Drunken Minotaur Zebra

Matt Ryan isn't his agent

51 posts in this topic

The same people pissing and moaning about MR2's deal would be rioting in the street if we didn't extend him, and in a year we'd have someone like Josh McCown leading us to an 8-8 season.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Drunken Minotaur Zebra said:

His agent worked out a deal with our FO, and once they came to a happy accord, they most likely called Matt and said "Hey Matty Ice, 4x Pro Bowler, All-Pro, and NFL MVP, how would you like some money?" and he said "Sure!" and that was it. 

Pretty much.

Excellent deal by TD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Drunken Minotaur Zebra said:

That's irrelevant. The agent works for many athletes. It's the AGENTS job to determine the value of his clients based off the market and future productivity in conjunction with the FO. The player has absolutely no place in the negotiations. 

And the agent works his arse off protecting his client while dealing/negotiating with the FO to get a good deal (A good deal is a good, acceptable, deal for both sides.). .................. so he can get his 10%.

This deal prolly took months to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2018 at 9:26 AM, JD dirtybird21 said:

People talk as if we’ve been through cap crisis before....

The Saints have been through cap crisis. And that wasn’t because of Brees. That was because of making stupid contract offers to guys like Jairus Byrd

Trufant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm glad we got the deal done, but to say that Matt has nothing to do with what his agent asks is ridiculous. Matt HIRES his agent. It's not the other way around. 

If you told your realtor in June that you wanted to sell your house 20% below market so that you could be guaranteed to have it sold by the start of the next school year do you think they would just say "Nah...I think I'll hold out for more"? Of course not. Your agent is supposed to operate on your behalf. Not their own. And their are more considerations to a sale than money.

If Matt had said "I only want 20m/year with the stipulation that $10m will be dedicated exclusively to OL talent", his agent absolutely would have had to do it, or risk being fired for a new agent.

Edited by since68andcounting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who think this contract is detrimental to the team baffle me.  It's cap friendly today, and it is structured such that he'll get another extension in a few years, and with the cap increase we'll be able to sign whoever we need to in order to win, provided we're talking about our players and not having to overpay for FA acquisitions.

This team is in fantastic shape right now.  This contract helped with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's not that ryan doesn't deserve his money or that the contract wasn't structured in a smart way--I've been enlightened by some of the analytics of you guys when I was skeptical before (showing that he's not taking up a much higher percentage of the cap with his new deal).  it's just that some of us think ryan can't get us to a super bowl without more money to protect him on the offensive line--he's obviously not Rodgers who can run around everywhere, but needs a great line like Brady.  We probably need more money also for 1-2 more high quality defensive players.

I've always wondered what Ryan could do if he had all that time Brady has behind the stellar offensive line of the **** Pats.  If I were Ryan, I'd wonder that too and free up more money for that to occur.  People say here "no one would do that, you're lying" but I genuinely believe I'd take a bit less to have a better chance at winning super bowls, given my salary would already be more than me or my family could ever hope to spend in a lifetime. 

We have a VERY short window - probably two years to keep a healthy Julio and freeman in their prime.  I predict that we'll keep getting close but never win a super bowl with this team and that Ryan's career will have gaudy stats (probably a top 5 quarterback in history in throwing yards) but without a super bowl his legacy will always be tainted. 

This is not about blaming Ryan or saying the deal was terrible and will crush us.  I just believe it's Ryan's responsibility, not his agent's--and he will regret not asking for less money as much as anyone precisely because he's not a greedy prima donna and wants desperately to win a super bowl.

since68andcounting likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

People who think this contract is detrimental to the team baffle me.  It's cap friendly today, and it is structured such that he'll get another extension in a few years, and with the cap increase we'll be able to sign whoever we need to in order to win, provided we're talking about our players and not having to overpay for FA acquisitions.

This team is in fantastic shape right now.  This contract helped with that.

