Peyton's Career Salary Cap Hits

[Superman]

OK so I went back, to my post #17.

 

http://forums.colts.com/index.php?/topic/15826-peytons-career-salary-cap-hits/#entry422345

 

It started with you saying that Manning took an under-market contract.to which my rebuttal was that it was for Manning's benefit to take the Broncos deal because of the obvious nature of the Tenn deal, to which i said it was silly to say he took an under-market contract because I don't believe the contract offer from Tenn was a contract to play football. It was a contract to play host in Tenn, and that is where it came from.

 

Yes, it was for Manning's benefit to take the Broncos deal for $6m/year less, for football reasons. It was also to Brady's benefit to take a contract for less from the Patriots, for football reasons.

 

That was the point.

[SilentHill]

Who cares what Adams motivation is? We're talking about Manning's motivation. He took less than he could have because he wanted to win. Did he not?

 

He did, He took less than what was "offered", but Manning wasn't even going to consider Tenn in the first place, so how can that be counted? That's like saying the chiefs offered him 30 million, who cares? Was he really going to play for the chiefs? We all know Manning wants to win, but let's face it, he didn't really give the Broncos a discount. They paid him 19.2 million, almost the most in the NFL when his health was in question. Ballsy move by Denver, but hardly a gesture by Manning.

[Yehoodi]

Market value is an argument in semantics at this point. I could continue to argue that his market value is whatever he was offered, but it's not relevant.

 

My point is that he chose to take less.

yes but the point to "take less" between two different teams is not the same thing as telling the same team you are going to give my 20, I will take 16 instead. It is one thing to not take a higher offer from one team to chose a lower offer from another, which happens all the time in FA, more often than not the lower offer that is accepted for a various of reason . . .

And the point in this thread and others is what is the player doing for his team in question and how does he help his team by taken less that what the team would otherwise want, or have to, pay him . . .

and lastly, market value is based on a broader value across more than one data point . . . the fact that one buyer will pay more for an item does not mean the item is worth that but just that one individual out of many has a desire for the item and is willing to pay more for it . . . . if a house is on the market for 300k, but i love it as it near somthing i like and I go in and offer 325k does not mean it market value is 325k just becuase i have a unique reason for buying it . . .

[SilentHill]

Yes, it was for Manning's benefit to take the Broncos deal for $6m/year less, for football reasons. It was also to Brady's benefit to take a contract for less from the Patriots, for football reasons.

 

That was the point.

 

It's all coming together. I think your under the assumption that Manning gave Denver a discount.

[MAC]

Let's just take Brady out of this conversation.

 

Manning to Tennessee was not based on his football play, it was based on the fact that he'd be King on TN, like you said. People who run and own multi-million dollar operations like a NFL franchise know how to make money, and the deal offered by Mr Adams was an attempt to make money. He didn't care if the team won, sure he woulda liked it, but he woulda made due with whatever salary cap he had left. He was in it for the Benjamins. This isn't hearsay, this is a calculated hypothesis based on American business.

You are absolutely correct, and I agree completely. And obviously Peyton knew that as well, and wanted nothing to do with it. My point was that his turning down the piles of cash and endless hero-worship (there was even suggestions of a lifetime personal services contract and partial ownership of the team) is admirable.

 

He wants to win - just like Brady - who can't be removed from the conversation entirely because he is the reason that the thread was started in the first place. The only reason that you were included in my post is because you were so stridently agreeing with a divisive Pats fan who has made it clear that she'd elect Brady Pope if he were eligible. Both players have been paid insane amounts of money, both players have structured contracts in ways beneficial to their respective teams, both players want desperately to win, and can afford to make compromises in order to facilitate same. My point was that Brady is being complimented left and right as if it's a matter of ethics, and WHAT exactly has he sacrificed to this point?   Peyton would still be with the Colts and could have avoided all of last years drama if he had simply let Irsay make him the highest paid player in history as he has so frequently and publicly offered. It was Peyton who insisted on taking less money because (among other things) he wanted Addai back, and it was Peyton who insisted on the team having the opportunity to dump him after one season as a means of protecting the team against his injury. He clearly isn't interested in getting paid for not playing. Brady, on the other hand, just received a guarantee protecting HIM against injury at an age when the possibility will become more and more likely, while giving up absolutely nothing. I'll believe that he'll actually get paid $9 mill (or whatever it is) per year while still playing at a top 5 level when I see it happen. What exactly is he being lauded for, and why isn't the same obvious courtesy extended to Peyton?

[Superman]

It's all coming together. I think your under the assumption that Manning gave Denver a discount.

 

No. I'm saying Manning turned down more money because winning is more important to him than money.

