Brady reworks deal (again)

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

I don't know, he may have a point there.  Sure, the new deal provides some immediate financial benefit to the Patriots, but it's not one that is going to impact their ability or willingness to dish out large signing bonuses to retain or attract players.  They would still pay what it took to improve the team - Brady's new contract doesn't make that more or less likely (slightly less, from a cap perspective, but not significantly so).  So what is Tom's motivation in giving up $24M guaranteed in exchange for $27M non-guaranteed?  He signed that extension in February, before the draft.  Maybe the selection of Garoppolo made him want an out in the event the Pats want to make a change.  He said he'd retire if he "sucked", but what if he starts to lose his fastball but still wants to play, but the Pats want to move on?  This gives them the ability to release him instead of trading him or keeping him and creating another awkward Bledsoe/Brady situation.  He gets to choose where he'll play out his career, and they're off the hook for the money.  They'd need to deal with a PR shitstorm which makes it a highly undesirable and unlikely move, but Barnwell isn't arguing that they plan to do this, just that the new contract benefits everyone in some way, if it ever comes to pass.

 
This logic really doesn't make any sense to me.
 
Basically, from Barnwell's perspective, the logic is this:  If Brady starts sucking, and the Patriots want to move on from him and play Jimmy G instead, Brady wants to be able to get cut and become a FA rather than riding the bench behind Garappolo.
 
This ignores all the following:
 
(1) The Patriots still can't really cut Brady before 2017 due to the dead money from his signing bonus.  If he was concerned about that year, he could have just killed the guarantee for 2017, not 2015-16,
(2) Brady is an intensely competitive guy coming off a great season.  Do we really think he's worried about being beaten out of a job by Jimmy G in the next couple years?
(3) Brady is on record as saying that he'll play until he sucks.  If he does experience a dramatic performance decline, do we really think he wants to go to another franchise?

 

[Dalton Jones]

I'm all over the place on this.  I immediately had the same reaction as Simmons and freaked out about the part that let's them cut Brady without owing him anything.  Then I began to listen to the voices of reason on twitter, here, and on the radio and became mildly convinced that it was a magnanimous gesture by Brady to improve the team next year and signaled his commitment to stay on and win.  But there remains a seed of doubt.  Maybe Tom wants to end his career in California or New York.  This makes it possible for him to immediately go on the free-agent market and make a killing like Manning did when he parted ways with Indy.  The team gives him his freedom to do so as a magnanimous gesture on its part.  They could spin it that way.  Of course, if they want to win, they need to keep Brady, who is still an exceptional QB and light years ahead of Jimmy G.  But I can't believe that even Tom Brady would agree to play for less than half of what Jay Cutler is getting for the next 2-3 years. I don't care how great a guy he is or how rich his wife is.  What player has ever done something that extreme in professional sports?
 
So can he sign a new contract with the Pats after this and get big money, or does he need to go somewhere else to get that?  Does anyone know?

 

[Dalton Jones]

Whoops, Morgan was posting his take while I was composing mine.  Never mind.....

 

[splendid splinter]

 
This logic really doesn't make any sense to me.
 
Basically, from Barnwell's perspective, the logic is this:  If Brady starts sucking, and the Patriots want to move on from him and play Jimmy G instead, Brady wants to be able to get cut and become a FA rather than riding the bench behind Garappolo.
 
This ignores all the following:
 
(1) The Patriots still can't really cut Brady before 2017 due to the dead money from his signing bonus.  If he was concerned about that year, he could have just killed the guarantee for 2017, not 2015-16,
(2) Brady is an intensely competitive guy coming off a great season.  Do we really think he's worried about being beaten out of a job by Jimmy G in the next couple years?
(3) Brady is on record as saying that he'll play until he sucks.  If he does experience a dramatic performance decline, do we really think he wants to go to another franchise?

 
Let's say they were to cut him after next season.  Wouldn't the dead money hit be $12M?  And $6M if they cut him after 2016?  I'm not sure they would consider that prohibitive, especially if it were done to replace him with a QB still on a second round rookie deal.  As far as his being competitive, absolutely, I'm sure he has no intention of losing his job to Garoppolo.  But he's also smart enough to recognize that he can't stave off Father Time forever.  Hedging his bets a bit isn't at odds with his competitive nature - it's just a smart thing to do.  And while he said he'd play until he sucked, maybe the threshold where the Pats would want to move on is higher than "sucks".  They're a "better to cut a guy a year too early than a year too late" organization, and they're entering a critical period where they have to identify their QB of the future very soon if they want a seamless transition where they continue to win.  So if they're really high on Garoppolo and Tom starts to show his age, they might be ready to make the move before he's ready to hang 'em up.  This gives him the chance to choose where he'll play out the string.
 
