2020 TB12: The Decision 2020

How Would You Feel if Brady Left?

  • Completely devastated

    Votes: 24 13.0%
  • Very disappointed but still got BB

    Votes: 84 45.4%
  • Hold my beer until we know our next QB

    Votes: 29 15.7%
  • Eh, this may turn out to be a plus

    Votes: 32 17.3%
  • Let the Stidham era begin!

    Votes: 16 8.6%

  • Total voters
    185
Status
Not open for further replies.

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
36,681
Hartford, CT
Why’s that?
Cap implications.

If the proposed CBA wasn't approved by the players, then all $13.5M of dead money slated to hit the Pats 2020 cap would have counted regardless of whether Tom extended his contract prior to the start of the 2020 league year. This is because if the league operated without a new CBA for the 2020 league year - which is scheduled to start on Wednesday - the Pats could not have pushed any of the dead money on Tom's current contract out to 2021 or later.

Given the proposed CBA was approved, the Pats can spread the dead money on Tom's current contract across the 2020 and 2021 caps if Tom/the Pats extend his current contract before this contract voids at the start of the new league year effective, at least for now, Wednesday. Instead of $13.5M in dead money plus, assuming he re-signed/extended his contract, Tom's salary/bonus for 2020, his cap figure for 2020 would only include about $6.75M in dead money plus the appropriate salary/bonus portion he negotiates; the other half of the existing dead money ($6.75M) would count against the 2021 cap.

The key premise underlying Red's point is that the Pats would be less able/willing to meet Tom's salary demands without an extra $6.75M to play with under the 2020 cap (half of Tom's dead money from his current contract). How important this cap flexibility is largely depends on Tom's openness to sign an extension before the start of the new league year/free agency, and, honestly, I'm not sure I/we have a good read on that.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,818
Hingham, MA
Cap implications.

If the proposed CBA wasn't approved by the players, then all $13.5M of dead money slated to hit the Pats 2020 cap would have counted regardless of whether Tom extended his contract prior to the start of the 2020 league year. This is because if the league operated without a new CBA for the 2020 league year - which is scheduled to start on Wednesday - the Pats could not have pushed any of the dead money on Tom's current contract out to 2021 or later.

Given the proposed CBA was approved, the Pats can spread the dead money on Tom's current contract across the 2020 and 2021 caps if Tom/the Pats extend his current contract before this contract voids at the start of the new league year effective, at least for now, Wednesday. Instead of $13.5M in dead money plus, assuming he re-signed/extended his contract, Tom's salary/bonus for 2020, his cap figure for 2020 would only include about $6.75M in dead money plus the appropriate salary/bonus portion he negotiates; the other half of the existing dead money ($6.75M) would count against the 2021 cap.

The key premise underlying Red's point is that the Pats would be less able/willing to meet Tom's salary demands without an extra $6.75M to play with under the 2020 cap (half of Tom's dead money from his current contract). How important this cap flexibility is largely depends on Tom's openness to sign an extension before the start of the new league year/free agency, and, honestly, I'm not sure I/we have a good read on that.
And on top of all this, it allows the Pats to understand implications of signing other free agents / adding pieces around Tom. It's more about building the team than Brady's individual number, in terms of getting him to come back, methinks.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
39,221
Cap implications.

If the proposed CBA wasn't approved by the players, then all $13.5M of dead money slated to hit the Pats 2020 cap would have counted regardless of whether Tom extended his contract prior to the start of the 2020 league year. This is because if the league operated without a new CBA for the 2020 league year - which is scheduled to start on Wednesday - the Pats could not have pushed any of the dead money on Tom's current contract out to 2021 or later.

Given the proposed CBA was approved, the Pats can spread the dead money on Tom's current contract across the 2020 and 2021 caps if Tom/the Pats extend his current contract before this contract voids at the start of the new league year effective, at least for now, Wednesday. Instead of $13.5M in dead money plus, assuming he re-signed/extended his contract, Tom's salary/bonus for 2020, his cap figure for 2020 would only include about $6.75M in dead money plus the appropriate salary/bonus portion he negotiates; the other half of the existing dead money ($6.75M) would count against the 2021 cap.

The key premise underlying Red's point is that the Pats would be less able/willing to meet Tom's salary demands without an extra $6.75M to play with under the 2020 cap (half of Tom's dead money from his current contract). How important this cap flexibility is largely depends on Tom's openness to sign an extension before the start of the new league year/free agency, and, honestly, I'm not sure I/we have a good read on that.
Awesome recap. Thanks!
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I wonder if it will be harder, in these days of economic uncertainty for so many, for someone like TB12 whose brand and legacy has always been about team over money, to be seen as demanding an extra couple million while so many are losing their jobs.

Or when seen in the light of the charity outreach being offered by other mega-stars like Ronaldo or Zion.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,073
I wonder if it will be harder, in these days of economic uncertainty for so many, for someone like TB12 whose brand and legacy has always been about team over money, to be seen as demanding an extra couple million while so many are losing their jobs.

