Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

    DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

    "Who Dat Nation can finally rest easy with
    quarterback Drew Brees locked
    up long term. You could almost hear a collective sigh of relief coming from New Orleans Saints fans everywhere when he signed
    his five-year, $100 million
    deal. We all know Brees deserved this contract.
    He is one of the top players at the game's most crucial position and delivered a
    Super Bowl title to a long-downtrodden franchise. Paying him --
    he'll get a $37 million signing bonus this year, $50 million over the first two
    years of the deal and $61 million over three -- is a great deal for both the
    player and the team. The one thing I have learned from managing the salary cap
    is that you can never overpay a great player ... especially when that player is
    a quarterback.

    Making Brees the highest-paid quarterback
    in the NFL was not hard for the Saints. Paying great players is never hard --
    simply determine the market value of players with similar talents, then work
    accordingly. However, there is one big mistake teams can make in terms of cap
    management: paying good players as if they were great players. (See: the NBA.)
    Good is not great; teams must be disciplined in assessing the difference.




    Unfortunately for teams, the player-contract market does not care about such
    distinctions. One contract can push another contract higher, and before too
    long, the good players are paid like great players. The ripple effect of the
    Brees contract will be a financial boon for many signal-callers. It should
    really benefit, for example, the New York Giants' Eli Manning, the
    Green Bay Packers'
    Aaron Rodgers,
    the Pittsburgh
    Steelers
    ' Ben
    Roethlisberger
    and maybe even the Detroit Lions' Matthew
    Stafford
    . But will it benefit the Baltimore Ravens'
    Joe Flacco and/or
    the Atlanta Falcons'
    Matt Ryan?




    Flacco, who has one year left on his rookie contract, has clearly shown
    improvement during his four years in the NFL. Flacco, who started his career as
    a game manager, has grown as a player and is now the reason the Baltimore Ravens
    can compete for a title. He has the skill set to carry the Ravens -- the team's
    success is no longer entirely dependent on its defense. Flacco's agent will look
    at Brees' contract, note the fact that his client has participated in nine
    playoff games in just four years and conclude that Flacco deserves a deal
    similar to Brees' (with incentives that would make it even to Brees' deal if
    Flacco wins a Super Bowl). Is this realistic? No, because Flacco is just an
    above-average quarterback right now. But he does have real potential to be great
    in the near future, making his contract hard to execute at this time, especially
    after the Brees deal.






    Flacco is not worth $20 million per year right now -- even his agent would
    quietly agree with that. But what will Flacco be worth in three years if he
    continues to improve and drive the Ravens' success?



    The Baltimore Ravens would not be able to easily replace Flacco, so if they
    can't complete a long-term deal, they will be forced to apply the franchise tag
    to him next offseason. This means Flacco will receive more than $14 million in
    2013, with a 120 percent raise every year thereafter. That's an expensive way to
    proceed. As much as the Ravens want to execute a deal worth less than $15
    million per year, the rules and their inability to replace him make that goal
    unrealistic. The Ravens will therefore pay Flacco like he is great now and hope
    he proves them right, sooner rather than later.




    The same scenario is playing out in Atlanta with Matt Ryan, who has two years
    left on a six-year, $72 million rookie deal. Ryan is not great, either, yet he
    is also hard to replace, which means the Atlanta Falcons will likely have to
    craft a deal that pays a good player great money. What choice do they
    have? Regarding Ryan and the Falcons, my original cap-management axiom -- You
    can never overpay a great quarterback
    -- suddenly applies to good
    quarterbacks, too.




    Brees' deal will impact the worth of franchise tags, which means both Flacco
    and Ryan become even harder to apply the tag to in the future and harder to sign
    right now. Both teams will have their work cut out for them and both might be
    well-served to wait until after the 2012 season to strike a deal that fits their
    payroll structures.



    "While Brees assisted Ryan and Flacco in future contract talks, he
    really helped Eli. Manning has won two Super Bowls and averages more
    than $15 million per year in a contract that does not expire until after the
    2015 season. Does he deserve a raise? Yes, but he has four more years on his
    deal, so the Giants have more time to decide how to proceed. However, we all
    know this is something that will be resolved before his contract is up.




    The Packers are facing a similar scenario with Rodgers. The reigning NFL MVP
    has a ring of his own, and he's signed to a very reasonable deal through 2014 --
    earning a base salary of just $8 million in 2012. The clock is now ticking for
    the Packers to give a new deal to the man who was just crowned the No. 1 overall player in the NFL by his peers.


