Skip to content

Manning, Brees, Mankins, Jackson need to quit trying to cut their own deals

brees-manning AP

Earlier today, Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports reported that Patriots guard Logan Mankins and Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson have requested either free agency or $10 million each in exchange for their signature on the settlement of the case.  Greg Bedard of the Boston Globe later reported (as we had pointed out several weeks ago) that Colts quarterback Peyton Manning and Saints quarterback Drew Brees want to be exempt from the franchise tag.

Adam Schefter of ESPN now reports that Jackson’s agents, Neil Schwartz and Jonathan Feinsod, have indeed made that request on their client’s behalf.  Schefter reports that Mankins has yet to make any such demands.

But does that mean Mankins doesn’t want free agency or more money?  It’s more likely that Mankins is sensitive to the potential P.R. fallout, both in the locker room and beyond, and that he wants to be more subtle and discreet.  (Mankins can feel free to prove us wrong by publicly declaring that he doesn’t want any special treatment.)

Schefter’s new report doesn’t address the separate report that Colts quarterback Peyton Manning and Saints quarterback Drew Brees also are seeking a promise not to be restricted by the franchise tag.

Regardless of what any of the named plaintiffs want or don’t want for themselves, the fact that they’re trying to get anything for themselves remains highly offensive.  They signed up to represent the class of all players, not themselves.  Any of those guys could have opted not to join the class action, and they could have filed their own lawsuits.  Instead, they chose to represent their 1,890 union brethren.

So at a time when they’re supposed to be representing all players, what are Jackson and Mankins and Manning and Brees doing?  They’re trying to cut their own deals.

And what does that sound like?  It sounds like precisely what the NFL did when it was supposed to be maxing out the shared TV revenue in 2009, but instead cut its own deal for lockout insurance.

We’ve believed since we first heard of the “lockout insurance” case that the NFL was in the wrong.  We now believe that Jackson and Mankins and Manning and Brees are just as wrong for abusing their position as representatives of all other players in order to get something for themselves.

Indeed, if the other 1,890 players knew that something may be in it for them, they would have signed up for the lawsuit, too.  Mankins and Jackson and Manning and Brees weren’t picked because they are true believers or because they planned to be involved in the litigation (they weren’t); they were picked because of their name recognition.

Here’s hoping that NFLPA* executive director DeMaurice Smith stands up and exercises real leadership here, especially as to Manning and Brees, who don’t need the leverage or the money that goes along with it.  (Manning particularly has done nothing to earn special consideration.)  As to Mankins and Jackson, they were victimized by the last year of a labor deal that was favorable to the players; maybe the right answer is for the NFLPA* to divert some of the lockout fund (secret or otherwise) to them.

Permalink 86 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Indianapolis Colts, New England Patriots, New Orleans Saints, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
86 Responses to “Manning, Brees, Mankins, Jackson need to quit trying to cut their own deals”
  1. hawkeye6 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:32 PM

    Because Manning and Brees don’t have enough money at the moment.

  2. tecmobowl34 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:35 PM

    yep, these guys are first-class jackasses. I’ve been with the players the whole time too, but this is beyond reproach. If the rest of the people involved in this let this thing crumble because of these idiots, shame on everyone.

  3. ebenezergrymm says: Jul 19, 2011 2:35 PM

    “And what does that sound like? It sounds like precisely what the NFL did when it was supposed to be maxing out the shared TV revenue in 2009, but instead cut its own deal for lockout insurance.”

    I knew you couldn’t write an article that long without taking some dig at the owners when the subject clearly is about how greedy the players are.

    But guess what.

    You’re little lockout insurance jab doesn’t work anymore now that DSmith came out and said he secured lockout insurance for the players.

    You should remember that since the article is right here on PFT. From just a few days ago.

  4. benh999 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:36 PM

    I guess we know why Peyton refused to sign an extension last year.

  5. jaggedmark says: Jul 19, 2011 2:36 PM

    I expected nothing less from the greedy Peyton Manning. Hey Peyton, go find another 15 products to endorse to make up that money.

