Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Bone Head Move Of The Decade Goes To The Ravens


dw49

Recommended Posts

If the agent's story is true, then I agree with this 100%. You don't let a lousy $1m keep you from locking up your quarterback long term. You wound up letting $1m cost you an extra $40m over the life of the contract. 

 

Here's where I differ, though: I wouldn't have been offering Flacco $80m in the first place. The eventual outcome probably would have been the same, because the Ravens couldn't afford to keep him on the franchise tag in 2013 and still make all the roster moves they made this year (contrary to popular belief, Flacco's deal isn't not hurting them this season, it's helping them). But if you think he's worth $80m, why not go to $81m?

 

And now, the structure of the contract makes it very difficult for them to release him in the future. They are set to pay him option bonuses in 2014 and 2015, which will increase the potential cap penalties on his contract pretty drastically. If they were to release him after 2013, they'd have a cap penalty of $23.2m. But if they release him after 2014, they have a cap penalty of $21.15m. They're pretty well stuck with him.

 

 

Hey,  maybe it's just me,  but I get the sense the Ravens are quite happy to be 'stuck' with Flacco......

 

But, I'm a lone voice in this conversation....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 339
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey,  maybe it's just me,  but I get the sense the Ravens are quite happy to be 'stuck' with Flacco......

 

But, I'm a lone voice in this conversation....

 

I think it's time for everyone to move on from this. I have never seen a thread in a topic so totally massacred. Not that I'm calling the shots but I started this topic and how it evolved to Tom Brady's restructure and Tony Romo's choking or non choking , I'll never know. Besides the conversation on those issues is just  bad and far off what is reality .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know why you just wrote 4 paragraphs to say Brady did nothing.

 

If it was nothing would New England have done it?    If it was nothing would Brady have done it?

 

Fast forward any number of years you want.    When Andrew Luck does the exact same thing he will be hailed here as a God!  A living hero!    Worthy of endless praise.

 

But, it's Brady.   The target of all Manning fans.  

 

You continue to write that what he did was nothing.   Why you do that is a mystery to me.    Why you dismiss it as nothing does not add up for me.    Everyone who renegotiates does this.     It's how the NFL salary game is played at the top of the food chain.

 

Please don't write Brady making $10 Million is all he could get, or is his market value.   Come on now.

 

If he became a Free Agent,  he'd be flooded with offers in the $18-20 Million dollar range.   His play hasn't fallen off despite his age.     He got paid up front and takes lower salary during his years.    Luck will do it repeatedly during his time with the Colts.

 

As for Peyton....   his classy move is to limit the amount of guaranteed money because he's still somewhat damaged goods and he doesn't want to punish Denver for taking a chance on him.    If/when he's done with the game, he walks away and wants to minimize the salary cap Denver might take.    Classy move.   Props to him.    But, until then,  he's still getting paid huge money.

 

Hey, the guy has earned it.    I don't fault him.   The reason he's not doing the same thing as Brady is because if he did,  Denver would have to write a big check.   But the money would be pro-rated over the life of the deal.  And if Manning can't finish the deal, Denver would takes a big salary cap hit when he retired.    The way they've done it,  Peyton gets his money,  Denver still gets salary cap protection.    Perhaps not salary cap relief,  but protection.    It's still win-win for both sides.

I don't want this conversation to be as contentious as this sounds. Not a big deal. Let me try again without using the phrase "Brady did nothing". :P

 

Yes, restructuring/renegotiating is routine, but there was nothing routine about the Brady deal. To me the routine transactions are as follows:

 

1) A restructuring that doesn't change the dollar value or term of an existing contract. IE: Current year salary being converted to a bonus so that the team can write if off over the rest of the contract instead of in the current year. Manning has done things like this a couple of times, and frankly doesn't deserve any kind of pat on the back for doing so. It's just a bookkeeping adjustment that costs the player zippo. In fact they usually get a few extra bucks for their "trouble".

 

2) A player has a contract with ballooning numbers at the end. Bizarrely common. I assume that contracts with escalating salaries are intended partly as an adjustment for inflation, partly on the expectation of a player getting better over time, partly to delay paying as long as possible. Often times there is an utterly absurd final year number (like Dwight Freeney had). It's the type of thing that the team normally "would never pay". I don't know why the players would want it since it just encourages the team to release them. Perhaps it's an ego thing. "I've got the biggest contract for a DE, and I'm ignoring the fact that nobody in their right mind is going to let it play out". Maybe it's a poison pill to encourage early renegotiation. And that's what often happens. The last year is extended into a longer deal to eliminate the enormous cap hit. There is nothing to applaud the player for in these deals either - he's just trying to keep his job.

 

The Brady deal was a different animal, and I don't remember ever seeing anything like it. Brady's old contract didn't have a big escalation at the end (like routine sample #2). In fact the yearly rate had declined during the course of it. He got his money up front (which is always nice). In total over the life of the contract it had made him about the highest paid QB in football, but the final two years - if looked at out of context - were below market rate. Secondly, when they changed it they (unlike routine sample #1) DID change both the length and the term. Of course therein comes the bizarre part - those extra years are at a rate that is WELL below market rate.

 

The crux of the matter is that under this "new" contract, his pay for 2013 and 2014 will be EXACTLY what it was under the old contract. In fact he got several million in additional funds to sign now that he wouldn't have gotten previously. People are applauding him based on the contracted salary in year 3 and onwards, but he hasn't "really" given up a thing. YET.

 

My contention is simply that I think it's more than reasonable to withhold the accolades until Brady actually plays through at least year 3 and actually accepts a reduced paycheck. If he renegotiates at any point before then - which to me and many others seems not only possible but highly probably - what exactly would he have given up? This all comes down to the fact that I REALLY don't believe that he'll actually go ahead and play at $10mil per year. If he does I'll come on here and state that I was wrong, and applaud him. But now? Or if his salary goes back up again? I obviously didn't mean that they literally did "nothing" as you have chosen to interpret it. You could applaud them for cleverly circumventing the salary cap, but you can't applaud him for making a sacrifice for his team anymore than you can applaud Manning or Freeney in the above samples. Once again, I don't really care one way or another, but I retch at the comments suggesting that Brady is now an example of someone who cares so much about winning that he'd sacrifice his personal income to do so. Show me what personal income he's sacrificed so far? Just his extra bonus for doing this deal is more than I could conceivably earn in my entire life.

 

To be clear, I'll applaud him for not throwing a tantrum and demanding a higher salary simply because Flacco and Rodgers etc have passed him. He honors his contracts and neither mouths off nor holds his team hostage to his ego. Just because I want Manning to be held in higher regard than him doesn't mean that I don't respect him. However FANS and some media treated him like he was Mother Theresa for this. I'm pretty sure that Mother Theresa didn't have nearly as good an agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want this conversation to be as contentious as this sounds. Not a big deal. Let me try again without using the phrase "Brady did nothing". :P

 

Yes, restructuring/renegotiating is routine, but there was nothing routine about the Brady deal. To me the routine transactions are as follows:

 

1) A restructuring that doesn't change the dollar value or term of an existing contract. IE: Current year salary being converted to a bonus so that the team can write if off over the rest of the contract instead of in the current year. Manning has done things like this a couple of times, and frankly doesn't deserve any kind of pat on the back for doing so. It's just a bookkeeping adjustment that costs the player zippo. In fact they usually get a few extra bucks for their "trouble".

 

2) A player has a contract with ballooning numbers at the end. Bizarrely common. I assume that contracts with escalating salaries are intended partly as an adjustment for inflation, partly on the expectation of a player getting better over time, partly to delay paying as long as possible. Often times there is an utterly absurd final year number (like Dwight Freeney had). It's the type of thing that the team normally "would never pay". I don't know why the players would want it since it just encourages the team to release them. Perhaps it's an ego thing. "I've got the biggest contract for a DE, and I'm ignoring the fact that nobody in their right mind is going to let it play out". Maybe it's a poison pill to encourage early renegotiation. And that's what often happens. The last year is extended into a longer deal to eliminate the enormous cap hit. There is nothing to applaud the player for in these deals either - he's just trying to keep his job.

