Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [patriotzip] Re: Reiss Quote from Samuels

Expand Messages
  • RandyZ. Pierce
    As for why they are insulted, this I can sort of understand. Insulted is more of a personal term and that s a sign of their immaturity but the deal from a
    Message 1 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      As for why they are insulted, this I can sort of
      understand. Insulted is more of a personal term and
      that's a sign of their immaturity but the deal from a
      business perspective is thus:

      Franchise offers by definition have no signing bonus
      which is the only form of guaranteed money in a
      contract. It's While the Franchise tag does guarantee
      them the year's paycheck, it is just that a year. A
      multi-year deal with a big signing bonus gives them
      guaranteed money for futures as well. So economically
      there is a significant hit and that's simply something
      most folks work to avoid (financial diminishings).

      So while it's a lot of money either way and many might
      discuss those merits the primary point is that anyone
      getting less than they think they deserve or could get
      otherwise is going to be a bitg disappointed.

      The insult part may be the real dollars they are
      offering for long term deals. I'm sure he's looking
      at the San Francisco offer as the benchmark while the
      Pats are looking at that as a act of financial
      irresponsibility by a struggling franchise. Somewhere
      in those meetings Pioli is rating Samuel amongst the
      top Corners and Sameuels through his agent is being
      rates as the top corner. They list his deficits while
      Samuels camp list his strengths and in this process is
      room for some 'insult' to be taken.

      It could still work out and this could all be
      posturing but I'm sad it's public (again) and that
      until July 15 we are hopeful but unlikely to get much
      news.

      Go Pats!
      Zip
    • RandyZ. Pierce
      The Globe article by Reiss is worth the read. It details the options and dates involved for all things. In synopsis: July 14 at midnight is the deadline for
      Message 2 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        The Globe article by Reiss is worth the read. It
        details the options and dates involved for all things.
        In synopsis:

        July 14 at midnight is the deadline for Samuels to
        sign his Franchise offer (7.79 Million for one year).
        After that point he can only make a one year deal
        which can't be extended. By not having signed it yet
        he remains officially a free agent (restricted) and
        thus he cannot be fined for mandatory events but that
        would change by July 15 as noted above.

        After that Samuel could sit out until week 10 being
        fined for mandatory events and not being paid for the
        games he no shows. He could then show up in week 10
        and collect the weekly salary, earn his season
        accruals and all that.

        He could also sit out the entire year and not earn
        those things though the Patriots under stan they
        would still have the option to re-frnchise him one
        more time.

        Go Pats!
        Zip
      • Frank
        It would be interesting to know how far apart they really are. The Pats are certainly a bottom line organization. I can t see them being willing to move far
        Message 3 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          It would be interesting to know how far apart they really are. The
          Pats are certainly a bottom line organization. I can't see them
          being willing to move far off their offer, after they have
          determined what a players value is. At this point one would think
          that they are pretty far down the road with negotiations. I guess
          I'm not optimistic. I don't think sitting out until week 10 serves
          anyone's interests.

          Could the Pats, Samuel, and a third party actually work a trade?
          He's not under contract, so I assume they'd have to strike a deal,
          have him sign the tender, then execute the trade, or something like
          that. The problem is, at this point, no one has enough money left
          for him, if the trade is for a draft pick.

          I don't think the distraction this year would be as bad as Branch
          was. Last year we lost our top 2 receivers, and it was a real
          struggle early on developing good replacements. I think the
          secondary is in better shape this year, than the receiving corp was
          last year.