  6. twitter:Chapman_Jamie says: Jul 19, 2011 2:37 PM

    I’m hoping this shows just what is important to all the Brees and Manning fans out there. These guys are beyond selfish and I know that I would never want to play on their team if they did indeed keep a deal from being done.

  7. gamecheck1 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:37 PM

    These jacknuts, need to quit being greedy, shut up, and let the Damn seAson begin! They will get paid. Rest assured, it will be a hell of a lot more than I make!

  8. rambo08 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:37 PM

    Poor guys. It must be so tough being franchised and making 10-20 million a year.

  9. oldbrowndawg says: Jul 19, 2011 2:37 PM

    Gee, I thought it was supposed to be “all for one and one for all.” Guess not! This needs to be squelched and these jackasses need to be “counselled” by some of their 350 pound colleagues! What a crock! Just goes to show how “dedicated” these dudes are (NOT).

  10. thephantomstranger says: Jul 19, 2011 2:38 PM

    If any of these guys delay this deal from being settled, they will be hated by most fans and players. Is it really worth it to them? Manning and Brees are two of the most popular players in the league, have a ton of money, and don’t seem to have any desire to play for another team. I can’t believe they would take a chance on blowing this up. Owners should call their bluff.

  11. omegalh says: Jul 19, 2011 2:38 PM

    The franchise thing can be solved in 5 seconds. Just make it retroactive. Jackson and Makins have been franschised before, they are exempt. Brees and Manning haven’t…wait a season. That is the fair solution.

  12. johnnyb216 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:39 PM

    What a bunch of snakes. Peyton manning fan no longer.

  13. northeastern31 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:39 PM

    if I were a foot taller and in more shape I would slap these fools.

  14. 0mattfrye0 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:39 PM

    Well as fans when the lockout ends we won’t watch any football unless our team is guaranteed to be in the Super Bowl. They want to make crazy requests then so will the fans Damit !!!

  15. jdog21b says: Jul 19, 2011 2:39 PM

    These types of stories makes me picture the PFT community as the angry mob in that South Part Episode “Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble”.

    Really though, 3rd story on the same thing… Im not getting any less angry at these players.

  16. sippindasyzurp says: Jul 19, 2011 2:40 PM

    They will not hold up, cause the next time they step on the field and get sacked, the player will make sure to grab there throwing finger and snap it into pieces just like romanowski back in the day

  17. Nikhil Balakumar says: Jul 19, 2011 2:41 PM

    ur all making bank as it is, simmer down and take a seat

  18. edjy71 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:41 PM

    Why does Manning need to cut a deal, is being the highest paid player in the NFL not good enough for him?

  19. minormillikin says: Jul 19, 2011 2:42 PM

    The players involved all think they are geniuses for coming up with this last-second money-grab. Unfortunately, it’s muddying up what should be the hopeful finale of the lockout.

    These guys, who seemed to be among the smarter NFL players (Manning and Brees particularly), are proving that they are just dumb jocks after all.

  20. andrejohnsonforpresident says: Jul 19, 2011 2:44 PM

    I’ve been thinking this for the past few weeks. It’s sick that these guys are “for the players” Yet they want special treatment. They’re just in it for themselves not the nflpa. It’s insane how greedy they are. Good luck with that neck injury ya douche bag!

  21. bucngator says: Jul 19, 2011 2:44 PM

    Give the 20 million to James Harrison, to take ‘em all out!!

    Seriously, the owners need to go ahead and sign the deal the way it is, put it on the table for the players…….. and walk out!!

    If they don’t want to sign the deal that Drew Greed suggested was a “good deal for all parties”, then the lockout can stay in place and the season can be scrapped …… at the NFLPA’s* expense!!

  22. cdwains says: Jul 19, 2011 2:45 PM

    I have been with the owners all along, it’s hillarious to me that employees are dictating to business owners what they are to be paid. Just imaginge you own a business and have invested hundreds of millions of dollars into it and thousands of hours of your time, and your employees demand that you give them 50% of everything you earn…. it’s commical, and for Manning, Brees & Jackson to be making demands in excess of what they have agreed to just represents the fact that everyone is out for themselves. I would blacklist all three of these guys, so they would never make another dollar from the NFL.

