Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

jacobo_moses

Mike Wallace could he leave if Pitt doesn't step up?

159 posts in this topic

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?
I didnt say that, lol.I said they can re-sign him with that as the year #1 amount. Though not likely.We are talking about a 4 year 40 million dollar contract, in total, however.Or they could do 8 million by letting Ward and Foote walk.Or 8 million with just letting Hampton go. Or 12 million with Hampton and Foote.*Pretty much Kemoeatu covers the entire rookie crop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How he steelers cap situation? Can they afford Wallace?

they can't even afford the franchise tag dollars. They can't afford to keep him. They'll tender him a 1st just to save face.

Losing him and waiving Ward and Cotchery, I'm rolling the dice on Derrick Williams, who becomes the #3 by default. I think he'll get the chance on keeping the gig and maybe even challenge Sanders.

Hoodie better get this done. NE has a pair of late 1st rounders and they have cap space too.
Why fill one of your team's biggest needs when you can use that first round pick to acquire countless mid-round picks.

Tough for me to envision BB tagging Welker, paying Wallace, and giving up a 1st even if it is #31. That's the bulk of the $25 mil ish cap space they've got spent on 2 players who don't play on the side of the ball they really need the help.

Let Welker hit the road?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?
He means 4M in cap space the first year. It'll be tough to do though with the way contracts are required to be structured now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?
He means 4M in cap space the first year. It'll be tough to do though with the way contracts are required to be structured now.
Looking more at the 4m from Ward and the Roeth+Harrison restructures, which I think is the reason that Ben and James offered to restructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see Baltimore going after Wallace. Adding the deep threat they need and taking a player away from your biggest division rival would be worth the late 1st round pick IMO.

Baltimore has a deep threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?
He means 4M in cap space the first year. It'll be tough to do though with the way contracts are required to be structured now.
Looking more at the 4m from Ward and the Roeth+Harrison restructures, which I think is the reason that Ben and James offered to restructure.
Aren't they still $11 million over cap even after Roth and Harrison restructured?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?
He means 4M in cap space the first year. It'll be tough to do though with the way contracts are required to be structured now.
Looking more at the 4m from Ward and the Roeth+Harrison restructures, which I think is the reason that Ben and James offered to restructure.
Aren't they still $11 million over cap even after Roth and Harrison restructured?
Neither of them have restructured yet, but yes, they are still well over the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How he steelers cap situation? Can they afford Wallace?

they can't even afford the franchise tag dollars. They can't afford to keep him. They'll tender him a 1st just to save face.

Losing him and waiving Ward and Cotchery, I'm rolling the dice on Derrick Williams, who becomes the #3 by default. I think he'll get the chance on keeping the gig and maybe even challenge Sanders.

Hoodie better get this done. NE has a pair of late 1st rounders and they have cap space too.
Why fill one of your team's biggest needs when you can use that first round pick to acquire countless mid-round picks.

Tough for me to envision BB tagging Welker, paying Wallace, and giving up a 1st even if it is #31. That's the bulk of the $25 mil ish cap space they've got spent on 2 players who don't play on the side of the ball they really need the help.

Let Welker hit the road?

interesting . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wanted to add, that poison pills were also removed from being in contracts with the new C.B.A.

You think Wallace will only get a 4M offer on the market?
He means 4M in cap space the first year. It'll be tough to do though with the way contracts are required to be structured now.
Looking more at the 4m from Ward and the Roeth+Harrison restructures, which I think is the reason that Ben and James offered to restructure.
Aren't they still $11 million over cap even after Roth and Harrison restructured?
Neither of them have restructured yet, but yes, they are still well over the cap.
It was Woodley and Timmons I was thinking of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How he steelers cap situation? Can they afford Wallace?

they can't even afford the franchise tag dollars. They can't afford to keep him. They'll tender him a 1st just to save face.

Losing him and waiving Ward and Cotchery, I'm rolling the dice on Derrick Williams, who becomes the #3 by default. I think he'll get the chance on keeping the gig and maybe even challenge Sanders.

Hoodie better get this done. NE has a pair of late 1st rounders and they have cap space too.
Why fill one of your team's biggest needs when you can use that first round pick to acquire countless mid-round picks.

Tough for me to envision BB tagging Welker, paying Wallace, and giving up a 1st even if it is #31. That's the bulk of the $25 mil ish cap space they've got spent on 2 players who don't play on the side of the ball they really need the help.

Let Welker hit the road?

interesting . . .

If they don't tag Welker, that makes it a different story. If they don't, then I start to sweat it if I'm the Steelers FO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see them not tagging Welker, but I like your thinking outside the box. After all, Wallace is cheaper (slightly) and younger, and the Pats have an extra 1st roud pick. Edelman could also move into that slot role if Welker left.

Very interesting . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see them not tagging Welker, but I like your thinking outside the box. After all, Wallace is cheaper (slightly) and younger, and the Pats have an extra 1st roud pick. Edelman could also move into that slot role if Welker left. Very interesting . . .

