Blake Bortles likes Tom Brady’s model for quarterback salaries

Getty Images

The Jaguars could have had quarterback Blake Bortles play out this year under the terms of the fifth-year option on his rookie deal, but they signed him to a three-year contract extension in February instead.

The deal guarantees Bortles $26.5 million over the next two seasons as opposed to the $19 million he would have made under the option. In an appearance on Sirius XM NFL Radio, Bortles said that he didn’t “really care about how much money” was in the deal because he prized the security that came with a deal running beyond the 2018 season.

Bortles also suggested that he would continue to feel that way by pointing to Patriots quarterback Tom Brady‘s habit of leaving money on the table to spend on other areas of the team.

“I think definitely the way the Tom has done it is the way to try to model,” Bortles said. “Having guys and putting pieces around him was definitely something. When you take up a ton of money you kind of limit your team and who they can help you out with and put around you. I’m not naive enough to say that we don’t need a run game. We also need a good defense, we need good receivers, we need all these pieces. You can’t play as a quarterback and do it yourself so I’m more than willing to take less money than somebody else might in my position to put good guys around us.”

Many would point out that Bortles’ play to this point in his career doesn’t give him the same leverage that Brady has avoided using to command the biggest possible salary. There’s little doubt, though, that any money saved at quarterback will be a plus for the Jaguars as players like Jalen Ramsey, Myles Jack, Yannick Ngakoue and, should he persuade the team to keep him around, Dante Fowler come up for new contracts.

If Bortles plays well, he would be in line for a new contract that would allow him to prove his faith in the Brady model before too long as well.

87 responses to “Blake Bortles likes Tom Brady’s model for quarterback salaries

  1. He is saying the right things anyways. If more players would follow suit then some of the so called great QBs (Brees, Stafford, Cousins, Jimmy G and now Rodgers) would have better weapons around them.
    The NFL should cap positions like QB. In a couple years there is going to be a 40 million dollar a yr QB. That team won’t ever win a Championship because he will be throwing to average WRs

  2. Aaron isn’t going to like this. And he certainly won’t leave any money on the table for his team.

  3. If you’re a QB on a good team, and you have a clean image, you’ll make more money on endorsements than you will on your salary. You’re going to end up with more money if you learn how to invest it, than a guy making $200 million that invests poorly. I don’t like the idea of capping certain positions. I’d rather see the onus put on teams to hire smart front office people, not cover for incompetent ones. Jacksonville has shown the ability to evaluate college talent. Even if they can’t sign all their guys, they’ll just go out and draft new ones.

  4. So hes in favor of taking money under the table like sleezebag tammy does? There are no 2 bigger scumbag scam artist hacks on the planet than tammy and kraft

  5. Cool! Might work. I’ve always thought the Manning Colts would have had more rings if Peyton’s salary wasn’t so high against the cap.

  6. Maybe instead of talking about how QB’s are eating up cap space and should be taking less money people should recognize the reality of the cap being an artificial cap on spending designed solely to help prevent the owners from losing money because they don’t make good business decisions. QB salaries are reflecting the true value that players have better than any other position because it’s so recognizable to the average fan when you have a good vs bad QB.

    Instead of arguing that the NFL should do things like cap QB salaries or that QB should be the ones taking less money, people should be arguing that the NFL’s salary cap is an anti-capitalist idea that it is designed to subsidize billionaires.

  7. just who gives a tinker’s d*n about what Bortles has to say?

    he’s won how many Super Bowls?

    as many as Romo, Tebow, Gabbert and about 30 cleveland quarterbacks and get he’s paid a top ten QB salary he could not beat any of the other nine of head to head even on a lucky day?

    take away that defence and he’s just another Hackenberg;

    unless all the QBs in his division get hurt again and his team is playing another soft schedule, the Jags will be lucky to even make the playoffs again with him under centre;

    until this clown proves otherwise, his words mean nothing;

  8. amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:58 pm

    Instead of arguing that the NFL should do things like cap QB salaries or that QB should be the ones taking less money, people should be arguing that the NFL’s salary cap is an anti-capitalist idea that it is designed to subsidize billionaires.
    ———
    Well said.
    A salary cap is a socialist scheme to make things “fair”.
    If our politicians have their way, our salaries would be capped as to what they think is fair.

  9. I’m actually starting to be impressed by Blake Bortles. He’s had some rough times, but he’s stuck in there and even though I don’t care a hoot about the Jaguars, I’d like to see him end up having a successful career with his team. Seems like a pretty decent guy. Time will tell if he’ll develop into a top ten quarterback, though.

  10. I like how Brady is the only big time QB to consistently leave money on the table, and all people can do is bash the guy. You wish he played for you.

  11. Cap ALL players contracts at $10mil/year. It’s more than enough to feed their families. Unless they are stupid they’ll be able to support future generations for life. The tv contracts are what’s running (ruining) it however.