[SilentHill]

You are absolutely correct, and I agree completely. And obviously Peyton knew that as well, and wanted nothing to do with it. My point was that his turning down the piles of cash and endless hero-worship (there was even suggestions of a lifetime personal services contract and partial ownership of the team) is admirable.

 

He wants to win - just like Brady - who can't be removed from the conversation entirely because he is the reason that the thread was started in the first place. The only reason that you were included in my post is because you were so stridently agreeing with a divisive Pats fan who has made it clear that she'd elect Brady Pope if he were eligible. Both players have been paid insane amounts of money, both players have structured contracts in ways beneficial to their respective teams, both players want desperately to win, and can afford to make compromises in order to facilitate same. My point was that Brady is being complimented left and right as if it's a matter of ethics, and WHAT exactly has he sacrificed to this point?   Peyton would still be with the Colts and could have avoided all of last years drama if he had simply let Irsay make him the highest paid player in history as he has so frequently and publicly offered. It was Peyton who insisted on taking less money because (among other things) he wanted Addai back, and it was Peyton who insisted on the team having the opportunity to dump him after one season as a means of protecting the team against his injury. He clearly isn't interested in getting paid for not playing. Brady, on the other hand, just received a guarantee protecting HIM against injury at an age when the possibility will become more and more likely, while giving up absolutely nothing. I'll believe that he'll actually get paid $9 mill (or whatever it is) per year while still playing at a top 5 level when I see it happen. What exactly is he being lauded for, and why isn't the same obvious courtesy extended to Peyton?

I can tell you why, because the Patriots front office is smarter than the old Colts front office. Brady gave a discount and they went out and got Moss, Brady gave a discount, and they will likely get Welker back. Ask anyone outside of Indianapolis who Joseph Addai is or whoever else got re-signed because Manning gave a discount, if Brady had given a discount and the front office floundered it, he would never have gotten the recognition either.

[SilentHill]

No. I'm saying Manning turned down more money because winning is more important to him than money.

 

Agreed. Now the only argument to be had is who sacrificed more because they wanted to win, and I'm not interested in that at all so I'll leave that for the Patriots fans lol.

[Superman]

yes but the point to "take less" between two different teams is not the same thing as telling the same team you are going to give my 20, I will take 16 instead. It is one thing to not take a higher offer from one team to chose a lower offer from another, which happens all the time in FA, more often than not the lower offer that is accepted for a various of reason . . .

And the point in this thread and others is what is the player doing for his team in question and how does he help his team by taken less that what the team would otherwise want, or have to, pay him . . .

and lastly, market value is based on a broader value across more than one data point . . . the fact that one buyer will pay more for an item does not mean the item is worth that but just that one individual out of many has a desire for the item and is willing to pay more for it . . . . if a house is on the market for 300k, but i love it as it near somthing i like and I go in and offer 325k does not mean it market value is 325k just becuase i have a unique reason for buying it . . .

 

When did the Patriots offer Brady $20m/year?

 

Home values are a bad comparison, for numerous reasons.

[Gramz]

All this talk about  both of them  "turning" down money,   makes my

 

They both already have more money $$ than their grandkids  grandkids  can spend.  We should all be so fortunate.

 

They've both done admirable things regarding  their contracts,  all the while,  still raking in  More money that most  people could ever dream of........     They're both IMO more interested in  WINNING,  than they are in  $$,  because they've  long been in a position to NOT have to worry about $$       Period.   

[Superman]

I can tell you why, because the Patriots front office is smarter than the old Colts front office. Brady gave a discount and they went out and got Moss, Brady gave a discount, and they will likely get Welker back. Ask anyone outside of Indianapolis who Joseph Addai is or whoever else got re-signed because Manning gave a discount, if Brady had given a discount and the front office floundered it, he would never have gotten the recognition either.

 

Brady gave a discount, and the Pats traded Deion Branch. Then when they had a couple disappointments in the playoffs, they went out and got Moss. That's not on Brady; I think the Pats front office should have done more with the wiggle room Brady's discounted contract gave them.

 

The Colts actually used their cap space, despite paying Manning more than the Pats were paying Brady. They used it to keep Marvin, Dwight, etc. They used it to sign Corey Simon and Adam Vinatieri. For all the mistakes Polian made over the years, and for the holes the roster had, he paid his own free agents. The Pats routinely shipped guys out, and it hasn't helped them win more championships.

[SilentHill]

Brady gave a discount, and the Pats traded Deion Branch. Then when they had a couple disappointments in the playoffs, they went out and got Moss. That's not on Brady; I think the Pats front office should have done more with the wiggle room Brady's discounted contract gave them.

