Drew Brees is greedy, cares more about $ than winning (I was so wrong about that, thread) (1 Viewer)

[obwhiteo]

He has the most team friendly contract in the NFL. Basically signed a 1 year guaranteed with a team option for 4 extra years. Every other QB not named Fitzpatrick and 90% of the NFL contracts guarantee franchise tag plus half of their salary for the second season.

7 years 175 million with 50 million Guaranteed would've still been a fair contract. It's still only a guarantee of average salary for 2 years, and the team can ask him to take a pay cut or release him without owing him anything the third year.

The media led everyone to believe he was asking for at least 60 million, and felt he deserved it.

I was wrong about him putting money over winning and questioning his values .Drew can come to my house and punch me 44 million times in the face. i deserve it.

If Drew was willing all this time to sign for 44 million guaranteed Benson should fire Loomis after the 1st game. Putting the greatest player in franchise history through the media scrutiny and causing fans to turn on Brees for asking for them to pay him what he would have been owed without an extension. Brees is the only QB that hasn't received an extension with 2 years left after they won a super bowl. he's had it happen twice.

Starting to believe we are one of the worst organizations at taking care of star players. Fans have felt Nicks,Graham, and Brees were greedy, but if they were signed to an extension with 2 years left like other teams their negotiations wouldn't have played out in the media.

Couple things here are incorrect though. It's not a 4 year option for the team. It's a one year extension that cost the team for 5 years. Drew is actually getting just as much money as the rumored contracts, it's just spread out more for the team, and more up front for him. It's not a team friendly contract, as much as it was a way for us to afford the extra year. If drew play lights out the this year, we are having the same conversation next offseason expect we won't be able to extend him because we will still be paying for this contract.

But regardless, we have drew for two more seasons and some cap space. I'm happy.

 

[Hustle]

Just read the actual structure of the contract, wasn't aware it was only a one year.. extension . 25 million is still better than 43 million. No more franchise tag should help negotiations next time. Unfortunately there's going to be a next time. When they announced it earlier it sounded so much better. Would have been more relieving to know he was under contract until he was done playing.

This kinda reminds me of Michael Jordan's last few years with the Bulls. They pretty much signed him on a year by year basis if memory serves me right (I'm old so I could be mistaken lol). Even though technically he was going to be a free agent, everyone knew he was staying with the Bulls. I think it's pretty safe to say Brees is to New Orleans what Jordan is to Chicago. He just belongs there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SaintsDrunkard]

I'll fess up! His actions certainly seemed to be that all he cared about was being the highest paid....Glad I was wrong on this one and I'm even more appreciative that he took a "hometown discount."

 

[crosswatt]

Loomis dragged his feet on the prior contract for so long that they lost Nicks to FA. Losing Nicks started the wheels in motion. What you see today, the team needing 2 new guards (I anticipate AP switching to RT next year) can be traced back to that point in time.

They signed Grubbs to a slightly lower valued contract just one day later, so, no, it wasn't the reason.

 

[Zztop]

They signed Grubbs to a slightly lower valued contract just one day later, so, no, it wasn't the reason.

Grubbs wasn't nearly the same caliber as Nicks. At the very least they would not have used the tag on Drew, they would instead have used it on Nicks, which would have given them one more year to work out a longer contract with him. But instead, they were forced to use the Tag on Drew since Loomis was dragging his feet.

 

[Saint_Ward]

Grubbs wasn't nearly the same caliber as Nicks.

Nicks didn't want to be on this team. He chose a slightly bigger contract and no State Tax to go to Florida and ended his career due to MRSA he got there.

Even if we could tag him, what then? What if he refused to play under it? What if he didn't give 100%? What if the relationship soured and we had to trade him.

Sure, we may have gotten value for it, but we'd still be down a top guard.

 

[Guido Merkins]

I almost never comment on contract stuff for two reasons

1. a lot of what you hear isn't true. It's either people making stuff up or agents or front office people allowing stuff to be believed that is pure speculation.