I don't really think they'd do it considering Brady is nearing the end of his prime. Wallace would open things up for Welker and the combination of Welker, Wallace, Gronk and Hernandez seems almost unstoppable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the Pats go, Welker isn't going anywhere. I do not think they think Edelman is the next Welker. For one, I doubt he could take the pounding Welker does. He's basically had two Welker-esque games (as a rookie) and on occasion had a few catches here and there. Not sure that translates into a 120+ catch a year guy. He's had a total of 11 catches the past two seasons.

I believe that it is in the best interest for the Pats to franchise Welker this year and next year. It will end up costing them less money ($9.4 million this year and $11.4 million next year). If that happened, two years from now, Welker (in theory) would be hitting the open market as a 33 year old slot receiver. I would think the interest in his services at that point would be lower (as would his potential earnings power).

At this point, Welker would probably ask for a 5 year, $50 million contract with $20+ million guaranteed. If Welker signed a deal for that much, he would probably get paid $32 million in real money over the first 2 years compared to the $20 million and change by franchising him twice.

The other issue is, I doubt the Pats would want to sign Welker for that many years and that kind of bonus money. IMO, the Pats will make a run at signing Brandon Lloyd. If the Pats also traded a first to get Wallace, they could average nearly 40 ppg given the rest of their offensive talent. That might be fun to watch, but as others have mentioned, NE really needs to upgrade their defense way more than their offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why give up a first-round draft pick to sign Wallace when you can sign DeSean Jackson, Wes Welker, Stevie Johnson, Dwayne Bowe or Marques Colston instead?

Because the bolded are expected to be franchised and Johnson may be signed up before he hits the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why give up a first-round draft pick to sign Wallace when you can sign DeSean Jackson, Wes Welker, Stevie Johnson, Dwayne Bowe or Marques Colston instead?

Because the bolded are expected to be franchised and Johnson may be signed up before he hits the market.
Ok, so throw in Vincent Jackson, Reggie Wayne and Brandon Lloyd. My point was it's a great year to shop for a WR...why spend a 1st rounder when teams can find similar talent and still keep their 1st pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a firm believer that spending a first round pick is a sure way to cement yourself as a team that will not be a playoff contender.

There are so many Wrs you can pick up that can do the job. The game is won and lost in the trenches.

Protect your Qb and you'll be good.

Get to the opposing Qb and you'll be good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a firm believer that spending a first round pick is a sure way to cement yourself as a team that will not be a playoff contender.

There are so many Wrs you can pick up that can do the job. The game is won and lost in the trenches.

Protect your Qb and you'll be good.

Get to the opposing Qb and you'll be good.

Got to disagree here. If you're trading picks for a known commodity and that player helps you win in the coming season(s) do you really remember the picks given up?

For example, as a Buc fan I hated what Tampa Bay gave up to get Jon Gruden in 2002. I thought they were absolutely nuts to give up two 1st round picks, two 2nd round picks, and $8 million dollars. Granted, Gruden isn't a player, but the same concept applies.

The Bucs won the Super Bowl. The Raiders?

2002:

1st round - Traded Tampa's 1st with Raiders 3rd and 5th pick to move up for CB Phillip Buchanon

2nd round - OT Langston Walker

2003:

1st round - DE Tyler Brayton

2004:

2nd round - C Jake Grove

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steelers can't afford him as they are currently structured. You have to ask yourself, why wouldn't a team (NE, Bal) with a mid to low 1st rounder and cap space sign him to a contract that requires a balloon payment on the front, say $25 million due at signing? The Steelers would lose him and get that mid to low 1st if they don't match.BTW, Emmanual Sanders becomes a very intriguing player in this situation.

I don't think it matters how much of a signing bonus you give as I think it's prorated over the life of the contract. And poison pills are no longer allowed either. I think any reasonably good offer will knock PIT out of contention.
According to Adam Schefter, any signing bonus would fully apply to the cap this year. He gave the example that a $20 million signing bonus would make it nearly impossible for the Steelers to match without major cuts and changes to contracts. He said Pats, Bengals, and Ravens are front runners.
I didn't hear whatever statement Schefter made, but I don't imagine he said it as worded here because that isn't correct. A signing bonus would be prorated over the life of the contract.I'm guessing what Schefter said is they would give Wallace a big ROSTER bonus for 2012. Unlike a signing bonus, a roster bonus is not prorated so the entire hit for one paid in 2012 would apply this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My main point in bringing all this up. Is the Steelers can't really afford to Franchise Tag him. And they have a lot of shuffling to do of other contracts and make releases to make room to sign him to a big contract. So bascially they will probably stick the 1st Rnd Tender on him. And hold their breath that no one tries to snatch him away. Now granted there are a lot of pretty good WR on the FA market. But in all honesty. I see most of them being Franchise Tagged. So its not as deep as some on this forum are claiming it to be for true #1 WR's.

This a pretty good list. I will put a FT by the ones I really think will be Franchise Tagged and you will see the list isn't as deep for top tier WR's as much as you'd think.