 

The Colts actually used their cap space, despite paying Manning more than the Pats were paying Brady. They used it to keep Marvin, Dwight, etc. They used it to sign Corey Simon and Adam Vinatieri. For all the mistakes Polian made over the years, and for the holes the roster had, he paid his own free agents. The Pats routinely shipped guys out, and it hasn't helped them win more championships.

 

 

I thought about it some more, you know what the real problem is? Most players that restructure or give a discount, they do so to get their team out of cap trouble, so they can keep the players they already have. I'm sure others have given discounts to bring in other players, but Brady gets the fame for publicly stating that he gave a discount / restructured to get Moss, and then it turned out to be better than sliced bread. This really is a front office thing. The patriots were never in cap trouble, and they used that $ to bring in big names, and they for the most part worked out. It's more on the Patriots front office than anything else IMHO,

[Tony Sullivan]

you know Tony you claim that QB of Brady's caliber circa 2005 would not command top dollar money . . . then can you explain how Eli Manning got the contract that he presently has and why ? . . . I for one feel very strongerly that a QB of Brady's caliber circa 2005 commands top dollar . . . or well at least at a minimun in the top 5 paid QBs . . .

I don't think Eli would have gotten the same contract on the market what the Giants gave him. What one organization sees at a smart move another would scoff at. Do you think the Pats would have given Eli that deal?

[MAC]

I thought about it some more, you know what the real problem is? Most players that restructure or give a discount, they do so to get their team out of cap trouble, so they can keep the players they already have. I'm sure others have given discounts to bring in other players, but Brady gets the fame for publicly stating that he gave a discount / restructured to get Moss, and then it turned out to be better than sliced bread. This really is a front office thing. The patriots were never in cap trouble, and they used that $ to bring in big names, and they for the most part worked out. It's more on the Patriots front office than anything else IMHO,

I agree, and I'd be willing to bet that in about 99.9% of the cases where a player does something, it's because the front office suggested it. And while I have tremendous respect for Belichick, this whole deal with Brady smacks of a salary cap manipulation that pushes the envelope of what's intended by the rules. By agreeing on paper to take less money than he might have otherwise in the future, the Pats get cap relief right now. If they win the next two SBs and then renegotiate his contract (or he rides into the sunset like Elway did) this will have been just a means of getting around the intent of the rules and push Brady's salary into the future - while paying other people now - in essence to exceed the salary cap. Once again, I'll reserve my applause for Brady until he actually pockets a paycheck for $9 mil while still playing like a $20 mil QB. So yes, this is all about the front office. I'm not sure whether one should applaud them for this or raise an eyebrow and wait for the cries of "scandal" three years down the road - but I do give them credit for creativity. However the fact that a guy currently featured in a thread that includes the phrase "$20 million dollar mansion with a moat" is being revered by some Pats fans as if he's made a unique personal sacrifice is galling.

[Yehoodi]

The question was whether Brady signed for 30% less than Manning did, and if you're looking at annual average, the answer is yes.

okay i must of misread the theme of the threads . . . I was just point out that Brady was in the top five, which is basically market value for a QB and if Manning is 15 mil and #2 is 14.8 and #5 is 14.5 is all in the same ball park . . . and if Brady sign 30% below 14.7 or 15.0 its kind of the same thing . . . that was my only angle . . .

[amfootball]

I agree, and I'd be willing to bet that in about 99.9% of the cases where a player does something, it's because the front office suggested it. And while I have tremendous respect for Belichick, this whole deal with Brady smacks of a salary cap manipulation that pushes the envelope of what's intended by the rules. By agreeing on paper to take less money than he might have otherwise in the future, the Pats get cap relief right now. If they win the next two SBs and then renegotiate his contract (or he rides into the sunset like Elway did) this will have been just a means of getting around the intent of the rules and push Brady's salary into the future - while paying other people now - in essence to exceed the salary cap. Once again, I'll reserve my applause for Brady until he actually pockets a paycheck for $9 mil while still playing like a $20 mil QB. So yes, this is all about the front office. I'm not sure whether one should applaud them for this or raise an eyebrow and wait for the cries of "scandal" three years down the road - but I do give them credit for creativity. However the fact that a guy currently featured in a thread that includes the phrase "$20 million dollar mansion with a moat" is being revered by some Pats fans as if he's made a unique personal sacrifice is galling.

Sure the deal is 50/50 between mgmt and player but BOTH have to agree. And if this is really no big deal on Brady's part as you suggest and just creative cap strategy by the Pats than I can expect both Brees and Manning to do the same thing this year right? I mean the whole deal is out there for everyone to see and saved the Pats millions. If this is providing such great cap relief with no real cost to Brady than Manning and Brees should do the same right now. But you know what, I am not holding my breath and neither should you.

