Overspend:

[The King]

There's one FA coming up that I think Buffalo needs to break the bank for.

Logan Mankins.

The dude is a beast, and he's committed to getting better. I think it's fair to say his relationship with the Pats has soured. They may tag him but if they dont Im ok with the Bills making him the highest paid guard in football.

[streetkings01]

There's one FA coming up that I think Buffalo needs to break the bank for.

Logan Mankins.

The dude is a beast, and he's committed to getting better. I think it's fair to say his relationship with the Pats has soured. They may tag him but if they dont Im ok with the Bills making him the highest paid guard in football.Didn't we make that mistake with Dockery? There is no need to overpay for guards......they can be had on the cheap via draft or FA. A good LT is the one we need to overpay for so we can move Bell to RT.

[ddaryl]

if he can make our run game dominant then it would be a worthwhile pursuit.

We've moved Woods to C we could use a dominant G to replace him.

I will never complain about pursuing high quality players for both lines... and we are so far under the cap we can afford the luxury some..

[JCBills]

Didn't we make that mistake with Dockery? There is no need to overpay for guards......they can be had on the cheap via draft or FA. A good LT is the one we need to overpay for so we can move Bell to RT.

Bell isn't a mauler. He probably lacks the strength for RT and has more ideal size for LT. He's doing fine where he is. Everyone wants a big shiny 1st round LT at some point, but right now we don't need one. I'd rather see us go after a RT in FA and take a project in the mid rounds.

[mikemac2001]

Lets see if there is even a Free agency first

[tomz]

I agree that Mankins would be one possible target but I think they are happy with the collection of guards we have.

How about inside linebackers? There seem to be a couple good ones starting with David Harris.

[Ickybaluky]

He is almost certain to be franchise tagged. I think there is a pretty good chance they try to re-sign him as well, once he is tagged.

There are probably going to be a record number of players franchised this year once a new CBA is agreed to, as there is a backlog of guys who weren't paid because of the labor uncertainty.

[DraftBoy]

I cant see any scenario that Mankins gets away from the Pats at this point.

[THATHURMANATOR]

Don't overpay for a dumbass guard.

[Night Train]

Lets see if there is even a Free agency first

Ding,ding,ding..we have a winner.

It may be a moot point if nothing is done in February. They're not even close, according to reports.

[better days]

He is almost certain to be franchise tagged. I think there is a pretty good chance they try to re-sign him as well, once he is tagged.

There are probably going to be a record number of players franchised this year once a new CBA is agreed to, as there is a backlog of guys who weren't paid because of the labor uncertainty.

In the past the Pats* did not want to pay top dollar which has to be done when franchising a player. Will they do that with Mankins? If so, I will bet he misses as many games as allowed under the new agreement.

I know he was REALLY not happy the Pats* did not give him a new contract LAST YEAR so I would not expect him to give the Pats* any kind of home team discount on a new contract.

[Mad Max]

In the past the Pats* did not want to pay top dollar which has to be done when franchising a player. Will they do that with Mankins? If so, I will bet he misses as many games as allowed under the new agreement.

I know he was REALLY not happy the Pats* did not give him a new contract LAST YEAR so I would not expect him to give the Pats* any kind of home team discount on a new contract.

They tagged Wilfork and Cassell, they pay when they need to.

[Prov401]

Mankins is a beast, but if we're going to spend major $ in FA, we should get a defensive starter.

Don't forget, the Bills signed 2 2nd rd, and 1 3rd rd lineman during the season last year. All are young players.

If we're throwing money into one player, I'd rather sign Richard Seymour, or Mathias Kiwanuka.

[Mad Max]

Mankins is a beast, but if we're going to spend major $ in FA, we should get a defensive starter.

Don't forget, the Bills signed 2 2nd rd, and 1 3rd rd lineman during the season last year. All are young players.

If we're throwing money into one player, I'd rather sign Richard Seymour, or Mathias Kiwanuka.

Both good players to be sure, but I wouldn't want us to get either. Seymour's best days are behind him, and we already pretty much have Kiwanuka in Moats (for a lot less money).

[better days]

They tagged Wilfork and Cassell, they pay when they need to.