Position Player Name Status 2011 Team 2012 Team

Wide Receiver Arnaz Battle ufa Pittsburgh Street Free Agent

FT Wide Receiver Wes Welker ufa New England

FT Wide Receiver Vincent Jackson ufa San Diego

FT Wide Receiver DeSean Jackson ufa Philadelphia

Wide Receiver Marques Colston ufa New Orleans

FT Wide Receiver Dwanye Bowe ufa Kansas City

Wide Receiver Reggie Wayne ufa Indianapolis

Wide Receiver Steve Johnson ufa Buffalo

Wide Receiver Mike Wallace rfa Pittsburgh

Wide Receiver Brandon Lloyd ufa St. Louis

Wide Receiver Pierre Garcon ufa Indianapolis

Wide Receiver Danny Amendola rfa St. Louis

Wide Receiver Terrell Owens ufa Street Free Agent

Wide Receiver Braylon Edwards ufa Street Free Agent

Wide Receiver Eddie Royal ufa Denver

Wide Receiver Robert Meachem ufa New Orleans

Wide Receiver Mario Manningham ufa New York Giants

Wide Receiver Deion Branch ufa New England

Wide Receiver Laurent Robinson ufa Dallas

Wide Receiver Plaxico Burress ufa New York Jets

Wide Receiver Mark Clayton ufa St. Louis

Wide Receiver Roy Williams ufa Chicago

Wide Receiver Jerricho Cotchery ufa Pittsburgh

Wide Receiver Steve Smith ufa Philadelphia

Wide Receiver Josh Morgan ufa San Francisco

Wide Receiver T.J. Houshmandzadeh ufa Oakland

Wide Receiver Roscoe Parrish ufa Buffalo

Wide Receiver Early Doucet ufa Arizona

Wide Receiver Harry Douglas ufa Atlanta

Wide Receiver Jerome Simpson ufa Cincinnati

Wide Receiver Mike-Sims Walker ufa Street Free Agent

Wide Receiver Brandon Gibson rfa St. Louis

Wide Receiver Chaz Schilens ufa Oakland

Wide Receiver Donnie Avery ufa Tennessee

Wide Receiver Eric Weems ufa Atlanta

Wide Receiver Andre Caldwell ufa Cincinnati

Wide Receiver Legedu Naanee ufa Carolina

Wide Receiver Anthony Gonzalez ufa Indianapolis

Wide Receiver Ted Ginn ufa San Francisco

Wide Receiver Lavelle Hawkins ufa Tennessee Tennessee

Wide Receiver Bernard Berrian ufa Street Free Agent

Wide Receiver Patrick Crayton ufa San Diego

Wide Receiver Greg Camarillo ufa Minnesota

Wide Receiver David Anderson ufa Washington

Wide Receiver Kevin Ogletree rfa Dallas

Wide Receiver Devin Aromashodu ufa Minnesota

Wide Receiver Bryant Johnson ufa Houston

Wide Receiver Donte' Stallworth ufa Washington

Wide Receiver Jerheme Urban ufa Kansas City

Wide Receiver Ruvell Martin ufa Buffalo

Wide Receiver Domenik Hixon ufa New York Giants

Wide Receiver Derek Hagan ufa Buffalo

Wide Receiver Devin Thomas ufa New York Giants

Wide Receiver Micheal Spurlock ufa Tampa Bay

Wide Receiver Matthew Willis rfa Denver

Wide Receiver Courtney Roby ufa New Orleans

Wide Receiver Matthew Slater ufa New England

Wide Receiver Rashied Davis ufa Detroit

Wide Receiver Michael Clayton ufa New York Giants

Wide Receiver Maurice Stovall ufa Detroit

Wide Receiver Brett Swain rfa San Francisco

Wide Receiver Patrick Turner rfa New York Jets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So unless the Pats think they can snag Colston, Reggie Wayne or Steve Johnson its going to be slim pickings. And we all know how confident the Patriots are in drafting WRs??!!! :rolleyes:;)

In fact the best WR's I can think of for the Patriots in the past 5-10 yrs the got from other teams. (Welker they snatched from the Dolphins) And Randy Moss came over from the Raiders.

Well I guess we will see what all shakes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So unless the Pats think they can snag Colston, Reggie Wayne or Steve Johnson its going to be slim pickings. And we all know how confident the Patriots are in drafting WRs??!!! :rolleyes:;) In fact the best WR's I can think of for the Patriots in the past 5-10 yrs the got from other teams. (Welker they snatched from the Dolphins) And Randy Moss came over from the Raiders. Well I guess we will see what all shakes out.

Anything wrong with Brandon Lloyd? McDaniels made him into a receiving asset in Denver and St. Louis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a 1st round pick and a 4 year deal to land Mike Wallace compare to what Blackmon might make as a rookie?

Anyone know what the rookie wage scale is for, say, the 20th player taken in the draft (I'm not buying the top-10 hype yet)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a 1st round pick and a 4 year deal to land Mike Wallace compare to what Blackmon might make as a rookie?

Anyone know what the rookie wage scale is for, say, the 20th player taken in the draft (I'm not buying the top-10 hype yet)?

2011 rookie salaries

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really doubt that Blackmon makes it to the Patriots pick in the 1st Rnd. I mean really either of the 1st Rnd Picks they have are too low for Blackmon to make it there.