Some people would rather have something to complain about than to resolve the very thing they're complaining about.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ket222 said:

it's not that ryan doesn't deserve his money or that the contract wasn't structured in a smart way--I've been enlightened by some of the analytics of you guys when I was skeptical before (showing that he's not taking up a much higher percentage of the cap with his new deal).  it's just that some of us think ryan can't get us to a super bowl without more money to protect him on the offensive line--he's obviously not Rodgers who can run around everywhere, but needs a great line like Brady.  We probably need more money also for 1-2 more high quality defensive players.

I've always wondered what Ryan could do if he had all that time Brady has behind the stellar offensive line of the **** Pats.  If I were Ryan, I'd wonder that too and free up more money for that to occur.  People say here "no one would do that, you're lying" but I genuinely believe I'd take a bit less to have a better chance at winning super bowls, given my salary would already be more than me or my family could ever hope to spend in a lifetime. 

We have a VERY short window - probably two years to keep a healthy Julio and freeman in their prime.  I predict that we'll keep getting close but never win a super bowl with this team and that Ryan's career will have gaudy stats (probably a top 5 quarterback in history in throwing yards) but without a super bowl his legacy will always be tainted. 

This is not about blaming Ryan or saying the deal was terrible and will crush us.  I just believe it's Ryan's responsibility, not his agent's--and he will regret not asking for less money as much as anyone precisely because he's not a greedy prima donna and wants desperately to win a super bowl.

Disagree.  Using that logic, why wouldn't Ryan just play for free?

I mean, it would free up a WHOLE lot of money to win a championship.  

The truth is, the market sets his value.  And this isn't a king's ransom type contract all things considered. Kirk Cousins got $84 million for 3 years.  Extrapolated, that's $140 million over 5 years, which is $10 million less than Ryan got.  Cousins' deal was fully guaranteed, meaning if it had been a 5 year contract it would have $40 million MORE guaranteed money than Matt Ryan's contract offers.

So the real question is, is Matt Ryan worth $10 million more, and $40 million guaranteed less than Kirk Cousins?  My answer is "uh......yeah!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ket222 said:

it's not that ryan doesn't deserve his money or that the contract wasn't structured in a smart way--I've been enlightened by some of the analytics of you guys when I was skeptical before (showing that he's not taking up a much higher percentage of the cap with his new deal).  it's just that some of us think ryan can't get us to a super bowl without more money to protect him on the offensive line--he's obviously not Rodgers who can run around everywhere, but needs a great line like Brady.  We probably need more money also for 1-2 more high quality defensive players.

I've always wondered what Ryan could do if he had all that time Brady has behind the stellar offensive line of the **** Pats.  If I were Ryan, I'd wonder that too and free up more money for that to occur.  People say here "no one would do that, you're lying" but I genuinely believe I'd take a bit less to have a better chance at winning super bowls, given my salary would already be more than me or my family could ever hope to spend in a lifetime. 

We have a VERY short window - probably two years to keep a healthy Julio and freeman in their prime.  I predict that we'll keep getting close but never win a super bowl with this team and that Ryan's career will have gaudy stats (probably a top 5 quarterback in history in throwing yards) but without a super bowl his legacy will always be tainted. 

This is not about blaming Ryan or saying the deal was terrible and will crush us.  I just believe it's Ryan's responsibility, not his agent's--and he will regret not asking for less money as much as anyone precisely because he's not a greedy prima donna and wants desperately to win a super bowl.

I'm completely in agreement with this. I'm not sure of the average age on this board. I turned 57 this year. When I was younger money was almost the most important thing to me. Your perspective changes when you get older. It's about quality of life and the memories you have with friends, family, and coworkers.

its not outrageous to think that a vet franchise QB would take less for the benefit of the team and the guys who are up front doing the dirty work. It's actually in the QBs best interest. It gives them more time to throw. It keeps them healthier. It gives them a better shot at a championship.

I'm not saying the deal hurt us. I just think Matt missed a golden opportunity to set a precedent for the league, help the team, and in the process help himself even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Disagree.  Using that logic, why wouldn't Ryan just play for free?

I mean, it would free up a WHOLE lot of money to win a championship.  

The truth is, the market sets his value.  

Market smarket. Matt decides what he will sign for. Him and not anyone else in the world except Sarah.