 

The Brady deal was a different animal, and I don't remember ever seeing anything like it. Brady's old contract didn't have a big escalation at the end (like routine sample #2). In fact the yearly rate had declined during the course of it. He got his money up front (which is always nice). In total over the life of the contract it had made him about the highest paid QB in football, but the final two years - if looked at out of context - were below market rate. Secondly, when they changed it they (unlike routine sample #1) DID change both the length and the term. Of course therein comes the bizarre part - those extra years are at a rate that is WELL below market rate.

 

The crux of the matter is that under this "new" contract, his pay for 2013 and 2014 will be EXACTLY what it was under the old contract. In fact he got several million in additional funds to sign now that he wouldn't have gotten previously. People are applauding him based on the contracted salary in year 3 and onwards, but he hasn't "really" given up a thing. YET.

 

My contention is simply that I think it's more than reasonable to withhold the accolades until Brady actually plays through at least year 3 and actually accepts a reduced paycheck. If he renegotiates at any point before then - which to me and many others seems not only possible but highly probably - what exactly would he have given up? This all comes down to the fact that I REALLY don't believe that he'll actually go ahead and play at $10mil per year. If he does I'll come on here and state that I was wrong, and applaud him. But now? Or if his salary goes back up again? I obviously didn't mean that they literally did "nothing" as you have chosen to interpret it. You could applaud them for cleverly circumventing the salary cap, but you can't applaud him for making a sacrifice for his team anymore than you can applaud Manning or Freeney in the above samples. Once again, I don't really care one way or another, but I retch at the comments suggesting that Brady is now an example of someone who cares so much about winning that he'd sacrifice his personal income to do so. Show me what personal income he's sacrificed so far? Just his extra bonus for doing this deal is more than I could conceivably earn in my entire life.

 

To be clear, I'll applaud him for not throwing a tantrum and demanding a higher salary simply because Flacco and Rodgers etc have passed him. He honors his contracts and neither mouths off nor holds his team hostage to his ego. Just because I want Manning to be held in higher regard than him doesn't mean that I don't respect him. However FANS and some media treated him like he was Mother Theresa for this. I'm pretty sure that Mother Theresa didn't have nearly as good an agent.

 

MAC.....

 

My posts have been frustrating you.   Not intentional I assure you.  Regardless, I'm sorry.

 

If I understand you correctly,  you feel as if Brady is being given credit for not doing much.  Because,  as you put it, with the restructure,  while he's giving the Pats salary cap relief,  he himself is getting paid more money than before the restructure.  So, it cost him nothing in essence.    He didn't do anything noble, he made a smart business move for him and the team.

 

And yet, too many are giving Brady credit where you don't believe it's deserved.

 

If that's your view,  and I've summed it up reasonably accurately,  then, for the most part,  I agree.

 

I don't choose to get too worked up about this one way or the other.   There's an unhealthy amount of Brady-hate here (perhaps not you, but others)....   and too many compliments of Brady are viewed as knocks on Manning.   Drives me a little crazy.

 

I know I don't have the history here, but I don't get it.

 

I'm only giving credit to Brady for doing the right thing by him, and the right thing by the team.   If he's making more money,  good for him.    If team is getting salary cap relief,  good for them.    I don't follow the "violation of the spirit of the salary cap rule" thing, but you're smarter than I am in these matters,  so you can explain that here if you want,  or send me a private e-mail....

 

Whatever you prefer.    We're good.    Sorry for the confusion in this thread....   :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey,  maybe it's just me,  but I get the sense the Ravens are quite happy to be 'stuck' with Flacco......

 

But, I'm a lone voice in this conversation....

 

I hope they are, because they are most definitely stuck.

 

I'm not anti-Flacco, I just don't think his resume supports his contract status. And if he doesn't continue improving, I think the Ravens will be in bad shape because of his contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea.. I remember you and I had a long go around on what Flacco would eventually get offered. You are entitled to your opinion on the 80 mill but as you say , its pretty lame to say "I'll give you 80 but not 81." Then go out and fork over 121 with over 50 mill guaranteed.

 

Yeah, it became obvious at a certain point that they were going to break the bank on him. I still don't think the body of work is there, but good for him.

 

Now that we've seen additional details about the contract structure, though, it's worse than I thought it would be. The option bonuses before 2014 and 2015 make it very difficult for the Ravens to do anything about the ballooning cap hit in 2016. What they really ought to do is restructure his contract before 2013 is over to get rid of the option bonuses. Make them guaranteed salary in those years, and slowly move some of that prorated bonus money from the last three or four years into the first two or three years. If they don't, their only viable option will be to extend him, which will mean giving him more guaranteed money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, it became obvious at a certain point that they were going to break the bank on him. I still don't think the body of work is there, but good for him.

 

Now that we've seen additional details about the contract structure, though, it's worse than I thought it would be. The option bonuses before 2014 and 2015 make it very difficult for the Ravens to do anything about the ballooning cap hit in 2016. What they really ought to do is restructure his contract before 2013 is over to get rid of the option bonuses. Make them guaranteed salary in those years, and slowly move some of that prorated bonus money from the last three or four years into the first two or three years. If they don't, their only viable option will be to extend him, which will mean giving him more guaranteed money.

 

 

I didn't look at the deal in detail. But I really didn't need to . When you do 121 mill for 6 years with over 50 guaranteed , it can't be good down the road . I'm looking at it now and if the report I'm reading is correct , this is a total train wreck . These *s worked his 2013 number down to 6.8 million , 14 in 2014 and around 17 in 2015. So for the first 3 years of the contract , it's around 8 million of the 121. So it in a simplistic way , that would mean they have to account for around 83 million in the last three years. I read that the cap hit in year 4 would be 29 million , which makes sense looking at the numbers. So this looks to be one of the most incredible salary shoves in the history of the league. It's not like giving a gut like Marvin Harrison a huge deal that pays him 16 mill in the last year of his contract. You know at age 36 Harrison wouldn't be worth it and you just cut him or do a pay cut. This contract is real money as years 3-6 of this deal has a QB only 31-34 years old. So this is real money and this just a deal that is good for this year and next year and then they hope for a big jump in the cap. This is no doubt a three year deal that shoves huge money into the next deal that will have to happen in 2016. I kind of guessed at the cap hit in 2015 and could be a little different due to possible guaranteed money paid out in 2014 or 2015. LOL that someone thought they could trade him after a couple years. 

 

My opinion of how the Ravens handed this starting with digging their feet in for the 1 million would be grossly pathetic. Saving the million and coughing up about an extra 40 the following year is laughable but then they even go on to be even more irresponsible. When you have a player you are paying that kind of money , IMO , you need to "buck up" a least a bit and not try to push that many millions down the road. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't look at the deal in detail. But I really didn't need to . When you do 121 mill for 6 years with over 50 guaranteed , it can't be good down the road . I'm looking at it now and if the report I'm reading is correct , this is a total train wreck . These . worked his 2013 number down to 6.8 million , 14 in 2014 and around 17 in 2015. So for the first 3 years of the contract , it's around 8 million of the 121. So it in a simplistic way , that would mean they have to account for around 83 million in the last three years. I read that the cap hit in year 4 would be 29 million , which makes sense looking at the numbers. So this looks to be one of the most incredible salary shoves in the history of the league. It's not like giving a gut like Marvin Harrison a huge deal that pays him 16 mill in the last year of his contract. You know at age 36 Harrison wouldn't be worth it and you just cut him or do a pay cut. This contract is real money as years 3-6 of this deal has a QB only 31-34 years old. So this is real money and this just a deal that is good for this year and next year and then they hope for a big jump in the cap. This is no doubt a three year deal that shoves huge money into the next deal that will have to happen in 2016. I kind of guessed at the cap hit in 2015 and could be a little different due to possible guaranteed money paid out in 2014 or 2015. LOL that someone thought they could trade him after a couple years. 