[Yehoodi]

I don't think Eli would have gotten the same contract on the market what the Giants gave him. What one organization sees at a smart move another would scoff at. Do you think the Pats would have given Eli that deal?

no i don't . . . the pats don't pay a lot of players . . . and with a few excepts never pay top dollar . . . and for the most part do pay top dollar for any given position . . . but they have made Brady the top dog for a time or two . . . and have made a few others another the top paid . . .

so yes the Pats likely would not to have given Brady top dollar and so some of the 30% reduction is due to the pats not willing to pay that 30% so agreed . . . but one had to agree that at least 20% of that was Brady helping out . . .

and for what it is worth Brady could of pull rank on the Pats and squeezed a good portion of that 30%, meaning if Brady wanted too he might be able to garner that money even though the pats might not of wanted to pay him . . .

and also, for what it is worth, Brady, like Brushci, was in line with not trying to get the top dollar from their team so to that extent they worked together, teh pats were not going to break the bank for the players and the a realizing this and deciding to stay as opposed to leaving . . .

[Yehoodi]

When did the Patriots offer Brady $20m/year?

 

Home values are a bad comparison, for numerous reasons.

not sure if they have ever have offered 20m/yr to be honest, i would have to look at the his contracts to say for sure . . . but yes as i indicated to Tony in post #137 some of the discount was the pats likely not willing to pay . . . so it was not all completely Brady, unless some believe that he could have pulled rank . . .

as for the housing market, i was just trying to point out that a house will have an intrinsic value and so will a player in a sport, or an employee for a company . . . if someone like Titans, or Mr Synder of the skins, or a person who really wants a house offers 20% over what 95% of the other buyers/owners will offer does not mean that the instrinic value of the item is what that one person offers, but is more towards what the 95% will offer . . .

[Yehoodi]

as for the OT, it would be interesting to see if we could get our hands on Peytons numbers versus the market value at the time of each year . . . sometimes perception is not in sync with the facts . . .

[Jules]

[MAC]

Sure the deal is 50/50 between mgmt and player but BOTH have to agree. And if this is really no big deal on Brady's part as you suggest and just creative cap strategy by the Pats than I can expect both Brees and Manning to do the same thing this year right? I mean the whole deal is out there for everyone to see and saved the Pats millions. If this is providing such great cap relief with no real cost to Brady than Manning and Brees should do the same right now. But you know what, I am not holding my breath and neither should you.

Realistically, Manning and Brady will be receiving 'top qb" compensation for the next two years. The question is what happens next.

 

On the day the 2015 season starts, 39 year old Peyton will be playing under a 2 year / $36 million contract that has no guarantees. 38 year old Tom will be playing under a 3 year / $24 million contract that is fully guaranteed.

 

Once again, if things are going well I would expect Brady to have renegotiated by that point. Few sportswriters seem confident that he would play it out. Peyton, on the other hand, could get zippo just based on the whim of management.

 

I would call that a lot of things - shrewd come to mind - but I'm not clear on what great sacrifice you would like Manning or Brees to make for their teams - unless it's for them to sign guaranteed contracts to play at an age by which QBs have historically been mere shells of their former selves.

 

And before you say "it's not really guaranteed", what I read was that it's fully guaranteed against injury, and becomes fully guaranteed for everything else if he is on the roster for the final game of the 2014 season. It's nice that the team has that window of protection, but unless you expect Brady to simply forget how to play football during his 36 and 37 year old seasons, it's for all intents and purposes fully guaranteed. Once again, it's not a personal sacrifice unless and until he plays out those final three seasons for the stated money. If he does so I'll applaud him. For now it appears to be cap manipulation - and as others have probably noted, he received an additional $3 million bump for making this "sacrifice".  Nice work if you can get it.

[amfootball]

Realistically, Manning and Brady will be receiving 'top qb" compensation for the next two years. The question is what happens next.

 

On the day the 2015 season starts, 39 year old Peyton will be playing under a 2 year / $36 million contract that has no guarantees. 38 year old Tom will be playing under a 3 year / $24 million contract that is fully guaranteed.

 

Once again, if things are going well I would expect Brady to have renegotiated by that point. Few sportswriters seem confident that he would play it out. Peyton, on the other hand, could get zippo just based on the whim of management.

 

I would call that a lot of things - shrewd come to mind - but I'm not clear on what great sacrifice you would like Manning or Brees to make for their teams - unless it's for them to sign guaranteed contracts to play at an age by which QBs have historically been mere shells of their former selves.

 

And before you say "it's not really guaranteed", what I read was that it's fully guaranteed against injury, and becomes fully guaranteed for everything else if he is on the roster for the final game of the 2014 season. It's nice that the team has that window of protection, but unless you expect Brady to simply forget how to play football during his 36 and 37 year old seasons, it's for all intents and purposes fully guaranteed. Once again, it's not a personal sacrifice unless and until he plays out those final three seasons for the stated money. If he does so I'll applaud him. For now it appears to be cap manipulation - and as others have probably noted, he received an additional $3 million bump for making this "sacrifice".  Nice work if you can get it.

