Tony Sullivan
-
Posts
457 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Tony Sullivan
-
-
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?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 . . .
-
That's talking about his current contract. It was probably confusing for you because he starts the paragraph talking about '05.here is the article with the 30 percent from King....http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130225/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-contract/
At a time when the growing market for quarterbacks pegs the average per year at about $20 million -- Drew Brees and Peyton Manning are there, and it's likely Super Bowl champ Joe Flacco will be there soon -- Brady's average over the next six years will be consistently about 30 percent lower.
-
Like I said, that's if you consider Brady an equal to Manning back then, then it's an argument. From that last part of the post it sounds like you didn't think that. Also I believe Manning had just won his second consecutive MVP when Brady signed that 05 contract.Yearly average, yes, 30%. Manning was making over $14m/year, and Brady was making $10m/year. That's 30%.
Now, I don't think Brady would have gotten the money Manning did, as Manning had just won MVP for the first time and statistically the two weren't close. But there's an argument to be made there.
-
30% more?He did take a below market contract back then. He was getting a pretty significant raise from his previous contract, so it's not like he was giving money back, and he certainly didn't take a pay cut. But he definitely could have gotten more than he did.
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.
-
No where in that article does he compare Brady's value to market value other than his opinion that Brady took less. Even if Brady did take less it nowhere proves that he took 30% less like you've claimed. 30% is a huge claim of a number to make.here is Peter King's article where he references the 2005 deal. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130225/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-contract/index.html
1. This site says Brady made over 15m in 2005 http://www.therichest.org/celebnetworth/athletes/nfl/tom-brady-net-worth/Kind has said at nauseam this week that Brady took about a 30 percent undermarket value in 2005 at 10 mil year compared to Manning's 14.2 mil. He could have easily commanded the 14.2 with three rings and two SB MVPs.
2. It's 'ad' nauseum and Brady had no chance of getting Manning money. If this is your belief that's fine but Manning just had back to back league MVP's and was putting up the best stats for a QB to begin his career ever. Brady was not at Manning's level in 2005.
What? He only threw 3 more TD's, 2 less Ints, and 400 more yards in those 2 seasons than he did the 2 seasons before. That's barely an increase in production.And statstically speaking 2004/2005 were two of his best years compared to his first three so he was on the rise at that point to boot and completely justified in getting Manning type money. He was also 9-0 in the post-season at that point.
Also it's actually very hard to try and compare 04/05 Brady to 04/05 Manning. In those 2 seasons Manning threw for 23 more TDs, 8 less INTs, and 500 more yards.
You don't get that the Pat's superbowls were the only reason that Brady got paid what he did. Without those superbowls Brady would struggle to have been considered a top 10 passer back then.
This is simply not true and laughable. No GM is going to compare a system QB to a guy who just threw 49 TDs and back-to-back LEAGUE MVP's. Nobody outside of New England fans put Brady in Manning's class until his 2007 MVP.Realistically, he could have gotten more than Manning if he wanted. With three rings, 2 SB MVPs, the check book was his to write.
-
The Patriots are not nearly as scary as when they had Randy Moss. The article is just saying that the dynasty is in their twilight which no one can doubt. We were in our twilight too for a few years after Edge left. Sure we still won a SB and went to another one, but who can really say we were as good as when we had Freeney/Mathis/Sanders/Stokley/Wayne/Harrison/Edge/Manning/Tarik?
-
27 games is a significant amount in the NFL. That means that Hines played almost 2 full seasons more, but still produced much less. 2-3 seasons worth of pro bowl stats less to be honest.I was recently reading an article on Stampede Blue, about how Marvin is a shoe in first ballot HoF according to Bill Polian. here is the link.
I love debating HoF. And its been awhile since I've debated Marvin. So here we go.
I dont believe Marvins is a first ballot guy. I believe Marvin will follow the Carter route, and it will take awhile....
Player A is Marvin Harrison.
Player A: 1102rec/14608 Total Yards/128Total TDs and played 190 games in 13 seasons...Owns all the franchise receiving records, and his franchise has 2 receivers already in the HoF...8x Pro Bowler, 3x All-Pro and won a SB....and he caught 87% of his TDs from Peyton Manning.....
