Mankins could hold up NFL settlement

[patfanken]

Again, the Patriots offer, per the Patriots was roughly equivalent to that of the top center. Mankins is a guard, and that's underpaying him a bit. I don't really consider that to be unfair, though, as much as just being a bit tight with a buc.

WOW! the streak continues. Are you now saying that G is a tougher position to play than C and deserves more money. WRONG it is much harder to find a C than G.

What was unfair, though, was making it an extension of the RFA tender, and requiring Mankins to play out the season under that salary. It was worse than unfair, though. It was monumentally stupid. This team does some things very well, obviously. However, dealing with its high end talent when contract time rolls around is an area where it could use some work.

The Pats extended Mankins an RFA as a matter of course while they continued to negotiate a long term deal. They only made him play under that RFA tag AFTER they refused to make him the highest paid G in the league. That's fully MANKINS choice. It was never the Pats intention to pay Mankins in 2010 at the RFA number, but OTOH, it was never the intention of the Pats to be FORCED to pay him what he wanted.

Mankins rejected the offer
Mankins walked away from the table
Mankins held out
Mankins came back

The Pats didn't treat Mankins badly in ANY respect, unless you actually believe that the Pats should pay all their players exactly what they want.

 

[DaBruinz]

so did Tom Brady.....even though he was already under contract for the next 4 years....

Tom Brady has not made any extra demands the way that Manning, Brees, Mankins and Jackson have done.. Nor has his name been tied to any extra demands.. That's the difference.

 

[IllegalContact]

The Patriots have an obligation to the players, organization and fans to field the best possible team and compete for a Super Bowl.

The RFA tender was there for them to use as a way to retain Mankins' services for 2010 - dramatically improving their chances of winning the Super Bowl.

That obligation is far greater than their obligation to appeasing Logan Mankins.

And again, it's not like Logan didn't have options. He could have negotiated and worked with the Patriots.

the only mistake mankins made was to not hold out before the 2009 season just like deion branch did before the last season of his rookie contract.

that is the moment that a player can either get what he wants, or shoot his way out of town.....screw the process......this league is clearly every man for himself

oh, BTW.....the pats could have paid deion branch, and then they would likely have a 4th SB trophy since having him would have been the difference in 2006 to get past the colts in the AFCC

 

[townes]

All any of the plaintiffs are entitiled to for being on the list is squat because the case hasn't even gone to trial yet. The lawsuit has nothing to do with the expired CBA or what it allowed all teams to do in the uncapped year. The union that represented those same players negotiated that agreement. Former Patriot offensive lineman turned mediot Ross Tucker sums it up pretty well on twitter...

Ross Tucker? Seriously? He was a moron as a player and nothing has changed since then.

 

[IllegalContact]

Tom Brady has not made any extra demands the way that Manning, Brees, Mankins and Jackson have done.. Nor has his name been tied to any extra demands.. That's the difference.

no...the difference is that he is under contract for the next 4 years.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Patriots have an obligation to the players, organization and fans to field the best possible team and compete for a Super Bowl.

The RFA tender was there for them to use as a way to retain Mankins' services for 2010 - dramatically improving their chances of winning the Super Bowl.

That obligation is far greater than their obligation to appeasing Logan Mankins.

And again, it's not like Logan didn't have options. He could have negotiated and worked with the Patriots.

It was an uncapped year. There was no salary cap. There was no need for any particular salary restriction on Mankins. You're not even attempting to be objective at this point, so we're done here. When you're ready to have an honest discussion on this, let me know.

 

[patfanken]

Fact: Both sides did/are doing things that were within their rights.

Fact: Neither side had/has to exercise those rights

Fact: The Patriots used a one year 'loophole' in such a way that Mankins got screwed financially

Fact: Mankins is looking to find some measure of righting that 'wrong'

While being correct in the first two facts, #3 is not a FACT its just YOUR view. Mankins screwed himself not so much when he reject the very reasonable offer, but when he walked away from the table with bothering to even counter

Finally when your 4th point is not a fact either because there was NO WRONG done.

 

[IllegalContact]

WOW! the streak continues. Are you now saying that G is a tougher position to play than C and deserves more money. WRONG it is much harder to find a C than G.



