Should Drew Play for Less $$ ?

Boutte · 02-04-2014, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II

Boutte your poll is a little lop sided. Should he have signed for less and not crippled the team? Maybe. But, he can not take a pay cut now.....too much going on with his contract to even touch it until next year.

Good poit.

Let's not forget though that he played for a lot less than his market value for 5 years. He never mentioned it, never asked for a new contract. Let's see what happens in the future. He's only played under this contract for two years.

Danno · 02-04-2014, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by Boutte

Good poit.

Let's not forget though that he played for a lot less than his market value for 5 years. He never mentioned it, never asked for a new contract. Let's see what happens in the future. He's only played under this contract for two years.

Don't know about a lot less for 5 years. He signed a 6 year 60 million contract in 2006 when no other offers were on the table. His 1st 2 years earned him about 12 million each, which was about the value of the franchise tag.

I'd say he was significantly underpaid for only about 3 of those 6 years.

Boutte · 02-05-2014, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by Danno

Don't know about a lot less for 5 years. He signed a 6 year 60 million contract in 2006 when no other offers were on the table. His 1st 2 years earned him about 12 million each, which was about the value of the franchise tag.

I'd say he was significantly underpaid for only about 3 of those 6 years.

Even so he could have suffered a career ending injury at any time. I just don't see how anybody can begrudge the guy, or any other player, maximizing their income while they can. Brees could reinjure his shoulder in practice and never play again. If you think that's farfetched ask LeCharles Bentley.

When Brees injured his shoulder going all out in a meaningless game for a team that didn't even want him anymore how many people stepped up and offered him any help. He was a young player with a bright future that only one team was willing to offer a decent contract. He took one for the Chargers. How much money did that cost him? He'd have to be stupid to take a penny less than he could get.

These guys pay a heavy price for the money they make. Most have handle at least some level of pain for the rest of their lives. Many are crippled or dependent on pain meds.

And it's real easy to tell somebody to give up millions of dollars because of some silly altruistic idea of taking one for the team. Neither the team nor the League is going to take one for the player if they get their brains scrambled and wind up out of the League after a couple of years suffering from brain damage. If you want to blame somebody blame the owners for not putting more money in the salary cap.

Some of you are living in Fairytale Land.

TheOak · 02-05-2014, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II

Boutte your poll is a little lop sided. Should he have signed for less and not crippled the team? Maybe. But, he can not take a pay cut now.....too much going on with his contract to even touch it until next year.

Seriously? "crippled"

There is absolutely zero evidence that the team has been crippled in the last 7 years, or that Drew's contract has had any effect on this team thus far.

Danno · 02-05-2014, 08:38 AM

This only works one way, more money up front in the form of a bonus spread out over a longer period.

Its not Drew's fault Loomis paid too much for other players.

jnormand · 02-05-2014, 11:50 AM

Who voted that he doesn't deserve to be paid like an elite QB? Lol.

Rugby Saint II · 02-05-2014, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

Seriously? "crippled"

There is absolutely zero evidence that the team has been crippled in the last 7 years, or that Drew's contract has had any effect on this team thus far.

You're right. Crippled is a little harsh. How about hog tied, hobbled, banged up or in a bad need of crutches?
The long and short of it is Drew's contract weakened the team tremendously. I love the man, but crippled isn't far off.

TheOak · 02-05-2014, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II

You're right. Crippled is a little harsh. How about hog tied, hobbled, banged up or in a bad need of crutches?
The long and short of it is Drew's contract weakened the team tremendously. I love the man, but crippled isn't far off.

Who were the casualties of Drews contract? We have hashed this out on these boards time and time again. Bushrod wasn't a Brees casualty he was over paid by Chicago, and is no where near a 7m/year LT..

Nicks signed with Tampa Bay on March 14th of 2012
Drew and the Saints didn't come to an agreement until July 13th of 2012.
Drews contract was cap relief until 2013.

There is no plausible evidence that Drews contract has weakened this team in even the sliest way.

So who? How?