Player B: 1000rec/12511 Total Yards/86 Total TDs and played 217 games in 14 seasons (although basically sat out his entire rookie year)....Owns all the franchise receiving records, and his franchise has 2 receivers already in the HoF...4x Pro Bowler, has won 2 SBs, and a SB MVP...and he caught 47% of his TDs from the teams best QB....
Marvin trumps player B by 102rec/ 2097yds/ 42TDs...And although Player B played more games, his team still attempted 443 less passes through both players respected careers...Player B is arguably the greatest blocking WR of all time...
Is there a large enough margin between these two players that 1 is a first ballot HoF, while the other is possibly not even going to make the HoF? Or perhaps both make it?
Player B is Hines Ward
If Marvin get's it it's because him and Manning are the most prolific duo ever in the NFL. The voters would probably want him in Canton when Peyton gets there for whatever kinds of shrines theyre going to make.
-
I read them anyway.....I like comedy
I like the Pacer stuff....some college BB stuff. Always laughed at their POWER RANKINGS 
I do see some unfamiliar names sometimes I like to research....
, I know that every writer is different and some might be in the early stages of a great career, but the tipping point for me was when a college friend of mine got hired by them to write their UFC articles. I don't watch UFC but I know for a fact that he knew less about it than I did lol.
-
All Bleacher Reports links should have their own sub-section called "comedy."I will look at this list...my bet he is better than several more....it is Bleacher Report ya know
Thanks for the post... -
When that QB has less than a 2:1 TD/INT ratio, struggles to throw 4000 yards, averages a passer rating under 90 it is heavily debatable. Actually it's the factual reason Brady wasn't considered a top QB. Brady knew the situation was best for him in New England so he stayed there and was one of the highest paid players in the league (even though you say he left 30% on the table.)As a three time SB champion it is not debatable at all to say he could not have demanded to be the highest paid QB.
You're completely speculating on Flacco's next contract. Just because you hear media pundits saying he's going to be the top paid guy doesn't mean he actually will. I can almost guarantee that his % against the cap will be less than that of Manning, Brees, E. Manning etc. when they signed their latest contracts.I mean Flacco right now with one ring is going to be right in line with Brees and ahead of Manning most likely. That is with ONE ring not THREE in four years with a perfect 10-0 post-season for a franchise that hadn't won one before his arrival. He took a 30 percent below market contract in 2005. That is a fact.
Also, could you actually provide me with the numbers that support your claim Brady took 30% less than market value in '05? I'm pretty sure you're talking complete bologne http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2054072 This article from 2005 actually says he's one of the NFL's highest paid. Also market value for Brady =/= Manning type money as Manning was undoubtedly the best QB in the game at the time and Brady was still being called a product of the system (which his passing stats support)
-
Before Moss came to New England 2007, Brady's passing stats looked like;FYI - Brees has never won league MVP and is the highest paid QB in the league and Flacco is going to be right behind him.
Only 1 of 6 seasons he threw over 4000 yards.
He averages 24.5 TD's to 13 int's per season.
He never had a season with a QBR over 93.
That's why he was hardly considered an MVP player before Moss. Considering all the Patriot's feats that you gave to Brady, this really just adds to how strong of a defense/running game/coaching the Patriots had then. It's not good you try to give Brady all that credit when anyone who actually remembers those games knows it was a team effort.
-
Why is it that when "Brady's" doing all this, that the voters are giving Manning back-to-back MVPs? Oh yeah, because Brady was hardly considered MVP material back then. His team probably could have done it without him (and was proved by 11-5 in '08)TWO SB MVPs. Oh gosh. Let me educate you on 2001. Bledsoe began the year at 0-2 and then Brady took over and went 14-3 including a 9 game winning streak to end the season and SB MVP. In 2003-04 Brady won a record 21 games in a row en route to his second and third SBs and another SB MVP.
But let me throw this at you. Flacco is about to make 18-20 mil because of ONE SB and he has no pro bowls, no 4000 yard passing seasons and no seasons with even 30 TDs. A ring and a SB MVP put you at the top of the board my friend.