The Pats extended Mankins an RFA as a matter of course while they continued to negotiate a long term deal. They only made him play under that RFA tag AFTER they refused to make him the highest paid G in the league. That's fully MANKINS choice. It was never the Pats intention to pay Mankins in 2010 at the RFA number, but OTOH, it was never the intention of the Pats to be FORCED to pay him what he wanted.

Mankins rejected the offer
Mankins walked away from the table
Mankins held out
Mankins came back

The Pats didn't treat Mankins badly in ANY respect, unless you actually believe that the Pats should pay all their players exactly what they want.

that's certainly one version of it.......

another one could be that 2 OL guys drafted in 2006, a year after mankins who are on the same level of ability as mankins were extended last year......the pats had an opportunity to put their money where their mouth was and instead of talking the 'we'll take care of you' hot air, actually signed him to a deal at that time.......it would have likely been much cheaper then, and would have avoided this mess altogether.

oh, those 2 guys? ferguson and mangold

 

[townes]

Tom Brady has not made any extra demands the way that Manning, Brees, Mankins and Jackson have done.. Nor has his name been tied to any extra demands.. That's the difference.

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.

 

[Deus Irae]

WOW! the streak continues. Are you now saying that G is a tougher position to play than C and deserves more money. WRONG it is much harder to find a C than G.

I'm saying that the top guard is getting paid more than the top center. Pretty basic stuff, and I'm tired of dealing with your nonsense.

You're a homer, Ken. I get that. However, in this thread, you're posting some of the stupidest stuff I've ever seen you post, and I'm not going to be arguing with people who are clowning themselves anymore. It's just not worth my time. You can't even be bothered to read what I've posted, yet your making asinine responses to imagined comments.

Have a nice day, Ken. We're done here.

 

[patfanken]

Perhaps reading what I've posted, striving for comprehension, and putting down the homer goggles would be a good start for you on this.

Why are you continuing to embarrass yourself. Why don't YOU stop trying to put play the "homer card" and respond to the substantive points I made

 

[IllegalContact]

Why are you continuing to embarrass yourself. Why don't YOU stop trying to put play the "homer card" and respond to the substantive points I made

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

 

[crowell33]

Vikings punter calls Mankins ( among others ) a D - Bag.

Vikes punter calls Manning, Brees, others 'douchebags' | National Football Post

 

[patfanken]

Apparently you also need to read up on law.

Again you avoid addressing the issue with another question. Enlighten me. What is the law that would back up your point?? I've only been asking the question now since around page 6 of this tread.

 

[Clonamery]

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

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[IllegalContact]

Vikings punter calls Mankins ( among others ) a D - Bag.

Vikes punter calls Manning, Brees, others 'douchebags' | National Football Post

LOL.......a punter

 

[mgcolby]

Vikings punter calls Mankins ( among others ) a D - Bag.

Vikes punter calls Manning, Brees, others 'douchebags' | National Football Post

Ding Ding Ding...We have a winner! :rocker:

 

[IllegalContact]

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

hence the 'sort of'

I was going to say 'kind of sort of, but not really', but he sort of does, so I chose to remain accurate in my assessment

 

[DaBruinz]

Again, the Patriots offer, per the Patriots was roughly equivalent to that of the top center. Mankins is a guard, and that's underpaying him a bit. I don't really consider that to be unfair, though, as much as just being a bit tight with a buc.

What was unfair, though, was making it an extension of the RFA tender, and requiring Mankins to play out the season under that salary. It was worse than unfair, though. It was monumentally stupid. This team does some things very well, obviously. However, dealing with its high end talent when contract time rolls around is an area where it could use some work.

God forbid that Mankins play for the RFA salary (3.29 million) AND his signing bonus.. OH the horror of it all.. He'd be so underpaid..

Kinda like Brady had to do in 2002 where his "salary" was from his previous contract but his signing bonus was quite large.. Kinda like Seymour did from his first to his second contract..

 

[DaBruinz]

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.

Which reports were those?? The reports where Reiss quote's Mankins?? Or the ones where Reiss quotes Mankins' agent??

I find it funny that you, of all people, can sit there and say that Rob is "pretty much never" objective. He's shown more objectivity in his pinky through this whole thing than you have shown you have in your entire body..

And before you say it, There are many things I am objective on and plenty that I'm not. And I know it. That's what makes us different.