Danno · 02-05-2014, 03:21 PM

Originally Posted by TheOak

Who were the casualties of Drews contract? We have hashed this out on these boards time and time again. Bushrod wasn't a Brees casualty he was over paid by Chicago, and is no where near a 7m/year LT..

Nicks signed with Tampa Bay on March 14th of 2012
Drew and the Saints didn't come to an agreement until July 13th of 2012.
Drews contract was cap relief until 2013.

There is no plausible evidence that Drews contract has weakened this team in even the sliest way.

So who? How?

The only issue I remember is if Brees had signed earlier, we would have franchised Nicks and he would still be a Saint. But since negotiations dragged on, we couldn't franchise Nicks and we ended up losing him.

Brees contact didn't hurt us, but the negotiation process involved in his deal sure did.

TheOak · 02-05-2014, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Danno

The only issue I remember is if Brees had signed earlier, we would have franchised Nicks and he would still be a Saint. But since negotiations dragged on, we couldn't franchise Nicks and we ended up losing him.

Brees contact didn't hurt us, but the negotiation process involved in his deal sure did.

Drew was Franchise tagged remember, he just didnt sign it because of the whole ordeal behind what the tag was worth? We can only FT 1 player and a whole lot of what caused things to drag out was not the negotiation but the entire argument between the league and the NFLPA over what that tag value was.. The whole was it is first or second tag issue.

The appeal over the tag was won July 3rd and 10 days later Drew and the Saints came to an agreement.

The Front Office could have tagged Nicks and offered Drew the contract they ended up giving him and we would have had both.

View Poll Results: Should Drew play for less money.
No, he earned his contract.	15	44.12%
Yes,if he cared about the team he'd play for less than he's worth.	14	41.18%
Yes, he doesn't deserve to be payed like an elite QB.	2	5.88%
No, he should think about his and his family's future and get every peny he can get.	3	8.82%
Voters: 34. You may not vote on this poll

02-04-2014, 06:43 PM	#61
Boutte Site Donor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belle Chasse Posts: 1,701	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II Boutte your poll is a little lop sided. Should he have signed for less and not crippled the team? Maybe. But, he can not take a pay cut now.....too much going on with his contract to even touch it until next year. Good poit. Let's not forget though that he played for a lot less than his market value for 5 years. He never mentioned it, never asked for a new contract. Let's see what happens in the future. He's only played under this contract for two years.

02-04-2014, 07:43 PM	#62
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by Boutte Good poit. Let's not forget though that he played for a lot less than his market value for 5 years. He never mentioned it, never asked for a new contract. Let's see what happens in the future. He's only played under this contract for two years. Don't know about a lot less for 5 years. He signed a 6 year 60 million contract in 2006 when no other offers were on the table. His 1st 2 years earned him about 12 million each, which was about the value of the franchise tag. I'd say he was significantly underpaid for only about 3 of those 6 years. Boutte and ScottF like this.

02-05-2014, 12:03 AM	#63
Boutte Site Donor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Belle Chasse Posts: 1,701	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by Danno Don't know about a lot less for 5 years. He signed a 6 year 60 million contract in 2006 when no other offers were on the table. His 1st 2 years earned him about 12 million each, which was about the value of the franchise tag. I'd say he was significantly underpaid for only about 3 of those 6 years. Even so he could have suffered a career ending injury at any time. I just don't see how anybody can begrudge the guy, or any other player, maximizing their income while they can. Brees could reinjure his shoulder in practice and never play again. If you think that's farfetched ask LeCharles Bentley. When Brees injured his shoulder going all out in a meaningless game for a team that didn't even want him anymore how many people stepped up and offered him any help. He was a young player with a bright future that only one team was willing to offer a decent contract. He took one for the Chargers. How much money did that cost him? He'd have to be stupid to take a penny less than he could get. These guys pay a heavy price for the money they make. Most have handle at least some level of pain for the rest of their lives. Many are crippled or dependent on pain meds. And it's real easy to tell somebody to give up millions of dollars because of some silly altruistic idea of taking one for the team. Neither the team nor the League is going to take one for the player if they get their brains scrambled and wind up out of the League after a couple of years suffering from brain damage. If you want to blame somebody blame the owners for not putting more money in the salary cap. Some of you are living in Fairytale Land. Danno and bobdog86 like this.