Yudkin

Yeah I did forget about Brandon LLoyd. But I wouldn't be suprised if the Rams make a strong play for him as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steelers can't afford him as they are currently structured. You have to ask yourself, why wouldn't a team (NE, Bal) with a mid to low 1st rounder and cap space sign him to a contract that requires a balloon payment on the front, say $25 million due at signing? The Steelers would lose him and get that mid to low 1st if they don't match.

BTW, Emmanual Sanders becomes a very intriguing player in this situation.

I don't think it matters how much of a signing bonus you give as I think it's prorated over the life of the contract. And poison pills are no longer allowed either. I think any reasonably good offer will knock PIT out of contention.
According to Adam Schefter, any signing bonus would fully apply to the cap this year. He gave the example that a $20 million signing bonus would make it nearly impossible for the Steelers to match without major cuts and changes to contracts. He said Pats, Bengals, and Ravens are front runners.
I didn't hear whatever statement Schefter made, but I don't imagine he said it as worded here because that isn't correct. A signing bonus would be prorated over the life of the contract.

I'm guessing what Schefter said is they would give Wallace a big ROSTER bonus for 2012. Unlike a signing bonus, a roster bonus is not prorated so the entire hit for one paid in 2012 would apply this year.

:yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the Pats go, Welker isn't going anywhere. I do not think they think Edelman is the next Welker. For one, I doubt he could take the pounding Welker does. He's basically had two Welker-esque games (as a rookie) and on occasion had a few catches here and there. Not sure that translates into a 120+ catch a year guy. He's had a total of 11 catches the past two seasons.I believe that it is in the best interest for the Pats to franchise Welker this year and next year. It will end up costing them less money ($9.4 million this year and $11.4 million next year). If that happened, two years from now, Welker (in theory) would be hitting the open market as a 33 year old slot receiver. I would think the interest in his services at that point would be lower (as would his potential earnings power).At this point, Welker would probably ask for a 5 year, $50 million contract with $20+ million guaranteed. If Welker signed a deal for that much, he would probably get paid $32 million in real money over the first 2 years compared to the $20 million and change by franchising him twice.The other issue is, I doubt the Pats would want to sign Welker for that many years and that kind of bonus money. IMO, the Pats will make a run at signing Brandon Lloyd. If the Pats also traded a first to get Wallace, they could average nearly 40 ppg given the rest of their offensive talent. That might be fun to watch, but as others have mentioned, NE really needs to upgrade their defense way more than their offense.

Is Welker ok with being franchised two years in a row knowing the Pats will then let him go? Or is it a case of there not being any better options for him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the Pats go, Welker isn't going anywhere. I do not think they think Edelman is the next Welker. For one, I doubt he could take the pounding Welker does. He's basically had two Welker-esque games (as a rookie) and on occasion had a few catches here and there. Not sure that translates into a 120+ catch a year guy. He's had a total of 11 catches the past two seasons.I believe that it is in the best interest for the Pats to franchise Welker this year and next year. It will end up costing them less money ($9.4 million this year and $11.4 million next year). If that happened, two years from now, Welker (in theory) would be hitting the open market as a 33 year old slot receiver. I would think the interest in his services at that point would be lower (as would his potential earnings power).At this point, Welker would probably ask for a 5 year, $50 million contract with $20+ million guaranteed. If Welker signed a deal for that much, he would probably get paid $32 million in real money over the first 2 years compared to the $20 million and change by franchising him twice.The other issue is, I doubt the Pats would want to sign Welker for that many years and that kind of bonus money. IMO, the Pats will make a run at signing Brandon Lloyd. If the Pats also traded a first to get Wallace, they could average nearly 40 ppg given the rest of their offensive talent. That might be fun to watch, but as others have mentioned, NE really needs to upgrade their defense way more than their offense.

Is Welker ok with being franchised two years in a row knowing the Pats will then let him go? Or is it a case of there not being any better options for him?
I doubt Welker is "ok" with being franchised, but he may not have much choice. Both teams will go through the motions to get a new deal done, but I think both sides are far apart on years, salary, and bonus money. I suspect Welker will want twice what the Pats will offer him on all three fronts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steelers can't afford him as they are currently structured. You have to ask yourself, why wouldn't a team (NE, Bal) with a mid to low 1st rounder and cap space sign him to a contract that requires a balloon payment on the front, say $25 million due at signing? The Steelers would lose him and get that mid to low 1st if they don't match.

BTW, Emmanual Sanders becomes a very intriguing player in this situation.

I don't think it matters how much of a signing bonus you give as I think it's prorated over the life of the contract. And poison pills are no longer allowed either. I think any reasonably good offer will knock PIT out of contention.
According to Adam Schefter, any signing bonus would fully apply to the cap this year. He gave the example that a $20 million signing bonus would make it nearly impossible for the Steelers to match without major cuts and changes to contracts. He said Pats, Bengals, and Ravens are front runners.
I didn't hear whatever statement Schefter made, but I don't imagine he said it as worded here because that isn't correct. A signing bonus would be prorated over the life of the contract.

I'm guessing what Schefter said is they would give Wallace a big ROSTER bonus for 2012. Unlike a signing bonus, a roster bonus is not prorated so the entire hit for one paid in 2012 would apply this year.