Well, they tagged Cassell in order to trade him. They were able to get Wilfork to do a new contract which Mankins may refuse to do.They may franchise Mankins like Cassell to trade him.

[better days]

Mankins is a beast, but if we're going to spend major $ in FA, we should get a defensive starter.

Don't forget, the Bills signed 2 2nd rd, and 1 3rd rd lineman during the season last year. All are young players.

If we're throwing money into one player, I'd rather sign Richard Seymour, or Mathias Kiwanuka.

I agree about going defense if they pay money for a FA but not for those two.

[Mad Max]

Well, they tagged Cassell in order to trade him. They were able to get Wilfork to do a new contract which Mankins may refuse to do.They may franchise Mankins like Cassell to trade him.

You said you didn't know if they would want to pay him. Regardless of the reasons, they obviously were willing to pay players in the past by Franchising them. If their plans didn't work out with Cassell or Wilfork, they were going to pay Franchise salaries.

Patriots pay when they need to for whom they deem worthy.

[YardRat]

If we're opening the vault for a free agent, I'd prefer it was Harris or Woodley for our LBer corps. Can't realistically see either of them leaving their current team, though.

[Mad Max]

If we're opening the vault for a free agent, I'd prefer it was Harris or Woodley for our LBer corps. Can't realistically see either of them leaving their current team, though.

Ya, either of those guys would be nice. And you're right, in that they're not likely to want to leave.

We for the most part are going to have to use the Stiller mold of building primarily through the draft

[better days]

You said you didn't know if they would want to pay him. Regardless of the reasons, they obviously were willing to pay players in the past by Franchising them. If their plans didn't work out with Cassell or Wilfork, they were going to pay Franchise salaries.

Patriots pay when they need to for whom they deem worthy.

They did not pay either of them the Franchise tag money. They were able to get Wilfork to agree to a new contract & they traded Cassell which was their plan, they did not want to sign him to a big money contract.

[better days]

Ya, either of those guys would be nice. And you're right, in that they're not likely to want to leave.

We for the most part are going to have to use the Stiller mold of building primarily through the draft

As well as the Packers. BOTH teams in the Super Bowl this year have the philosophy of draft & develop rather than sign expensive free agents like the Redskins. Maybe there is hope for the Bills.

[Mad Max]

They did not pay either of them the Franchise tag money. They were able to get Wilfork to agree to a new contract & they traded Cassell which was their plan, they did not want to sign him to a big money contract.

They were willing to pay obviously, by the mere act of placing the tags. Teams place the tags for various reasons, but at the end of the day they go in knowing that there's a chance that they will have to pay.

BTW Wilfork got paid handsomely, more than Franchise money, huge signing bonus.

Franchise tag is just a tool, Pats have used it before and will use it again.

[better days]

They were willing to pay obviously, by the mere act of placing the tags. Teams place the tags for various reasons, but at the end of the day they go in knowing that there's a chance that they will have to pay.

BTW Wilfork got paid handsomely, more than Franchise money, huge signing bonus.

Franchise tag is just a tool, Pats have used it before and will use it again.

Agreed franchise tag is a tool, but Wilfork was paid much less LONG term than the Franchise tag & they NEVER intended to pay Cassell a penny.

[Mad Max]

Agreed franchise tag is a tool, but Wilfork was paid much less LONG term than the Franchise tag & they NEVER intended to pay Cassell a penny.

No, Wilfork got paid a huge signing bonus, which is much more valuable than projecting out ghost salaries in the NFL.

And it doesn't matter that they didn't pay Cassell, if their plans went by the wayside, they would have paid since they applied the tag.

Same goes for Mankins, not saying they will Franchise him, just that they certainly could and have no apprehension in doing so.

[better days]

No, Wilfork got paid a huge signing bonus, which is much more valuable than projecting out ghost salaries in the NFL.

And it doesn't matter that they didn't pay Cassell, if their plans went by the wayside, they would have paid since they applied the tag.

Same goes for Mankins, not saying they will Franchise him, just that they certainly could and have no apprehension in doing so.

NO in the LONG TERM Wilfork was paid MUCH LESS than if you apply the franchise tag amount to the FULL term of his contract.

As for Cassell, they could have pulled the tag off of him if they could not make a trade. They would NEVER have paid him the franchise tag money.

