Mangold: Issue 'deeply disappointing'

[NIGHT STALKER]

By Rich Cimini

ESPNNewYork.com

FLORHAM Park, N.J. -- Nick Mangold didn't feel the need to skip the New York Jets' mandatory minicamp to send a message. Unlike teammate Darrelle Revis, he didn't feel it was necessary to make a statement by feigning injury and sitting out a few plays in practice.

The All-Pro center suspects his employers already know how he feels about his contract situation, adding, "Nothing else really needs to be said or done."

In other words, he's ticked and they know it.

"It's deeply disappointing," Mangold said Tuesday after the morning practice. "I've tried to do the right thing, on and off the field. I feel it's the Jets' turn. Not having the security of an extension is bothersome."

Mangold is entering the final year of his contract, due to make $3.3 million. The Jets have yet to make a proposal for a new contract, claiming they're handcuffed by the CBA rules and the uncertain labor landscape. Mangold said last week there was a 50/50 chance he'd skip the minicamp, which would've made him subject to a fine.

Because of a personal matter not related to his contract situation, Mangold was unavailable to address the matter. But he was there Tuesday in front of his locker, calmly explaining his frustration and disappointment.

Mangold said he's still hopeful of landing a new deal by the regular season, although that's believed to be highly unlikely. The Jets have made Revis their No. 1 priority. Mangold said he'd never ask for a trade, but he indicated that not having an extension "would definitely affect our long-term relationship."

When asked to elaborate, he said, "If they let me go into the season without the security of a long-term deal, at some point I'm going to have to decide my wants and desires to be on the team."

Under the old system, Mangold would be an unrestricted free agent in 2011. In that case, the Jets would be acting with a greater sense of urgency to lock him up. But there's a chance he may only be a restricted free agent, making it easy for the Jets to retain his rights. If he does become unrestricted -- and this depends on the CBA -- the Jets can simply use the franchise tag on him.

"That," Mangold said, "would be a continuation of the disappointing I'm feeling now."

[GREENBEAN]

By Rich Cimini

ESPNNewYork.com

FLORHAM Park, N.J. -- Nick Mangold didn't feel the need to skip the New York Jets' mandatory minicamp to send a message. Unlike teammate Darrelle Revis, he didn't feel it was necessary to make a statement by feigning injury and sitting out a few plays in practice.

The All-Pro center suspects his employers already know how he feels about his contract situation, adding, "Nothing else really needs to be said or done."

In other words, he's ticked and they know it.

"It's deeply disappointing," Mangold said Tuesday after the morning practice. "I've tried to do the right thing, on and off the field. I feel it's the Jets' turn. Not having the security of an extension is bothersome."

Mangold is entering the final year of his contract, due to make $3.3 million. The Jets have yet to make a proposal for a new contract, claiming they're handcuffed by the CBA rules and the uncertain labor landscape. Mangold said last week there was a 50/50 chance he'd skip the minicamp, which would've made him subject to a fine.

Because of a personal matter not related to his contract situation, Mangold was unavailable to address the matter. But he was there Tuesday in front of his locker, calmly explaining his frustration and disappointment.

Mangold said he's still hopeful of landing a new deal by the regular season, although that's believed to be highly unlikely. The Jets have made Revis their No. 1 priority. Mangold said he'd never ask for a trade, but he indicated that not having an extension "would definitely affect our long-term relationship."

When asked to elaborate, he said, "If they let me go into the season without the security of a long-term deal, at some point I'm going to have to decide my wants and desires to be on the team."

Under the old system, Mangold would be an unrestricted free agent in 2011. In that case, the Jets would be acting with a greater sense of urgency to lock him up. But there's a chance he may only be a restricted free agent, making it easy for the Jets to retain his rights. If he does become unrestricted -- and this depends on the CBA -- the Jets can simply use the franchise tag on him.

"That," Mangold said, "would be a continuation of the disappointing I'm feeling now."

While I hear him and want the Jets to sign him long term, it's not like it's Sept or something. This is all being made into bigger stories by beat writers who need to write about something. It's JUNE for Gods sakes.

[NIGHT STALKER]

While I hear him and want the Jets to sign him long term, it's not like it's Sept or something. This is all being made into bigger stories by beat writers who need to write about something. It's JUNE for Gods sakes.

I agree to an extent. But, Mangold should keep his yap shut and these "beat writers" wouldn't be writting this crap...

[Bruce Banner]

I hate hearing players complain about the franchise tag. The tag gets you money thats 100% guaranteed and its enough to be set for life and its just for one year's work. The union has agreed to it over more than one CBA. Your union said yes, its a ton of guaranteed money and its just for one year so shut up.

[#27TheDominator]

"Deeply disappointing" is weak. I'M INSULTED!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jetfan13]

You went to the AFC Championship game last year and you are gonna make 3.3 mill this year. You have nothing to complain about. Go to Cleveland, get your security and win 2 games a year...ASS WIPE!!!!