  12. Phillyfan1 – of course there’s going to be a qb who makes 40 million because the salary cap will continue to rise and that’s just common sense(which doesn’t appear to be too common here). The percentage of the cap the qb is getting hasn’t changed but slightly since the 90’s so unless you want to shrink the cap yes qb salaries as all others will continue to rise.

  13. thefeisty1 – You might want to change your name how about theslow1 or thedumb1 or the nobrains1? They all seem more fitting for you. So cap everyone salary at 10 million so the owners take home even m[re money? Well that’s just genius! The tv contracts are ruining it? Are you serious? Without those tv contracts tickets to games would be even more expensive.

  14. thermanmerman99 says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:47 pm

    So hes in favor of taking money under the table like sleezebag tammy does? There are no 2 bigger scumbag scam artist hacks on the planet than tammy and kraft

    I think this says more about you than it does about Tom Brady and Robert Kraft.

  15. amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:58 pm
    Maybe instead of talking about how QB’s are eating up cap space and should be taking less money people should recognize the reality of the cap being an artificial cap on spending designed solely to help prevent the owners from losing money because they don’t make good business decisions. QB salaries are reflecting the true value that players have better than any other position because it’s so recognizable to the average fan when you have a good vs bad QB.

    Instead of arguing that the NFL should do things like cap QB salaries or that QB should be the ones taking less money, people should be arguing that the NFL’s salary cap is an anti-capitalist idea that it is designed to subsidize billionaires.
    ————————————————–

    ‘Missed it by that much.’ The point of initiating the salary cap/floor in’94 was to provide for competitive balance in an NFL that was suddenly facing true FA. In a league where there were more Mike Browns than Eddie DeBartolos it was an absolute necessity in order to prevent a MLB type situation with a couple of Steinbrenner types buying championships while the Angelos types just cashed checks. The cap doesn’t ‘subsidize’ billionaire owners so much as it provides for millionaire players. If you want to make the argument the salary floor is too low and owners get too big a piece of the pie in comparison to what they put back into the ‘product’ or a guaranteed profit thanks to an antitrust exemption is anti-capitalist then I am all ears but it’s the ability to jointly share revenues that protects bad owners not the cap.

  16. thermanmerman99 says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:47 pm
    So hes in favor of taking money under the table like sleezebag tammy does? There are no 2 bigger scumbag scam artist hacks on the planet than tammy—

    And there is no bigger jealous crybaby on PFT than you

  17. Peyton’s teams were in the playoffs every year and he ultimately played in four Super Bowls even as the highest paid QB of all time.

    Most QBs simply aren’t good enough to make multiple Super Bowl runs no matter what their salaries are. That’s just an excuse.

  18. With as much money Tom Brady’s wife has earned (and will continue to earn after he retires), it’s a wonder Brady doesn’t play for free to give the Pats an overwhelming cap advantage.

  19. commentawaitingdeletion says:
    July 15, 2018 at 5:01 pm

    ‘Missed it by that much.’ The point of initiating the salary cap/floor in’94 was to provide for competitive balance in an NFL that was suddenly facing true FA. In a league where there were more Mike Browns than Eddie DeBartolos it was an absolute necessity in order to prevent a MLB type situation with a couple of Steinbrenner types buying championships while the Angelos types just cashed checks. The cap doesn’t ‘subsidize’ billionaire owners so much as it provides for millionaire players. If you want to make the argument the salary floor is too low and owners get too big a piece of the pie in comparison to what they put back into the ‘product’ or a guaranteed profit thanks to an antitrust exemption is anti-capitalist then I am all ears but it’s the ability to jointly share revenues that protects bad owners not the cap.

    ————————-

    This argument doesn’t hold up. Just because the owners say that salary caps provide competitive balance doesn’t make it true. Competitive balance can be defined in multiple ways, but in anyway you look at it the NFL has no no better than MLB, which doesn’t have a salary cap, when it comes to number of teams making the playoffs, number of teams winning championships, and preventing teams from being perennial losers and winners. Your argument of Steinbrenner is appropriate but ironically wrong. He lost more money trying to “buy” championships than he got back when he finally won them. Salary caps are simply a means to make sure owners don’t overdo themselves in their lust for looking good. Nothing more. There’s no justification for it and the fact that fans have bought the line of competitive balance hook line and sinker makes their job easy.

  20. amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:58 pm
    …NFL’s salary cap is an anti-capitalist idea that it is designed to subsidize billionaires.
    ————————-
    No, it was to STOP billionaires simply coming in and buying an all-star team like Jerrah did.

  21. Bortle sis full of it.
    He’s no where near being a good QB, so good QB is out of the picture for him.
    If winning is so important then he should take less, because he’s not worth what he’s being paid. Let him take 15 million.
    He’s talking the talk, sounding good, but it’s empty.
    It’s as if I said “If I was a QB winning would mean everything to me and I’d play for the Vets minimum”

  22. thermanmerman99 says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:47 pm
    So hes in favor of taking money under the table like sleezebag tammy does? There are no 2 bigger scumbag scam artist hacks on the planet than tammy and kraft

    —————-+
    Whos Tammy?