  23. mathsimillion says: Jul 19, 2011 2:45 PM

    Sad that a deal is practically ready to be signed and football around the corner and these guys are standing in the way. Peyton/Brees, if you really don’t want the franchise tag just hold out. I guarantee the Colts/Saints won’t start the season without you. Who do they have to back you up? What a tool to screw the rest of your peers and the fans over like this. There are other ways to be a greedy SOB without messing it up for everyone else.

  24. bandwagondan says: Jul 19, 2011 2:45 PM

    Does this mean a deal is close?

  25. gtmann says: Jul 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    Well writen

  26. grpatriot says: Jul 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    Funny, everybody wanted Mankins lynched earlier!
    Now we find out the “Golden Boy and the player Rep. Brees have staked out a position for themselves?” Especially after the joint statement where Brady, Brees and Manning stated to the owners,”the deal is fair and it’s time to get it done!”
    So, who’s the culprit? It’s not Mankins! Jackson’s issue is the DUI and getting a long term deal is a huge risk. One more infraction and he’s on the shelf for a year’s suspension!

  27. sj39 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    Manning, Brees, and Brady all stand a good chanch of losing their locker rooms this season.

  28. doncho2010 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    Like the Saints aren’t gonna throw a whole lot of money at Brees anyway. The fans will never let them get away with not locking Drew up long term.

    As a Saints fan and a huge Drew Brees fan, if this is true, this would make me question the guy’s integrity a little bit.

  29. flapjack1231 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    It’s been evident since day 1 that this could have been resolved very quickly had it not been for the players demanding so much. They planned to decertify last year. This has ALWAYS been about greedy players.

    Considering the deal that just expired favored them heavily, you would think they’d be willing to engage in some give n take. But noooooo…

    They are players, NOT owners. They have contracts. How about honoring them & the rules they were signed under? Players always hold out, cry & whine that it’s never enough. TOO BAD. Who told you to sign on the dotted line?

    Considering it’s some of the biggest faces & names in the league being this greedy now, depolrable! Ask yourselves this question….

    If you went up to your employer & demanded to see the last 5-10 years of financials or risk possible litigation, would you still have a job? The players have been the ones to drag this out since DAY ONE. The owners should have locked them out & cancelled the season. maybe then these cry babies would learn a lesson. IT’S NOT ALL ABOUT THEM!

  30. bradshawlives says: Jul 19, 2011 2:49 PM

    jaggedmark says:
    “I expected nothing less from the greedy Peyton Manning. Hey Peyton, go find another 15 products to endorse to make up that money.”

    Don’t forget to add the greedy little Brees.

  31. 808raiderinparadise says: Jul 19, 2011 2:51 PM

    Wow, we find out why some of these players actually joined the suit in the first place. $$$ for themesleves. What do you say to one of these guys when you see them in your camp film room, “seats taken”.

  32. drop703 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:52 PM

    They shouldn’t be doing this as individuals…but for the whole league. Franchise tags should NOT exist in the NFL or any other league or association. Owners shouldn’t be able to hold players hostage for 1-3 years. If a contract is up, then it’s up. Let the players go. Mankins and Jackson have already been franchised and they deserve the right to free agency…not a 10 million ultimatum though.

    As far as Brees and Manning go…they’re trying to take advantage and it’s not right. In a week or so they’re going to be the highest paid players in the league! Oh, and besides that…the contracts they sign after this lockout will be their last big contracts anyway…they’re both in their 30’s.

  33. qj1984 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:52 PM

    What the heck is Manning doing? He’s much more valuable to the Colts organization than he would be to anyone else. Peyton, no other organization is going to cater to you the way the Colts do. No other organization is going to throw other players under the bus after a bad loss to appease your ego. No other team is going build its entire organization from top to bottom around you. Not now, not at this age. Free agency is not for you Peyton. So, why bother?

  34. nineroutsider says: Jul 19, 2011 2:52 PM

    The NFL has to tell these guys, “No More Soup for You!”

    I don’t want to take the time to learn all of the nuances of class action law, but I say the NFL call their bluffs.

    Of course, I was stupid enough to buy tickets on Sunday, so get that deal done!!!