Ok, so you are telling me right now that if Elway approached Manning and said we want to do a deal similar to Brady's to save millions on the cap that Manning would say yes just because it is guaranteed? I mean as you noted it is also $12 million LESS.

 

And I love how you ASSUME Brady will renogiate as you have to assume this otherwise he really is taking a HUGE undermarket contract AND really is putting the team ahead of himself. Perhaps past history can help us here. In 2005 when Brady took an undermarket contract of 30 percent less did he renogiate at any point? Let's see in 2006 he took perhaps one of the weakest receiving corps to ever step on the field to the AFCCG and was within one first down of the SB. He did NOT ask for more money that off-season. In 2007 he had the best statistical season of any QB in the history of the game, set all kinds of offensive records and came within the flukiest catch in football history of a perfect season. Did he ask to renogiate after that? Surely he did, I mean he won the first of his two league MVPs that year and threw 50 TDs. NOPE. Still played at 10mil when QBs like Mick Vick were signing $100 million contracts.

 

Fact is he played out the contract until 2010 when the Pats gave him a new contract at 18 mil a year. The FIRST time he was ever the highest paid QB in the league despite 3 rings, 4 SB appearances and 2 league MVPs. Manning, the following year when his contract came up according to Irsay was asking for $25 mil a year. Irsay said the Colts could not pay Manning $25/mil a year he was asking for because they could not put a team around him. Of course Manning denied ever asking for $25 mil but then made sure he signed for more than Brady making him the highest paid QB in the league until Brees did his contract last year. And interestingly that deal had a $28 mil roster bonus due at the end of the year he got paid to sit out.Let me say that again $28 mil. Brady has never had that in any of his contracts.

 

So, in reality, history says Brady will play out the deal saving his team millions to spend on talent around him while at age 39 Manning will still be asking to be among the highest paid Qbs.

[Superman]

O

So, in reality, history says Brady will play out the deal saving his team millions to spend on talent around him while at age 39 Manning will still be asking to be among the highest paid Qbs.

 

Brady has never played out a contract in his entire career. Ever.

[Mameluc]

So, in reality, history says Brady will play out the deal saving his team millions to spend on talent around him while at age 39 Manning will still be asking to be among the highest paid Qbs.

again, Manning has restructred his contracts to save the team millions to spend on talent around him, you just wish to ignore it in order to make Brady much sweeter...

 

 

INDIANAPOLIS -- Peyton Manning didn't need the money, and he sure didn't want the title of being the NFL's highest-paid player if it meant losing his teammates.

Nope, all the four-time MVP really wanted was a few more shots at winning a Super Bowl. "You take a look at things and what's potentially going to happen, and I realized that I've got to have these guys around me,"

 

 

With a resume like that, team owner Irsay and club vice chairman Polian were prepared to break the bank to keep Manning in Indy for the rest of his career.

But Manning said no thanks.

"Peyton called me on Thursday and we had a long talk. He made it clear that he didn't want to be the highest-paid player in the league, he wanted to put the best possible team on the field and he wanted to finish his career as an Indianapolis Colt," Polian said. "Over the weekend, we worked very hard to make that happen."

While the annual average salary of $18 million per year matches Tom Brady's record, Irsay described the deal as cap-friendly throughout the life of the contract. The benefit of saving that money is already paying dividends.

Shortly after Manning agreed to his new deal, the Colts re-signed free agent running backJoseph Addai to a three-year, $14 million contract. In addition, the Colts have re-signed unrestricted free agents Melvin Bullitt, Bob Sanders' projected replacement, and kickerAdam Vinatieri to three-year deals. And Sunday, Indy announced it was bringing back defensive tackles Eric Foster and Antonio Johnson, and offensive linemen Kyle DeVan and Michael Toudouze. DeVan started at left guard the last two seasons, while Johnson started at defensive tackle.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6821628/peyton-manning-says-new-deal-indianapolis-colts-not-money

 

stop saying Brady does it nobody else does it. is not his fault the team resigned Devan/ Bullit etc instead of someone any good lol

 

I am sure if i google it, i will find Eli, Brees, Ben doing it also

[Mameluc]

Ok

 Manning, the following year when his contract came up according to Irsay was asking for $25 mil a year. Irsay said the Colts could not pay Manning $25/mil a year he was asking for because they could not put a team around him. Of course Manning denied ever asking for $25 mil but then made sure he signed for more than Brady making him the highest paid QB in the league until Brees did his contract last year. And interestingly that deal had a $28 mil roster bonus due at the end of the year he got paid to sit out.Let me say that again $28 mil. Brady has never had that in any of his contracts.