It's all highly speculative.  Even Barnwell isn't saying they're greasing the skids to let him go.  I think the "eventual departure" line is just a poor turn of phrase. He means Brady is going to depart in some way, at some point, and this contract makes the possibility of him leaving the Pats before he's ready to leave the game less painful for all involved.  He still says he thinks Brady will retire with NE.
 
Who knows, maybe it is just an accounting move born of absolute trust that a non-guaranteed deal with Kraft is as a good as a guaranteed deal if you're an icon like Brady.  But there could be some contingency planning at work as well.

 

[Mystic Merlin]

But, I mean, did this warrant a Grantland article?
 
Barnwell writes about the NFL generally, not the Patriots.  I can understand why Pats reporters would write about it, but not him.

 

[splendid splinter]

But, I mean, did this warrant a Grantland article?
 
Barnwell writes about the NFL generally, not the Patriots.  I can understand why Pats reporters would write about it, but not him.

 
Agreed.  Seems like a lot of digital ink spilled for something that's probably not all that significant.

 

[Shelterdog]

But, I mean, did this warrant a Grantland article?
 
Barnwell writes about the NFL generally, not the Patriots.  I can understand why Pats reporters would write about it, but not him.

 
I'm guessing because Simmons told Barnwell to write something about it, perhaps prompted by some random rumor somebody "who knows something" told him.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

But, I mean, did this warrant a Grantland article?
 
Barnwell writes about the NFL generally, not the Patriots.  I can understand why Pats reporters would write about it, but not him.

Think about this though. The "Brady will be cut" or "Brady wants to leave the Pats" story line is huge and more than enough to generate fodder for talk shows or Bleacher Report follow up articles. Essentially, it's a click-bait.

And since Barnwell is into throwing up shit on the wall (in the best Peter King fashion), here is mine. Barnwell is a huge Giants fan and a Patriots detractor who would like nothing but the B/B dynasty to end. Yup - I've got a much evidence of that as Barnwell does on Brady's motives.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

My wife thinks only way Brady leaves or retires is family. Either for the kids or Giselle wants to base in another city (even though they sold their mega mansion in L. A. and bought a big house in Boston.)

Literally the only thing that could trump competitive juice and/or relationship with BB/Kraft.

 

[Reverend]

My wife thinks only way Brady leaves or retires is family. Either for the kids or Giselle wants to base in another city (even though they sold their mega mansion in L. A. and bought a big house in Boston.)

Literally the only thing that could trump competitive juice and/or relationship with BB/Kraft.

 
Rented out their place in NYC too.
 
I think, as someone said earlier, this is really just an illustration of the fact that the most important people in the franchise have a really, really good working relationship such that minor adjustments can be made to get even minor improvements. It's just a well run operation.

 

[mcpickl]

 
Let's say they were to cut him after next season.  Wouldn't the dead money hit be $12M?  And $6M if they cut him after 2016?  I'm not sure they would consider that prohibitive, especially if it were done to replace him with a QB still on a second round rookie deal.  As far as his being competitive, absolutely, I'm sure he has no intention of losing his job to Garoppolo.  But he's also smart enough to recognize that he can't stave off Father Time forever.  Hedging his bets a bit isn't at odds with his competitive nature - it's just a smart thing to do.  And while he said he'd play until he sucked, maybe the threshold where the Pats would want to move on is higher than "sucks".  They're a "better to cut a guy a year too early than a year too late" organization, and they're entering a critical period where they have to identify their QB of the future very soon if they want a seamless transition where they continue to win.  So if they're really high on Garoppolo and Tom starts to show his age, they might be ready to make the move before he's ready to hang 'em up.  This gives him the chance to choose where he'll play out the string.
 
It's all highly speculative.  Even Barnwell isn't saying they're greasing the skids to let him go.  I think the "eventual departure" line is just a poor turn of phrase. He means Brady is going to depart in some way, at some point, and this contract makes the possibility of him leaving the Pats before he's ready to leave the game less painful for all involved.  He still says he thinks Brady will retire with NE.
 