[Mad Max]

NO in the LONG TERM Wilfork was paid MUCH LESS than if you apply the franchise tag amount to the FULL term of his contract.

As for Cassell, they could have pulled the tag off of him if they could not make a trade. They would NEVER have paid him the franchise tag money.

NO, Wilfork got paid an 18mil signing bonus which is what players covet, since it's guaranteed money. Since NFL contracts are not guaranteed, it's the bonuses that mean eveything. You can't project out Franchise tag money to X number of years, that's not how it works.

Just as the tag could have been placed and released on Cassell the same could be done with Mankins. It's a tool. Mankins is not immune.

[better days]

NO, Wilfork got paid an 18mil signing bonus which is what players covet, since it's guaranteed money. Since NFL contracts are not guaranteed, it's the bonuses that mean eveything. You can't project out Franchise tag money to X number of years, that's not how it works.

Just as the tag could have been placed and released on Cassell the same could be done with Mankins. It's a tool. Mankins is not immune.

NO, while the bonus money is guaranteed, so is Franchise tag money. If Wilfork were to be paid the franchise amount for the term of his contract, it would be MUCH MORE than what he signed for.

The same applies to Mankins if he is franchised & refuses to sign a new contract, the franchise tag money is guaranteed unless the Pats* withdraw the tag within the window of time for doing so. I already said the Pats* could tag Mankins & trade him.

Can anyone name the last player the Pats* franchised tagged & PAID the tag money?

[Mad Max]

NO, while the bonus money is guaranteed, so is Franchise tag money. If Wilfork were to be paid the franchise amount for the term of his contract, it would be MUCH MORE than what he signed for.

The same applies to Mankins if he is franchised & refuses to sign a new contract, the franchise tag money is guaranteed unless the Pats* withdraw the tag within the window of time for doing so. I already said the Pats* could tag Mankins & trade him.

Can anyone name the last player the Pats* franchised tagged & PAID the tag money?

NO, noone is going to get paid franchise money throughout a contract, that's not how contracts work. Nice in theory, doesn't happen in reality.

[better days]

NO, noone is going to get paid franchise money throughout a contract, that's not how contracts work. Nice in theory, doesn't happen in reality.

That was my point. The Pats* got Wilfork to agree to a long term contract which was MUCH LESS than Franchise tag money. Cassell was NEVER in the Pats* plans, they only franchised him for trade.

I could see the Pats* paying the tag money possibly for a year to Mankins but as I said, he would likely miss as many games as he is allowed to do.

[Mad Max]

That was my point. The Pats* got Wilfork to agree to a long term contract which was MUCH LESS than Franchise tag money. Cassell was NEVER in the Pats* plans, they only franchised him for trade.

I could see the Pats* paying the tag money possibly for a year to Mankins but as I said, he would likely miss as many games as he is allowed to do.

yikes, I got into a debate and stayed in a debate about a Pats player.

In any case, we've reached the magical point of having to "agree to disagree", I can't waste another moment of valuable free time talking about Logan fin Mankins.

Out of curiousity why do you put an asterisk after Pats*?

[better days]

yikes, I got into a debate and stayed in a debate about a Pats player.

In any case, we've reached the magical point of having to "agree to disagree", I can't waste another moment of valuable free time talking about Logan fin Mankins.

Out of curiousity why do you put an asterisk after Pats*?

I started doing that when they were caught cheating. Teams & Players caught cheating have the asterisk placed after their names. Even though he did not really cheat, Roger Marris had the asterisk placed after his name when he broke Babe Ruths home run record because it took him more games to do so.

As I said can you or anybody else tell me the last time the Pats* paid the tag money to a player? The Pats* do not like to pay retail.

[Mad Max]

I started doing that when they were caught cheating. Teams & Players caught cheating have the asterisk placed after their names. Even though he did not really cheat, Roger Marris had the asterisk placed after his name when he broke Babe Ruths home run record because it took him more games to do so.

As I said can you or anybody else tell me the last time the Pats* paid the tag money to a player? The Pats* do not like to pay retail.
OIC, interesting about the *.

As for the other question, as I said we're going to agree to disagree. I'm not interested in trying to change your mind, your opinion is yours to keep!

[better days]

OIC, interesting about the *.