 

My opinion of how the Ravens handed this starting with digging their feet in for the 1 million would be grossly pathetic. Saving the million and coughing up about an extra 40 the following year is laughable but then they even go on to be even more irresponsible. When you have a player you are paying that kind of money , IMO , you need to "buck up" a least a bit and not try to push that many millions down the road. 

 

 

Here is a link to Flacco's Spotrac contract page....

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/joe-flacco/

 

 

The first 3 years are very reasonable and manageable....

 

But, the last 3 years out are onerous.    An expected raise in TV money will help some,  but I think it's a safe bet that the Ravens and Flacco will renegotiate his last 3 years.    Some will get moved into a new bonus....    and his base salary will be lowered dramatically to give salary cap relief....   and so on....   the same drill as all highly paid players go through....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't look at the deal in detail. But I really didn't need to . When you do 121 mill for 6 years with over 50 guaranteed , it can't be good down the road . I'm looking at it now and if the report I'm reading is correct , this is a total train wreck . These . worked his 2013 number down to 6.8 million , 14 in 2014 and around 17 in 2015. So for the first 3 years of the contract , it's around 8 million of the 121. So it in a simplistic way , that would mean they have to account for around 83 million in the last three years. I read that the cap hit in year 4 would be 29 million , which makes sense looking at the numbers. So this looks to be one of the most incredible salary shoves in the history of the league. It's not like giving a gut like Marvin Harrison a huge deal that pays him 16 mill in the last year of his contract. You know at age 36 Harrison wouldn't be worth it and you just cut him or do a pay cut. This contract is real money as years 3-6 of this deal has a QB only 31-34 years old. So this is real money and this just a deal that is good for this year and next year and then they hope for a big jump in the cap. This is no doubt a three year deal that shoves huge money into the next deal that will have to happen in 2016. I kind of guessed at the cap hit in 2015 and could be a little different due to possible guaranteed money paid out in 2014 or 2015. LOL that someone thought they could trade him after a couple years. 

 

My opinion of how the Ravens handed this starting with digging their feet in for the 1 million would be grossly pathetic. Saving the million and coughing up about an extra 40 the following year is laughable but then they even go on to be even more irresponsible. When you have a player you are paying that kind of money , IMO , you need to "buck up" a least a bit and not try to push that many millions down the road. 

 

Agreed on all fronts.

 

The detail that really throws a monkey wrench in their future plans is that they are due to pay him option bonuses of $15m in 2014 and $7m in 2015 (those are guaranteed for injury). Those raise the dead cap money by about $5m/year in the final four years of his contract, and make it absolutely untenable to cut or trade him, and very difficult to restructure without extending.

 

What I would be trying to do, if I were the Ravens, is to free up some cap space this season and next with new deals for Ngata and Suggs. Then (and this has to be done before the final regular season game of 2013), assuming Flacco is playing well, I would rework his contract to get rid of the option bonuses. That would mean increasing his base salaries and making them fully guaranteed, and you'd probably have to go year by year in order to make that happen. But he's set to make another $33m in option bonuses and salary between 2014 and 2015, and I think that number can be met without pushing so much of that money into the last three years of the deal.

 

What will likely happen is that, before 2016, they'll extend him for another three or four years, give him another $30-40m guaranteed, and still wind up carrying him at around $20-23m/year for the next seven years. For Joe Flacco. 

 

Like Linta said, that's dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed on all fronts.

 

The detail that really throws a monkey wrench in their future plans is that they are due to pay him option bonuses of $15m in 2014 and $7m in 2015 (those are guaranteed for injury). Those raise the dead cap money by about $5m/year in the final four years of his contract, and make it absolutely untenable to cut or trade him, and very difficult to restructure without extending.

 

What I would be trying to do, if I were the Ravens, is to free up some cap space this season and next with new deals for Ngata and Suggs. Then (and this has to be done before the final regular season game of 2013), assuming Flacco is playing well, I would rework his contract to get rid of the option bonuses. That would mean increasing his base salaries and making them fully guaranteed, and you'd probably have to go year by year in order to make that happen. But he's set to make another $33m in option bonuses and salary between 2014 and 2015, and I think that number can be met without pushing so much of that money into the last three years of the deal.

 

What will likely happen is that, before 2016, they'll extend him for another three or four years, give him another $30-40m guaranteed, and still wind up carrying him at around $20-23m/year for the next seven years. For Joe Flacco. 

 

Like Linta said, that's dumb.

 

Careful now....

 

For a guy who proclaims that he's not anti-Joe Flacco,  there's a lot of anti-Joe Flacco sentiments in this post....     :thmup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Careful now....

 

For a guy who proclaims that he's not anti-Joe Flacco,  there's a lot of anti-Joe Flacco sentiments in this post....     :thmup:

 

What's anti-Joe Flacco about that? (I know your comment was somewhat tongue in cheek, but I'm going to elaborate a little bit, for the sake of "it's May and there's not much else to talk about, so bear with me.)

 

Peyton Manning's cap hits will average $19.5m/year for the next four years. Eli's will average $20.3m/year for the final three years of his deal. Before his new contract, Tom Brady's contract would have averaged cap hits of $22m/year over two years, before he restructured. Drew Brees will average $22.4m over the next four years; his cap hit takes a big jump up in 2015 to $26.4m, but there are no option bonuses like Flacco's, so if they need/want to rework his deal, it will be significantly easier to do so. Aaron Rodgers' deal will eventually have hits of about $21m, but it averages under $19m. 

 

So for five quarterbacks that I think everyone will agree are better than Flacco, the yearly average cap hit is about $20-21m/year. 

 

If the Ravens extend Flacco after 2015, and let's just say it's four years, $80m, they'll still have $84.45m from this deal to work onto the cap, plus the new $80m, over a total of seven years. That's an average cap hit of about $23.5m/year. 

 

I don't dislike him, I just don't think that kind of compensation makes sense for Joe Flacco. He's getting paid like an elite quarterback, and I don't think he is one. I'd call him the 8th best quarterback in the league, at best, but he's the highest paid (in whatever order, I have both Mannings, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger and Ryan ahead of Flacco, and I could argue for Stafford, Luck, Wilson and Griffin if I were in the mood.) And the structure of his contract makes it very difficult for the Ravens to unravel their commitment to him if he doesn't perform at a high enough level.

 

That's all I'm saying -- I don't think his contract makes sense, and the structure makes it hard to address in the future. People are saying "it's a three year deal, and they'll do something about it before 2016," but the only thing they'll be able to do is commit even more money to him, and he'll still have a very hefty cap charge. And that's a tough situation to be in for someone like Joe Flacco.

 

So, to bring it back to the original topic, if the Ravens really did walk away from the table over a matter of $1m, it's one of the biggest contract negotiation blunders by a team that I've seen in a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed on all fronts.

 

The detail that really throws a monkey wrench in their future plans is that they are due to pay him option bonuses of $15m in 2014 and $7m in 2015 (those are guaranteed for injury). Those raise the dead cap money by about $5m/year in the final four years of his contract, and make it absolutely untenable to cut or trade him, and very difficult to restructure without extending.