  23. This whole notion of Brady leaving money on the table is hogwash. It tells me most of the so-called football fans out there don’t understand that Brady’s salary and cap hit are completely different. He’s never actually taken a pay cut. Portions of his salary have been converted into signing bonuses and contract incentives. This has happened several times over the years. Tom Brady is the third highest paid player in the history of the NFL. He’s made $197.2M over an 18-year career. He made $28.8M in 2016, alone. Yet, he takes less than others for the sake of the team. Give me a break! Lol
    Career earnings:
    P. Manning – $248.7M
    E. Manning – $219.3M
    T. Brady – $197.2M
    D. Brees – $194.7M
    P. Rivers – $187.9M

  24. motleytrap says:
    July 15, 2018 at 5:09 pm
    Peyton’s teams were in the playoffs every year and he ultimately played in four Super Bowls even as the highest paid QB of all time.
    ——————-
    The MAIN reason his Colts comfortably reached the playoffs every year (but then usually did poorly, Peyton was 14-13 overall in postseason) was because the Colts moved to the AFC south in 2002, the rest of which was a total joke during his tenure there. Before which the Colts were usually mid-to-low ranking in the AFC East every year.

  25. greenwhodat26 says:
    July 15, 2018 at 5:51 pm
    This whole notion of Brady leaving money on the table is hogwash. It tells me most of the so-called football fans out there don’t understand that Brady’s salary and cap hit are completely different. He’s never actually taken a pay cut. Portions of his salary have been converted into signing bonuses and contract incentives. This has happened several times over the years. Tom Brady is the third highest paid player in the history of the NFL. He’s made $197.2M over an 18-year career. He made $28.8M in 2016, alone. Yet, he takes less than others for the sake of the team. Give me a break! Lol
    Career earnings:
    P. Manning – $248.7M
    E. Manning – $219.3M
    T. Brady – $197.2M
    D. Brees – $194.7M
    P. Rivers – $187.9M
    ——————————–
    Brady earned $14.7M in 2016, not $28.8M. As to the rest, Eli and Rivers have played 4yrs less, Brees wasn’t settled as a highly-paid franchise QB until arriving in Saints in 2006, and Peyton’s high salary is actually skewed low by starting playing a few years earlier and retiring a few years ago.

  26. amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 5:32 pm

    This argument doesn’t hold up. Just because the owners say that salary caps provide competitive balance doesn’t make it true. Competitive balance can be defined in multiple ways, but in anyway you look at it the NFL has no no better than MLB, which doesn’t have a salary cap, when it comes to number of teams making the playoffs, number of teams winning championships, and preventing teams from being perennial losers and winners. Your argument of Steinbrenner is appropriate but ironically wrong. He lost more money trying to “buy” championships than he got back when he finally won them. Salary caps are simply a means to make sure owners don’t overdo themselves in their lust for looking good. Nothing more. There’s no justification for it and the fact that fans have bought the line of competitive balance hook line and sinker makes their job easy.
    ——————————————-

    Granted N.E. skews things a bit with their cooperative QB and Belichick’s roster ruthlessness but the NFL has much better competitive balance than MLB, worst to first happens in at least one division almost every year. The Sox & Yanks are a threat almost every year thanks to their deep pockets, sure a small market team can go for broke or catch lightning in a bottle but what chance does TB or Toronto have for long term success against Boston or NY’s checkbooks? The Stenbrenner argument bears out very well precisely because he didn’t care if he lost money. Neither did DeBartolo who spent money hand over fist without a cap along with Jack Kent Cooke and to a certain extent Wellington Mara and that was BEFORE real FA. Imagine what they would have spent in unlimited FA with no cap. Do you really think without a cap Jerry Jones or Kroenke wouldn’t break the bank going after every available FA? Who could compete with the Seahawks if Paul Allen decided he just had to win and damn the costs. Take a look at what unrestricted FA and a couple of idiot owners did to the NHL. The cap doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it cohabits with FA. GB, among other teams, would become irrelevant without the cap.

  27. “The MAIN reason his Colts comfortably reached the playoffs every year (but then usually did poorly, Peyton was 14-13 overall in postseason) was because the Colts moved to the AFC south in 2002, the rest of which was a total joke during his tenure there. Before which the Colts were usually mid-to-low ranking in the AFC East every year.”

    Oh yeah, and the Patriots have been so disadvantaged playing in the same division as the fearsome Mark Sanchez, Ryan Fitzpatrick, JP Losman, EJ Manuel, Trent Edwards, Chad Henne.

    It’s amazing the NFL hasn’t followed the mercy rule and moved the Pats to a division where they’d actually have a chance.

  28. The funny thing is the patriots often don’t pay their players despite Brady taking less. Case in point: they let solder go. You don’t let reliable tackles walk.