As for the other question, as I said we're going to agree to disagree. I'm not interested in trying to change your mind, your opinion is yours to keep!

Agreed, I formed my opinion based on what the Pats* have done in the past.

[Ickybaluky]

Agreed, I formed my opinion based on what the Pats* have done in the past.

Which seems to be something you know little about. I am not sure how you got the idea that the Patriots don't pay, considering they spend to the cap every year. You may think you know, but you show remarkable ignorance of their team.

They have used the Franchise tag 6 times over the years, including Wilfork, Cassel, Asante Samuel, Adam Vinatieri (twice) and Tebucky Jones. They have positioned themselves to have plenty of cap room this year because they have so many younger players earning relatively little money, so carrying a large one year contract is not much of a burden. There is little chance they don't tag Mankins, to at least protect their rights to him. They likely want to sign him long term, and the uncertain CBA means they will franchise him to give time to do so. You are going to see a ton of guys franchised this year for the same reason.

Also, I am not sure how you can say the Pats won't pay top talent when they have the highest paid player in the NFL on their team. They will pay to keep top players.

Wilfork did not take a discount. He signed a 5 Yr/$40M contract with $25M guaranteed and an $18M SB. At the time he signed it it made him the highest paid NT in the NFL and the 2nd-highest paid DT (to Albert Haynesworth).

The one year franchise tag for Wilfork was for $7M, so they paid him a higher annual average and $18M to sign. Thus, they paid more to keep him than the tag.

[better days]

Which seems to be something you know little about. I am not sure how you got the idea that the Patriots don't pay, considering they spend to the cap every year. You may think you know, but you show remarkable ignorance of their team.

They have used the Franchise tag 6 times over the years, including Wilfork, Cassel, Asante Samuel, Adam Vinatieri (twice) and Tebucky Jones. They have positioned themselves to have plenty of cap room this year because they have so many younger players earning relatively little money, so carrying a large one year contract is not much of a burden. There is little chance they don't tag Mankins, to at least protect their rights to him. They likely want to sign him long term, and the uncertain CBA means they will franchise him to give time to do so. You are going to see a ton of guys franchised this year for the same reason.

Also, I am not sure how you can say the Pats won't pay top talent when they have the highest paid player in the NFL on their team. They will pay to keep top players.

Wilfork did not take a discount. He signed a 5 Yr/$40M contract with $25M guaranteed and an $18M SB. At the time he signed it it made him the highest paid NT in the NFL and the 2nd-highest paid DT (to Albert Haynesworth).

The one year franchise tag for Wilfork was for $7M, so they paid him a higher annual average and $18M to sign. Thus, they paid more to keep him than the tag.

Of the players you named tell me one that the Pats* PAID the tag money to. They got Wilfork to agree to a LONG TERM contract. My point was not so much that they did not want to sign Mankins, but that Mankins may not want to sign a long term contract with the Pats* because he was not happy they did not extend him last year.

[Ickybaluky]

Of the players you named tell me one that the Pats* PAID the tag money to. They got Wilfork to agree to a LONG TERM contract. My point was not so much that they did not want to sign Mankins, but that Mankins may not want to sign a long term contract with the Pats* because he was not happy they did not extend him last year.

Mankins did not sign because they couldn't agree on a contract. It has nothing to do with his not being happy. This is just a business deal, it isn't personal. He has already stated that all 32 teams are in play, he hasn't eliminated the Patriots. He may not be happy with being franchised, but lots of players aren't happy when they are holding out, but what it comes down to is agreeing on terms.

Right now, the Patriots can, and almost certainly will, hold onto him via the franchise tag. They likely will negotiate with him on a contract. I don't know if they can come to an agreement or not, but nothing will happen without an agreement on the CBA anyway. They reportedly weren't that far apart with Mankins, but it is harder to reach a deal without the CBA being finalized. He reported back earlier than he had to this season and hasn't ruled out signing with the Pats. He just wants his money, and time will tell if he gets it.

Mankins situation isn't any different from a lot of guys who were screwed by the rules in the uncapped year and the CBA uncertainty.

[k-oneputt]

The only free agent they should overspend for is Ngata, and he will be tagged if they need to.
Not overpaying for a guard.

