WTF are you talking about?NortheasternPJ said:Why'd they give Brady more money and a higher cap number then?
Does anyone think they really want to be able to cut him?
WTF are you talking about?NortheasternPJ said:Why'd they give Brady more money and a higher cap number then?
Does anyone think they really want to be able to cut him?
bankshot1 said:the incremental cost of providing $39 million in escrow and $20 MM (or any amount) is an immaterial cost relative to either the size of the Revis contract or the scope of the Patriots business.
Its possible that a LOC from a bank like Wells Fargo or JP Morgan Chase could be had about 10 basis points.
bankshot1 said:the incremental cost of providing $39 million in escrow and $20 MM (or any amount) is an immaterial cost relative to either the size of the Revis contract or the scope of the Patriots business.
Its possible that a LOC from a bank like Wells Fargo or JP Morgan Chase could be had about 10 basis points.
I do not think you know what you are talking about.bankshot1 said:LOCs are provided all the time in commercial transactions. And the cost is relatively modest for large companies (5-25 basis points depending on co. size, or size of LOC or relationship) . Whether a LOC from Wells or JPM would suffice the NFL's need of a guarantee is not known. But it is typical in other areas of corp. transactions.
10 BP on $40MM = $40,000
I do not think that was the deal breaker.
HomeBrew1901 said:I do not think you know what you are talking about.
Then explain why they restructured Brady's deal?bankshot1 said:
OK-
IMO the cost of the guarantee ($39MM-whatever guarantee the Pats were comfortable with, and i gave you an example of this could be financed via an LOC) was probably very modest relative to the other risks that the Pats saw in this contract.
Apples and orangesHomeBrew1901 said:Then explain why they restructured Brady's deal?
bankshot1 said:Apples and oranges
I have no idea why they restructured that deal. But perhaps there were other specfiic benefits to a new Brady contract structure, that has nothing to do with Revis and his contract structure.
Ralphwiggum said:So, I'll bring up the point again about Belichick's involvement in all of this. Assuming it is true that the failure to re-sign Revis was driven by cash flow issues and a reluctance to escrow the guaranteed portion of the contract (which only the Krafts should care about) and not salary cap issues, why would Belichick not only go along with that, but as the guy who has final say on all personnel moves, be orchestrating this whole thing?
Knowing what we know about Bill Belichick, and given what he's accomplished in his career to date, why would he be interested in working for an owner who wanted to make a move that unquestionably weakened the team simply because of the reluctance to escrow the guaranteed portion of the contract?
That just doesn't compute for me. There are a bunch of good posts in BBTL showing how signing Revis would have involved borrowing against the future cap and would have impacted their ability to re-sign some of their young guys still playing on rookie deals. That makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than Felger's take.
Ralphwiggum said:So, I'll bring up the point again about Belichick's involvement in all of this. Assuming it is true that the failure to re-sign Revis was driven by cash flow issues and a reluctance to escrow the guaranteed portion of the contract (which only the Krafts should care about) and not salary cap issues, why would Belichick not only go along with that, but as the guy who has final say on all personnel moves, be orchestrating this whole thing?
Knowing what we know about Bill Belichick, and given what he's accomplished in his career to date, why would he be interested in working for an owner who wanted to make a move that unquestionably weakened the team simply because of the reluctance to escrow the guaranteed portion of the contract?
That just doesn't compute for me. There are a bunch of good posts in BBTL showing how signing Revis would have involved borrowing against the future cap and would have impacted their ability to re-sign some of their young guys still playing on rookie deals. That makes a hell of a lot more sense to me than Felger's take.
MillarTime said:They're not idiots. In fact, they are quite smart. Trolling the lowest common denominator has gotten them a #1 radio show and a lucrative new contract.
apples-Brady was already under comtractNortheasternPJ said:
So if you have no idea why they did it, how can you determine if it's apples and oranges?
The only thing we know about the Brady restructure was that he's getting more money, his cap number is up, they can cut him for injury and didn't have to put tens of millions in an escrow account.
It may very well have nothing to do with anything, but I don't think you can just dismiss it.
True enough. But their assertions are preposterous.MillarTime said:They're not idiots. In fact, they are quite smart. Trolling the lowest common denominator has gotten them a #1 radio show and a lucrative new contract.
jsinger121 said:
This is so fucking true. F&M are fucking idiots and don't understand the cap.
Are you guys even listening to the show or making assumptions based on the limited posts here?dcmissle said:True enough. But their assertions are preposterous.
BB would not put up with this for a nanosecond. In the business of the NFL, he's bigger than Kraft. Kraft needs him far more than vice versa.