  29. “The tv contracts are ruining it? ”

    Thats correct actually. It gives an owner zero incentive to spend near the cap and put a decent product on the field because no matter what they get a huge tv check every month

    Look at the con job Haslam has pulled in Cleveland the last couple years. 2016 the Bowns were 41 million under the cap, won 1 game. 2017 they were a whopping 63 mil under the cap w 0 wins. The top 24 teams under the cap were all 12 mil or less, anaverage player buget gap of 43 freaking million dollars+ between the Browns an 24 other teams. Haslam laughed allt the way to the babk while pocketing all those millions in cap difference. He never had any intention of fielding a wining product

    He could never have even tried that if tv contracts were structured to reflect wins dictating distrubution of those funds, making it a better idea to win than cheat the fans.

  30. greenwhodat26 says:
    July 15, 2018 at 5:51 pm
    This whole notion of Brady leaving money on the table is hogwash. It tells me most of the so-called football fans out there don’t understand that Brady’s salary and cap hit are completely different.

    streetyson says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:08 pm
    Brady earned $14.7M in 2016, not $28.8M. As to the rest, Eli and Rivers have played 4yrs less, Brees wasn’t settled as a highly-paid franchise QB until arriving in Saints in 2006, and Peyton’s high salary is actually skewed low by starting playing a few years earlier and retiring a few years ago.
    —————————————–

    The irony is both of you are right, with caveats. Brady’s contracts have consistently been torn up with time remaining and bonus money added, until now he has never in his career entered the last year of a contract, he also usually gets his money up front. Brady and the Pats have played the cap like a fiddle and both have gotten theirs out of it. That exemplifies an extraordinary level of trust between player and team we are unlikely to see duplicated. That said anyone that thinks Brady couldn’t have made more by not accepting the restructures hasn’t been paying attention to what’s gone on almost everywhere else. No matter how you slice it Paid-a-ton smoked the system for cash while Brady worked it for rings and security. The supposedly greedy Drew Brees has nothing on the truly avaricious Manning brothers but you also can’t discount the fantastically rich starting points of their very first contracts as number one overall picks or even Rivers as a top 5 in comparison to where Brees as a 2nd rounder or Brady as a 6th started out contract wise. It takes a long time to make up that kind of disproportionate starting deficit

  31. “Brady earned $14.7M in 2016, not $28.8M. As to the rest, Eli and Rivers have played 4yrs less, Brees wasn’t settled as a highly-paid franchise QB until arriving in Saints in 2006, and Peyton’s high salary is actually skewed low by starting playing a few years earlier and retiring a few years ago.”
    This is it. This is where you go wrong. Brady signed an extension in 2016 for $41M with $28M guaranteed over two years, meaning, yes $14.7M in 2016. What you’re not looking at is the $28M signing bonus that came with the contract. $28M guaranteed on top of a $28M signing bonus. It was officially reported as a 2-year $41M extension with $28M guaranteed and a $28M bonus just for signing the contract. The total potential value was for $60M with added performanced-based incentives and bonuses. Still don’t believe it, google it.

  32. Brady most definitely could’ve pushed for more, but claiming he took less than any QB is ridiculous. An $8.4M or a $14.7M base salary is a facade.

  33. Peyton played 18 seasons, which is as many as Tom Brady currently and one more than Drew Brees.

  34. Granted N.E. skews things a bit with their cooperative QB and Belichick’s roster ruthlessness but the NFL has much better competitive balance than MLB, worst to first happens in at least one division almost every year. The Sox & Yanks are a threat almost every year thanks to their deep pockets, sure a small market team can go for broke or catch lightning in a bottle but what chance does TB or Toronto have for long term success against Boston or NY’s checkbooks? The Stenbrenner argument bears out very well precisely because he didn’t care if he lost money. Neither did DeBartolo who spent money hand over fist without a cap along with Jack Kent Cooke and to a certain extent Wellington Mara and that was BEFORE real FA. Imagine what they would have spent in unlimited FA with no cap. Do you really think without a cap Jerry Jones or Kroenke wouldn’t break the bank going after every available FA? Who could compete with the Seahawks if Paul Allen decided he just had to win and damn the costs. Take a look at what unrestricted FA and a couple of idiot owners did to the NHL. The cap doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it cohabits with FA. GB, among other teams, would become irrelevant without the cap.

    6 0 Rate This

    ———

    well said

    end thread

    all the rest is jealousy

  35. taintedsaints2009 says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:29 pm
    The funny thing is the patriots often don’t pay their players despite Brady taking less. Case in point: they let solder go. You don’t let reliable tackles walk.
    ————————————

    The Patriots pretty much spend to the cap most every year it’s just spread throughout their roster rather than top loaded. Case in point, N.E. only has $10M in available cap space they couldn’t afford to pay Solder what NY did.

  36. motleytrap says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:23 pm
    “The MAIN reason his Colts comfortably reached the playoffs every year (but then usually did poorly, Peyton was 14-13 overall in postseason) was because the Colts moved to the AFC south in 2002, the rest of which was a total joke during his tenure there. Before which the Colts were usually mid-to-low ranking in the AFC East every year.”

    Oh yeah, and the Patriots have been so disadvantaged playing in the same division as the fearsome Mark Sanchez, Ryan Fitzpatrick, JP Losman, EJ Manuel, Trent Edwards, Chad Henne.