25 million was the tag that year, which never was really the intention from anyone on the organization so im not sure where you get that info...they were all rumors quickly shutdown when a deal was signed

[Fx Stryker]

I am sure if i google it, i will find Eli, Brees, Ben doing it also

Actually your a 100% right. Big Ben has actually done it. He saved the team $6M in cap space I just seen it on the local Pittsburgh news. The funny thing is this has nothing to do with what Brady did either because this is about the third year in a row Ben has done this.

Where is his giant shrine of news stories...

[amfootball]

Actually your a 100% right. Big Ben has actually done it. He saved the team $6M in cap space I just seen it on the local Pittsburgh news. The funny thing is this has nothing to do with what Brady did either because this is about the third year in a row Ben has done this.

Where is his giant shrine of news stories...

There is a BIG difference between restructuring and signing TWO below market value deals. Brady has also restructured several times with the Pats including last year and very little hoopla was made as restructuring is common.  The point here is playing for a sub market contract which Manning has NEVER done or the other QBs you mentioned. It is amazing to me that some here believe Manning actualy took a discount to play for the Broncos last year at $19 mil. I mean it is laughable. He was the highest paid player until Brees signed his deal last year.

 

Like I said, once Manning, Brees, Ben or Eli sign a below market deal like Brady did in 2005 and played out 5 of the 6 years of it never asking for a new contract OR take a 50 percent market deal like Brady just did now, you have NO case. I mean there are some things you can argue about in terms of a players rings, stats, etc because it is a team game. A players contract however is individual and is negotiated between that player and the team ALONE. The numbers are there for everyone to see. Peyton has made the most money in NFL history to date and is scheduled to make another $36 mil the next two years. Brees has made his fair share as well and when his team needed him the most to negotiate a friendly deal last year after the worst scandal in franchise history, he used it as leverage to get every penny out of them he could and then when the Saints struggled he had the gall to blame Goodell. Like I said, I don't blame any player for getting what the can especially in football when every down can be your last. Good for Brees. Good for Manning. But Brady? Stands alone as he does in much of the record books.

[chad72]

Actually your a 100% right. Big Ben has actually done it. He saved the team $6M in cap space I just seen it on the local Pittsburgh news. The funny thing is this has nothing to do with what Brady did either because this is about the third year in a row Ben has done this.

Where is his giant shrine of news stories...

 

Apparently, east coast bias does not extend to Pittsburgh .

[amfootball]

Brady has never played out a contract in his entire career. Ever.

That all you got? What about what we actually played fo? Isn't that what we are discussing? In 2005 the deal was for six years. He played under it for five and never renegotiated. Pats signed him up before the final year so he would not hit FA, very common. Still, for those 5 years he played for 10 mil/year. Never renegotiated even though Qbs like Vick, McNabb, Ryan, Big Ben, JaMarcus Russell were all paid a lot more than him. Like I said, you have no argument at all.

[GoPats]

You want us to concede that AM is the one being provoked? Second time recently you've astonished me in your defense of these conversations. She isn't exactly doing "you guys" any favors. More like dragging the concept of "Pats fans welcomed on the Colts board" backwards towards one of your beloved precipices. Hopefully your shoulder is feeling better.

 

 

No, not exactly what I meant. I'm just saying it takes (at least) two to have a no-holds-barred message board battle. I know what other fans do to bait Patriots fans in arguments. And there are some folks here with plenty of lines in the water. ;)

 

The shoulder is great, thank you! I'm about halfway through the regimen of legalized torture they call "physical therapy" and am way ahead of schedule in terms of range-of-motion and strength. Must be that deer antler spray. :clap:

 

Cheers amigo.

[GoPats]

30% more?

Nope. In that article AM shared Brady says it's a difference of about a million dollars he could have made. Even if you tripled that it's still not a 30% off deal.

My whole issue is that he keeps saying 30%. 30% is a huge claim to make and it's not being justified unless we agree that Brady in '05 was as good of a QB as Manning was and it's simply not true.

If Brady was equal to Manning in '05, Brady would be unarguably the best QB of all time considering his statistical success since '07. That is not the case.

 

Joe Montana - the man who most people consider to be the greatest quarterback of all time - never threw for 4000 yards once. He also only threw more than 30 TDs in a season one time.

 

Brett Favre is the career leader in virtually every passing statistic of note. Does that make him the best ever?

 

You're only considering statistics in this conversation. Brady could have gotten anything he wanted after the 2004 season... I'm sorry, but if you believe otherwise, you're simply incorrect. If he demanded to be paid more than Manning, the Patriots would have no choice but to pay the man. At that point he had won three SBs (by age 27) and had the highest winning percentage as a starting QB in the Super Bowl era (and still does).