02-05-2014, 08:37 AM	#64
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,026	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II Boutte your poll is a little lop sided. Should he have signed for less and not crippled the team? Maybe. But, he can not take a pay cut now.....too much going on with his contract to even touch it until next year. Seriously? "crippled" There is absolutely zero evidence that the team has been crippled in the last 7 years, or that Drew's contract has had any effect on this team thus far.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-05-2014, 08:38 AM	#65
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? This only works one way, more money up front in the form of a bonus spread out over a longer period. Its not Drew's fault Loomis paid too much for other players. bobdog86 likes this.

02-05-2014, 11:50 AM	#66
jnormand 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Free State of Idaho Posts: 5,660	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Who voted that he doesn't deserve to be paid like an elite QB? Lol.

02-05-2014, 02:57 PM	#67
Rugby Saint II Bounty Money $$$ Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 5800 Airline Dr. Metairie, LA. Posts: 24,052	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by TheOak Seriously? "crippled" There is absolutely zero evidence that the team has been crippled in the last 7 years, or that Drew's contract has had any effect on this team thus far. You're right. Crippled is a little harsh. How about hog tied, hobbled, banged up or in a bad need of crutches? The long and short of it is Drew's contract weakened the team tremendously. I love the man, but crippled isn't far off.

02-05-2014, 03:06 PM	#68
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,026	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II You're right. Crippled is a little harsh. How about hog tied, hobbled, banged up or in a bad need of crutches? The long and short of it is Drew's contract weakened the team tremendously. I love the man, but crippled isn't far off. Who were the casualties of Drews contract? We have hashed this out on these boards time and time again. Bushrod wasn't a Brees casualty he was over paid by Chicago, and is no where near a 7m/year LT.. Nicks signed with Tampa Bay on March 14th of 2012 Drew and the Saints didn't come to an agreement until July 13th of 2012. Drews contract was cap relief until 2013. There is no plausible evidence that Drews contract has weakened this team in even the sliest way. So who? How?

02-05-2014, 03:21 PM	#69
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by TheOak Who were the casualties of Drews contract? We have hashed this out on these boards time and time again. Bushrod wasn't a Brees casualty he was over paid by Chicago, and is no where near a 7m/year LT.. Nicks signed with Tampa Bay on March 14th of 2012 Drew and the Saints didn't come to an agreement until July 13th of 2012. Drews contract was cap relief until 2013. There is no plausible evidence that Drews contract has weakened this team in even the sliest way. So who? How? The only issue I remember is if Brees had signed earlier, we would have franchised Nicks and he would still be a Saint. But since negotiations dragged on, we couldn't franchise Nicks and we ended up losing him. Brees contact didn't hurt us, but the negotiation process involved in his deal sure did.

02-05-2014, 03:30 PM	#70
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,026	Re: Should Drew Play for Less $$ ? Originally Posted by Danno The only issue I remember is if Brees had signed earlier, we would have franchised Nicks and he would still be a Saint. But since negotiations dragged on, we couldn't franchise Nicks and we ended up losing him. Brees contact didn't hurt us, but the negotiation process involved in his deal sure did. Drew was Franchise tagged remember, he just didnt sign it because of the whole ordeal behind what the tag was worth? We can only FT 1 player and a whole lot of what caused things to drag out was not the negotiation but the entire argument between the league and the NFLPA over what that tag value was.. The whole was it is first or second tag issue. The appeal over the tag was won July 3rd and 10 days later Drew and the Saints came to an agreement. The Front Office could have tagged Nicks and offered Drew the contract they ended up giving him and we would have had both. Boutte likes this.
	It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see. ~ Henry David Thoreau

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/64146-should-drew-play-less.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	02-02-2014 04:16 PM	5
Should Drew Play for Less $$ ?	This thread	Refback	02-02-2014 04:12 PM	14