  35. eaglesfan290 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:52 PM

    This is exactly what I have been saying from day one; there is no Nobel effort on the part of any of the named plaintiffs to advance the cause of the average player, the NFLPA, or CBA.

    What this all comes down to is what is best for the small group on the lawsuit Mankins, Osi, Brees, Manning, Jackson, Brady everyone of these guys had significant agenda’s at stake.

    Jackson is in a fight with AJ Smith and the Chargers over the franchise tag.

    Manning doesn’t want the franchise tag used on him to leverage the best deal his deal is up now.

    Mankins wants out of his contract and feels Kraft lied to him about renegotiating his contract.

    Brady not on his current deal, but his last deal left a ton of money on the table and that money was supposed to be used to re-sign players so they could keep the dynasty going. The Patriots then used his contract model to get other players to leave large sums of money on the table.

    Brees his contract is up next year he wants as much money on his next contract, because it will be his last he would also like to avoid a one year franchise tag and get a long term deal.

    Osi wants his contract re-negotiated or wants to be traded.

    Vrabel was going to retire…………..he now has and had nothing to lose.

    Von Miller didn’t want a rookie wage scale.

    Does anyone think it’s a coincidence the guys on this lawsuit? This is the NFLPA* doing what it does best giving special treatment to big name members of it’s own union. They promise special treatment to these players and in exchange the players are expected to brow beat and get the rest of the 1895 players to go along with the agenda. The younger guys look up to most of these players and just follow along probably not asking many questions.

  36. typhilly21 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:53 PM

    Brees’ means nothing. Manning is being a tool and the drunkard Jackson should be thankful he hasn’t been kicked out of the league by now

  37. chadmurdigan says: Jul 19, 2011 2:53 PM

    Prediction: the greedy ones will quickly get on Twitter and tweet that it’s all just a big misunderstanding and they don’t really want anything at all other than what their fellow players are getting in the agreement.

  38. greenbay4ever says: Jul 19, 2011 2:54 PM

    Yeah these guys want to be treated differently. Lets make note of that when people start talking about how much these guys are team players and class acts. Definitely not coming off like Class acts here.

  39. typhilly21 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:54 PM

    you pro owner guys blaming it on the “players demands” do realize that the players lost money in this whole deal right?

  40. derekjetersmansion says: Jul 19, 2011 2:56 PM

    The lockout insurance case, to me, is WAY more egregious than this. There is precedence already here with the Reggie White case.

    Also, the future of the league does not depend on these guys any more than other players. They would probably even tell you they won the lottery. The league will keep going on far after these guys retire.

    I mean, everyone here thinks they can play NFL football, right?

  41. bradjames33160 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:56 PM

    I’m disappointed in Peyton and Drew. They are two gentlemen or so I thought. It might be time for me to throw the Drew Brees autobiography I got for Christmas in the toilet.

  42. 4gone says: Jul 19, 2011 2:56 PM

    As I said in previous post – all this anger is deserved at these turds but as soon as the lockout is over, once again in their lives, there will be no consequence. They will be cheered and people will scramble for their autograph.
    Sickening.

  43. deadmanwalking47 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:57 PM

    does’nt mean they still won’t sign the deal!

  44. eagleswin says: Jul 19, 2011 3:02 PM

    omegalh says:
    Jul 19, 2011 2:38 PM
    The franchise thing can be solved in 5 seconds. Just make it retroactive. Jackson and Makins have been franschised before, they are exempt. Brees and Manning haven’t…wait a season. That is the fair solution.

    ——————————-

    Neither of those players have been franchised before. Even if they were, it would still be unfair to the other players as their’s nothing in the upcoming CBA (that i’ve heard anyway) about the franchise tag being limitted to one use.

  45. dawgpound3 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:02 PM

    4gone. that is so true. Fans need to shun these idiots and boo them so bad.

  46. dawgpound3 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:03 PM

    If Drew Brees, Mankins, Jackson, Manning screw up the settlement, they will lose so many fans. Believe me…

  47. zerored78 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:04 PM

    The other players were foolish if they didn’t think they could get something out of representing the players. The players that did this last time got special perks.