:yes:
I doubt teams can circumvent the signing bonus rules by calling it a roster bonus in the 1st yr of a contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt teams can circumvent the signing bonus rules by calling it a roster bonus in the 1st yr of a contract.

Roster bonus info, but I'm not certain that it applies after the most recent CBA/poison pill clauses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt teams can circumvent the signing bonus rules by calling it a roster bonus in the 1st yr of a contract.

Roster bonus info, but I'm not certain that it applies after the most recent CBA/poison pill clauses.
I don't get the comment about "circumventing" the signing bonus rules. It's sort of like saying I'm circumventing the rules for my credit card by paying cash. The team is doing something entirely different than a signing bonus, and something which has it's own set of CBA rules to cover it. There is nothing that requires you to give a signing bonus, nor to put some percentage of cash into one.

The only times a roster bonus is treated as a signing bonus is if it is guaranteed, or if it is a contract signed after the last preseason game then any year 1 roster bonus would be a signing bonus.

The poison pill clause just says that you can't make a contract where terms would be different for one team than for another. So no "fully guaranteed contract if the player plays more than 4 games in Minnesota in any given year" type things like was done with Steve Hutchinson.

CBA:

(iii) Notwithstanding Subsections (i) and (ii) above, no Offer Sheet may contain a Principal Term that would create rights or obligations for the Old Club that differ in any way (including but not limited to the amount of compensation that would be paid, the circumstances in which compensation would be guaranteed, or the circumstances in which other contractual rights would or would not vest) from the rights or obligations that such Principal Term would create for the Club extending the Offer Sheet (i.e., no “poison pills”).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the Pats go, Welker isn't going anywhere. I do not think they think Edelman is the next Welker. For one, I doubt he could take the pounding Welker does. He's basically had two Welker-esque games (as a rookie) and on occasion had a few catches here and there. Not sure that translates into a 120+ catch a year guy. He's had a total of 11 catches the past two seasons.I believe that it is in the best interest for the Pats to franchise Welker this year and next year. It will end up costing them less money ($9.4 million this year and $11.4 million next year). If that happened, two years from now, Welker (in theory) would be hitting the open market as a 33 year old slot receiver. I would think the interest in his services at that point would be lower (as would his potential earnings power).At this point, Welker would probably ask for a 5 year, $50 million contract with $20+ million guaranteed. If Welker signed a deal for that much, he would probably get paid $32 million in real money over the first 2 years compared to the $20 million and change by franchising him twice.The other issue is, I doubt the Pats would want to sign Welker for that many years and that kind of bonus money. IMO, the Pats will make a run at signing Brandon Lloyd. If the Pats also traded a first to get Wallace, they could average nearly 40 ppg given the rest of their offensive talent. That might be fun to watch, but as others have mentioned, NE really needs to upgrade their defense way more than their offense.

Is Welker ok with being franchised two years in a row knowing the Pats will then let him go? Or is it a case of there not being any better options for him?
I doubt Welker is "ok" with being franchised, but he may not have much choice. Both teams will go through the motions to get a new deal done, but I think both sides are far apart on years, salary, and bonus money. I suspect Welker will want twice what the Pats will offer him on all three fronts.
Greg Bedard speculated a few weeks ago that the Pats will franchise Welker and once they do the situation will turn antagonistic and he could envision a situation similar to Mankins were Welker would hold out until week 8.Now if you think Welker is going to be unhappy getting franchised how do you think it's going to play out for Welker and the locker room chemistry if they choose to franchise Welker, who's been underpaid for years, and bring in a guy like Wallace and give him the kind of contract Welker is seeking? Besides the fact I don't see the Pat's sacrificing a #1 pick, committing major money to 2 WR's especially when they utilize their TE's like no other team has ever before. Keeping in mind they have needs on the other side of the ball and finally I think the locker room environment Bellichick has fostered with that team could potentially get punctured if the Pat's "broke the bank" for another big time WR and simply franchised an unhappy Welker. Also keep in mind the cost to franchise Welker is going to jump up for the 2013 season. At a minimum he'll get a 20% raise but with Calvin likely to re-do his deal and the slew of FA WR's it's possible the average of the top 5 takes a spike up making the cost to franchise him in 2013 not as easy a call it is to franchise him this season.Add it all up and think the Pat's will of course franchise Welker now and seek a low to middle cost WR. It's possible a player like Brandon Lloyd fit's this criteria but not a player like Mike Wallace. I more or less see the Pat's bargain shopping for some WR help, not leading the FA pack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Greg Bedard speculated a few weeks ago that the Pats will franchise Welker

AGREE.

- and once they do the situation will turn antagonistic and he could envision a situation similar to Mankins were Welker would hold out until week 8.

DISAGREE. WELKER GETTING FRANCHISED WOULD MEAN HE WOULD GET PAID ALMOST AS MUCH AS HE'S BEEN PAID OVER HIS ENTIRE CAREER. I DOUBT HE WOULD WALK AWAY FROM $9.4 MILLION.

- Now if you think Welker is going to be unhappy getting franchised how do you think it's going to play out for Welker

I THINK HE WILL GET TAGGED, THEY WILL TRY TO WORK OUT A DEAL (BUT WON'T) AND HE WILL PLAY ALL 16 GAMES IF HEALTHY.