2. when you are talking about money in these quantities, working people like us can't really react rationally to it. The owners make billions, so IMO it's only fair that the players make millions. The players ARE the NFL. And if you don't like them making that much money, look in the mirror because they teams make a fortune because we support it. Ticket sales, merchandise sales, concessions, etc... Drew Brees is one of only 32 NFL QBs on the planet and he's an elite one of those. If he doesn't deserve millions, then nobody does. Yes teachers should be paid more, but there are far more people capable of being a teacher than an NFL QB. Just simple economics.

Anybody who think Drew Brees is just a money grubber, really haven't been paying enough attention or they let #2 blind them. When #9 is gone, we'll be WISHING we had some QB who deserved to be paid $100 million + a year

 

[crosswatt]

Grubbs wasn't nearly the same caliber as Nicks. At the very least they would not have used the tag on Drew, they would instead have used it on Nicks, which would have given them one more year to work out a longer contract with him. But instead, they were forced to use the Tag on Drew since Loomis was dragging his feet.

Caliber doesn't matter. We're not talking about who the better player was. Grubbs signed for $11 million less that Nicks did one day after Nicks agreed with Tampa.

Yes, they could have franchised Nicks, but he was adamant that he would not be happy with that scenario. He wanted his huge payday, and the Saints weren't willing to pay him more than Evans, so he went job hunting.

 

[Clintonrebel]

Regarding the "greed" issue...I have to respect him for holding the line so hard for so long, because this negotiation is not just about him. The NFLPA has worked for decades for ALL players to get a fair shake, so in part he is holding the line for the players in general, not just Drew the player. In the end, we got a win win.

 

[Eman5805]

I wonder if there's something behind the scenes we have planned for the 2017 offseason. Like a player we plan to throw some of the cap space we could roll over. I think most of the big FAs I wanted in 2017 all got extensions this offseason. Like Muhammad Wilkerson and Fletcher Cox.

 

[26ISTHEMAN]

It's a hard thing to judge when we don't know what goes on behind the scenes. As someone said above, if this was Brees' demand all along and Loomis dragged it this far, then shame on him, and he probably should be fired. On the other hand, we know Drew's agent drives a hard bargain, so we'll never know why it took so long to get a deal done.

I'm just happy that it's done, that's it's a good deal for the team, and it's a good deal for Drew. After all, the guy will have made $200 million or more (plus endorsement money) by the time he stops playing.

It's time for football!

 

[SAINTSFAN]

Nicks didn't want to be on this team. He chose a slightly bigger contract and no State Tax to go to Florida and ended his career due to MRSA he got there.

Even if we could tag him, what then? What if he refused to play under it? What if he didn't give 100%? What if the relationship soured and we had to trade him.

Sure, we may have gotten value for it, but we'd still be down a top guard.

That is not accurate. He wanted to be here, but the Saints did not make him an offer until the last minute. He decided to see what Tampa was offering and it was much better in terms of front loading. We lost him because we had to use the tag on Brees. That was somewhat strategic on Condon's part in order to get the 2nd tag (knowing the 3rd one was golden under the rules).

 

[Saint_Ward]

That is not accurate. He wanted to be here, but the Saints did not make him an offer until the last minute. He decided to see what Tampa was offering and it was much better in terms of front loading. We lost him because we had to use the tag on Brees. That was somewhat strategic on Condon's part in order to get the 2nd tag (knowing the 3rd one was golden under the rules).

that still assumes he'd be happy playing under the tag or we'd work out a contract.

 

[lapaz]

It's not politically correct to say it about someone we like, but of course Brees is greedy. I'm not going to condemn anyone for getting as much as they can, because capitalism is all about greed. When getting as much as you can has negative side affects on something else that you also want, such as winning, then that puts a check on greed. Brees got a good deal that seems to work for both sides. The team now has money to help him achieve his other non-monetary goals.

 

[sammymvpknight]

Brees definitely took a bit of a cut...but you have to think that ensure financial security while playing a year between a brittle OL had to at least pay a part in his decision.