And the "free" comment is a straw man argument. No one EVER said free. Matt Ryan has been living perfectly confortably on $23m or whatever it is for the last several years. Could he not do the same for 5 more?

He is set for life. His kids are set for life. And his grandkids are set for life. What more could he ask for?

1- His health

2- His Legacy

3- His championships

ALL THREE of which would be improved by taking less to benefit the OL.

Sooner or later some smart franchise QB will figure this out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

trying to maintain a middle ground here without blaming.  agree that Ryan is MUCH more deserving than Cousins and gerrapalo (sp)  Ryan isn't 'wrong' to take the contract and the falcons weren't 'stupid' in offering it.  The guy above who is 57, which is close to my age, said exactly what I'm getting at. 

I was impressed with the rams game last year and we looked for the first time like we did in our previous super bowl season.  but even though we 'almost' beat the eagles, it just never felt comfortable, we were never DOMINANT like the year before and we would have lost badly to the Pats in the super bowl just as we did earlier last season   at best we'll win a lot of close victories and MAYBE eek by into the super bowl this year but we're probably one of about 8 teams that can do the same.  that's hardly reassuring and I think Ryan will regret the situation

since68andcounting likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly don't care if it was 100% Matt, he came in here after the disaster with Vick and became a leader. He's had more success than any QB we've had. I've never once questioned his drive, heart, leadership or will.

He deserved what he got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, since68andcounting said:

Market smarket. Matt decides what he will sign for. Him and not anyone else in the world except Sarah.

And the "free" comment is a straw man argument. No one EVER said free. Matt Ryan has been living perfectly confortably on $23m or whatever it is for the last several years. Could he not do the same for 5 more?

He is set for life. His kids are set for life. And his grandkids are set for life. What more could he ask for?

1- His health

2- His Legacy

3- His championships

ALL THREE of which would be improved by taking less to benefit the OL.

Sooner or later some smart franchise QB will figure this out. 

Why do you care how much he makes?  Who are you to decide he should take a cut rate contract over what the normal contract rate for a first tier QB should be?

And if you can decide $23 million is okay, why can’t I decide he should play for free?

Why not vet minimum?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/4/2018 at 9:14 AM, Faithful Falcon said:

If you guys really understood professional sports contract, then it would be a lot clearer.  The only money that is on point is the signing bonus, which won't count against the cap.  This also creates more cap space.  Do people actually think that franchises will cripple themselves with a player's contract?

handdown.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JDaveG said:

Why do you care how much he makes?  Who are you to decide he should take a cut rate contract over what the normal contract rate for a first tier QB should be?

And if you can decide $23 million is okay, why can’t I decide he should play for free?

Why not vet minimum?

I only care within the context of the fact that I'm a Falcons fan and if we have a better OL, we have a better Matt Ryan. And a better team.

I'm not anyone to decide. I said straight up that Matt and Sarah Ryan are the only people that make that decision. He made his choice.

Sure, he could sign for free too if he wanted. But nobody is on here arguing that. Just like Ket222 said, I'm not begrudging either him for taking the money or the organization for paying him. He absolutely deserved that money based on his past performance, future potential, and the market. I'm just trying to point out the bigger picture.

Tell me if any of the following are untrue if a QB takes less than market with the stipulation it only goes to the OL and it is properly used by the organization:

1) They will have more time to throw the ball.
2) They will be hit less.
3) Due to #2, they will likely stay healthier, both immediately and long term.
4) Due to #1 and #2, they will have a better completion ratio and less turnovers.
5) Due to #1, #2, #3, and #4, they will have a better shot at the playoffs and a championship.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, since68andcounting said:

I only care within the context of the fact that I'm a Falcons fan and if we have a better OL, we have a better Matt Ryan. And a better team.

I'm not anyone to decide. I said straight up that Matt and Sarah Ryan are the only people that make that decision. He made his choice.

Sure, he could sign for free too if he wanted. But nobody is on here arguing that. Just like Ket222 said, I'm not begrudging either him for taking the money or the organization for paying him. He absolutely deserved that money based on his past performance, future potential, and the market. I'm just trying to point out the bigger picture.