- and the locker room chemistry if they choose to franchise Welker, who's been underpaid for years, and bring in a guy like Wallace and give him the kind of contract Welker is seeking?

I DON'T SEE THEM SIGNING WALLACE. I THINK THAT IS TOTAL SPECULATION BY SOMEONE IN THE MEDIA. ALL I SAID WAS IT WOULD BE INTERESTING IF THEIR WRs WERE WELKER, WALLACE, AND LLOYD. OCHOCINCO MADE THREE TIMES WHAT WELKER MADE THIS YEAR (IN REAL $$$). THE PATS ARE NOT ADVERSE TO MAKING SOME MOVES THAT DON'T ALIGN WITH GUYS ON THEIR TEAM.

Besides the fact I don't see the Pat's sacrificing a #1 pick, committing major money to 2 WR's especially when they utilize their TE's like no other team has ever before.

- I THINK THEY WILL SIGN MAKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO SIGN LLOYD.

Keeping in mind they have needs on the other side of the ball and finally I think the locker room environment Bellichick has fostered with that team could potentially get punctured if the Pat's "broke the bank" for another big time WR and simply franchised an unhappy Welker.

- WHICH IS WWHY I DON'T SEE THE PATS TRADING FOR WALLACE AND INSTEAD WILL LOOK TO UPGRADE THEIR DEFENSE.

- Also keep in mind the cost to franchise Welker is going to jump up for the 2013 season. At a minimum he'll get a 20% raise but with Calvin likely to re-do his deal and the slew of FA WR's it's possible the average of the top 5 takes a spike up making the cost to franchise him in 2013 not as easy a call it is to franchise him this season.

THEY CHANGED THE RULES FOR FRANCHISE TAGS. IT IS NO LONGER THE AVERAGE OF THE TOP 5 AT A POSITION IN THAT SEASON. IIRC, IT'S THE AVERAGE OF ONLY THE HIGHEST PAID AT THAT POSITION FROM THE PREVIOUS 5 SEASONS (THUS MAKING THE TOTAL AMOUNT SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS LOWER THAN IN THE PAST. THE LOWEST TOTAL WOULD BE $9.4 MILLION + 20%. EITHER WAY, IF TAGGED 2 YEARS, THE PATS WOULD LIKELY PAY HIM LESS TOTAL MONEY THAN JUST THE SIGNING BONUS OF A NEW DEAL.

- Add it all up and think the Pat's will of course franchise Welker now and seek a low to middle cost WR. It's possible a player like Brandon Lloyd fit's this criteria but not a player like Mike Wallace. I more or less see the Pat's bargain shopping for some WR help, not leading the FA pack.

IN GENERAL< THE PATS RARELY MAKE A BIG SPLASH IN FREE AGENCY BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE PAYING BIG MONEY IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO. THEIR MODEL OBVIOUSLY HAS WORKED PRETTY WELL< AS THEY ARE ALWAYS IN THE HUNT AND ALMOST ALWAYD HAVE A VERY GOOD RECORD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Also keep in mind the cost to franchise Welker is going to jump up for the 2013 season. At a minimum he'll get a 20% raise but with Calvin likely to re-do his deal and the slew of FA WR's it's possible the average of the top 5 takes a spike up making the cost to franchise him in 2013 not as easy a call it is to franchise him this season.

THEY CHANGED THE RULES FOR FRANCHISE TAGS. IT IS NO LONGER THE AVERAGE OF THE TOP 5 AT A POSITION IN THAT SEASON. IIRC, IT'S THE AVERAGE OF ONLY THE HIGHEST PAID AT THAT POSITION FROM THE PREVIOUS 5 SEASONS (THUS MAKING THE TOTAL AMOUNT SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS LOWER THAN IN THE PAST. THE LOWEST TOTAL WOULD BE $9.4 MILLION + 20%. EITHER WAY, IF TAGGED 2 YEARS, THE PATS WOULD LIKELY PAY HIM LESS TOTAL MONEY THAN JUST THE SIGNING BONUS OF A NEW DEAL.

They use the tag number and the salary cap from the previous seasons. They don't use player salaries directly anymore.

Edit to add: For the non-exclusive which I assume we're talking about here. For exclusive they are still used but they are all the current year... greater of the non-exclusive or average of top 5 paid players at the position this year as of the end of the RFA signing period.

The non-exclusive tag number is:

  2007 WR tag + 2008 WR tag + 2009 WR tag + 2010 WR tag + 2011 WR Tag ---------------------------------------------------------------------    *   (2012 cap)     2007 cap + 2008 cap + 2009 cap + 2010 cap + 2011 cap
Player salaries going forward no longer play a role in the calculations. The 2013 franchise tag for WRs is unaffected whether 5 WRs get paid double in 2012 what last year's top 5 did. Or half as much.

A close (but not quite) way to think of it is that they almost said, "let's take the tag number for the position the last 5 years... find what percentage of the cap that was for each year... average those... and that's what percent of the cap the position will get every year going forward".