    It’s amazing the NFL hasn’t followed the mercy rule and moved the Pats to a division where they’d actually have a chance.
    ———
    Just curious….what division do you want the Patriots to play in? Go ahead and cherry pick one to support your argument. Because they’re winning percentage is about the same in/out, actually a little less in the division. So what exactly is our point? Do you honestly think that after watching them for 17 years, if they played in another division B.B. and Brady wouldn’t be successful?

  37. motleytrap says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:23 pm

    It’s amazing the NFL hasn’t followed the mercy rule and moved the Pats to a division where they’d actually have a chance.
    ———————————————-

    And where would that be? New England is located in extreme Northeast corner of the country. In the Brady/Belichick era the Pats winning pct’s against Northern and Eastern divisions are AFCE .792, NFCE .813, AFCN .833 and NFCN .875. No doubt fans of other teams in the AFCE would be happy to see the Pats go to one of those other divisions and Pats fans obviously wouldn’t mind beating up on the cream puff AFCN you however would have to start whining about some other boogeyman.

  38. commentawaitingdeletion says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:13 pm

    Granted N.E. skews things a bit with their cooperative QB and Belichick’s roster ruthlessness but the NFL has much better competitive balance than MLB, worst to first happens in at least one division almost every year. The Sox & Yanks are a threat almost every year thanks to their deep pockets, sure a small market team can go for broke or catch lightning in a bottle but what chance does TB or Toronto have for long term success against Boston or NY’s checkbooks? The Stenbrenner argument bears out very well precisely because he didn’t care if he lost money. Neither did DeBartolo who spent money hand over fist without a cap along with Jack Kent Cooke and to a certain extent Wellington Mara and that was BEFORE real FA. Imagine what they would have spent in unlimited FA with no cap. Do you really think without a cap Jerry Jones or Kroenke wouldn’t break the bank going after every available FA? Who could compete with the Seahawks if Paul Allen decided he just had to win and damn the costs. Take a look at what unrestricted FA and a couple of idiot owners did to the NHL. The cap doesn’t exist in a vacuum, it cohabits with FA. GB, among other teams, would become irrelevant without the cap.

    ———————————-

    I appreciate what you’re saying and I understand why you think that but hear me out. The NFL is 4 divisions with 4 teams while MLB is 3 divisions with 5 teams (we’ll exclude the NBA where everyone makes the playoffs). This means that it’s easier right there to make the playoffs since each season you’re only competing with 3 other teams. Combine with a short schedule and injuries, randomness plays a far far larger roll in how a team does over a season than baseball does. The last-to-first is great for fans, but I see no evidence that it’s based on the salary cap. It’s based on that randomness as well as the schedule that NFL plays being more unequal between the division than MLB teams, which I don’t think is bad.

    The real point though is that when you look at MLB you see as many different teams have made the playoffs since 2010 as the NFL has, despite fewer teams making the playoffs each year. Since 2000 (and probably 2010 I just don’t care to look) a larger variety of teams have won the World Series than have won the Super Bowl (and NBA finals for that matter). Yes MLB teams can buy “super teams” but that hasn’t been shown to work in baseball and frankly I doubt it’d work in football where it’s clear that younger teams are stronger than older.

    Finally, let’s suppose that a super team was created that teams struggle to compete with consistently. Would that impact enjoyment of the sport? I think not based on the fact that the last 20 years have been dominated by the Patriots, that their 2007 team was, in my opinion, the greatest team ever and they didn’t win the Super Bowl. Just 6 teams have made the Super Bowl from the AFC since 2001, all of them multiple times. The rest are just there for show. You can’t say that about MLB which doesn’t have the salary cap. All of this has seen a massive rise in the popularity in the NFL over that span.

    So, given all of that and the costs it has on player salaries, I just don’t buy any argument predicated on competitive balance.

  39. It’s all Monopoly money. They’re all just playing games with the tv money. Cut that to realistic levels and the salaries will respond accordingly.

  40. I like Kate Upton’s model for a wife, but some baseball player thought about it first!

  41. amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 7:45 pm

    So, given all of that and the costs it has on player salaries, I just don’t buy any argument predicated on competitive balance.
    ———————————————

    Thus proving you missed my point entirely. The cap doesn’t guarantee competitive balance, it simply prevents $ from being the reason for an imbalance like it was in the 80’s and early 90’s. In that regard the cap is doing it’s job. You are placing the blame for players not being compensated at a higher level on the existence of the cap but the cap isn’t the cause of that, rather the collectively bargained percentage of total revenues it is comprised of is. Also keep in mind, no cap means no floor. The NFL is unique in that the league negotiates the TV deal and everyone splits revenue equally whereas in the other 3 major sports every team makes it’s own TV deal and keeps the proceeds for the bulk of it’s games with only select national games generating shared revenue. I am all for a higher % of revenue going to the players (along with a much higher spending floor) but I am dead set against the Allens Jones and Kroenkes of the league buying their way to dynasty status. As it is now the cap system rewards the best and brightest organizations rather than the richest, an increase in the amount of the percentage of revenues the cap is comprised of won’t change that.