 

"There's no wing of the Hall of Fame for the guys who made the most money."

 

That's a Brady quote. He gets it, he understands this. In order to achieve the best team success, he's always taken less money than he could have gotten.

 

I'm not saying it's noble... it's actually self-serving on some level. He's doing this for the sake of his career and his legacy, not because he's a swell guy or a good teammate.

[Tony Sullivan]

Joe Montana - the man who most people consider to be the greatest quarterback of all time - never threw for 4000 yards once. He also only threw more than 30 TDs in a season one time.

 

Brett Favre is the career leader in virtually every passing statistic of note. Does that make him the best ever?

 

Brady could have gotten anything he wanted after the 2004 season... I'm sorry, but if you believe otherwise, you're simply incorrect.

1. Brady and Manning played in the same era. Montana began playing about 20 years before them, I think it's well known that the passing-game has had beneficial rule changes over the years.

2. Are you saying Favre isn't one of the greatest of all time?

3. You're incorrect, at that point in a persons career no one is happily giving up $20-$30 million. I've already established the 30% number was used by King to describe Brady's current contract, not his 2005 one which was what all the fuss was about.

[amfootball]

King's quote on exactly the type of player Tom is:

 

“And Don Yee, Brady’s agent, I think deserves a lot of credit. You’ll hear a lot of agents, if you talk to them off the record, they’ll really be critical of this deal: ‘Yee got taken to the cleaners, Brady could have gotten a lot more money.’ Of course he could have. Everybody knows he could have. That’s not Brady’s goal. Brady’s goal is to walk into training camp every year — if you told Tom Brady right now that somebody would write him a check for 3 million more dollars this year or he could use that 3 million as part of a deal to go get Dwight Freeney, what would he rather have? He’ll take Freeney any day of the week, I guarantee you. Everybody says, ‘Oh, it isn’t really that way.’ It is that way. That’s the way Tom Brady is.”

 

http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/newengland/football/patriots/2013/02/26/peter-king-on-mm-thats-the-way-tom-brady-is/

[GoPats]

1. Brady and Manning played in the same era. Montana began playing about 20 years before them, I think it's well known that the passing-game has had beneficial rule changes over the years.

2. Are you saying Favre isn't one of the greatest of all time?

3. You're incorrect, at that point in a persons career no one is happily giving up $20-$30 million. I've already established the 30% number was used by King to describe Brady's current contract, not his 2005 one which was what all the fuss was about.

 

1. Plenty of guys - plenty - had 4000 yard seasons in Montana's era. This isn't Slingin' Sammy Baugh's days we're talking about. His contemporaries were Marino, Elway, Kelly... guys who put up multiple 4000-yard seasons. And you missed the point anyway. What were people saying about multi-MVP-winner Manning prior to 2006? "Great regular season QB, not the guy you want in the playoffs though." And at the time it was warranted.

 

Your entire argument for Brady being the inferior QB in those years is based on statistics. I'm simply pointing out that the man generally regarded as the GOAT (Montana) has some fairly pedestrian numbers, when you get right down to it.

 

2. Favre is in the top 10 QBs of all time. Any higher than that is a stretch. He holds records because of longevity more than anything else. Credit him for that, but Favre is not even in the discussion if you peel it back to the top 5 ever.

 

3. This discussion won't go very far if you refuse to acknowledge facts. I'm not saying he's a hero or a martyr for it (I covered that last time, it's self-serving), but there's zero chance Tom Brady has maximized his NFL earning potential over the course of his career. Zero chance. He's made enough money to be more comfortable than most of us will ever know, but his MO has never been to cash in. Not sure what else to tell you if you simply refuse to believe that. It's the entire, God's honest truth. He's taken more than one under-market deal and has never made a stink about his contract.

[Superman]

That all you got? What about what we actually played fo? Isn't that what we are discussing? In 2005 the deal was for six years. He played under it for five and never renegotiated. Pats signed him up before the final year so he would not hit FA, very common. Still, for those 5 years he played for 10 mil/year. Never renegotiated even though Qbs like Vick, McNabb, Ryan, Big Ben, JaMarcus Russell were all paid a lot more than him. Like I said, you have no argument at all.

 

My goodness, you're all over the place.

 

Has Tom Brady ever played a contract out? Ever???

 

The answer is no. So the precedent is well set for Brady reaching an extension with the team with a couple years left on his current contract. And if he still playing at high level in 2015 or 2016, it's very likely -- and clearly foreshadowed -- that his contract will be adjusted to compensate him more.

 

I don't know the future, but for you to act like this is completely outside the realm of possibility is quite myopic.