The formula they use doesn't do that exactly, but it's close. The formula actually looks like the kind of mistake you'd find on a 4th grade math test... where someone thinks that:

2007 tag    2008 tag                            2007 tag + 2008 tag-------- + -----------     is the same as:    -----------------------2007 cap    2008 cap                            2007 cap + 2008 cap

Not saying they actually screwed it up. The text description they have matches the formula. But darn if it doesn't look odd the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Greg Bedard speculated a few weeks ago that the Pats will franchise WelkerAGREE.- and once they do the situation will turn antagonistic and he could envision a situation similar to Mankins were Welker would hold out until week 8.DISAGREE. WELKER GETTING FRANCHISED WOULD MEAN HE WOULD GET PAID ALMOST AS MUCH AS HE'S BEEN PAID OVER HIS ENTIRE CAREER. I DOUBT HE WOULD WALK AWAY FROM $9.4 MILLION.- Now if you think Welker is going to be unhappy getting franchised how do you think it's going to play out for Welker I THINK HE WILL GET TAGGED, THEY WILL TRY TO WORK OUT A DEAL (BUT WON'T) AND HE WILL PLAY ALL 16 GAMES IF HEALTHY.- and the locker room chemistry if they choose to franchise Welker, who's been underpaid for years, and bring in a guy like Wallace and give him the kind of contract Welker is seeking?I DON'T SEE THEM SIGNING WALLACE. I THINK THAT IS TOTAL SPECULATION BY SOMEONE IN THE MEDIA. ALL I SAID WAS IT WOULD BE INTERESTING IF THEIR WRs WERE WELKER, WALLACE, AND LLOYD. OCHOCINCO MADE THREE TIMES WHAT WELKER MADE THIS YEAR (IN REAL $$$). THE PATS ARE NOT ADVERSE TO MAKING SOME MOVES THAT DON'T ALIGN WITH GUYS ON THEIR TEAM.Besides the fact I don't see the Pat's sacrificing a #1 pick, committing major money to 2 WR's especially when they utilize their TE's like no other team has ever before. - I THINK THEY WILL SIGN MAKE A CONCERTED EFFORT TO SIGN LLOYD. Keeping in mind they have needs on the other side of the ball and finally I think the locker room environment Bellichick has fostered with that team could potentially get punctured if the Pat's "broke the bank" for another big time WR and simply franchised an unhappy Welker.- WHICH IS WWHY I DON'T SEE THE PATS TRADING FOR WALLACE AND INSTEAD WILL LOOK TO UPGRADE THEIR DEFENSE.- Also keep in mind the cost to franchise Welker is going to jump up for the 2013 season. At a minimum he'll get a 20% raise but with Calvin likely to re-do his deal and the slew of FA WR's it's possible the average of the top 5 takes a spike up making the cost to franchise him in 2013 not as easy a call it is to franchise him this season.THEY CHANGED THE RULES FOR FRANCHISE TAGS. IT IS NO LONGER THE AVERAGE OF THE TOP 5 AT A POSITION IN THAT SEASON. IIRC, IT'S THE AVERAGE OF ONLY THE HIGHEST PAID AT THAT POSITION FROM THE PREVIOUS 5 SEASONS (THUS MAKING THE TOTAL AMOUNT SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS LOWER THAN IN THE PAST. THE LOWEST TOTAL WOULD BE $9.4 MILLION + 20%. EITHER WAY, IF TAGGED 2 YEARS, THE PATS WOULD LIKELY PAY HIM LESS TOTAL MONEY THAN JUST THE SIGNING BONUS OF A NEW DEAL.- Add it all up and think the Pat's will of course franchise Welker now and seek a low to middle cost WR. It's possible a player like Brandon Lloyd fit's this criteria but not a player like Mike Wallace. I more or less see the Pat's bargain shopping for some WR help, not leading the FA pack.IN GENERAL< THE PATS RARELY MAKE A BIG SPLASH IN FREE AGENCY BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE PAYING BIG MONEY IF THEY DON'T HAVE TO. THEIR MODEL OBVIOUSLY HAS WORKED PRETTY WELL< AS THEY ARE ALWAYS IN THE HUNT AND ALMOST ALWAYD HAVE A VERY GOOD RECORD.