 

What I would be trying to do, if I were the Ravens, is to free up some cap space this season and next with new deals for Ngata and Suggs. Then (and this has to be done before the final regular season game of 2013), assuming Flacco is playing well, I would rework his contract to get rid of the option bonuses. That would mean increasing his base salaries and making them fully guaranteed, and you'd probably have to go year by year in order to make that happen. But he's set to make another $33m in option bonuses and salary between 2014 and 2015, and I think that number can be met without pushing so much of that money into the last three years of the deal.

 

What will likely happen is that, before 2016, they'll extend him for another three or four years, give him another $30-40m guaranteed, and still wind up carrying him at around $20-23m/year for the next seven years. For Joe Flacco. 

 

Like Linta said, that's dumb.

 

 

 

Where does all the water go ? Eventually it all leads to the ocean. Nothing you can do about or change that . Same thing goes for this. Other than huge base salaries in the last years of contracts , the money given in these contracts is going to eventually count against the cap. Compare this to how Green Bay handled the Rodgers contract. One is a great deal for both sides while the other creates cap space for two years and then the contract blows up. It will no doubt go as you say , they will find a way to extend Ngatab for sure and MAYBE E E... Suggs. Then they shovel all the poop under the rug again by extending him with another similar deal. The only thing that can lesson the effect will be a big boost to the cap. Simple math there too. If the Ravens have to "make up" say... 20 mill in space they stole from 2013 and 2014 , it's felt less on a 150 mill cap (just a guess) than a 125 mill $ cap. You still have to account for paying all the players more on the higher cap but at least the % of the "lost space" would be less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does all the water go ? Eventually it all leads to the ocean. Nothing you can do about or change that . Same thing goes for this. Other than huge base salaries in the last years of contracts , the money given in these contracts is going to eventually count against the cap. Compare this to how Green Bay handled the Rodgers contract. One is a great deal for both sides while the other creates cap space for two years and then the contract blows up. It will no doubt go as you say , they will find a way to extend Ngatab for sure and MAYBE E E... Suggs. Then they shovel all the poop under the rug again by extending him with another similar deal. The only thing that can lesson the effect will be a big boost to the cap. Simple math there too. If the Ravens have to "make up" say... 20 mill in space they stole from 2013 and 2014 , it's felt less on a 150 mill cap (just a guess) than a 125 mill $ cap. You still have to account for paying all the players more on the higher cap but at least the % of the "lost space" would be less.

 

Yep.

 

If they draft well -- like, unreasonably well -- then they can handle some cap strain for a couple seasons. But they've always had the luxury of great leadership and a well rounded roster. They lost some leadership this year, and they plugged some roster holes with free agents that they hope will work out. But let their drafting falter, and Flacco's contract will be doubly inconvenient for them.

 

And that's true even if he plays like a $20m/year quarterback. If he plays more like the $15m/year quarterback that I think he is, oh boy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's anti-Joe Flacco about that? (I know your comment was somewhat tongue in cheek, but I'm going to elaborate a little bit, for the sake of "it's May and there's not much else to talk about, so bear with me.)

 

Peyton Manning's cap hits will average $19.5m/year for the next four years. Eli's will average $20.3m/year for the final three years of his deal. Before his new contract, Tom Brady's contract would have averaged cap hits of $22m/year over two years, before he restructured. Drew Brees will average $22.4m over the next four years; his cap hit takes a big jump up in 2015 to $26.4m, but there are no option bonuses like Flacco's, so if they need/want to rework his deal, it will be significantly easier to do so. Aaron Rodgers' deal will eventually have hits of about $21m, but it averages under $19m. 

 

So for five quarterbacks that I think everyone will agree are better than Flacco, the yearly average cap hit is about $20-21m/year. 

 

If the Ravens extend Flacco after 2015, and let's just say it's four years, $80m, they'll still have $84.45m from this deal to work onto the cap, plus the new $80m, over a total of seven years. That's an average cap hit of about $23.5m/year. 

 

I don't dislike him, I just don't think that kind of compensation makes sense for Joe Flacco. He's getting paid like an elite quarterback, and I don't think he is one. I'd call him the 8th best quarterback in the league, at best, but he's the highest paid (in whatever order, I have both Mannings, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger and Ryan ahead of Flacco, and I could argue for Stafford, Luck, Wilson and Griffin if I were in the mood.) And the structure of his contract makes it very difficult for the Ravens to unravel their commitment to him if he doesn't perform at a high enough level.

 

That's all I'm saying -- I don't think his contract makes sense, and the structure makes it hard to address in the future. People are saying "it's a three year deal, and they'll do something about it before 2016," but the only thing they'll be able to do is commit even more money to him, and he'll still have a very hefty cap charge. And that's a tough situation to be in for someone like Joe Flacco.

 

So, to bring it back to the original topic, if the Ravens really did walk away from the table over a matter of $1m, it's one of the biggest contract negotiation blunders by a team that I've seen in a while.

 

 

This post covered a lot of what I said in the one I posted a minute later. Sorry about that... 

 

But ya ...giving Joe Flacco 20 mill per year is bad ... really bad. The only thing that might be worse is structuring it so he cost you about 25 mill after the first 2-3 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This post covered a lot of what I said in the one I posted a minute later. Sorry about that... 

 

But ya ...giving Joe Flacco 20 mill per year is bad ... really bad. The only thing that might be worse is structuring it so he cost you about 25 mill after the first 2-3 years. 

 

I originally wasn't aware of the upcoming option bonuses. That's the real killer, making it so they have no choice but to extend him and give him even more guaranteed money. Just not a good contract structure, especially when you compare it to Aaron Rodgers, like you said.

 

And that's separate from the fact that they could have had him for $39m less, one year ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hindsight is always 20/20

 

We wanted to play them in the first round last year because they gave us the best chance to win.

I wasn't on that wagon, I thought our best chance to win was Denver because of Manning trying to do to much at times and I felt he would make a mistake and we could capatalize on it (if it would have been possible to play them originally)....I even said as much back towards the end of the season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's anti-Joe Flacco about that? (I know your comment was somewhat tongue in cheek, but I'm going to elaborate a little bit, for the sake of "it's May and there's not much else to talk about, so bear with me.)

 

Peyton Manning's cap hits will average $19.5m/year for the next four years. Eli's will average $20.3m/year for the final three years of his deal. Before his new contract, Tom Brady's contract would have averaged cap hits of $22m/year over two years, before he restructured. Drew Brees will average $22.4m over the next four years; his cap hit takes a big jump up in 2015 to $26.4m, but there are no option bonuses like Flacco's, so if they need/want to rework his deal, it will be significantly easier to do so. Aaron Rodgers' deal will eventually have hits of about $21m, but it averages under $19m. 

 

So for five quarterbacks that I think everyone will agree are better than Flacco, the yearly average cap hit is about $20-21m/year. 

 

If the Ravens extend Flacco after 2015, and let's just say it's four years, $80m, they'll still have $84.45m from this deal to work onto the cap, plus the new $80m, over a total of seven years. That's an average cap hit of about $23.5m/year. 

 

I don't dislike him, I just don't think that kind of compensation makes sense for Joe Flacco. He's getting paid like an elite quarterback, and I don't think he is one. I'd call him the 8th best quarterback in the league, at best, but he's the highest paid (in whatever order, I have both Mannings, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Roethlisberger and Ryan ahead of Flacco, and I could argue for Stafford, Luck, Wilson and Griffin if I were in the mood.) And the structure of his contract makes it very difficult for the Ravens to unravel their commitment to him if he doesn't perform at a high enough level.

 

That's all I'm saying -- I don't think his contract makes sense, and the structure makes it hard to address in the future. People are saying "it's a three year deal, and they'll do something about it before 2016," but the only thing they'll be able to do is commit even more money to him, and he'll still have a very hefty cap charge. And that's a tough situation to be in for someone like Joe Flacco.

 

So, to bring it back to the original topic, if the Ravens really did walk away from the table over a matter of $1m, it's one of the biggest contract negotiation blunders by a team that I've seen in a while.