    By signing on the dotted line Sunday, Brees finally gave Saints fans peace of
    mind ... and made every other starting quarterback in the league a little more
    money."
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1

  • #2
    Re: DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

    [quote user="RoanokeFan"]DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

    "Who Dat Nation can finally rest easy with
    quarterback Drew Brees locked
    up long term. You could almost hear a collective sigh of relief coming from New Orleans Saints fans everywhere when he signed
    his five-year, $100 million
    deal. We all know Brees deserved this contract.
    He is one of the top players at the game's most crucial position and delivered a
    Super Bowl title to a long-downtrodden franchise. Paying him --
    he'll get a $37 million signing bonus this year, $50 million over the first two
    years of the deal and $61 million over three -- is a great deal for both the
    player and the team. The one thing I have learned from managing the salary cap
    is that you can never overpay a great player ... especially when that player is
    a quarterback.

    Making Brees the highest-paid quarterback
    in the NFL was not hard for the Saints. Paying great players is never hard --
    simply determine the market value of players with similar talents, then work
    accordingly. However, there is one big mistake teams can make in terms of cap
    management: paying good players as if they were great players. (See: the NBA.)
    Good is not great; teams must be disciplined in assessing the difference.




    Unfortunately for teams, the player-contract market does not care about such
    distinctions. One contract can push another contract higher, and before too
    long, the good players are paid like great players. The ripple effect of the
    Brees contract will be a financial boon for many signal-callers. It should
    really benefit, for example, the New York Giants' Eli Manning, the
    Green Bay Packers'
    Aaron Rodgers,
    the Pittsburgh
    Steelers
    ' Ben
    Roethlisberger
    and maybe even the Detroit Lions' Matthew
    Stafford
    . But will it benefit the Baltimore Ravens'
    Joe Flacco and/or
    the Atlanta Falcons'
    Matt Ryan?




    Flacco, who has one year left on his rookie contract, has clearly shown
    improvement during his four years in the NFL. Flacco, who started his career as
    a game manager, has grown as a player and is now the reason the Baltimore Ravens
    can compete for a title. He has the skill set to carry the Ravens -- the team's
    success is no longer entirely dependent on its defense. Flacco's agent will look
    at Brees' contract, note the fact that his client has participated in nine
    playoff games in just four years and conclude that Flacco deserves a deal
    similar to Brees' (with incentives that would make it even to Brees' deal if
    Flacco wins a Super Bowl). Is this realistic? No, because Flacco is just an
    above-average quarterback right now. But he does have real potential to be great
    in the near future, making his contract hard to execute at this time, especially
    after the Brees deal.






    Flacco is not worth $20 million per year right now -- even his agent would
    quietly agree with that. But what will Flacco be worth in three years if he
    continues to improve and drive the Ravens' success?



    The Baltimore Ravens would not be able to easily replace Flacco, so if they
    can't complete a long-term deal, they will be forced to apply the franchise tag
    to him next offseason. This means Flacco will receive more than $14 million in
    2013, with a 120 percent raise every year thereafter. That's an expensive way to
    proceed. As much as the Ravens want to execute a deal worth less than $15
    million per year, the rules and their inability to replace him make that goal
    unrealistic. The Ravens will therefore pay Flacco like he is great now and hope
    he proves them right, sooner rather than later.




    The same scenario is playing out in Atlanta with Matt Ryan, who has two years
    left on a six-year, $72 million rookie deal. Ryan is not great, either, yet he
    is also hard to replace, which means the Atlanta Falcons will likely have to
    craft a deal that pays a good player great money. What choice do they
    have? Regarding Ryan and the Falcons, my original cap-management axiom -- You
    can never overpay a great quarterback
    -- suddenly applies to good
    quarterbacks, too.




    Brees' deal will impact the worth of franchise tags, which means both Flacco
    and Ryan become even harder to apply the tag to in the future and harder to sign
    right now. Both teams will have their work cut out for them and both might be
    well-served to wait until after the 2012 season to strike a deal that fits their
    payroll structures.



    "While Brees assisted Ryan and Flacco in future contract talks, he
    really helped Eli. Manning has won two Super Bowls and averages more
    than $15 million per year in a contract that does not expire until after the
    2015 season. Does he deserve a raise? Yes, but he has four more years on his
    deal, so the Giants have more time to decide how to proceed. However, we all
    know this is something that will be resolved before his contract is up.




    The Packers are facing a similar scenario with Rodgers. The reigning NFL MVP
    has a ring of his own, and he's signed to a very reasonable deal through 2014 --
    earning a base salary of just $8 million in 2012. The clock is now ticking for
    the Packers to give a new deal to the man who was just crowned the No. 1 overall player in the NFL by his peers.