Or when seen in the light of the charity outreach being offered by other mega-stars like Ronaldo or Zion.
I'm sure if he does end up signing with another team he will be saying publicly that it was for reasons other than money.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
31,215
AZ
The new CBA beat up on the Pats’ cap number a little. Miguel was basically indicating he thought the higher cap number would offset increases in player salaries but the 2020 cap number was a bit lower than he expected. Pats’ cap number now at $25m so a net decrease of something on the order of about $5m.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
20,253
Newton
I have to say, now that the CBA is out of the way, I actually don’t understand why teams aren’t falling over themselves to sign Brady. No he’s not in the prime of his career but GTFO with any “evidence” that he has legitimately slipped. At best it’s a theory based on production with a porous line and pathetic weapons.

How 15 teams aren’t lining up to give him 3 years to the greatest quarterback in history just over one season removed from a Super Bowl victory and three straight appearances (including a 505 yard performance) is beyond me.

Instead they’re talking about guys like Bridgewater and Tannehill and maintaining cap flexibility. Good grief this league is a conservative bunch of morons.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
9,187
Gallows Hill
I have to say, now that the CBA is out of the way, I actually don’t understand why teams aren’t falling over themselves to sign Brady. No he’s not in the prime of his career but GTFO with any “evidence” that he has legitimately slipped. At best it’s a theory based on production with a porous line and pathetic weapons.

How 15 teams aren’t lining up to give him 3 years to the greatest quarterback in history just over one season removed from a Super Bowl victory and three straight appearances (including a 505 yard performance) is beyond me.

Instead they’re talking about guys like Bridgewater and Tannehill and maintaining cap flexibility. Good grief this league is a conservative bunch of morons.
Owners don’t want to guarantee $60 million in cash to a 43 year old player.
 

Kramerica Industries

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2006
1,014
nh
This. Bill has always been right when to cut ties with a guy. Let me know the last time he was wrong on guys he has gotten rid of? Its pretty rare that Bill is wrong.
Some people believe Bill wanted to let Tom go a few years ago for Jimmy. They did win a Super Bowl after that.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,222
Some people believe Bill wanted to let Tom go a few years ago for Jimmy. They did win a Super Bowl after that.
Sure, but your post starts with "some people believe". Let's tie it to actual players he decided to cut bait on.

The big difference however, is replacing a QB is a lot different than letting a DL go.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,818
Hingham, MA
Titans have signed D Lewis, Logan Ryan, and Butler the last 3 years (any others?). So far they are 1 for 3 on good signings.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
20,253
Newton
Owners don’t want to guarantee $60 million in cash to a 43 year old player.
Other teams may also be wary if BB looks very willing to let Brady depart.
This. Bill has always been right when to cut ties with a guy. Let me know the last time he was wrong on guys he has gotten rid of? Its pretty rare that Bill is wrong.
Some people believe Bill wanted to let Tom go a few years ago for Jimmy. They did win a Super Bowl after that.
All true and yet: 3 years of Brady is still a worthwhile gamble for probably half the league.

This is a quarterback’s league. Putting aside the whole “he has a hard time working with new receivers” or those kinds of factors, half these teams stand no chance at winning as currently constructed. Virtually every team in the other half would be in better shape with Brady than what they have at present.

The idea that all but maybe a handful of teams have some better use for those $60M than investing in the best quarterback of all time who will at the bare minimum put butts in the seats is breathtakingly arrogant.

Tom Senior must be apoplectic at his son getting overlooked and underestimated yet again.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
3,741
All true and yet: 3 years of Brady is still a worthwhile gamble for probably half the league.

This is a quarterback’s league. Putting aside the whole “he has a hard time working with new receivers” or those kinds of factors, half these teams stand no chance at winning as currently constructed. Virtually every team in the other half would be in better shape with Brady than what they have at present.

The idea that all but maybe a handful of teams have some better use for those $60M than investing in the best quarterback of all time who will at the bare minimum put butts in the seats is breathtakingly arrogant.

Tom Senior must be apoplectic at his son getting overlooked and underestimated yet again.
Let's say you're right, now how many of those half make sense for Brady?

He's going to want a chance to win, good ownership, good coaching, good(and probably veteran) pass catchers, he'd probably like some familiarity with the coaching staff.

I'd guess he'd heavily prefer East coast since his oldest son will continue to live in NY.

It really limits the options.
 