[better days]

Mankins did not sign because they couldn't agree on a contract. It has nothing to do with his not being happy. This is just a business deal, it isn't personal. He has already stated that all 32 teams are in play, he hasn't eliminated the Patriots. He may not be happy with being franchised, but lots of players aren't happy when they are holding out, but what it comes down to is agreeing on terms.

Right now, the Patriots can, and almost certainly will, hold onto him via the franchise tag. They likely will negotiate with him on a contract. I don't know if they can come to an agreement or not, but nothing will happen without an agreement on the CBA anyway. They reportedly weren't that far apart with Mankins, but it is harder to reach a deal without the CBA being finalized. He reported back earlier than he had to this season and hasn't ruled out signing with the Pats. He just wants his money, and time will tell if he gets it.

Mankins situation isn't any different from a lot of guys who were screwed by the rules in the uncapped year and the CBA uncertainty.

I agree the Pats* will franchise him if necessary, but I also think he will be even more mad than last year if it comes to that & he will miss as many games as allowed.

[Ickybaluky]

I agree the Pats* will franchise him if necessary, but I also think he will be even more mad than last year if it comes to that & he will miss as many games as allowed.

If the Pats paid him what he was looking for, he would sign it tomorrow. So far, they haven't come off their 5 yr/$35M offer, and probably are unlikely to without knowing the terms of the next CBA.

In the end, I think they franchise him an try to keep him. I think they pay him closer to the going rate for a guy like him. I predict he signs for 6 yrs/$48M, $26M coming in the first 3 years.

[Stewie]

I'm in favor of any move that makes our roster better. I can't imagine Mankins bumping a scrub off the depth chart makes us a worse football team. I literally don't care how much it takes. Get him in here.

[Ickybaluky]

According to Adam Schefter on twitter, he has been franchised.


Patriots officially placed franchise tag on Pro Bowl G Logan Mankins on Monday. Franchise OL number is projected to be $10.1 million.

I still feel pretty strongly the Pats re-sign him, once the CBA issues are cleared up. This is a step in that direction, protecting their right to keep him while they negotiate.

As for his holding out, I guess it is possible. It is hard to imagine him leaving over $5M on the table. There is much more money at stake this time. That $10.1M is more than Mankins has earned in his entire career to date (6 seasons).

He would have to go the entire offseason without signing the tender, which means it could be pulled at any time. Once the tender is signed, he is guaranteed the money. However, he is then subject to holdout rules with fines and the possibility he could be placed on the Reserve-Did-Not-Report list and his contract tolled.

Even in the case he held out, would it be any different than last year? He missed half the year and still was named All-Pro, while they managed to win without him.

[Ickybaluky]

I agree the Pats* will franchise him if necessary, but I also think he will be even more mad than last year if it comes to that & he will miss as many games as allowed.

He won't miss any games:


The four other moves announced by the Patriots: Offensive lineman Logan Mankins signed his franchise tender;

LINK (http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4698739/pats-re-sign-rb-faulk)

I think they re-up him long-term before the Sep 20 deadline. Here was my prediction before, and I'll stick with it:


In the end, I think they franchise him an try to keep him. I think they pay him closer to the going rate for a guy like him. I predict he signs for 6 yrs/$48M, $26M coming in the first 3 years.

[Ickybaluky]

I agree the Pats* will franchise him if necessary, but I also think he will be even more mad than last year if it comes to that & he will miss as many games as allowed.

Logan doesn't sound too angry (http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4699234/mankins-all-cool-with-robert-kraft):


"Let's get things straight. Me and Mr. Kraft never had a problem. I never said he lied," Mankins told reporters. "When I said the organization, I never said he did. So let's get that straight right now. Me and Mr. Kraft never had a problem. We've talked last offseason, we've talked last season, we've talked this offseason, we've talked in training camp, so everything is good between me and him."



When it comes to a potential longer contract, Mankins said, "This year I'm putting everything behind me. I'm going to try to have a good year, help the team, and if I play good things will take care of themselves."

An extension with the Patriots is a possibility.

"Oh yeah, there's always a chance. I've talked to the coaches, ownership, everyone. We're all on the same page. We'll just see what happens," he said.