 

I knew that's what you're saying.....    I was just messing with you.

 

But, for what it's worth,  since the overall deal is 6/120.6,   then I'm not worried that suddenly Flacco is going to jump above the rest of the $20 Million club.   He might if he wins a 2nd SB.    But otherwise,  I think he'll be roughly in the 5-8 highest paid.

 

Just my hunch....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I knew that's what you're saying.....    I was just messing with you.

 

But, for what it's worth,  since the overall deal is 6/120.6,   then I'm not worried that suddenly Flacco is going to jump above the rest of the $20 Million club.   He might if he wins a 2nd SB.    But otherwise,  I think he'll be roughly in the 5-8 highest paid.

 

Just my hunch....

 

I'm talking about yearly cap hits. His six year average is $20.1m, but the average over the last three years is something like $28m. That's $84m that is very likely to hit the cap, one way or the other, assuming they don't terminate the contract. That's a lot of money to be amortized in three years (Manning got $96m for FIVE years).

 

It's just a tough situation for the Ravens, I think, and there isn't a tidy solution, even if Flacco is the best in the league at that time. The way they structured that deal just gives me a lot of pause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm talking about yearly cap hits. His six year average is $20.1m, but the average over the last three years is something like $28m. That's $84m that is very likely to hit the cap, one way or the other, assuming they don't terminate the contract. That's a lot of money to be amortized in three years (Manning got $96m for FIVE years).

 

It's just a tough situation for the Ravens, I think, and there isn't a tidy solution, even if Flacco is the best in the league at that time. The way they structured that deal just gives me a lot of pause.

 

I think there's very little chance of that huge money hitting the cap....    I think deals that are structured like that are deliberately designed to be renegotiated at that point.    That's why so many deals of that length (6-years)  have 3 years at reasonable numbers with a big signing bonus, plus 3 years that are clearly unmanageable...

 

I don't see the negotiations being hung up on what the averages of the last 3-years were....    I think there's an understanding going in that the negotiation jumping off point is the 6-year average,  not the average of the last 3.   

 

By the way,  I think I had some poor speculation on my part in the previous post to you...   I guessed Flacco's next deal would put him with the top 5-8 QB's.    I think that's not well thought out by me...

 

I'd revise that to say,  4-6 QB's....   that allows for some of the older QB's still being around performing at a high level,  plus some possible newer QB's getting big deals when the new TV money is available...     Just thinking out loud....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's very little chance of that huge money hitting the cap....    I think deals that are structured like that are deliberately designed to be renegotiated at that point.    That's why so many deals of that length (6-years)  have 3 years at reasonable numbers with a big signing bonus, plus 3 years that are clearly unmanageable...

 

I don't see the negotiations being hung up on what the averages of the last 3-years were....    I think there's an understanding going in that the negotiation jumping off point is the 6-year average,  not the average of the last 3.   

 

It's only partly an issue of negotiation. A significant portion of that money will HAVE to hit the cap because of the structure of the contract.

 

And while you're right that Flacco's contract isn't the first and only deal to have a significant increase in cap hit in later years, it is the only contract I can remember that only has 30% of the total value of the deal in the first three years, with 70% of the total value hitting in Year 4-6. Especially when you're talking about a total value of $121m. 

 

So my point in bringing up the average of the last three years is specifically because the extremely backloaded nature of the deal makes it harder for the team to address his contract when they get ready to. 

 

You're looking at it as one $20m/year contract, for six years. I'm looking at it as a three year deal for $12.3m/year, and another three year deal for $28m/year. That's essentially what it is, because of the option bonuses and the delayed base salaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you guys really believe this blustering agent

Linta? The problem with this guy is that he unprofessionally negotiates through the media , which Ozzie and the ravens do not like. That being said, they wereore than happy to pay Joe after the Super Bowl win. You have to pay a good quarterback in this league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you guys really believe this blustering agent

Linta? The problem with this guy is that he unprofessionally negotiates through the media , which Ozzie and the ravens do not like. That being said, they wereore than happy to pay Joe after the Super Bowl win. You have to pay a good quarterback in this league.

 

 

If it makes you , Ozzie and the Ravens happy to write that kind of a cap destroying contract when he could have been signed for around 80 million for 5 years , what can we say ? What do they say...?  What ever floats your boat ? 

 

 

Oh.. and yea , I believe they could have signed him for at least about what Linta was saying. I have a hard time believing if he came out with a fabricated story calling the Ravens buffoons , they would deny this happened . Also Flacco would have to be the ultimate jerk to let his agent spin a ridiculous yarn like that if it was not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an unhealthy amount of Brady-hate here (perhaps not you, but others)....   and too many compliments of Brady are viewed as knocks on Manning.   Drives me a little crazy.

 

I know I don't have the history here, but I don't get it.

No fear, I probably frustrate pretty easily anyway. :D It's all in good fun.

 

You are correct about your not being able to appreciate the Brady sentiment because of not living it. How about I put it like this.................

 

Pretend that Luck's college career finished about 7 years before it actually did. You watched every game and just KNEW that by every conceivable measure he was the best QB in college sports. BUT in the majority of articles you read, majority of broadcasts you listen to, and in the majority of encounters you have with other fans, one recurring theme comes up over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over

 

"Matt Leinart is WAY better than Luck. He has the championships, and that's ALL that matters."

 

YOU talk statistics and detail amazing performances until you are blue in the face, for YEAR after year, but NOTHING EVER gets past the wall of illogic framed by those who persist in boiling down a complicated matter into the most moronically simplistic calculation imaginable. Doesn't MATTER that USC was a dominant team loaded with future NFL stars, and that Leinart was just a decent college QB along for the ride. Luck DOESN'T HAVE THE RINGS. He is therefore, by virtue of this sophisticated analysis, a LOSER, and a CHOKE ARTIST, doomed to cringe in Leinerts shadow for all eternity.

 

How long do you think it would be before you develop a knee jerk reaction just upon hearing the name Leinart? If wouldn't matter if several years after leaving college Leinart had developed into a talent that "on any given Sunday" was at least capable of playing in the general neighborhood as Luck. You might grudgingly acknowledge that, but your ears still ring from the noise. "He came SO close to getting another ring. ONE more and he'll just be the bestest of all time." Makes me want to puke.

 

Christ, I'm beginning to detest Leinart just writing this. My blood boils at the mere thought of him. Hate his pretty boy SoCal beachboy image, the girls, his fake "Ah schucks I'm just one of the guys" persona. I don't care if he gives all his income to animal welfare funds and donates his organs while he's still alive, I just don't want to hear it. I HATE him. I think I'm developing a twitch.

 

It's an old argument. I'd have taken Marino over Montana any day. Probably Elway and Kelly as well for that matter. But history isn't kind, and only has a good enough memory to count one game per year. Brady NOT winning each year is almost as important to me as Manning actually winning. Most anything said positive about one is nearly by definition a criticism of the other. It's a career long battle, and it's like the move/tv show Highlander. "There can be only one". Nobody ever said that that was entirely rational either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think about it , what kind of goofy agent brags about besting a club when he may have to deal with them again ? A complete buffoon ! That however, is Linta . That being said, what were the Ravens supposed to do? They put out a competitive package last year , and Flacco and Linta turned it down. Flacco got a fair offer because of what he did previously, and until the playoffs , he still struggled a bit, especially on the road. Well , he won a Super Bowl with an aging , over the hill defense, and for that he deserves to get paid. Flacco gambled on himself, won us a Super Bowl, and Linta should just take the money and shut up. For the next three years Flacco's cap hit is manageable. If he is not an elite quarterback as you contend , Ozzie will not extend him out. If Joe continues to excel like I believe he will , I am sure both he and Ozzie can restructure the back end properly. If Linta wants more clients, other than coaches which he mostly has, he should keep his fat trap shut and just take the money and run .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think about it , what kind of goofy agent brags about besting a club when he may have to deal with them again ? A complete buffoon ! That however, is Linta . That being said, what were the Ravens supposed to do? They put out a competitive package last year , and Flacco and Linta turned it down. Flacco got a fair offer because of what he did previously, and until the playoffs , he still struggled a bit, especially on the road. Well , he won a Super Bowl with an aging , over the hill defense, and for that he deserves to get paid. Flacco gambled on himself, won us a Super Bowl, and Linta should just take the money and shut up. For the next three years Flacco's cap hit is manageable. If he is not an elite quarterback as you contend , Ozzie will not extend him out. If Joe continues to excel like I believe he will , I am sure both he and Ozzie can restructure the back end properly. If Linta wants more clients, other than coaches which he mostly has, he should keep his fat trap shut and just take the money and run .