  42. I like Blake. Decent quarterback and just seems like the buddy you can always have a beer with, hang out, and have a good time. This dude gets it.

  43. commentawaitingdeletion says:
    July 15, 2018 at 8:33 pm
    amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 7:45 pm

    So, given all of that and the costs it has on player salaries, I just don’t buy any argument predicated on competitive balance.
    ———————————————

    Thus proving you missed my point entirely. The cap doesn’t guarantee competitive balance, it simply prevents $ from being the reason for an imbalance like it was in the 80’s and early 90’s.

    —————-

    I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. I wouldn’t say that 1 extra Super Bowl team and 2 extra Super Bowl winners is more balanced than the 80’s, that’s what we have right now. The Patriots have been to half of all Super Bowls since the 80’s. No team in history is like that. Do you really think that Ross or Snyder or Jones are going to suddenly have great teams because they’re dishing out mad cash? Don’t you remember Albert Haynesworth? Money doesn’t buy championships. Not in Baseball, not in Football, not in any sport. Smart developing of players who fit your system and grow into great players from young ages do.

  44. “I like Tom Brady’s model for a wife”

    I think there are lots of women out there who aren’t rich and famous models that are just as appealing as Giselle is, if not more so.

  45. commentawaitingdeletion says:
    July 15, 2018 at 7:41 pm
    motleytrap says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:23 pm

    It’s amazing the NFL hasn’t followed the mercy rule and moved the Pats to a division where they’d actually have a chance.
    ———————————————-

    And where would that be? New England is located in extreme Northeast corner of the country. In the Brady/Belichick era the Pats winning pct’s against Northern and Eastern divisions are AFCE .792, NFCE .813, AFCN .833 and NFCN .875. No doubt fans of other teams in the AFCE would be happy to see the Pats go to one of those other divisions and Pats fans obviously wouldn’t mind beating up on the cream puff AFCN you however would have to start whining about some other boogeyman.
    ———————————-
    Playing a team twice a year is hardly the same thing as playing a team/division once every four years. If you knew anything about game prep, you would concede that.

    When’s the last time a team from the AFCE not named the Pats reached the super bowl, let alone won it? How far back in time do we really need to go here?

    Speaking of the SB, what’s the Pats win percentage against NFCE opponents in the playoffs? How does that .250 factor into your .813? You can cherry pick stats all day. Of course the recent Pats teams would have had plenty of success in another division – SB wins included – and I’ll concede that. But the bottom line is, those three other teams have perennially sucked since Butt Fumble Sanchez led Rex Ryan’s gang in green, and that’s saying a lot.

  46. Money doesn’t buy championships. Not in Baseball, not in Football, not in any sport. Smart developing of players who fit your system and grow into great players from young ages do.
    _______

    Reggie White. Biggest FA fish ever landed. Won a ring with GB. ’97 Marlins bought a ring. There are plenty of examples. Miami Heat. South Florida likes those bought championships. Hell, even Durant with Golden State.

  47. He’s absolutely right. QB’s need to be content with 20-25 million and give the team more cap room to sign help for them. And why is it every new QB contract breaks the record? It should be based on talent. Cousins is a nice QB but he shouldn’t be paid as the best.

  48. 1phillyphan says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:34 pm
    He is saying the right things anyways. If more players would follow suit then some of the so called great QBs (Brees, Stafford, Cousins, Jimmy G and now Rodgers) would have better weapons around them.
    The NFL should cap positions like QB. In a couple years there is going to be a 40 million dollar a yr QB. That team won’t ever win a Championship because he will be throwing to average WRs

    ————————————————————————————————-

    Unfortunately this only works if you have a good GM/Coach. Belichek was able to find pieces to fit their game. Unfortunately, the Thompson/McCarthy/Capers combo in Green Bay was terrible. Sure they got a hit on Favre and Rodgers back to back but other than that, there aren’t any other notable players. The real question is do you take a team friendly salary only to get disappointed anyway or say ‘eff’ it’…the front office is going mess up anyway so might as well maximize your earnings while you can.

  49. This whole notion of Brady leaving money on the table is hogwash. It tells me most of the so-called football fans out there don’t understand that Brady’s salary and cap hit are completely different.
    ======

    Tell him what he’s won, Bob!

  50. It’s always fun listening to people who are so sick and tired of the Patriots unparalleled success that that will jump threads and post maniacal stuff to discount it somehow. You’d think the sample size would be good enough for these geniuses, but…

    Sorry guys—the answer has been right in front of your faces, and has been all along. What’s more is, we know you know it. You’ll admit it one day. It’s ok—we’ll wait.

    In the meantime, keep looking for the secret cheating though and the ‘magic system’ formula! Maybe you’ll find it? Haha!

