The Truth is Adam did not want to be here period

[JR4]

.......... Yes they offered him the highest contract for a kicker but none of it was gauranteed after the signing bonus, that's a slap in the face to the most "clutch" kicker in the NFL with 2 Superbowl winning kicks.
........................

Just a few points:

1. No guaranteed money in PATs offer means NOT even a Signing Bonus
which is guaranteed money.

2. If PATs know he has a bad back which makes him a high risk for a multiple
year contract then why would they offer guaranteed money? That's not
a slap in the face that would be good business practice.

3. Even if he WAS the most clutch kicker if he can't kick it's meaninless.
PATs don't pay because of "WHAT YOU DID" they pay for what they think
a player WILL DO going forward.

Since we have do not have access to the information that BB/SP used
to make this decision, the best we can do is trust the team that brought
us Patriots Fans Three(3) Superbowls. I do.

 

[patpatriot]

Using Occam's Razor

A few people have mentioned that the Pats offered him the highest salary but wouldn't guarantee any of it. There may be ego factors involved in rejecting that kind of deal but the simplest explanation has been stated: His back is too risky to pay him upfront money. He knows it. They know it The Colts are more of a gambling organization so they are willing to bet his back holds up.

 

[pats1]

Just a few points:

1. No guaranteed money in PATs offer means NOT even a Signing Bonus
which is guaranteed money.

2. If PATs know he has a bad back which makes him a high risk for a multiple
year contract then why would they offer guaranteed money? That's not
a slap in the face that would be good business practice.

3. Even if he WAS the most clutch kicker if he can't kick it's meaninless.
PATs don't pay because of "WHAT YOU DID" they pay for what they think
a player WILL DO going forward.

Since we have do not have access to the information that BB/SP used
to make this decision, the best we can do is trust the team that brought
us Patriots Fans Three(3) Superbowls. I do.

"after the signing bonus," it reads, meaning that was the only guaranteed money (some contracts will have other portions guaranteed).

 

[jct]

Absolutely True!!

 

[Warhorse]

So what some of you are saying is that it didn't matter that he was such a clutch kicker before, that the front office not choosing to give him more guaranteed money because he might have a back problem is okay. That tells me that it was fine for him to move on after playing with no guarantees under the franchise tag. Teams can't have it both ways. They can't say that they get to keep a player until they deem them not worthy. That's what makes free agency so great. Considering the Patriots are a team that is built from veterans after the cash dries up in free agency, I think this point would be obvious.

The Patriots offered him a contract with little guaranteed money.

The Colts offered him a contract with a lot of guaranteed money, the opportunity to play in a dome to increase his percentages and the ability to extend his career considering he is in the lowest paid position in the NFL.

Some of you talk about loyalty but if a player is doing bad then you can't kick them out the door fast enough (ex. Duane Starks). But if a player is doing well then he should stay at a reduced salary to retire as a Patriot because we gave him the chance to succeed. Maybe just maybe, he gave the Patriots the chance to succeed.

If the roles were reversed and a company came and offered you a job that guaranteed your salary with a raise with the possibility of extended your career over the company that you worked for now that said they would just continue to pay you but nothing was guaranteed, you would go to the new company.