Who knows, maybe it is just an accounting move born of absolute trust that a non-guaranteed deal with Kraft is as a good as a guaranteed deal if you're an icon like Brady.  But there could be some contingency planning at work as well.

But, as pointed out by another poster above, if it was about greasing the skids for his departure and not freeing up the cash for the Patriots to use elsewhere this summer, he wouldn't need to drop the skill guarantee now.
 
Unless you think they're cutting him this offseason, he could drop the skill guarantee the day before they agree to a release and it would have the exact same effect as it does doing it now.
 
This is just the Patriots asking Brady, hey would you mind rather than us stuffing 24 million dollars into a trust account that neither of us will be available to use, could we use that money now and we'll give you an extra three million for that right?
 
It's not as complicated as Simmons is trying to make it out to be. There isn't a conspiracy theory everywhere Bill. #FrozenEnvelope
 
Edit: Simmons twitter rantings are so dumb, I assumed he would've deleted them today after a voice of reason called him and let him know he was way off base. Guess he wasn't kidding that Mike Lombardi lost his number.

 

[bankshot1]

Has any NFL player signed a contract with an opt-out? Are they legal in the NFL? IMO if Brady really wanted an out at his choosing, he could have swapped the guaranteed $24MM for a deal with an opt-out.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

Another Barnwelian conspiracy theory: BB is forced to retire (at least from coaching) due to health, giving Brady as well as Kraft options for the future.

Yup. Too much time off until week after Saturday.

 

[Harry Hooper]

 
I'm guessing because Simmons told Barnwell to write something about it, perhaps prompted by some random rumor somebody "who knows something" told him.

 
Sort of an updated version of George Kimball being ordered to write an article about Roger Clemens' weight.

 

[JohnnyK]

Unless you think they're cutting him this offseason, he could drop the skill guarantee the day before they agree to a release and it would have the exact same effect as it does doing it now.

 
I don't think so. From the Globe (and I believe posted earlier in this thread):

 
Brady’s contract, which he agreed to before the 2013 season, called for him to have his salaries from 2015-17 become fully guaranteed ($24 million in total) this past Saturday.

 
So they had to act now.

 

[crystalline]

Above, Otto said this could free up cap space next year. I suspect this is true and it's not just a cash flow issue, despite what both Reiss and Miguel are reporting. We will see.

 

[rslm]

Above, Otto said this could free up cap space next year. I suspect this is true and it's not just a cash flow issue, despite what both Reiss and Miguel are reporting. We will see.

This was my thought as well. So often when initially reported -- the details of these contracts are not nearly accurate. I think as time goes by additional details will emerge and we'll have a much better picture as to why this was done.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Could it be that somehow this makes things easier for Brady or the team if he decides he wants to retire? Despite the "play until I'm 40" stuff I could imagine Brady thinking he might at least want to consider going out on top if they win another Super Bowl.

The freeing up $24m from escrow makes zero sense to me, because the Patriots apparently committed to pay another $3m as part of this deal. That would be a pretty irrational move, wouldn't it? I expect Kraft could borrow $24m for a year, $16m for a year, and $8m for a few months and pay less than $3m in interest. And it wouldn't add $3m to the cap over the next 3 years. Committing another $3m to a player salary for a billionaire to avoid an escrow makes no rational sense.

Which brings me to my last crazy thought. Could this just be Kraft saying, I don't want to put $24m in a crappy .5% percent NFPA trust account and would rather invest the money and pay you, Tom, the interest? So, get us out of the escrow, and I'll just pay you the money.

 

[BannedbyNYYFans.com]

 

[theapportioner]

Why does he look so dirty?

 

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

HOBO12

 

[BernieRicoBoomer]

Is that the new Trivago ad?

 

[Morgan's Magic Snowplow]

Are those gold velvet pants?

 

[Ferm Sheller]

If I was that guy, I wouldn't even wear clothes.

 

[Deathofthebambino]

Guys, I'm not really sure why everyone is speculating on what this is about.  We have a member on this board that is about as versed on this topic as anyone can be.  Otto, unless I'm mistaken, is an agent, who either has or works with other agents that have NFL clients.  He's made a couple of posts in here already that seem to indicate to me that this does have cap space ramifications, and potentially large ones, and nowhere did he mention that this is a cash flow move to help the team.
 