FWIW Greg Bedard is the one who said he felt the situation would be become antagonstic and that the Pats could be be looking at a Mankins situations with a possible Welker holdout. So not sure if my post was clear before but that's not my opinion, it's his and like you I'd have a hard time seeing him hold out for half the season and piss half of that money away.Now I agree with almost everything you stated except the following:I don't agree that Welker is going to be pleased getting franchised and even more off for the reasoning behind it that it will equal the pay he's got throughout his career. I think just the opposite in fact, he's someone who generally speaking could really use a big payday and by big payday I'm talking $20+ million not $9.5. Huge difference between getting franchise tagged when you are 26 or so like Wallace versus soon to be 32 year old Welker. A guy like Wallace can get tagged and still be in this prime next year in a position to negotiate a long term deal. A guy like Welker gets tagged and he's looking at a situation were at best he hits FA as a soon to be 33 year old. Ocho's contract was a different set of circumstances than pursuing a FA. They not only inherited his contract but had him take a pay cut and to me and I'm guessing to a guy like Welker that's not a slap in the face. Now not giving Welker a long term big contract but giving one to another WR is something I think Welker would view as "insulting".While I agree they will kick the tires on Lloyd I only see them signing him at a very friendly contract. I don't see them getting into much of a bidding war for his services but more of a situation where they allow Lloyd to see what's available first. If they sign Lloyd it's going to be at a bargain and Lloyd is only going to sign a bargain contract if he can't do better on the open market because he also could use a big payday. Only reason I tend to think Lloyd might become a Patriot is the lack of interest in him when he was available for trade. That being said teams are a lot quicker to bring someone in during the off season as opposed to trying to work them in mid-season and sacrifice draft picks so I'm not entirely convinced the lack or interest in Lloyd at the trade deadline means teams are simply not that interested in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW Greg Bedard is the one who said he felt the situation would be become antagonstic and that the Pats could be be looking at a Mankins situations with a possible Welker holdout. So not sure if my post was clear before but that's not my opinion, it's his and like you I'd have a hard time seeing him hold out for half the season and piss half of that money away.Now I agree with almost everything you stated except the following:I don't agree that Welker is going to be pleased getting franchised and even more off for the reasoning behind it that it will equal the pay he's got throughout his career. I think just the opposite in fact, he's someone who generally speaking could really use a big payday and by big payday I'm talking $20+ million not $9.5. Huge difference between getting franchise tagged when you are 26 or so like Wallace versus soon to be 32 year old Welker. A guy like Wallace can get tagged and still be in this prime next year in a position to negotiate a long term deal. A guy like Welker gets tagged and he's looking at a situation were at best he hits FA as a soon to be 33 year old. Ocho's contract was a different set of circumstances than pursuing a FA. They not only inherited his contract but had him take a pay cut and to me and I'm guessing to a guy like Welker that's not a slap in the face. Now not giving Welker a long term big contract but giving one to another WR is something I think Welker would view as "insulting".While I agree they will kick the tires on Lloyd I only see them signing him at a very friendly contract. I don't see them getting into much of a bidding war for his services but more of a situation where they allow Lloyd to see what's available first. If they sign Lloyd it's going to be at a bargain and Lloyd is only going to sign a bargain contract if he can't do better on the open market because he also could use a big payday. Only reason I tend to think Lloyd might become a Patriot is the lack of interest in him when he was available for trade. That being said teams are a lot quicker to bring someone in during the off season as opposed to trying to work them in mid-season and sacrifice draft picks so I'm not entirely convinced the lack or interest in Lloyd at the trade deadline means teams are simply not that interested in him.

I think there are some differences between Mankins and Welker. For one, Welker is not suggesting that the owner is a bold faced liar. Second, Welker is not saying that the owner is demanding a public apology for insulting the owner. Third, unlike Mankins, there are no other comparible players to Welker. There were other contracts for elite guards that Mankins could use as a barometer for his contract. In Welker's case, slot receivers historically don't get paid a ton of money and that will be one of the issues in determining his contract. Welker is clearly more valuable to NE than any other franchise, and it's unlikely another team would offer him the contract he will want either. As you mentioned, his age, size, and style of play all point to him potentially not being worth his salary on the back end of a deal. That should all drive Welker's value down, but his agent certainly won't see it that way.The talking media heads around here think that Welker is only worth $5 or $6 million a year. They also think that if the Pats offer a 3 year, $20 million deal with half guaranteed that should be enough to get him signed. I think they are WAY off on that one, as Welker will likely ask for 5 years, $50 million with $20+ million guaranteed. Those starting points are so far removed that I am not sure either side would even want to meet in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd heard Schefter's talk about a team signing Wallace with a huge first year roster bonus to ensure the Steelers wouldn't match. Whether Wallace agrees to a signing bonus or roster bonus doesn't affect him, he'll have the money upfront. Now if he really has no interest in allowing the Steelers to match his agent would agree to the roster bonus over a signing bonus. My guess would be that if Wallace gets an offer it will have a signing bonus so that he gives the Steelers every chance to match if they can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd heard Schefter's talk about a team signing Wallace with a huge first year roster bonus to ensure the Steelers wouldn't match. Whether Wallace agrees to a signing bonus or roster bonus doesn't affect him, he'll have the money upfront. Now if he really has no interest in allowing the Steelers to match his agent would agree to the roster bonus over a signing bonus. My guess would be that if Wallace gets an offer it will have a signing bonus so that he gives the Steelers every chance to match if they can.

Is there any player the Steelers are using the franchise tag on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Wallace WR - PIT: Feb 20, 7:30PM

According to NFL Network's Jason La Canfora, there is "real concern" in the Steelers' front office that they may lose restricted free agent Mike Wallace. The Steelers are in a tough spot because they're so tight up against the salary cap. They'll place a first-round tender on Wallace, but a franchise tag isn't financially doable, and the tender would leave Pittsburgh vulnerable to teams willing to surrender a first-round pick. La Canfora mentioned the division-rival Ravens and Patriots as teams potentially interested in Wallace. Baltimore drafts at No. 29, and New England has two first-round picks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If New England signs him, they would forfeit their own pick, is this correct ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.