  51. amurdora says:
    July 15, 2018 at 8:54 pm

    I’m not sure what you’re talking about here. I wouldn’t say that 1 extra Super Bowl team and 2 extra Super Bowl winners is more balanced than the 80’s, that’s what we have right now. The Patriots have been to half of all Super Bowls since the 80’s. No team in history is like that. Do you really think that Ross or Snyder or Jones are going to suddenly have great teams because they’re dishing out mad cash? Don’t you remember Albert Haynesworth? Money doesn’t buy championships. Not in Baseball, not in Football, not in any sport. Smart developing of players who fit your system and grow into great players from young ages do.
    ———————————————

    If you are holding up Haynesworth as an example to counter my argument then I am really not explaining very well because what happened with him actually reinforces it, no cap and the big $ mistakes become meaningless. Without the impact of the cap hit the miss on Haynesworth’s contract would have meant nothing on the field (see Sandoval’s Sox or Igawa’s Yankees contracts for prime examples) Snyder would just have written a big check and moved on. What you are missing in this discussion is the NFL has NEVER known real FA without a cap. If you think New England’s dominance on a level financial field has been impressive just imagine what they could do if they could keep whoever they wanted. No cap and Garoppolo is still a Patriot, it would be a Montana to Young type transition. Consider the way Kroenke is loading up the Rams right now in order to sell the PSLs for his new palace in spite of the cap carnage that will follow then consider what he would do if there were no cap at all. It’s ugly to contemplate what just he and Jones alone might do unchecked to salary structures and competitive balance. Baseball provides the best basis for relative comparison because it is the only sport with FA and no cap but it is still a flawed comparison as MLB players are under team control for far longer than NFL players are.

  52. Sorry Blake but that is BS. The owner will still get his even if you blow out a knee and your gone next year. Make hey while the sun shines and he missed out on his payday.

  53. motleytrap says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:23 pm
    “The MAIN reason his Colts comfortably reached the playoffs every year (but then usually did poorly, Peyton was 14-13 overall in postseason) was because the Colts moved to the AFC south in 2002, the rest of which was a total joke during his tenure there. Before which the Colts were usually mid-to-low ranking in the AFC East every year.”

    Oh yeah, and the Patriots have been so disadvantaged playing in the same division as the fearsome Mark Sanchez, Ryan Fitzpatrick, JP Losman, EJ Manuel, Trent Edwards, Chad Henne.

    It’s amazing the NFL hasn’t followed the mercy rule and moved the Pats to a division where they’d actually have a chance.

    ———

    If they moved them to the cream-puff AFC North they would never lose a game

  54. helmetsail says:
    July 15, 2018 at 9:45 pm

    Playing a team twice a year is hardly the same thing as playing a team/division once every four years. If you knew anything about game prep, you would concede that.

    When’s the last time a team from the AFCE not named the Pats reached the super bowl, let alone won it? How far back in time do we really need to go here?

    Speaking of the SB, what’s the Pats win percentage against NFCE opponents in the playoffs? How does that .250 factor into your .813? You can cherry pick stats all day. Of course the recent Pats teams would have had plenty of success in another division – SB wins included – and I’ll concede that. But the bottom line is, those three other teams have perennially sucked since Butt Fumble Sanchez led Rex Ryan’s gang in green, and that’s saying a lot.
    —————————————————–

    Posting regular season winning %’s against complete divisions over a 17 year span is a far cry from cherry picking as opposed to your use of SB results where a team is playing one game against the best of the best, lol. You need to up your game. 17 years worth of full regular season results don’t lie. On average for the past decade division winners lose 1.32 division games per season, in that same time span New England has lost 1.53. Teams are built to win their division. A tip of the cap to Philly who did it when it mattered most but few teams are going to win a shoot out with Brady & Co so of course the other AFCE teams have concentrated their efforts primarily on defense. Contrary to your flawed supposition the fact that other AFCE teams can’t get past NE actually reinforces just how good they have been. No team has suffered more at the hands of the Brady led Pats than the Bills, if you reverse their game results against him Buffalo would have had a winning record in 8 of their last 10 seasons against him and a minimum of 4 playoff trips.

  55. thegreatgabbert says:
    July 15, 2018 at 3:55 pm
    I like Tom Brady’s model for a wife, and I’m just about as likely to achieve that.

    ________________________________________________________

    Best comment of all time lmao!

  56. Not trying to fault what Bortles said, but that’s easier to say with his stats’s than, say, Aaron Rodgers’ numbers. Their leverage/opportunities are quite different.

  57. Brady has built a brand outside the sport that will make him money long after his NFL career is over. He did that by winning so much. So, taking a little less money to ensure his team has a bit of extra money to spend is an investment in his own brand. As someone pointed out above, he may not push the envelope, but he still has done better than nearly everyone throughout his whole career, so it’s not like he’s taking dramatically less money.

  58. frodoftw7 says:
    July 16, 2018 at 12:30 am
    The owners should be the ones taking a pay cut, not the quarterbacks who are the reason for all that $$$ coming in.