  48. realitypolice says: Jul 19, 2011 3:05 PM

    So I guess last season when Brees participated in that show of player solidarity by walking onto the field before a game holding up one finger, what he really meant was “there is one person I care about, and that’s me.”

  49. klunge says: Jul 19, 2011 3:05 PM

    jdog21b says:
    These types of stories makes me picture the PFT community as the angry mob in that South Part Episode “Rabble Rabble Rabble Rabble”.
    ——————————————

    Haha, yeah…actually I think we all need to declare “Shenanigans!” and start pummeling these dudes with broomsticks. (Cow Days episode)

  50. hikohadon says: Jul 19, 2011 3:09 PM

    This is why I get frustrated when people try to “identify” with these guys… they might “seem” like good guys, but we don’t know them. We don’t know them at all. In these days of agents and PR staff and pocket scribes, you have no idea if the person they “seem” to be is really them or who they want us to think they are.

    And then 2 guys that have such shining public images and will be highly paid regardless next year make moves like this that can only be deciphered as completely selfish (and possibly as deliberate moves to pry themselves away from their current teams).

  51. jetsetfred says: Jul 19, 2011 3:09 PM

    Drew Brees threw his Dead Momma under the Bus for a Buck I’m not surprise by this not the least bit..

  52. jerrydesaulniers says: Jul 19, 2011 3:12 PM

    Maybe the Judge can just throw the stupid Brady case out. And I hope some guys around the league remember this stuff and have some payback during the season for these fine upstanding individuals. And I’ve never said that about guys I like before like Brees and Manning. #@*^! Ouch Helmet driven to the turf! Brees leaves the game with a headache. A well deserved headache!

  53. patriotsdefense says: Jul 19, 2011 3:13 PM

    This is why Tom Brady’s name was first on that list. Love him or hate him he’s a team first guy.

  54. benh999 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:20 PM

    Do any of these guys play at Lincoln Financial Field on D-cell day?

  55. nolarules says: Jul 19, 2011 3:23 PM

    You people need to calm down here. So we have one of these players that it has been actually verified that he made a request. Mankins has requested nothing. We have no proof that Manning or Brees have demanded anything other than an “unnamed source” from a Boston Globe reporter (Globe certainly has no agenda going after Manning, wink, wink). So we have one player so far that has made this demand. I prefer to see some proof which we have for Jackson. We have an “unnamed source” for the other two and Mankins has apparently requested nothing. Think a little before you go nuts at these guys. This move makes absolutely no sense for Manning or Brees. They are both staying where they are and are going to be paid huge regardless. But instead, you people do the usual, just believe whatever our corrupt media and “journalists” (as if they really existed any more – they all have agendas which I would think a writer from Boston might have) tells you. Think a little. Would it possibly not be in the interest of the league to have some “sources” leak that these guys are demanding these things as a little payback for them actually being named on the case in the first place? could that not be a possibility as well? But no, let’s just believe what the owners side is leaking today. They would never lie to get their way or be vindictive. All of these owners are like a bunch of Mother Teresas. They are always on the up and up
    And if these things are actually confirmed to be true, then we can all pile on because if these RUMORS are indeed true, these men are greedy douches.

  56. johnny1979 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:24 PM

    If this report is true, all four of them can go to hell. They are slowing down progress for a deal to be made while pissing off another 2,000 players. If the owners give in, they’re nuts. I’d tell these four that they can go F-themselves and they’re screwing the rest of the players by doing it.

    Look up “Selfish” and “Greedy” in the dictionary, you’ll find Brees / Manning / Mankins / Jackson.

  57. BroncoNick says: Jul 19, 2011 3:25 PM

    Wow… When will enough be enough??? None of these guys are hurting for money right now….

  58. kwalk4780 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:26 PM

    Im sick of the innocent Drew Brees crap. Dude is greedy as the rest of us. No wonder he wanted part of the negotiations last week.

  59. garyln7 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:30 PM

    Well said Mike….

  60. silverhornet says: Jul 19, 2011 3:38 PM

    But these guys are only trying to do what is best for their families…

  61. homelanddefense says: Jul 19, 2011 3:44 PM

    “patriotsdefense says: Jul 19, 2011 3:13 PM

    This is why Tom Brady’s name was first on that list. Love him or hate him he’s a team first guy.”