 

 

 

Problem would be , assuming Linta isn't lying is , sounds like they dug their feet in for a lousy , extra 1 mill. If that is the case , it was bone headed as with everything considered , they had way more to lose than gain. There's 4 pages of why myself and others believe if true this was insane. We have always stipulated everything with an "if true." I will believe the story until I hear Flacco or the Ravens deny this. Could be that I'm wrong , but I can only use common sense to form an opinion.

 

As far as Flacco being elite , I dunno. He could be . He sure has been great during the playoffs while his whole body of work doesn't scream out that he is a great QB. He did , IMO , get a little lucky on throws that appeared to be just plain ol' heaves. But anyway , I agree they "had" to sign him. The amount and structure of the contract is what is very questionable.

 

Also it's not just that simple to just say "bye bye" after 3 years . You are kidding with that one I hope. There is 51 million guaranteed . Without me spending time again looking at when the scheduled guaranteed money is being paid , I know the hit would be greater than 25 million. How about you do that calculation and come back to us with ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Problem would be , assuming Linta isn't lying is , sounds like they dug their feet in for a lousy , extra 1 mill. If that is the case , it was bone headed as with everything considered , they had way more to lose than gain. There's 4 pages of why myself and others believe if true this was insane. We have always stipulated everything with an "if true." I will believe the story until I hear Flacco or the Ravens deny this. Could be that I'm wrong , but I can only use common sense to form an opinion.

 

That's the whole point. If the difference between the two sides was $1m, then the Ravens made a huge mistake. Like you said, assuming the agent is telling the truth. 

 

And based on reports from last offseason, the numbers sound right.

 

 

Without me spending time again looking at when the scheduled guaranteed money is being paid , I know the hit would be greater than 25 million. How about you do that calculation and come back to us with ?

 

 

 

As far as I understand, if the Ravens do nothing with Flacco's contract over the next three years, his cap hit in 2016 is $28.55m. If they cut him prior to 2016, they would have a cap penalty of just under $26m. 

 

Like I've been saying, that's a tough situation for the Ravens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want this conversation to be as contentious as this sounds. Not a big deal. Let me try again without using the phrase "Brady did nothing". :P

 

Yes, restructuring/renegotiating is routine, but there was nothing routine about the Brady deal. To me the routine transactions are as follows:

 

1) A restructuring that doesn't change the dollar value or term of an existing contract. IE: Current year salary being converted to a bonus so that the team can write if off over the rest of the contract instead of in the current year. Manning has done things like this a couple of times, and frankly doesn't deserve any kind of pat on the back for doing so. It's just a bookkeeping adjustment that costs the player zippo. In fact they usually get a few extra bucks for their "trouble".

 

2) A player has a contract with ballooning numbers at the end. Bizarrely common. I assume that contracts with escalating salaries are intended partly as an adjustment for inflation, partly on the expectation of a player getting better over time, partly to delay paying as long as possible. Often times there is an utterly absurd final year number (like Dwight Freeney had). It's the type of thing that the team normally "would never pay". I don't know why the players would want it since it just encourages the team to release them. Perhaps it's an ego thing. "I've got the biggest contract for a DE, and I'm ignoring the fact that nobody in their right mind is going to let it play out". Maybe it's a poison pill to encourage early renegotiation. And that's what often happens. The last year is extended into a longer deal to eliminate the enormous cap hit. There is nothing to applaud the player for in these deals either - he's just trying to keep his job.

 

The Brady deal was a different animal, and I don't remember ever seeing anything like it. Brady's old contract didn't have a big escalation at the end (like routine sample #2). In fact the yearly rate had declined during the course of it. He got his money up front (which is always nice). In total over the life of the contract it had made him about the highest paid QB in football, but the final two years - if looked at out of context - were below market rate. Secondly, when they changed it they (unlike routine sample #1) DID change both the length and the term. Of course therein comes the bizarre part - those extra years are at a rate that is WELL below market rate.

 

The crux of the matter is that under this "new" contract, his pay for 2013 and 2014 will be EXACTLY what it was under the old contract. In fact he got several million in additional funds to sign now that he wouldn't have gotten previously. People are applauding him based on the contracted salary in year 3 and onwards, but he hasn't "really" given up a thing. YET.

 

My contention is simply that I think it's more than reasonable to withhold the accolades until Brady actually plays through at least year 3 and actually accepts a reduced paycheck. If he renegotiates at any point before then - which to me and many others seems not only possible but highly probably - what exactly would he have given up? This all comes down to the fact that I REALLY don't believe that he'll actually go ahead and play at $10mil per year. If he does I'll come on here and state that I was wrong, and applaud him. But now? Or if his salary goes back up again? I obviously didn't mean that they literally did "nothing" as you have chosen to interpret it. You could applaud them for cleverly circumventing the salary cap, but you can't applaud him for making a sacrifice for his team anymore than you can applaud Manning or Freeney in the above samples. Once again, I don't really care one way or another, but I retch at the comments suggesting that Brady is now an example of someone who cares so much about winning that he'd sacrifice his personal income to do so. Show me what personal income he's sacrificed so far? Just his extra bonus for doing this deal is more than I could conceivably earn in my entire life.

 

To be clear, I'll applaud him for not throwing a tantrum and demanding a higher salary simply because Flacco and Rodgers etc have passed him. He honors his contracts and neither mouths off nor holds his team hostage to his ego. Just because I want Manning to be held in higher regard than him doesn't mean that I don't respect him. However FANS and some media treated him like he was Mother Theresa for this. I'm pretty sure that Mother Theresa didn't have nearly as good an agent.

If you look at past history, there is nothing to suggest that Brady won't in fact play out the deal or at least most of it. He has taken less money than what he was worth most of his career save for the contract he signed in 30's. The Pats have extended him with either one or two years left on his contracts in the past. Don't see them doing that here given Brady's age. If they do throw some money at him in the last three years, I guarantee it will not be anywhere in the neighborhood of what he is worth. In other words, it won be in the $18-20 mil range. The accolades are warranted given the deal is unprecedented and gives the Pats millions in cap relief....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like joe

I trust Ozzie

Linta is a loudmouth

Joe got Us a Super Bowl so I really don't care that he got paid well

The ravens are well situated the next two years

Ozzie and joe will work out a restructure

The ravens have the best front office in football

Joe is becoming an elite quarterback

All is good in Baltimore !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like joe

I trust Ozzie

Linta is a loudmouth

Joe got Us a Super Bowl so I really don't care that he got paid well

The ravens are well situated the next two years

Ozzie and joe will work out a restructure

The ravens have the best front office in football

Joe is becoming an elite quarterback

All is good in Baltimore !