[amfootball]

My goodness, you're all over the place.

 

Has Tom Brady ever played a contract out? Ever???

 

The answer is no. So the precedent is well set for Brady reaching an extension with the team with a couple years left on his current contract. And if he still playing at high level in 2015 or 2016, it's very likely -- and clearly foreshadowed -- that his contract will be adjusted to compensate him more.

 

I don't know the future, but for you to act like this is completely outside the realm of possibility is quite myopic.

I don't get where you think I am all over the place as I am just responding to your statements. Sure, it is a possibility but I would put it at remote because he has consistently played under market value for the bulk of his career and has never so much as quibbled about a contract EVER and on top of all that he just signed THIS contract with the expressed purpose to help the Pats build a winning team around him. Perhaps you don't believe him and that is fine but that is what he said and if that is his MO than why on earth would he in two years say, now pay me what I am worth? Answer that.

[Superman]

I don't get where you think I am all over the place as I am just responding to your statements. Sure, it is a possibility but I would put it at remote because he has consistently played under market value for the bulk of his career and has never so much as quibbled about a contract EVER and on top of all that he just signed THIS contract with the expressed purpose to help the Pats build a winning team around him. Perhaps you don't believe him and that is fine but that is what he said and if that is his MO than why on earth would he in two years say, now pay me what I am worth? Answer that.

 

Going on to explain to me why Brady has never played his contract out -- as if I don't already get it -- doesn't refute the simple fact that he has never played his contract out.

 

I'm not accusing him of quibbling over money; I'm not accusing him of anything. I'm simply saying that history DOESN'T suggest that he will simply play out his deal. History suggests that he WON'T play out his deal, because he never has.

 

This contract that he's just done provide both him and the team with a ton of flexibility moving forward. If he's still healthy and playing at a high level, it is reasonable to suggest that he could be given a raise.

[amfootball]

Going on to explain to me why Brady has never played his contract out -- as if I don't already get it -- doesn't refute the simple fact that he has never played his contract out.

 

I'm not accusing him of quibbling over money; I'm not accusing him of anything. I'm simply saying that history DOESN'T suggest that he will simply play out his deal. History suggests that he WON'T play out his deal, because he never has.

 

This contract that he's just done provide both him and the team with a ton of flexibility moving forward. If he's still healthy and playing at a high level, it is reasonable to suggest that he could be given a raise

He came in making league minimum as a sixth round pick and won the SB so the Pats gave him 4 million/year on the last 3 years of his rookie deal. He played out those three years and won two more SBs at 4 mil/year. In 2005, he got 10 mil for six years and played 5 of the six. He is currently playing out this deal from 2010. So, I am not sure again what you are talking about? He has played out contracts and is currently playing out this one from 2010. History shows if anything that he will continue to play undermarket.

[Superman]

He came in making league minimum as a sixth round pick and won the SB so the Pats gave him 4 million/year on the last 3 years of his rookie deal. He played out those three years and won two more SBs at 4 mil/year. In 2005, he got 10 mil for six years and played 5 of the six. He is currently playing out this deal from 2010. So, I am not sure again what you are talking about? He has played out contracts and is currently playing out this one from 2010. History shows if anything that he will continue to play undermarket.

 

After this, I'm done.

 

Brady's first contract was to expire after the 2002 season. Prior to that season, with one year left on his contract, he reached terms on a five year, $32.5m contract extension. He did NOT play his first contract out; he was extended prior to reaching free agency.

 

His second contract was to expire after the 2006 season. Prior to the 2005 season, with two years left on his contract, he reached terms on a six year, $60m contract extension. He did NOT play his second contract out; he was extended prior to reaching free agency.

 

His third contract was set to expire after the 2014 season. Prior to the 2013 season, with two years left on his contract, he reached terms on the extension we've been talking about lately. He did NOT play his third contract out; he was extended prior to free agency.

 

Brady has never -- NOT EVER -- played an entire contract out.

[dw49]

Going on to explain to me why Brady has never played his contract out -- as if I don't already get it -- doesn't refute the simple fact that he has never played his contract out.

 

I'm not accusing him of quibbling over money; I'm not accusing him of anything. I'm simply saying that history DOESN'T suggest that he will simply play out his deal. History suggests that he WON'T play out his deal, because he never has.

 

This contract that he's just done provide both him and the team with a ton of flexibility moving forward. If he's still healthy and playing at a high level, it is reasonable to suggest that he could be given a raise.

 

 

 

So do you think we sign two offensive linemen and either a safety or a pass rusher or one offensive linemen and a safety and a pass rusher. I'm figuring 3 good free agents will be signed. Do you think a CB coud also be in the mix ? This is really neat having all this money to spend around the best young QB in the league.