          I do think it will be resolved before the deadline, one way or
          another.

          fdb


          --- In patriotzip@yahoogroups.com, "RandyZ. Pierce" <alaric02@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > The Globe article by Reiss is worth the read. It
          > details the options and dates involved for all things.
          > In synopsis:
          >
          > July 14 at midnight is the deadline for Samuels to
          > sign his Franchise offer (7.79 Million for one year).
          > After that point he can only make a one year deal
          > which can't be extended. By not having signed it yet
          > he remains officially a free agent (restricted) and
          > thus he cannot be fined for mandatory events but that
          > would change by July 15 as noted above.
          >
          > After that Samuel could sit out until week 10 being
          > fined for mandatory events and not being paid for the
          > games he no shows. He could then show up in week 10
          > and collect the weekly salary, earn his season
          > accruals and all that.
          >
          > He could also sit out the entire year and not earn
          > those things though the Patriots under stan they
          > would still have the option to re-frnchise him one
          > more time.
          >
          > Go Pats!
          > Zip
          >
        • RandyZ. Pierce
          We can blame BB for the continued rumor and/or potential for Wilson. Having played him at CB through most of camp last year he had folks thinking about it.
          Message 4 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            We can blame BB for the continued rumor and/or
            potential for Wilson. Having played him at CB through
            most of camp last year he had folks thinking about it.

            Honestly in New England's systems BB will play Ty Law
            at Safety and Rodney Harrison at corner when it suits
            him - well probably not playing Ty this year but it
            was a solid example as he did it extensively in a game
            to thwart the Colts.
            Our Safeties and Corners will do some mixing and
            mingling - heck Troy Brown might someday play a few
            snaps at Corner...

            Go Pats!
            Zip

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "fnordcircle" <fnordcircle@...>
            To: "George" <patswingr@...>
            Cc: "Bosco Patriot Listt" <patriots@...>;
            <patriotzip@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2007 6:14 PM
            Subject: Re: Reiss Quote from Samuels


            Why are people always talking about Eugene Wilson
            playing Corner? He's
            spent his entire time in the pros playing safety, it's
            been 4 seasons now
            it's probably time to let that dream die.

            On 6/5/07, George <patswingr@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > ***** As for this season, if a trade doesn't include
            > a good starting CB,
            > which seems unlikely, it looks like Hobbs on one
            > side, and either Tori
            > James
            > or Eugene Wilson on the other, as our CBs. That
            > doesn't seem like a
            > disaster
            > to me. It's certainly not as bad as what happened to
            > our WR corps last
            > year.
            >
            _______________________________________________
            patriots mailing list
            patriots@...
            http://patriots.bosco.net/mailman/listinfo/patriots
          • George
            ***** Valid point, Chris. In fact, yesterday, I forgot to include among the options the one that I told Randy I preferred in an off-list discussion a few days
            Message 5 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              ***** Valid point, Chris. In fact, yesterday, I forgot to include among the options the one that I told Randy I preferred in an off-list discussion a few days ago. That is putting Meriweather at CB, with Wilson in his regular FS spot. Meriweather did play some CB at Miami, and, so I've read, has the tools to play there. Wilson has always been criticized for having some problems with the quick hip turn required of a CB in cover situations. So I'd really favor a secondary of Hobbs and Meriweather at CB, Harrison at SS, and Wilson at FS. Tori James, Chad Scott, and Artrell Hawkins provide solid veteran depth behind that group; while the best of the kids round out the secondary roster. 
               
              ***** I think there's a very real possibility that, if Wilson is healthy, and shows some of the improvement that should come with experience, the lineup I noted above can actually be at least as good as what we'd have with Samuel. In any case, as I said yesterday, the secondary is not a disaster area without our one year wonder.  
               

              George
              Dogs have masters ... Cats have staff!

               


              From: fnordcircle [mailto:fnordcircle@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 5:14 AM
              To: George
              Cc: patriotzip@yahoogroups.com; Bosco Patriot Listt
              Subject: Re: Reiss Quote from Samuels

              Why are people always talking about Eugene Wilson playing Corner?  He's spent his entire time in the pros playing safety, it's been 4 seasons now it's probably time to let that dream die.

