I think you already know the answer to that question. Of course we'd all rather Brees. We all wanted him to re-sign. We just hoped that maybe we wouldn't have to mortgage the rest of the team to do so. But that hope turned out to be very unrealistic.

I think the Saints will find a way to continue to be successful in the future, but it will be a much different team before long. In the end, there does not appear to be one single player out there who is willing to take less for the better of the team. They go for straight market value.

After a 60 million dollar deal (that's not even including however much he made in San Diego, which still would have been far more then any of us are likely to ever make) you'd think that maybe an 80-85 million dollar contract the second time around would be sufficient pay. Ah, but athletes don't think like that. They feel "disrespected" if they make less than someone else.

If only we could all be so hurt.

And I can appreciate the "hope", but *****ing about it a year later seems to be some people's only reason to live.

I am obviously one of the few that believes two things, I would NEVER intentionally lower the income that comes into my home and takes care of my family, and the only person that is responsible for his contract size is the person that gave it to him.

The guy selling coffee at $10 a cup is not evil, the guy who bought it is an idiot. The Saints did not HAVE TO pay him anything, they could have moved on.



We shall see how it plays out. Denver seems to have done just fine paying Manning, Flacco is about to score huge, Rogers will do the same.... We are not the only team that feels its worth paying a super star QB 20% of your cap.

There is a lot of judging going on about a man based off of what someone else pays him.

NFL Salaries | NFL Player Salaries | SportsCity.com

No, they didn't HAVE to pay him. But they sure had to pay him what he was demanding or face an uncertain period of mediocrity, without a proven QB.

I wouldn't lower the income in my home either. Guess what? Brees was getting a raise. Millions of dollars on top of the already millions of dollars he was receiving. There is no realistic comparison, bro. He could have gotten a 20 million dollar total raise, and left the team a little more cap room, but instead he wanted to be paid more than guys who have won more games, and just as many (in Brady's case, more) championships. Leaving our cap situation a mess.

I think this subject is coming up again because there were people who said at the time he signed the deal, that it wouldn't hurt us, because "Mickey will figure it out". Mickey ain't figuring nothing out. He's being forced to dump people and restructure others which will only make it more difficult in the future. As I said, I believe we'll rebuild in time, but make no mistake, it will be a major over haul.

It was going to happen someday anyway, but this shortens the window for the current team.

By the way, other players demanding ridiculous amounts of money aren't any better. But they don't play for the Saints, therefore no one here cares about them. Those teams didn't have the kind of cap problem the Saints had at the time of the deal. We had nothing left. So it was easy to see this crap coming.

You are correct, $20m is an unrelateable factor....


So is going to work each day knowing that one wrong move from either you or your opponent could leave you crippled for the remaining years of your life with no want to earn an income. This is a huge driver for a person that was told a few years ago he would probably never play again.

Fk how many of you can relate to going to work there there is an opponent? How many of us can relate to have a written contract with their employer?

Those players that take a home team discount show immaturity in life, and they put the team before their family. At the end of the day, if Drew had taken a cheaper contract, and had a career ending injury in the opening drive against Washington, we would be discussing picking a QB in the draft and how well Daniel would or wouldn't do.... Notice no one would be thinking of Drew or his family.

Am I defending Drew? nope... There is nothing to defend. LOOMIS/PAYTON/BENSON paid him that contract. Is it Drews responsibility to look out for the entire team? Nope that is LOOMIS/PAYTON/BENSON. If they entered into a contract that they could not handle that is their fault.

I am defending a mans right to seek and get as much money as an employer will pay him. Market value and timing is what dictates that number.

To play class warfare because Drew makes more money than all of us put together is down right .... Well.. liberal.. and one should consider what values they really focus on. Drew Brees is a small private business, and he has the right to ask any prices he wants... No one HAS to pay them.

I am not saying anyone has to like it, however the drone of that sentiment being the first thing out of some peoples keyboards is getting quite annoying.


As far as for the OP... LOL The Saints do not make the call on restructuring a contract. The player has that word.

Again, it's not a discount to give a guy a 20 something million dollar raise, as opposed to 40 million. You're telling me that market value drives the number, when I already said as much. I know this quite well, and it is what bothers me with athletes. Comparing my opinion to that of a liberal is downright insulting.

A liberal tells a man to give up what he has earned in life. Ordinary people don't get to dictate how much they make to their employer. Athletes, however, do. You continue to say that we can't blame Drew or any other athlete for taking what someone gives them. I don't blame anyone for that. But the difference is that the Saints made him an offer they felt he was worth, (which was already a lot more than we could realistically afford) and he rejected it. He dictated the terms. The Saints needed him, so they had no choice.

A sport is a business just like any other. But an athlete is not like any other employee. You can let a desk job worker go and replace him with any of the thousands who are waiting in line to do the same things. But there are only a few exceptional athletes.

The idea that he may get hurt has nothing to do with anything. Drew is set for life, and for a little less money, he still would have been. If he gets a career ending injury, his money won't bring him back. He can get surgery to help make the rest of his life as comfortable as possible, but money doesn't cure anything. I wish no player would ever get hurt, but it's part of the game, and it's what players have used in part to drive up their salaries for years. But with athletes now in the 100 million range, the idea of being paid as much as possible has much to do with ego, and little to do with financial security, anymore.

Does Drew have a responsibility to take care of his team? Technically no. Does he want to win another championship? I would think so, but his contract hurts dearly. Even the hated Alex Rodriguez took a pay cut to help the Yankees sign other players, once before. He knows he can afford it. I don't buy this crap about players worrying about injury.

I have no problem with the guy who touches the ball most (not the center) being the highest paid.

As for "greedy" players wanting too much money - think about how much the NFL makes off them and their success.

And then think about guys like Marcus Lattimore.

Look up Goodells 2012 salary. I do believe its in the 15-18 million range.

And he's arguably brought more money to the owners than any other commissioner. Right?

Probably why we didn't have too many owners step up in support of Tom Benson during the "bounty" "scandal" aka nigh-f'n-mare season.