 

 

 

LOL . Didn't mean to leave foot prints all over your butt but next time think things out a bit before you talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at past history, there is nothing to suggest that Brady won't in fact play out the deal or at least most of it. He has taken less money than what he was worth most of his career save for the contract he signed in 30's. The Pats have extended him with either one or two years left on his contracts in the past. Don't see them doing that here given Brady's age. If they do throw some money at him in the last three years, I guarantee it will not be anywhere in the neighborhood of what he is worth. In other words, it won be in the $18-20 mil range. The accolades are warranted given the deal is unprecedented and gives the Pats millions in cap relief....

 

 

The point that you either miss or refuse to acknowledge is that in you look at all the great QB's in the history of the game , you'll find  some common treads. One of those is that QB's , in general usually experience a drop off in the skills that enable them to be great at age 38 or above. Not to say that this will for sure be that case with Brady , but good chance it is. 

 

Let's take it one step further . Would any owner in his right mind sign Brady right now to an extension that begins when he hits 38 for 3 years at 18 million ? So I'm saying is if the Pats had no cap issues , would Kraft protect himself against the inflation of salaries and sign Brady to guaranteed deals of 18 mill per at ages 38-40. Please don't give me that "a team like the Jags would jump at the chance " again. When Tom Brady's skills erode like every other QB who ever played the game , people are not going to line up to watch him play. 

 

So bottom line is you can argue this all you want but no one really knows how it will play out. The first thing that we'll need to see is how good is he at 38. He could be anywhere from almost a good as now or ready for the broadcast booth.  

 

That all said , IMO , the Pats and Brady did a deal to circumvent the cap and Brady was no "hero" and "MOST LIKELY" is not going to lose or sacrifice any or significant dollars as a result off the extension. But that's just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the whole point. If the difference between the two sides was $1m, then the Ravens made a huge mistake. Like you said, assuming the agent is telling the truth. 

 

And based on reports from last offseason, the numbers sound right.

 

 

As far as I understand, if the Ravens do nothing with Flacco's contract over the next three years, his cap hit in 2016 is $28.55m. If they cut him prior to 2016, they would have a cap penalty of just under $26m. 

 

Like I've been saying, that's a tough situation for the Ravens.

 

 

Thanks for the number as I wasn't going to figure it out for that Baltimore guy. Just he fact that he said they could just "cut ties" with him after 3 years is pretty telling as to where conversation with him is going. I guess when I said upwards of 25 mill , it was close enough to get the point across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point that you either miss or refuse to acknowledge is that in you look at all the great QB's in the history of the game , you'll find  some common treads. One of those is that QB's , in general usually experience a drop off in the skills that enable them to be great at age 38 or above. Not to say that this will for sure be that case with Brady , but good chance it is. 

 

Let's take it one step further . Would any owner in his right mind sign Brady right now to an extension that begins when he hits 38 for 3 years at 18 million ? So I'm saying is if the Pats had no cap issues , would Kraft protect himself against the inflation of salaries and sign Brady to guaranteed deals of 18 mill per at ages 38-40. Please don't give me that "a team like the Jags would jump at the chance " again. When Tom Brady's skills erode like every other QB who ever played the game , people are not going to line up to watch him play. 

 

So bottom line is you can argue this all you want but no one really knows how it will play out. The first thing that we'll need to see is how good is he at 38. He could be anywhere from almost a good as now or ready for the broadcast booth.  

 

That all said , IMO , the Pats and Brady did a deal to circumvent the cap and Brady was no "hero" and "MOST LIKELY" is not going to lose or sacrifice any or significant dollars as a result off the extension. But that's just my opinion.

Hi Dw. Always enjoy your posts. I think you missed the point of my argument which was in response to MAC. He was arguing that the Pats would give Brady more money in year 3 and that he would not in fact play out the extension as the Pats would redo it. This was the basis of my post which assumes Brady will still be playing at a high level in two years.

 

Brady has never even so much as quibbled about a contract in his whole career and has made less than what he is worth for the majority of his career.  The Patriots don’t do fake deals as Kraft said when he talked to Peter King about the extension. And Brady has never demanded more money either. He has been extended with either one or two years left on every deal he has signed. To think that would all of a sudden change from either the Patriots side or Brady’s side is to ignore 13 years of history.

 

But to your larger point about Brady’s worth in two years, just last year Peyton Manning coming off of four neck surgeries and a weakened arm/neck signed a 5 year/$100 mil contract with the Broncos. Just a few months ago when he said his arm is still not 100 percent and may never be, he was guaranteed $40 mil for this year and next. My point here is the Broncos are taking a big time flier on Manning to be healthy AND still play at a high level at ages 37 and 38. And he will still have two years left at $20 mil after that. So, I vehemently disagree with your assumption that Brady will not be worth $18-$20 mil in two year’s time as he has never had a major injury other his knee which has been fine for the last several seasons. Sure, the wheels could come off but like Kraft said, even Brady at 80 percent is better than anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like joe

I trust Ozzie

Linta is a loudmouth

Joe got Us a Super Bowl so I really don't care that he got paid well

The ravens are well situated the next two years

Ozzie and joe will work out a restructure

The ravens have the best front office in football

Joe is becoming an elite quarterback

All is good in Baltimore !

I hear you Old Crow. Ozzie did his job. Ravens are SB champs. Everything else is gravy. You have to pay the man. I think Joe has a serious upside with Caldwell and the fact that he has won the bowl. I think he will play with a lot of mojo next year. The team may not be good enough because of all the exits but Ozzie is one of the top GMs. He will figure things out as Joe's contract plays out.

 

I am just not sure why is agent is STILL talking about it. Seems like a personal vendetta or something. It's weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dw. Always enjoy your posts. I think you missed the point of my argument which was in response to MAC. He was arguing that the Pats would give Brady more money in year 3 and that he would not in fact play out the extension as the Pats would redo it. This was the basis of my post which assumes Brady will still be playing at a high level in two years.

 

Brady has never even so much as quibbled about a contract in his whole career and has made less than what he is worth for the majority of his career.  The Patriots don’t do fake deals as Kraft said when he talked to Peter King about the extension. And Brady has never demanded more money either. He has been extended with either one or two years left on every deal he has signed. To think that would all of a sudden change from either the Patriots side or Brady’s side is to ignore 13 years of history.

 

But to your larger point about Brady’s worth in two years, just last year Peyton Manning coming off of four neck surgeries and a weakened arm/neck signed a 5 year/$100 mil contract with the Broncos. Just a few months ago when he said his arm is still not 100 percent and may never be, he was guaranteed $40 mil for this year and next. My point here is the Broncos are taking a big time flier on Manning to be healthy AND still play at a high level at ages 37 and 38. And he will still have two years left at $20 mil after that. So, I vehemently disagree with your assumption that Brady will not be worth $18-$20 mil in two year’s time as he has never had a major injury other his knee which has been fine for the last several seasons. Sure, the wheels could come off but like Kraft said, even Brady at 80 percent is better than anyone else.

 

 

Manning has his contract  guaranteed for this year and next as you say. I'm not real sure that the Broncos don't have an escape clause on 2014 if Manning is injured or just plain cooked. So could be just guaranteeing the year will he will be 37. If this is not the case , the year when is is 38 also.

 

If you look at all the great QB's , that (37-38) is the extent of it. I'm sure you'll check and maybe come back with Warren Moon. Dunno ... as I did the search once and don't feel like it again. In any event , the last 3 years of Brady's deal occur at a later age than Manning's.

 

His years are 38 , 39 and 40. Like I say and have said , usually , most always , if we go by the past 50 years , this age bracket has eroded the skills of all the great ones. Sure you might be able to find a statistical good year or two but even then it's probably just an anomally . I don't ever recall a 39-40 year old QB leading his team to the SB. Could be it has happened but not the norm. That said , I wouldn't want to be on the hook to be paying huge money to Brady when he's at or pushing 40. You really can't or shouldn't say you vehemently disagree because you don't know what Brady is going to be worth at ages 39 and 40. I just don't think many general managers or owners would ever go more than a year or two ahead on any QB when they are at that age. And thus far no one has. As I said Manning's is for age 37 and "maybe 38. We are looking at 38. 39 and 40. You can think he'll be great in those years but past history would stack the odds against that.