Frankly, I think it's absurd to believe that this is being done to alleviate the Pats from putting 24 million in escrow.  Kraft and Co. aren't going to be unable to re-sign Revis or hand out bonuses this offseason because they don't have the cash flow to do so.  They will be unable to do so because of salary cap issues.  It just doesn't make any sense at all, especially if they paid him 3 million extra to do so.  As someone else said, they could have borrowed 24 million at rates lower than that kind of up front cost.  It's not like they are some sort of risky borrower with no collateral.
 
As Otto said, we haven't seen the deal and don't know the particulars, but based on what Otto has written, here is how I think it plays out numerically.  Let's say Brady's contract was previously guaranteed for 45 million (I'm ignoring signing bonus money for this hypothetical) over the next three years (but it was back loaded, so it was 10, 15, 20 million per over that time).  The cap hit would be 15million this season because fully guaranteed money is spread out over the life of the deal as it affects the cap.  However, with just an injury guarantee, the cap hit this season would only be 10million (it only applies to the amount to be paid out that season at a certain time).
 
What we need to see are the exact dollar amounts over the life of the contract, and see what money is injury guaranteed.   Then we can figure out the cap hits each season vs. what they would have been under his prior deal. 
 
Bottom line, why doesn't everyone just wait and see what Otto posts next?

 

[mcpickl]

 
I don't think so. From the Globe (and I believe posted earlier in this thread):
 
So they had to act now.

Except that, they didn't.
 
It would've been fully guaranteed in the current framework of the deal. If the issue was making it easier for his release, as opposed to just freeing up on hand cash for the Krafts', they could renegotiate the deal a minute before he's released.
 
As example, as of last Saturday his last three years become fully guaranteed for 24 million.
Brady doesn't give a shit about freeing up the cash, so he keeps his guarantees.
On June 18, 2015, Brady and the Patriots decide to part ways and they want to release Brady.
Brady renegotiates his deal, dropping the guarantees on his final two seasons the morning of June 18, 2015.
The Patriots release Brady at noon on June 18, 2015.
 
That works exactly the same as dropping his guarantees now. This theory about his renegotiation holds no water.

 

[Deathofthebambino]

Well, that's assuming that both Brady and the Patriots would want his release.  I think the issue some people have (ie. Simmons) is that this makes it easier for the Pats to release Brady (even if Brady doesn't want to be released). Sure, I see how that's possible based on what's being reported, but I think it's pretty much inconceivable at this point.  They have a HOF QB playing at a HOF level on a below market rate contract.  It makes no sense that the Pats would want to now, or at any time in the near future, release him.

 

[mcpickl]

Well, that's assuming that both Brady and the Patriots would want his release.  I think the issue some people have (ie. Simmons) is that this makes it easier for the Pats to release Brady (even if Brady doesn't want to be released). Sure, I see how that's possible based on what's being reported, but I think it's pretty much inconceivable at this point.  They have a HOF QB playing at a HOF level on a below market rate contract.  It makes no sense that the Pats would want to now, or at any time in the near future, release him.

There's no question it does make it easier for Brady to be released.
 
But it's a Superman sized leap to say, therefore that's why the Patriots and Brady agreed to this.
 
At some point Simmons, and people who think like him, have to look at which conclusion makes more sense.
 
1. Brady allowed the Patriots to keep the 24 million he's guaranteed in their pockets, as opposed to stuffed in a trust account neither he nor they can touch. For this he gets an extra 3 million in salaries, and they have more cash they might be willing to use on his teammates signing bonuses, therefore helping make his team better.
 
2. Brady allowed the Patriots to keep the 24 million he's guaranteed in their pockets, to make it easier for the Patriots in case they want to release him against his will.

 

[JohnnyK]

Except that, they didn't.
 
It would've been fully guaranteed in the current framework of the deal. If the issue was making it easier for his release, as opposed to just freeing up on hand cash for the Krafts', they could renegotiate the deal a minute before he's released.

 
Are you sure? It would have become fully guaranteed last Saturday, and once that happened I don't believe you can negotiate that guarantee away (although I can't find any definitive info on that).

 

[Saints Rest]

There's no question it does make it easier for Brady to be released.
 
But it's a Superman sized leap to say, therefore that's why the Patriots and Brady agreed to this.
 
At some point Simmons, and people who think like him, have to look at which conclusion makes more sense.
 
1. Brady allowed the Patriots to keep the 24 million he's guaranteed in their pockets, as opposed to stuffed in a trust account neither he nor they can touch. For this he gets an extra 3 million in salaries, and they have more cash they might be willing to use on his teammates signing bonuses, therefore helping make his team better.
 