JokersWildJIMED

Blinded by Borges
SoSH Member
Oct 7, 2004
2,048
This. Bill has always been right when to cut ties with a guy. Let me know the last time he was wrong on guys he has gotten rid of? Its pretty rare that Bill is wrong.
BB is not infallible. He is usually right but has made a few mistakes. I would agree that this one is likely the most important and highest profile, so erring in the side of BB’s decision will likely be wise.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
20,253
Newton
Yep, with $62M guaranteed. I literally don’t understand a single reason they’d do this unless Brady said he wasn’t interested. And even then, I’d consider extending myself to make it happen.
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
40,773
If the Raiders, Bucs, and Chargers bow out, would he sign for the veteran minimum? That would be awesome.
 

jmanny24

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2003
465
A couple of questions, (admittedly haven't read all 26 pages). Why aren't the Chargers an option? And can anyone link me to the implications on the cap (and the team) if he doesn't sign before noon tomorrow, signs between noon tomorrow and before 3/18, and post 3/18? Thanks
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,818
Hingham, MA
A couple of questions, (admittedly haven't read all 26 pages). Why aren't the Chargers an option? And can anyone link me to the implications on the cap (and the team) if he doesn't sign before noon tomorrow, signs between noon tomorrow and before 3/18, and post 3/18? Thanks
Not sure on the Chargers - rumor is Gisele hates LA though. Re: cap implications, no change between now and the official start of free agency on Thursday - the start of legal tampering tomorrow is irrelevant. Once Thursday hits (the official start of free agency, whatever time that starts), the $13.5M hit is locked onto the 2020 cap. If deal is struck prior to that, they can spread it $6.75 in 2020 and 2021.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
29,421
A couple of questions, (admittedly haven't read all 26 pages). Why aren't the Chargers an option? And can anyone link me to the implications on the cap (and the team) if he doesn't sign before noon tomorrow, signs between noon tomorrow and before 3/18, and post 3/18? Thanks
The ownership of the Chargers is not well-regarded.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
70,876
Oregon
PFT is an established source and Simms is a douche, but buddies with Niners coach.
Too bad Simms didn't report why the 49ers haven't backed JG publicly yet

Simms' anti-Brady bias is well-known. Until TB12 is under contract, the only suspected team "out" is the Titans
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,222
Too bad Simms didn't report why the 49ers haven't backed JG publicly yet

Simms' anti-Brady bias is well-known. Until TB12 is under contract, the only suspected team "out" is the Titans
Sure, but if we're all just going to wait for news to break, will someone play Words With Friends with me?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
31,215
AZ
Miguel says that under new CBA the rule that 10 year players can only lead to a 5th round comp pick does not apply to QBs. So, Patriots could get a third if Brady leaves.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
27,823
Here
DMac signing means they’d probably need a fake 2nd year in a deal to afford Brady.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
70,876
Oregon
Sure, but if we're all just going to wait for news to break, will someone play Words With Friends with me?
Simms is all about self-promotion. As soon as the CBA news came out, and with the FA week beginning, he wanted to get a Brady take out there so that he could be in queue to be interviewed/a guest/talked about on NFLN and the national radio shows Monday.

Now, that doesn't mean that he won't turn out to be correct ... but that little hot take was timed to give himself maximum exposure
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
3,672
Bow, NH
Multiple reporters who have reputations they care about have cultivated connections with Brady's agent and/or the Pats such that they feel they can trust those sources and report on tidbits leaked to them. Multiple of those reporters have been indicating that Brady is likely to leave, based on sources. At the very least, it seems likely that (1) Yee is getting a bad feeling from the Pats and is starting to leak "he's gone" to see if he can bring them around and/or (2) people within the Pats' organization are being told to do things that make them think Brady's gone or have been given indications that the Pats aren't going to spend a ton at the QB spot this year, meaning that if Brady goes to FA, he's very likely gone.

Do those sources have agendas? Sure. Is this iron-clad factual info? No. But that doesn't mean that "no one knows anything."

The idea that NO ONE knows ANYTHING is incredibly naive, particularly when combined with your assertion that "only" Belichick and Brady know what's going to happen next. Do you think those two just lock themselves into a room to negotiate his contract? There are agents and underlings of various stripes being exposed to all kinds of info that explicitly or implicitly indicates what's happening.

But if no one knows anything, then why even bother coming into the thread? Go find something else to talk about until Brady and BB emerge from their conclave.
So what’s the latest?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,222
Simms is all about self-promotion. As soon as the CBA news came out, and with the FA week beginning, he wanted to get a Brady take out there so that he could be in queue to be interviewed/a guest/talked about on NFLN and the national radio shows Monday.

Now, that doesn't mean that he won't turn out to be correct ... but that little hot take was timed to give himself maximum exposure
I mean, we'll see. But saying SF is out on Brady makes a lot more sense to me than than them dumping JG to bring on Brady. That seems to be a lot more "hot take" to me.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
70,876
Oregon
I mean, we'll see. But saying SF is out on Brady makes a lot more sense to me than than them dumping JG to bring on Brady. That seems to be a lot more "hot take" to me.
I just have a rational dislike for Simms. He's already a talking point on NFLN, though; so he got what he wanted
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
29,421

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
27,823
Here
And that number doesn’t include McCourty. Legit not sure how they afford Brady now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.