    Yeah it probably has nothing to do with the fact his name comes first alphabetically…..

  62. dietrich43 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:44 PM

    Precedent was set with the Reggie White case, where the named plantiffs did get special treatment.

    Why didn’t all the players sign? I’m assuming that the named plantiffs had to spend some time on this action, more than the other players spent (which is probably ‘none’).

    I think they’re entitled to ask for something. Cash doesn’t seem appropriate, but getting the White ‘no franchise tag’ treatment is reasonable. Maybe Peyton should ask for extra-tall hats to cover his sixhead.

    Now, if they hold up the CBA by refusing to sign unless they get special treatment, then I’ll bash them.

  63. tommyf15 says: Jul 19, 2011 3:45 PM

    Earlier today, Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports reported that Patriots guard Logan Mankins and Chargers receiver Vincent Jackson have requested either free agency or $10 million each in exchange for their signature on the settlement of the case.

    Both Mankins and Jackson lost millions of dollars last year due to the franchise tag. I don’t blame them for either seeking compensation or moving forward with their lawsuit.

  64. bison4me says: Jul 19, 2011 3:45 PM

    It’s time for the other 1890 players to go A Few Good Men style and order a Code Red on Brees, Manning, Mankins, and Jackson. Brees in particular has not looked good in the whole process. The statements he made in regards to the retired players and now him trying to cut a side deal leads me to think this guy is one selfish S.O.B.

    It also leads me to believe that all these guys, Brees and Manning more so, could lose their locker rooms. I know Brady’s name is on the lawsuit, but I haven’t heard him demanding anything. I used to couldn’t stand Brady, but I have a new found respect for him, IF he isn’t trying to cut any deals.

  65. gimmeabruschi says: Jul 19, 2011 4:01 PM

    This tells us who is who.

    All the Brady haters take note, Tom isn’t trying to throw a monkey wrench into the whole machine for his own self interest.

  66. thefiesty1 says: Jul 19, 2011 4:09 PM

    DeMo is NO leader. That’s been the problem all along. Manning, Brady, et al have enough $$$ so just shut up and sign the deal.

  67. firstroyal says: Jul 19, 2011 4:12 PM

    We’ve believed since we first heard of the “lockout insurance” case that the NFL was in the wrong

    god forbid a business does something thats in its best interest

  68. phillyforlife says: Jul 19, 2011 4:17 PM

    Give them UFA and sign them at vet minimum the tag money will look so much better to these guys

  69. polishkingski says: Jul 19, 2011 4:30 PM

    much to my dissapointment i am really starting to hate peyton manning. yeah, i live my life vicariously thru him, i would love to have been the best of the best in the best league that plays a sport that i have dearly loved since i was five but his lust for money seems to have no end. mark my words, this guys got his eye on bigtime politics when he hangs up the jock. maybe brady can kick his ass as a dem like he did on the field most of the time. peyton will end up g.o.p darling that won`t win when it really matters.

  70. eaglesfan290 says: Jul 19, 2011 4:32 PM

    Both Mankins and Jackson lost millions because they held out not because of the Tag. It would be false to say they lost million just because they had the Tag placed on them. The Tag is the average of the top 5 player’s salaries at that position.

    The reason they were pissed is they were both told they would be taken care of and neither the Pats nor Chargers made them a priority! In Mankins case he is a small town guy and felt he had a gentleman’s agreement with Kraft, Mankins actually is a man of principle and for that I respect him. Jackson is an egomaniac and wants to get a long term deal and be a Top paid receiver……………….but in reality he isn’t a Top 5 receiver in the league……….so by no stretch did he lose millions.

    The only thing the Tag does in practical terms is retain a player to a team it doesn’t in theory cost him money unless he has a career ending injury in that year. This is why they are both pissed; there is no security in having the Tag placed on a player. Now from an Owner’s perspective keep this in mind when you sign a young player who you see promise in to a long term deal the player out plays that contract and demands to have his contract re-negotiated …………along the same lines there is nothing fair about that. The player signed the deal, he was given long term security, he then outplays the deal refuses to report and then holds out……………………this happens all the time.