2. Brady allowed the Patriots to keep the 24 million he's guaranteed in their pockets, to make it easier for the Patriots in case they want to release him against his will.

I think #1 here is pretty obviously the answer. I'm basing this on both Otto's (knowledgeable/in the business) insights and Brady's own statements about wanting to improve the team.

 

[mcpickl]

 
Are you sure? It would have become fully guaranteed last Saturday, and once that happened I don't believe you can negotiate that guarantee away (although I can't find any definitive info on that).

I'm not going to pretend to be a CBA expert, because I'm not. But I'm pretty sure, yes.
 
Guys rip up their guaranteed salaries every year, Brady himself already did this once with his 2012 salary.
 
The only reason it's unusual in this case is that the player usually(maybe always until this one), gives up his guaranteed salary in exchange for a bonus equaling or exceeding the guarantee he passed on. You may see this in the spring if Nate Solder signs an extension. His salary of 7.4M becomes fully guaranteed the fist day of the 2015 season. If he signs an extension, you can bet he gives up that guaranteed salary for a much bigger bonus and a really small salary.
 
This is definitely unusual, but Brady is an outlier in many ways anyway. His salaries are so small in relation to his skill level, that he's really not giving up much. He's still guaranteed/protected against injury, and I think it's safe to say his skill level won't plummet enough between now and opening day of 2015, when his 2015 salary guarantees as a vested veteran, that the Pats would cut him. So he's waiving a 2 year 17 million dollar contract for 2016-17. What are the odds a healthy Brady has his skills fall off so far that he's worried he couldn't recoup that money(he'd have to get 2/16 or better since he's now getting an extra 1M this year) as a FA if the Pats cut him? One in a 100? One in a 1,000? Maybe more? And that's even if he really cares about the money that much.

 

[lexrageorge]

Guys, I'm not really sure why everyone is speculating on what this is about.  We have a member on this board that is about as versed on this topic as anyone can be.  Otto, unless I'm mistaken, is an agent, who either has or works with other agents that have NFL clients.  He's made a couple of posts in here already that seem to indicate to me that this does have cap space ramifications, and potentially large ones, and nowhere did he mention that this is a cash flow move to help the team.
 
Frankly, I think it's absurd to believe that this is being done to alleviate the Pats from putting 24 million in escrow.  Kraft and Co. aren't going to be unable to re-sign Revis or hand out bonuses this offseason because they don't have the cash flow to do so.  They will be unable to do so because of salary cap issues.  It just doesn't make any sense at all, especially if they paid him 3 million extra to do so.  As someone else said, they could have borrowed 24 million at rates lower than that kind of up front cost.  It's not like they are some sort of risky borrower with no collateral.
 
As Otto said, we haven't seen the deal and don't know the particulars, but based on what Otto has written, here is how I think it plays out numerically.  Let's say Brady's contract was previously guaranteed for 45 million (I'm ignoring signing bonus money for this hypothetical) over the next three years (but it was back loaded, so it was 10, 15, 20 million per over that time).  The cap hit would be 15million this season because fully guaranteed money is spread out over the life of the deal as it affects the cap.  However, with just an injury guarantee, the cap hit this season would only be 10million (it only applies to the amount to be paid out that season at a certain time).
 
What we need to see are the exact dollar amounts over the life of the contract, and see what money is injury guaranteed.   Then we can figure out the cap hits each season vs. what they would have been under his prior deal. 
 
Bottom line, why doesn't everyone just wait and see what Otto posts next?

The cash flow relief is certainly a benefit to Kraft and Co, so I don't believe it's as absurd as you're making it out to be.  Smart businesses prioritize the management of cash flow, no matter how much money is sitting in the bank account.  The $24M is certainly not a big deal to the Patriots, but it's not nothing either.  
 
Having said that, I do agree with you, Otto, and others that there may likely be more to the restructuring from a cap management perspective, and until we see the details it's not really possible to speculate.  The speculation in this thread is mainly in reaction to Simmons' bleatings about the possibilities of Brady being cut.  I'm not sure why Simmons' is given as much credibility as some on this board seem to give him; he's lost his fastball, assuming he ever had one, long ago.  He seems to know about as much of the NFL salary cap as Felger/Mazz, if that.  
 
Finally, this restructure may very well have had a deadline.  Once the money goes into escrow, I'm not sure if there's any way for the team to get it back aside from a Brady retirement.  I don't believe it's analogous to a player turning his salary into a guarantee.