Tell me if any of the following are untrue if a QB takes less than market with the stipulation it only goes to the OL and it is properly used by the organization:

1) They will have more time to throw the ball.
2) They will be hit less.
3) Due to #2, they will likely stay healthier, both immediately and long term.
4) Due to #1 and #2, they will have a better completion ratio and less turnovers.
5) Due to #1, #2, #3, and #4, they will have a better shot at the playoffs and a championship.

 

I don't think they're untrue (except the premise -- I don't think a player can contractually bind an organization to sign certain players, and I think an organization would be foolish to let their QB bind them in that way), but I think it ignores a lot of realities.  Contracts in the NFL are not (usually) fully guaranteed.  Getting guaranteed money is a player's chance to maximize his playing career.  One injury can derail an entire career.  And after their NFL days are over, the player has to live the rest of his life on that money or transition to a new gig (being honest, Ryan will be in broadcasting at some point -- I'd almost guarantee it).

Matt Ryan has to look out for him and his family first.  That isn't to say he can't or shouldn't consider a pay cut at times, but I don't believe now is one of those times.  His contract does not hamper this team's competitiveness right now or in the foreseeable future.  Our o-line isn't bad.  If the team valued o-line over QB, as you suggest perhaps they should, then they would pay more for o-line and pay less to QBs.  They don't, and there is a reason for that.  Matt Ryan makes every o-lineman on that team look better than they are, even the ones who are really good.  The QB is the most important player on the team.  Contracts are always going to reflect that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PokerSteve said:

Do people actually think that franchises will cripple themselves with a player's contract?

Yes...........They do.......And.............

As the Minotaur stated above: We aren't the Saints.

PokerSteve likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JDaveG said:

His contract does not hamper this team's competitiveness right now or in the foreseeable future.

People cannot wrap their arms around this.

SWOOOOOOOSH.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JDaveG said:

I don't think they're untrue (except the premise -- I don't think a player can contractually bind an organization to sign certain players, and I think an organization would be foolish to let their QB bind them in that way), but I think it ignores a lot of realities.  Contracts in the NFL are not (usually) fully guaranteed.  Getting guaranteed money is a player's chance to maximize his playing career.  One injury can derail an entire career.  And after their NFL days are over, the player has to live the rest of his life on that money or transition to a new gig (being honest, Ryan will be in broadcasting at some point -- I'd almost guarantee it).

Matt Ryan has to look out for him and his family first.  That isn't to say he can't or shouldn't consider a pay cut at times, but I don't believe now is one of those times.  His contract does not hamper this team's competitiveness right now or in the foreseeable future.  Our o-line isn't bad.  If the team valued o-line over QB, as you suggest perhaps they should, then they would pay more for o-line and pay less to QBs.  They don't, and there is a reason for that.  Matt Ryan makes every o-lineman on that team look better than they are, even the ones who are really good.  The QB is the most important player on the team.  Contracts are always going to reflect that.  

Very good points. Yeah, it would be hard to stipulate anything concrete. You certainly couldn't force an organization to sign a specific player. And you're right, they would be foolish to accept that. But you could maybe work out an arrangement less specific. Say, perhaps, a portion of the cap money you give up goes into some sort of "escrow" style account that is designated for the OL. If there's no one good available at the price point during free agency, then it's banked until the following year. Perhaps the next year someone like Mack is available who fills a huge need. Or even if you spend less this year on a solid vet backup, that's a good thing to have. It certainly would have been nice to have in SB51, when we had a seriously banged up OL. It could even be used in an emergency if someone like Matthews goes down mid-season.

You'd have to be creative on the contract, but I think it could work. To the organization it's really no different. This is money that would have gone against the cap at the QB position. Now it's just sitting in a "slush fund" available for the OL. To the QB, it's a pay cut. But it's also a work benefit. it's buying himself a better supporting cast, and an extra layer of insurance. 

And I do think you're wrong that this was not the time when Matt should do this. Imo, it's exactly the time when he should have.

 

Whatever...what's done is done. I'm happy we resigned Matt. And he certainly deserves the money he earned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now