[Ickybaluky]

I agree the Pats* will franchise him if necessary, but I also think he will be even more mad than last year if it comes to that & he will miss as many games as allowed.

Um....


Can anyone name the last player the Pats* franchised tagged & PAID the tag money?

Logan Mankins.

LINK (http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/6851087/new-england-patriots-sign-logan-mankins-six-year-deal)

[X-Era]

The Pats are showing that they can both re-sign their own and add players via trade or signing in the same year. And the new additions aren't simply roster fillers. And all on a team that is already a playoff team.

The Bills had a great draft IMO, and I think it was a better draft than NE to be honest. They get an A in that phase from me.

However, the Bills choose to not compete in the FA phase and the teams record suffers.

[better days]

The Pats are showing that they can both re-sign their own and add players via trade or signing in the same year. And the new additions aren't simply roster fillers. And all on a team that is already a playoff team.

The Bills had a great draft IMO, and I think it was a better draft than NE to be honest. They get an A in that phase from me.

However, the Bills choose to not compete in the FA phase and the teams record suffers.

It is clear that Belichick & Kraft know the Pats* window to win a Super Bowl is closing fast. Aside from Brady getting older, they have two years before the hard cap takes effect.

The trades & signings by the Pats* are an attempt to keep up with the Jets & to go for the Super Bowl ring NOW. If it pans out, the Pats* should be considered strong contenders, if not it didn't cost the Pats* much.

[Ickybaluky]

It is clear that Belichick & Kraft know the Pats* window to win a Super Bowl is closing fast. Aside from Brady getting older, they have two years before the hard cap takes effect.

The trades & signings by the Pats* are an attempt to keep up with the Jets & to go for the Super Bowl ring NOW. If it pans out, the Pats* should be considered strong contenders, if not it didn't cost the Pats* much.

I love when people bring up the cap argument. It shows they know nothing about how the cap works. They really have nothing else to grab onto, so they pull that out of their butt.

A cap number is merely an accounting number. You can move money year-to-year and manage the cap hit, as long as the player is good.

Where you get in trouble is when you invest big money into a player who isn't worth it. Then you have to eat the amortized money and get rid of they guy, like Dallas did with Roy Williams. That is how you get cap issues.

Look at the players the Pats have invested big dollars in: Brady, Wilfork, Mankins. They are all among the elite at their positions in the league. No problem managing those cap hits. I'd prefer paying big money and keeping those guys to having oodles of cap room and having crappy players.

The Pats strategy coming out of the lockout is now clear, and they executed in perfectly. They locked up their core players. Then, they brought in some veteran players on short-term contracts because they were a value.

Chad Ochocinco? He got a $4.5M signing bonus and has a cap hit of $2.5M this year.

Albert Haynesworth? He cut his base pay this year to $1.5M, converting the rest of his old salary to incentives. He can earn up to $5.85M this year, but he has to play a lot and play well to do that. He got no bonus money, so they can cut him at any time with no future cap effect.

Mark Anderson ($1.35M) and Andre Carter ($1.75M), both on 1-year deals for short money. No long-term cap effects there.

Shaun Ellis? Paid him $4M - $5M this year, but no cap effect beyond this year.

Gerard Warren? 1 Year deal.

They Pats will continue to lock up their core players. Jerod Mayo is one of the best LB in the NFL. Sebastian Vollmer is one of the best OT in the league. Patrick Chung, Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez and Devin McCourty are all likely to get pretty big contracts in the next few years. However, those are good players, so paying them doesn't create a problem with the cap.

[Ickybaluky]

...they have two years before the hard cap takes effect.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, but the cap is the cap. The same cap rules are in effect for all teams for the full 10 years of the new CBA. All teams have to stay under the same total cap.

I think you may be referring to the per-team minimum cash spending floor, which starts in 2013. However, again, that is true for all teams.

[X-Era]

It is clear that Belichick & Kraft know the Pats* window to win a Super Bowl is closing fast. Aside from Brady getting older, they have two years before the hard cap takes effect.

The trades & signings by the Pats* are an attempt to keep up with the Jets & to go for the Super Bowl ring NOW. If it pans out, the Pats* should be considered strong contenders, if not it didn't cost the Pats* much.Both the teams you mention are perennial playoff teams... maybe they know how to do it and the Bills don't?