    By signing on the dotted line Sunday, Brees finally gave Saints fans peace of
    mind ... and made every other starting quarterback in the league a little more
    money."[/quote]

    I think Eli's next contract will be about 5 years for 75 million.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

      [quote user="THE_New_York_Giants"][quote user="RoanokeFan"]DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

      "Who Dat Nation can finally rest easy with quarterback Drew Brees locked up long term. You could almost hear a collective sigh of relief coming from New Orleans Saints fans everywhere when he signed his five-year, $100 million deal. We all know Brees deserved this contract. He is one of the top players at the game's most crucial position and delivered a Super Bowl title to a long-downtrodden franchise. Paying him -- he'll get a $37 million signing bonus this year, $50 million over the first two years of the deal and $61 million over three -- is a great deal for both the player and the team. The one thing I have learned from managing the salary cap is that you can never overpay a great player ... especially when that player is a quarterback.

      Making Brees the highest-paid quarterback in the NFL was not hard for the Saints. Paying great players is never hard -- simply determine the market value of players with similar talents, then work accordingly. However, there is one big mistake teams can make in terms of cap management: paying good players as if they were great players. (See: the NBA.) Good is not great; teams must be disciplined in assessing the difference.




      Unfortunately for teams, the player-contract market does not care about such distinctions. One contract can push another contract higher, and before too long, the good players are paid like great players. The ripple effect of the Brees contract will be a financial boon for many signal-callers. It should really benefit, for example, the New York Giants' Eli Manning, the Green Bay Packers' Aaron Rodgers, the Pittsburgh Steelers' Ben Roethlisberger and maybe even the Detroit Lions' Matthew Stafford. But will it benefit the Baltimore Ravens' Joe Flacco and/or the Atlanta Falcons' Matt Ryan?




      Flacco, who has one year left on his rookie contract, has clearly shown improvement during his four years in the NFL. Flacco, who started his career as a game manager, has grown as a player and is now the reason the Baltimore Ravens can compete for a title. He has the skill set to carry the Ravens -- the team's success is no longer entirely dependent on its defense. Flacco's agent will look at Brees' contract, note the fact that his client has participated in nine playoff games in just four years and conclude that Flacco deserves a deal similar to Brees' (with incentives that would make it even to Brees' deal if Flacco wins a Super Bowl). Is this realistic? No, because Flacco is just an above-average quarterback right now. But he does have real potential to be great in the near future, making his contract hard to execute at this time, especially after the Brees deal.





















      Flacco is not worth $20 million per year right now -- even his agent would quietly agree with that. But what will Flacco be worth in three years if he continues to improve and drive the Ravens' success?




      The Baltimore Ravens would not be able to easily replace Flacco, so if they can't complete a long-term deal, they will be forced to apply the franchise tag to him next offseason. This means Flacco will receive more than $14 million in 2013, with a 120 percent raise every year thereafter. That's an expensive way to proceed. As much as the Ravens want to execute a deal worth less than $15 million per year, the rules and their inability to replace him make that goal unrealistic. The Ravens will therefore pay Flacco like he is great now and hope he proves them right, sooner rather than later.




      The same scenario is playing out in Atlanta with Matt Ryan, who has two years left on a six-year, $72 million rookie deal. Ryan is not great, either, yet he is also hard to replace, which means the Atlanta Falcons will likely have to craft a deal that pays a good player great money. What choice do they have? Regarding Ryan and the Falcons, my original cap-management axiom -- You can never overpay a great quarterback -- suddenly applies to good quarterbacks, too.




      Brees' deal will impact the worth of franchise tags, which means both Flacco and Ryan become even harder to apply the tag to in the future and harder to sign right now. Both teams will have their work cut out for them and both might be well-served to wait until after the 2012 season to strike a deal that fits their payroll structures.




      "While Brees assisted Ryan and Flacco in future contract talks, he really helped Eli. Manning has won two Super Bowls and averages more than $15 million per year in a contract that does not expire until after the 2015 season. Does he deserve a raise? Yes, but he has four more years on his deal, so the Giants have more time to decide how to proceed. However, we all know this is something that will be resolved before his contract is up.




      The Packers are facing a similar scenario with Rodgers. The reigning NFL MVP has a ring of his own, and he's signed to a very reasonable deal through 2014 -- earning a base salary of just $8 million in 2012. The clock is now ticking for the Packers to give a new deal to the man who was just crowned the No. 1 overall player in the NFL by his peers.




      By signing on the dotted line Sunday, Brees finally gave Saints fans peace of mind ... and made every other starting quarterback in the league a little more money."[/quote]

      I think Eli's next contract will be about 5 years for 75 million.
      [/quote]







      So you think he will take a pay cut???

      #80

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: DREW BREES' DEAL BENEFITS JOE FLACCO, MATT RYAN, ELI MANNING

        Im not sure this effects Eli as much as Rodgers, Stafford and Ryan. Eli is signed through 2016 and was the highest paid player in the NFL 2 years ago. He is already getting his coin. Rodgers will get a blockbuster deal no doubt though. So will Stafford if he stays healthy.

        Comment

        Working...
        X