 

The rest of the stuff ... I can't argue. he has been a real team player as far as contract negotiations and he appears to not have a greedy bone in his body. But as far as if he "gave any money away" on this one , only time will tell the real story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manning has his contract  guaranteed for this year and next as you say. I'm not real sure that the Broncos don't have an escape clause on 2014 if Manning is injured or just plain cooked. So could be just guaranteeing the year will he will be 37. If this is not the case , the year when is is 38 also.

 

If you look at all the great QB's , that (37-38) is the extent of it. I'm sure you'll check and maybe come back with Warren Moon. Dunno ... as I did the search once and don't feel like it again. In any event , the last 3 years of Brady's deal occur at a later age than Manning's.

 

His years are 38 , 39 and 40. Like I say and have said , usually , most always , if we go by the past 50 years , this age bracket has eroded the skills of all the great ones. Sure you might be able to find a statistical good year or two but even then it's probably just an anomally . I don't ever recall a 39-40 year old QB leading his team to the SB. Could be it has happened but not the norm. That said , I wouldn't want to be on the hook to be paying huge money to Brady when he's at or pushing 40. You really can't or shouldn't say you vehemently disagree because you don't know what Brady is going to be worth at ages 39 and 40. I just don't think many general managers or owners would ever go more than a year or two ahead on any QB when they are at that age. And thus far no one has. As I said Manning's is for age 37 and "maybe 38. We are looking at 38. 39 and 40. You can think he'll be great in those years but past history would stack the odds against that.

 

The rest of the stuff ... I can't argue. he has been a real team player as far as contract negotiations and he appears to not have a greedy bone in his body. But as far as if he "gave any money away" on this one , only time will tell the real story.

I am not aware of any out clause in Manning’s contract for this season or next. But maybe someone else knows the details.

 

There have been many QBs to play into their late 30’s and early 40’s but that is not really the main point here. I think you would agree that Brady is arguably the best QB of his generation. I have no qualms if you think it is Manning. But Brady is right there too. We are not talking about Brad Johnson, Warren Moon, or Steve DeBerg. He also plays a style of offense that does not require him to have a cannon for an arm so even if he does lose some velocity like Manning has due to his neck injury it is not going to make him a scrub.

 

Also, the years the Patriots won their championships, Brady did not need to put up videogame numbers for them to win. The main impetus behind the Pats doing this contract with Brady was so mgmt. could put a complete team around him which really means a defense. In other words, the Pats are not dumb. They know Brady’s numbers are not going to continue to go up over the next five years so they did a deal where they can surround him with a more complete team and he agreed to it.

 

When I look at Brady I see John Elway. Elway could have continued to play past age 38 at a high level but chose to leave after his two SB wins. Brady is chasing that 4th ring. He needs a better team to be able to do it. Hence the contract.

 

You will not convince me that at ages 38-40 that Brady won’t be worth more than the $8 mil the Pats are on the hook to pay him. Of course, he could get injured on any play but like I said before, he has not had any major injuries other than the knee, rarely takes sacks, and works and trains as hard as anyone. And the NFL will only continue to invent rules to protect the QB which should prolong his career past the QBs of other eras.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not aware of any out clause in Manning’s contract for this season or next. But maybe someone else knows the details.

 

There have been many QBs to play into their late 30’s and early 40’s but that is not really the main point here. I think you would agree that Brady is arguably the best QB of his generation. I have no qualms if you think it is Manning. But Brady is right there too. We are not talking about Brad Johnson, Warren Moon, or Steve DeBerg. He also plays a style of offense that does not require him to have a cannon for an arm so even if he does lose some velocity like Manning has due to his neck injury it is not going to make him a scrub.

 

Also, the years the Patriots won their championships, Brady did not need to put up videogame numbers for them to win. The main impetus behind the Pats doing this contract with Brady was so mgmt. could put a complete team around him which really means a defense. In other words, the Pats are not dumb. They know Brady’s numbers are not going to continue to go up over the next five years so they did a deal where they can surround him with a more complete team and he agreed to it.

 

When I look at Brady I see John Elway. Elway could have continued to play past age 38 at a high level but chose to leave after his two SB wins. Brady is chasing that 4th ring. He needs a better team to be able to do it. Hence the contract.

 

You will not convince me that at ages 38-40 that Brady won’t be worth more than the $8 mil the Pats are on the hook to pay him. Of course, he could get injured on any play but like I said before, he has not had any major injuries other than the knee, rarely takes sacks, and works and trains as hard as anyone. And the NFL will only continue to invent rules to protect the QB which should prolong his career past the QBs of other eras.

 

 

 

I won't try to convince you how much he will be worth at 39... 40 because I don't know. If I had to bet , I would say that he probably will be no where near as good as he is today. That said , if Brady really wanted to "give money away"  for the good of the team , why not restructure the deal where he takes less in 2013 and 2014 ? Why bother with all the what ifs and possible restructures and what ever else. Just take less now. Fact is he put more money in his pocket in 2013.  The cap should go up 3-4 years from now and the Pats might have more cap room then. So figuring Brady is a sure thing to still be worth 18-19 mill. , let him collect it then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear you Old Crow. Ozzie did his job. Ravens are SB champs. Everything else is gravy. You have to pay the man. I think Joe has a serious upside with Caldwell and the fact that he has won the bowl. I think he will play with a lot of mojo next year. The team may not be good enough because of all the exits but Ozzie is one of the top GMs. He will figure things out as Joe's contract plays out.

 

I am just not sure why is agent is STILL talking about it. Seems like a personal vendetta or something. It's weird.

 

Probably the remark was made to someone in the Baltimore press that blames Flacco for all the cap problems the Ravens have. No doubt that Flacco was made out to be a greedy pig that "gobbled up" too much cap space. Pretty bad when you put the blame on him for the Ravens letting other players go. No doubt in my mind this was happening as we saw ESPN calling Brady a savior and comparing that to the deal Flacco signed. I'm sure Linta is not a total * and this no doubt is what made him speak out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't try to convince you how much he will be worth at 39... 40 because I don't know. If I had to bet , I would say that he probably will be no where near as good as he is today. That said , if Brady really wanted to "give money away"  for the good of the team , why not restructure the deal where he takes less in 2013 and 2014 ? Why bother with all the what ifs and possible restructures and what ever else. Just take less now. Fact is he put more money in his pocket in 2013.  The cap should go up 3-4 years from now and the Pats might have more cap room then. So figuring Brady is a sure thing to still be worth 18-19 mill. , let him collect it then. 

I am not sure what you are asking. Brady had a five year deal in place. He is still playing at an elite level. The extension dropped his cap to $11 mil a year for both this year and next year. The fact that he signed a three year $24 mil extension is the key here. I know what you are saying about the what if’s but that is the media. The reality is he has saved the Pats millions of cap space and he has a binding contract that will only pay him $8 mil a year regardless of his playing level. Like I said, Brady at 80 percent is still worth a heck of a lot more than $8 mil a year.

 

I think for everyone who says this deal is really no big deal, I still maintain why haven’t the other elite QBs signed the same deal? If anything the other guys are raking it in, i.e. Brees, Manning, Flacco, Rodgers. I am not suggesting that they should do what Brady did as every player should get what they can when they can but honestly that is what separates Brady IMO. He has always been this way. Peter King best summarized Brady when he told WEEI that if the Pats had $3 mil and told Brady he could have it or they could use it to sign a player like Freeney, he would say pay Freeney. I am not making him out to be some hero but he reminds me a lot of Jordan. His drive to win is almost an illness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...