    —————

    That argument is as old as professional sports itself. Owners have been taking pay cuts on a percentage basis for years. Players used to make nothing.

    The challenge is that at a time when the league is really healthy it’s easy to look at Robert Kraft’s $175 million purchase of the Patriots as a great investment, but he took a massive risk with a huge amount of money, as did many other owners. If you take the financial risk, you typically get the rewards that come with it. Players get paid whether the team is successful financially or not. They aren’t taking any risk.

  59. “He is saying the right things anyways. If more players would follow suit then some of the so called great QBs (Brees, Stafford, Cousins, Jimmy G and now Rodgers) would have better weapons around them.”

    A weak excuse to justify poor personnel moves.

    If you look at teams with highpaid QBs and their 5 year draft and FA history, for the ones who haven’t had success, the QB’s salary usually isn’t a top 5 reason for their lack of success. Aaron Rodgers’s salary isn’t why Green Bay has consistently failed to give him a quality run game and defense. A great QB can only carry you so far when your GM continues to do dumb stuff.

  60. thefiesty1- Instead of misquoting me, try reading comprehension. I never said I or anyone couldn’t live off 10 million, I said why should players be capped at 10 million so owners get the extra cash?

  61. Unfortunately, the Thompson/McCarthy/Capers combo in Green Bay was terrible. Sure they got a hit on Favre and Rodgers back to back but other than that, there aren’t any other notable players.
    ======

    Charles Woodson cemented his HOF case as a Packer. DPOY 2009.

    Josh Sitton.. TJ Lang.. Nick Collins.. Clay Matthews.. All-Pros

    Plenty of Pro Bowlers.. Jordy Nelson.. Greg Jennings..

    .. common denominator; almost all of those guys are gone.

  62. If they moved them to the cream-puff AFC North they would never lose a game
    ======

    AFC North – 29 Playoff trips in the Brady-era

    AFC East – 25 trips in the Brady era… 15 of which being Brady himself

    .. back to the drawing board.

  63. aarons444 says:
    July 16, 2018 at 2:13 pm
    If they moved them to the cream-puff AFC North they would never lose a game
    ======

    AFC North – 29 Playoff trips in the Brady-era

    AFC East – 25 trips in the Brady era… 15 of which being Brady himself

    .. back to the drawing board.

    ———–

    And if Brady were in the division the majority of those trips would be by the Patriots and only wild card visits by the other teams here and there

  64. aarons444 says:
    July 16, 2018 at 2:13 pm

    AFC North – 29 Playoff trips in the Brady-era

    AFC East – 25 trips in the Brady era… 15 of which being Brady himself

    .. back to the drawing board.
    ————————————————

    The subject was moving the Brady era Pats to the creampuff AFCN where he is 25-5. Without the Pats to keep them out what bearing does how many trips those teams made to the playoffs? Of course they make more trips to the playoffs against inferior competition, lol. Really how good a division can it be getting collectively whipped at an .833 clip? Must look pretty cream puff from where Brady sits. It’s no wonder AFCE fans laugh at the division inequity talk.

    Back to the drawing board indeed

  65. aarons444 says:
    July 16, 2018 at 2:13 pm

    If they moved them to the cream-puff AFC North they would never lose a game
    ======

    AFC North – 29 Playoff trips in the Brady-era

    AFC East – 25 trips in the Brady era… 15 of which being Brady himself

    .. back to the drawing board.

    ——
    9 straight seasons and most likely 10 and counting this year where an AFC BEAST representative has made the conference championship game. No other division comes close to that. Just 3 one and dones by the division champ in that timeframe too. With 1 of those one and done losses to another AFC BEAST team.

    Funny… for such a “weak” division the AFC BEAST sure wins a lot in the playoffs. I would think if the division was that horrible, and the division champ was purely a product of a weak division, they would be a quick and easy out in the playoffs. That is far from the case, of course.

    🙂

  66. Smart developing of players who fit your system and grow into great players from young ages do.
    ———–
    The first part is right but I think you’re confusing the NFL with Major league baseball. You don’t “grow” players in the NFL. Top draft picks are expected to contribute a lot sooner than later.

  67. commentawaitingdeletion says:
    July 15, 2018 at 7:41 pm

    motleytrap says:
    July 15, 2018 at 6:23 pm

    It’s amazing the NFL hasn’t followed the mercy rule and moved the Pats to a division where they’d actually have a chance.
    ———————————————-

    And where would that be? New England is located in extreme Northeast corner of the country. In the Brady/Belichick era the Pats winning pct’s against Northern and Eastern divisions are AFCE .792, NFCE .813, AFCN .833 and NFCN .875. No doubt fans of other teams in the AFCE would be happy to see the Pats go to one of those other divisions and Pats fans obviously wouldn’t mind beating up on the cream puff AFCN you however would have to start whining about some other boogeyman.
    ——————-
    Bring the Colts back to the AFC East! The Pats would have some fun whooping them too. That is, if the Colts aren’t deflating footballs like they were caught doing the night of the 2014 AFC Championship game.

Leave a Reply

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