    Mankins has a legitimate gripe with Kraft I will give him that Jackson is a spoiled brat!

  71. bsreimer says: Jul 19, 2011 4:44 PM

    Don’t get me wrong, screw Brees and Peyton. But, Brees’ argument may be warranted because he has to deal with The Claymaker and Bursari Raji in a few months….

  72. hrmlss says: Jul 19, 2011 5:00 PM

    If this is true, and they “blowed up” the whole deal, with their side deals, I hope they lose all their endorsements. Kind of like making ignorant statements on twitter, people hate you and the Company doesn’t want the PR crap rubbing off on them.

  73. catman72 says: Jul 19, 2011 5:06 PM

    Brees loves New Orleans and felt “called” to be there, he just doesn’t want to be trapped there by a franchise tag when he can more more $ somewhere else… thanks for showing your true colors Drew, LOL

  74. cpinct says: Jul 19, 2011 5:17 PM

    cdwains says:
    Jul 19, 2011 2:45 PM

    I am totally with with cdwains on this one. I do not typically side with big business but in this particular case, my feeling is that the owners are the ones that stand to lose everything. They are the ones who spent the money on the franchise and pay all the players very well to play a game. This story exemplifies what the players are all about – and I find it very hard to be in their corner on the issues at stake (and I really would like to be able to side with the players).

    Mankins and Jackson – have either of these guys played more than half the games over the past two seasons? Do we really care if we never see them again?

    Brees and Manning – I can’t wait for their offensive lines to “miss” a block as a little payback for looking out for themselves more than all the players that they are supposed to represent. In fact, I am sure Manning will get up with that whinny look on his face, and that will be a very enjoyable moment for all who remember this lockout.

    I love football, especially NFL football, and I hope to be watching it in early September.

  75. aldavisisthenfl says: Jul 19, 2011 5:20 PM

    Brees was always about the money, ask his Mother……..

  76. tamonty67 says: Jul 19, 2011 5:25 PM

    As a Chargers fan I can say that Jackson is a complete TOOL!

  77. patsandsox says: Jul 19, 2011 5:29 PM

    Manning doesnt make enough off his stupid commercials? That surprises me.
    Great QB, but I bet if a nickel gets dropped around him he would break arms to get it first.
    The only thing I want to caution is I am not even sure if this is true or is just another reporter trying to create a headline and get people worked up.
    I do seem to remember the Colts owner promising to make Peyton the highest paid player in the NFL as soon as the CBA was resolved so I am not sure why he would be holding things up.
    Mankins may have a legit gripe but they way I read this his agent has asked for anything yet. Infact if you read the entire post the only one that has asked for anything is Jacksons agent. Thats why I think this whole thing may be BS.

  78. CKL says: Jul 19, 2011 5:41 PM

    Eaglesfan-
    We probably will never know the exact truth with Mankins as far as if his gripe was legit or not b/c Pats don’t discuss contracts publicly. All I know is that he called Mr.Kraft a liar and Mr Kraft was reportedly moved enough by it to want an apology. There has also been reports that Mankins WAS offered a pretty competitive deal but again, we will likely never know the truth.
    All I’ll say on that is this: The Pats under BB have never paid over what they consider their top value for any player, no matter how beloved. So if Mankins is surprised they won’t make him the highest paid guy at his position in the whole NFL it’s hard to see why. Heck even when they ponyed up the big cash for Seymour’s extension the guy kept bitching. The Pats are STRAIGHT business, 24-7 and the day Brady isn’t worth his salary to them, he’ll be gone too. Say what you will but that’s as fair as it gets meaning guys know what to expect when they go there as FA or re-sign. They make their decision with eyes wide open.

    I heard Schefty say on NFL Live that there is absolutely NO way that Manning & Brees get exempted from the FT, FWIW.

  79. jwil444 says: Jul 19, 2011 5:47 PM

    Ok, can we now stop talking about what great guys manning and brees are? cant see them holding up a deal though, at least not for long…..their peers would kill them

  80. dewalt2990 says: Jul 19, 2011 5:52 PM

    Peyton: My mommy says my poopies special.