              On 6/5/07, George <patswingr@...> wrote:

              ***** As for this season, if a trade doesn't include a good starting CB,
              which seems unlikely, it looks like Hobbs on one side, and either Tori James
              or Eugene Wilson on the other, as our CBs. That doesn't seem like a disaster
              to me. It's certainly not as bad as what happened to our WR corps last year.
            • rockmaul74@aol.com
              freaking baby.....if he doesnt want 7 million this year to play a kids game, i ll be in foxboro to take his place in a heartbeat
              Message 6 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                freaking baby.....if he doesnt want 7 million this year to play a kids game, i'll be in foxboro to take his place in a heartbeat


                **************************************
                See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
              • Don Diamant
                Clearly the Patriots made some mistakes with the handling of Branch but they held all the cards and probably never considered that the NFL would step in and
                Message 7 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
                • 0 Attachment

                   

                  Clearly the Patriots made some mistakes with the handling of Branch but they held all the cards and probably never considered that the NFL would step in and force them to give up the upper hand against their will.  If they are smart they let Samuel do what he will and if he decides to hold out until week ten bench him for the rest of the season.  When the season is over franchise him again and let him hold out again.  I think they need to make a statement.  As for Samuel’s comments they are as absurd as Law’s infamous “I gotta eat.”  I can’t believe he’s going to walk away from a nearly 8 million dollar deal for one year.  I just can’t begin to understand that level of greed but perhaps it’s just me.

                   

                  Don

                • George
                  ***** I don t think you can label this type of action by a player and his leech as greed alone, Don. I think it s a combination of greed and ego. How much of
                  Message 8 of 11 , Jun 5, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    ***** I don't think you can label this type of action by a player and his leech as greed alone, Don. I think it's a combination of greed and ego. How much of each probably varies with each player, and each leech.
                     
                    ***** Players like Bruschi and Brady surely have their egos under better control than players like Branch and Samuel. Players, like all of us, differ as to the importance they place on "mo' money", beyond some very subjective level. Some players see their (public) contract numbers as the most important public declaration of their level of success. Others measure it differently. Right and wrong? I don't think there is a right and wrong in this. It's a matter of personal philosophy.
                     
                    ***** Leeches also differ in their approach to thier job, and the responsibilities that come with it. Some appear to be most concerned with enhancing their own reputations, and, in their view, increasing their client base as a result. All certainly have to give some importance to that, since it's their livelihood. But the weight which they appear to place on that, compared to the weight they place upon what is truly best for their client, is as varied as any other personal philosophy. Unlike the players, however, I feel that there is some degree of "right and wrong" with leeches, since they do have a moral responsibility to their clients. Some of them, in my opinion, ignore that responsibility.
                     
                    ***** In any case, I think there are few, if any, of the leeches who have any concern at all for what is best for the team. Some players do feel some obligation in that direction, again, to varying degrees.
                     
                    ***** In the end, everybody has to look out for #1. The question in negotiations always comes down to the weight that is placed upon that primary concern by all 3 parties involved: the team, the player, and the leech. There are an incredible number of alternate outcomes as a result of those variables. But at least the players and management, as a group, bring something to the game itself. The leeches, on the other hand, add nothing of value for us, the fans.
                     

                    George
                    Dogs have masters ... Cats have staff!

                     


                    From: patriotzip@yahoogroups.com [mailto:patriotzip@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Don Diamant
                    Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 9:57 AM
                    To: patriotzip@yahoogroups.com
                    Cc: 'Bosco Patriot Listt'
                    Subject: RE: [patriotzip] Reiss Quote from Samuels

                    Clearly the Patriots made some mistakes with the handling of Branch but they held all the cards and probably never considered that the NFL would step in and force them to give up the upper hand against their will.  If they are smart they let Samuel do what he will and if he decides to hold out until week ten bench him for the rest of the season.  When the season is over franchise him again and let him hold out again.  I think they need to make a statement.  As for Samuel’s comments they are as absurd as Law’s infamous “I gotta eat.”  I can’t believe he’s going to walk away from a nearly 8 million dollar deal for one year.  I just can’t begin to understand that level of greed but perhaps it’s just me.

                    Don

                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.