Even if you exclude the NFL owners BB would not work for regardless of the money -- Jerry Jones, Daniel Snyder, York (increasingly apparent), the guy in Cleveland -- there are a dozen owners in the NFL he would work for who would fire their own coaches and happily pay whatever Kraft is paying him.
I am listening to Dale & Holley and responding to the limited posts here.HomeBrew1901 said:
Are you guys even listening to the show or making assumptions based on the limited posts here?
H78 said:Yeah, Mazz is really just riding Felger's coattail today.
soxfan121 said:So...imaginary game threading of a radio show? Fact like points, indeed.
I really can't wait for Murray's BS capacitor to overload with respect to Mazz. It will though and the often hilarious, dry and witty Murray will be openly making fun of Mazz on the air by 2016. There will be serious discussions at TSH offices after the first week of Mazz vacation / Felger & Murray happens. They have good chemistry already and though I haven't heard everything, it does sound like Felger asked for Murray. Local guy, fan, level-headed, radio pro, entertaining...you don't have to be Chad Finn to see this coming. Like many of you, I grew up listening to Big Jim on FNX and he will counter Felger's runaway narratives in a way people will appreciate.
Assuming of course, they actually listen to the show. ;-)
BannedbyNYYFans.com said:
I hope you're right, but Murray sucked today. And I like him. He basically just reiterated everything Felger and Mazz said only worse. When they asked him for his input with respect to Kraft's "real money" escrow deposits versus the cap money he twice answered, "I don't understand that stuff....I'm not good with math".
bankshot1 said:What the real cost of escrowing $40MM-$35MM=$5MM?
For a multi-billion co. the cost is immaterial.
I don't buy it.
WenZink said:
While I have no idea what the cost would be, I can't believe that Robert Kraft has any cash flow problems. The value of the Patriots is now about 10 times what he paid for the team 20+ years ago. He's an astute businessman, and he's going to take advice from his "experts" as to what moves have the best chance of increasing the value of the franchise. If the Patriots had matched the Jets' offer to Revis, then their two highest paid, and most valued, players would both be "old" for their position. Brady, because he's just old, and Revis, because 30 is getting up there for a cornerback. If one or the other were to decline or to go down to injury, both contracts would be a waste. The Patriots have experienced 15 years of success under Belichick and, with all that success, Kraft can afford to look at the long-term. Going all in is no longer worth the risk.
Felger and Mazz are just catering to a horde of spoiled callers who now feel entitled, similar to Yankee fans when George was still kicking. Mustard and Johnson would have a more legitimate take on the matter. (Are they still on?)
The only thing in jest was that Mustard and Johnson would be "more legitimate." In fact they'd be just as legitimate, which means no legitimacy at all.John Marzano Olympic Hero said:That Mustard and Johnson reference must have been in jest, or you're getting bounced.
And they are still on, Saturday mornings on EEI.
teddykgb said:
I don't mean this to be flippant or to criticize -- I just can't believe someone is calling for Mustard and Johnson's take on anything. Proof that although we are all humans, we can be so very, very different.
Felger and Mazz' take has some measure of legitimacy. ...
Mike from Canton *ducks*teddykgb said:
I don't mean this to be flippant or to criticize -- I just can't believe someone is calling for Mustard and Johnson's take on anything. Proof that although we are all humans, we can be so very, very different.
Corsi said:Felger says he has never seen Seinfeld.
we need audio!Marbleheader said:Dale and Holley mocking F&M. Holley trolling the Patriots and Dale occasionally chiming in 'You're Absolutely right Mike'
Corsi said:Felger says he has never seen Seinfeld.
NDame616 said:
I've probably been less than 1 minute total of Seinfeld
Like Dennis and Callahan mocking T&R it's how you know F&M are crushing them in the ratings.Marbleheader said:Dale and Holley mocking F&M. Holley trolling the Patriots and Dale occasionally chiming in 'You're Absolutely right Mike'
Get that chicken yet?Kramerica Industries said::whaaaat:
Gambler7 said:I think Adam Jones is just the absolute worst. I don't have a detailed analysis, I just literally can not stand listening to him. Talk about tonality issues.
MillarTime said:
Agree 100%. He is beyond terrible. He tries to be Felger-light, only with none of the cleverness or interesting angles.
I admittedly haven't listened to he and Mazz this week. I was basing my comments on the Jones' 6pm show.jasail said:
I typically hate his show and generally agree with the negative sentiment towards Pacman. However, he's brought balance to Mazz's relentless whining this week, whereas when Felger is in Mazz is just a parrot and it's recently been nothing more than 4 hours of knee jerk negative reactions and trolling.