  81. therillest says: Jul 19, 2011 5:56 PM

    Ok, I got my season tickets in the mail yestarday and I aims to use every damn one of them…so everyone needsto get their headsout of their asses and get these boys in camp!! GO JAGS!!!!

  82. frankvzappa says: Jul 19, 2011 6:00 PM

    Wow. A chink in the heroic Brees’ armor. We all knew Peyton, Jackson, and Mankins were douches, now Brees joins that list forever.

  83. stanklepoot says: Jul 19, 2011 6:06 PM

    ebenezergrymm says: Jul 19, 2011 2:35 PM

    “And what does that sound like? It sounds like precisely what the NFL did when it was supposed to be maxing out the shared TV revenue in 2009, but instead cut its own deal for lockout insurance.”

    I knew you couldn’t write an article that long without taking some dig at the owners when the subject clearly is about how greedy the players are.

    But guess what.

    You’re little lockout insurance jab doesn’t work anymore now that DSmith came out and said he secured lockout insurance for the players.

    You should remember that since the article is right here on PFT. From just a few days ago.
    _______________________
    Big difference between the lockout insurance case and the lockout insurance De Smith picked up. In the case of the NFLPA, they’re simply paying a premium for an insurance policy that would pay them in the case of an extended lockout. Just a typical insurance policy, only on a grand scale. In the lockout insurance case, the problem is that the owners were negotiating with the tv networks for revenue they already had a contractual agreement with the players to share. In their capacity as sole negotiator, however, the owners left extra revenue on the table in return for guarantees that would bolster the position of the owners in the case of an extended lockout. In other words, they went behind their partners’ backs and made a deal that sacrificed some of their partners’ money in order to make a deal that would help them further screw their partners in the upcoming negotiations. Huge difference. Oh, and before there’s a big argument about whether the owners and players are partners, I simply used that term as a quick way to refer to the fact that they had an agreement in place to share the revenue the league took in.

  84. stanklepoot says: Jul 19, 2011 6:24 PM

    sj39 says: Jul 19, 2011 2:47 PM

    Manning, Brees, and Brady all stand a good chanch of losing their locker rooms this season.
    _______________________
    What does Brady have to do with this? He already has a contract, and I haven’t read or heard anywhere that he’s asking for anything special. Personally, I have nothing against most of these players trying to get a LITTLE something for themselves. They put their butts on the line when they added their names to the lawsuit. In the past, owners have retaliated against certain players because they were upset with the union and those players were reps or union officers. As long as they don’t let things sidetrack the settlement (which I highly doubt, since they’ll have to face their fellow players after this is all over), I have no problem with most of them trying to get a little something in the settlement. I do have a problem with Peyton asking to be exempt from the franchise tag, however. Yes, he put his name on the lawsuit, but immediately after that he ran for cover and acted like he didn’t know what a lawsuit was. At least Brady and Brees answered questions about the lawsuit. Peyton, however, was so worried about his public image and his advertising deals that he refused to answer a single question about the issue. The only time we heard from him was after the breakthrough when he said it was time to get the deal done. Way to put your butt on the line there Peyton. He just wants the exemption so he can squeeze even more money out of the Colts, as if he hasn’t signed max contracts since day one. He let himself be franchised the last time his contract was up so that he’d have a much higher starting salary when he negotiated this past deal. Now that he’s getting older and has had two neck surgeries, he doesn’t want to risk playing things out a bit and getting injured. He just wants to jump straight to the uber-contract with all of that guaranteed money. Funny thing is, I remember reading posts Colts fans wrote earlier where they said Peyton was such a team guy he’d take a little less to help the team. LMAO on that one then, and even more so now. By the time Peyton is done with the Colts, not only will they not be able to afford a quality backup QB, they won’t be able to afford a defense…oh, wait.

  85. skoobyfl says: Jul 19, 2011 6:26 PM

    Drug test all of them before one check goes out, they’ll catch one & pay them $0.

  86. axespray says: Jul 19, 2011 7:19 PM

    Yo’ Brees…

    Reggie White, Jerry Kramer, most of the “Drug using drunk” retired guys wouldn’t screw over the rest of the league for themselves….
    just saying….

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!