FinSaint

So, that would be an annual cap hit of about $25M for the first 3 years, because he (Condon & Brees) would undoubtedly want it all to be guaranteed money, which is as much as they've said?

How could the Saints keep the rest of the team on the competitive level it is at the moment with a $25M cap hit for - admittedly the most important, but nevertheless - a single player?

I'd be OK with that figure if the cap was about $10 to $15 million more than it is at the moment, but since there's some disagreement about whether the cap is going to chance with the new TV deals - $25M is too much.

And I agree with you burningmetal, the Broncos way over paid for Manning and it's ridiculous that these players feel automatically deserving of the same salary - and a little more - when another guy signs a big contract.

"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno

SaintFanInATLHELL

I originally threw out a hypothetical 5/yr $115 million with $75 million in the first three years.

Not exactly. That would include the signing bonus, which is spread over all 5 years. So the cap hit will come in lower.

I think ya'll think that the Saints should pay this. I don't. But I do want you to understand that the agent asking for this isn't really all that unreasonable. It's like all negotiations: ask high (Brees/Condon) and offer low(Saints) then find a way to meet in the middle.

BTW whether or not the Broncos overpaid is irrelevant. Manning's deal and Johnson's deal provide a framework for negotiation, overpriced or not.

The Saints also have a framework specified by the francise tag. It's $64.5 million over three years, then their franchise QB walks away scott free, and most likely very PO'ed. That's $64.5 million in cash, with no deferral to the cap. Brees doesn't want this because there's no long term security. The Saints don't want it because there's no flexibility in the structure and pretty much a guarantees that after that 3 year windows, Brees is gone.

So both have skin in the game. The $18 million/yr offer doesn't make a whole lot of sense now. Brees of course wants his dollars guaranteed and frontloaded so that injury or decline (I'm not sure that's possible, but you never know) doesn't jeopardize the total value of the contract. The Saints need cost stability and the flexibility to improve the team. Both have skin in the game.

This is why it's not going to be an instant process even though that's what the fanbase wants. I reiterate that after this is all over, everyone is on the same team again. So in the end both sides will get some of what they want, and have to give up some of what they want too. The objective is to to walk away with both sides satisfied that the best deal to be had was made.

They are just not there yet.

SFIAH

Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO

Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

FinSaint

I know it was a hypothetical number that you threw out, and that's why I also I added the word "about" into the mix, but mayhap I should've been more clear about that.

Still, signing bonuses + other bonuses are all nice and well, but Brees' side stated that they wanted a heavily frontloaded contract with mostly guaranteed money.

Continuing on from that basis, it's impossible - at least to my understanding - to have all those things and still construct a "cap friendly" contract with a high overall worth.

The reason why Brees wants such a contract is because he knows that the odds are that he might not see year 4 and 5 of his future contract, and therefore, high base salaries in those years won't make him any difference.

Similarly, even though the signing bonus counts on incrementally towards the annual cap figure throughout the whole contract, a high signing bonus will probably not cut it. I fear that the Saints will need to agree to a high base salary as well, which will decrease quite rapidly towards the years 4 and 5, so that Brees will be able to "cash in" a very high percentage of the total worth of the contract within the first 3 years.



And I do understand the rest of the points you made, and I do understand how comparables work in the sports' contract world, whether it's determining a tag's worth or the value of a contract in arbitration, but what I was referring to in my show of support for burningmetal's point was that I am against the business of how they (all sides, but mainly the agents) do it in a more general sense.

The point about Manning's contract was also that it puts the Broncos' franchise in a tough situation, because if Manning doesn't work out - they'll be running Elway out of town for mortgaging their franchise over one player.

I think Brees is a better QB than Manning and definitely in a better health state, but that can all change with one play on the field, and I don't want to see the Saints' franchise be "all-in" because of a single player.

To conclude, I understand the stance Brees is taking and the reasons behind it, but I also understand the franchise's stance and reasons - when it boils down to it I honestly would be willing to see Brees go if it meant that the best interest of the franchise as a whole was being served by not agreeing to his side's demands.

And if it comes down to it, they can "make" him play under the tag for the next two years (the 3rd year would be too costly in my opinion) while finding a young QB to take his place in 2014.

"I'm not bashing people, I'm bashing their opinions because in my opinion their opinion is wrong" - Danno