect it would provide the basis upon which the sides would propose/negotiate amendments. So in that respect the rules roll over subject to last best offer amendment absent a new CBA. And of course if there is a lockout it's a moot point...everyone from the QB to the ball boy will be in limbo, and most of them will be absent compensation or on reduced compensation for the duration.

I believe DaBruinz is wrong in assuming a new CBA doesn't supercede an expired CBA. Although it would not invalidate an existing contract. Mankins however isn't under contract. If he were including if he'd signed his RFA tender and then held out, his contract would likely toll and he would in fact probably owe the team another year of service regardless of whether the rules for RFA's going forward reverted to 4 years.

Mankins has 5 years of service time. You're incorrect.

 

[Deus Irae]

Wrong.. Mankins RFA status won't change with the new CBA. His status will be grandfathered in. Just like Jackson, McNeill, and any other RFA who hasn't signed prior to the end of the CBA.

The only way it won't change is if there is a specific clause written in to the new CBA that says otherwise. And I just don't see the owners giving that up.

As I said, there is already precedent in sports contracts to uphold my viewpoint. Both in the NFL and in other sports.

There is no "Logan Mankins gets screwed" clause in the CBA. There is a general clause regarding years of service. If the years of service requirement drops back down, Mankins will be an unrestricted free agent.

 

[Patsrock]

There is no "Logan Mankins gets screwed" clause in the CBA. There is a general clause regarding years of service. If the years of service requirement drops back down, Mankins will be an unrestricted free agent.

Well I think it depends on if the franchise/transition tags remain in place. I would think the players do not want those tags to exist and if they are taken out the owners are going to want something in return. The easiest thing would be years of service. If I was the owners and gave up franchise tag I would want UFA to come after 6 years of service. Take a rookie salary cap, that would allow RFA after 3 years but make the tender offers higher.