BTW Superbowl MVP's are not MVP's. Eli Manning has just as many as Brady and both against Brady.
-
How many MVP's did he win? He wasn't as valuable to the Patriots as you're making him out to be. Bledsoe got the team through the season for Brady's first superbowl. Plus Spygate.Wow you don't possible believe this, do you? 3 SBs in 4 years, 10-0 post-season. He could have commanded any salary he wanted. Even Peter King said he took 30 percent lower than market value at the time. six years at 10 mil a year. Manning was getting 13-14. Brady could have gotten more than that but chose not to.
-
Anybody who watched football back then knows Brady didn't win those superbowls. He was efficient in the system he ran but the Pats D and Belichik's schemes won them their rings. Plus Spygate.Brady had three rings in '05 and could have commanded any salary he wanted. He took less for six years while Manning was ringless getting paid as the "best" QB in the game. Like I said the money game is a losing battle.
-
Manning's renegotiated his contract at least twice to clear up lots of space. You also forget that Manning was a #1 overall pick and was being called potentially the greatest of all time by '04. Brady was never truly considered an elite passer until Randy Moss arrived in '07. Brady is not as good as Manning so it would be expected that he would make less anyways. Brady also has a wife who makes more than he does.Homestly this is a losing debate for any Manning fan here. Brady has taken much less money over the length of his career than Manning. Like I said before, I don't think that reflects on Manning in poor light at all. He deserved his contracts as did Brady. Brady just decided in 2005 and now to take less because he wants to win. It is unfair to hold Manning or anyone else to that standard. It has never been done before. I mean already the Denver Post is saying Manning should take a pay cut like Brady. No he shouldn't. He has never been that type of guy. He won't and neither will Brees or Flacco.
-
Then again, I hope our CB really does have enough brains not to put stuff like that on blast. I'm going to accept his story ignorantly.
-
Schaub got a couple of seconds and he was a third round pick. Granted Schaub had a handful of starts, and an impressive game against New England. He also came out of one of the most rich QB classes ever which is why he was only a third to begin with. I think Mallet could generate a second, but he also has a lot less experience than Schaub did and came out of a (so far) very weak draft class for QBs.
-
He was pretty good in GB as a DE wasn't he?
-
Completely agree, what was it, 7 first down drops in our playoff loss?I don'y buy into the WR Depth. I'm not saying we need a big name FA WR, but Outside of Reggie and T.Y. I'm not sold on our corps.
-
-
Says the grammar policeNice! (Although the grammar police might say "makes better choices when to run", but it doesn't have the same ring as your line)
-
RG3 is the better runner, Andrew Luck chooses when to run better.
-
I like it, I do think we may look towards free agency for CB though because of the depth of players likely to be available.
-
That's completely different both those guys produced by the end of their first season. I can tell that you're going by NFL.com stats because they didn't record sacks in 1981, they started in 1982. Had they recorded sacks in 1981 Taylor would of had 9.5. He had a remarkable rookie campaign in which he won Rookie of the Year.Like I said, If the 49ers took that approach in '85 who knows what would have become of Rice, Same with Lawrence Taylor in '81
A good argument you could have used is James Harrison. Like Hughes he never got much playing time his first 3 seasons. He was injured his 4th but then exploded in his fifth season and has been used since then. We still have Jerry locked up for another two seasons so he still does have time to prove himself.
I like the Pacer stuff....some college BB stuff. Always laughed at their POWER RANKINGS 
, I know that every writer is different and some might be in the early stages of a great career, but the tipping point for me was when a college friend of mine got hired by them to write their UFC articles. I don't watch UFC but I know for a fact that he knew less about it than I did lol.
Bengals Likely To Allow Andre Smith To Test FA Market
in NFL General
Posted
Andre Smith doesn't have the kind of character I would like to see out of an NFL player, but he does possess the ideal skills to suit the type of O-Line the Colts are going for. I do believe in a well coached team being able to help players improve their character and Chuck seems like the kind of coach who would be able to do that.