[NJ]

Not saying that Nick has no legit beef, at all. But I wonder if there's a canned class that agents give their client

[Garb]

You guys are funny.

PLAYERS PLAY FOR THE MONEY. They really don't care that much about you. Sure, they may think it's awesome that you follow the team so closely and they may get a real ego boost from all the ass kissing a lot of you do (especially on Twitter - the Nick Mangold jock sniffing is EPIC), but in the end it's about MONEY.

Now, there are exceptions to that rule. CuMart, Chrebet, Bruschi....but lets be real, they want money and glory. The team loyalty comes and goes. Doesn't mean they won't play hard - shoot - they are playing for a raise, a contract, etc....

[bitonti]

for all this revis talk, mangold's case is even more legit. Revis has 3 years left... mangold is entering his walk year.

Mangold's deal should have been done months ago. The ownership has checks to write and for whatever reason... they ain't doing it.

[Garb]

for all this revis talk, mangold's case is even more legit. Revis has 3 years left... mangold is entering his walk year.

Mangold's deal should have been done months ago. The ownership has checks to write and for whatever reason... they ain't doing it.

....I have some thoughts:

1) any idea what the cap will be next year?

2) any idea if the year will happen?

3) any idea what kind of guaranteed money he's wanting?

4) any idea how poorly PSL sales projection were off by?

5) any idea how hard it is to predict the future and avoiding salary cap hell?

[#27TheDominator]

You guys are funny.

PLAYERS PLAY FOR THE MONEY. They really don't care that much about you. Sure, they may think it's awesome that you follow the team so closely and they may get a real ego boost from all the ass kissing a lot of you do (especially on Twitter - the Nick Mangold jock sniffing is EPIC), but in the end it's about MONEY.

Now, there are exceptions to that rule. CuMart, Chrebet, Bruschi....but lets be real, they want money and glory. The team loyalty comes and goes. Doesn't mean they won't play hard - shoot - they are playing for a raise, a contract, etc....

Curtis Martin wasn't about the money? Funny, I'm not even sure they've finished paying him. He didn't seem to mind jumping teams for the right price.

[Garb]

Curtis Martin wasn't about the money? Funny, I'm not even sure they've finished paying him. He didn't seem to mind jumping teams for the right price.

Well, yah, he jumped the Pats ship to join the green one for more $$....but I honestly think that had more to do with his love of Parcells...either that or I completely bought into the "what a sweet, God fearing, loyal guy" thing. Wait, you may be right, Dom, CuMart did do a segment on "Cribs." I remember him showing off the gold bidet in the master bath. He was really excited about that thing. LOL!

[Sperm Edwards]

You guys are funny.

PLAYERS PLAY FOR THE MONEY. They really don't care that much about you. Sure, they may think it's awesome that you follow the team so closely and they may get a real ego boost from all the ass kissing a lot of you do (especially on Twitter - the Nick Mangold jock sniffing is EPIC), but in the end it's about MONEY.

Now, there are exceptions to that rule. CuMart, Chrebet, Bruschi....but lets be real, they want money and glory. The team loyalty comes and goes. Doesn't mean they won't play hard - shoot - they are playing for a raise, a contract, etc....

I'm unfamiliar with Brushi's deal(s), but I wouldn't have used Martin and Chrebet as examples.

Martin signed 2 contracts in a row with the Jets, each of which (at the time) made him the highest-paid RB in NFL history. The latter of the two was a long-term, cap-crippling, $46M megadeal signed at age 29.

Chrebet's contract was also 29 and only a marginal starter when the Jets paid him like a top-level #2 or lower-level #1 WR. The only reason he even started that 2002 season is because Curtis Conway was Bradway's idea of a replacement for Laveranues Coles. After that year one of his new contract ended, Chrebet would start 6 games over his final 3 NFL seasons.

No matter how many fans loved them, these were not examples of players who took less money to stay with the team. Rather, they're examples of the exact opposite.

[Garb]

I'm unfamiliar with Brushi's deal(s), but I wouldn't have used Martin and Chrebet as examples.

Martin signed 2 contracts in a row with the Jets, each of which (at the time) made him the highest-paid RB in NFL history. The latter of the two was a long-term, cap-crippling, $46M megadeal signed at age 29.

Chrebet's contract was also 29 and only a marginal starter when the Jets paid him like a top-level #2 or lower-level #1 WR. The only reason he even started that 2002 season is because Curtis Conway was Bradway's idea of a replacement for Laveranues Coles. After that year one of his new contract ended, Chrebet would start 6 games over his final 3 NFL seasons.

No matter how many fans loved them, these were not examples of players who took less money to stay with the team. Rather, they're examples of the exact opposite.

Honestly, I wanted to give some Jets examples because the only one I knew of was Bruschi.....and I thought, guessed, whatever about CuMart and Chrebet. FAIL! My bad. I'm going to JN jail now....

[JohnnyHector]

I'm unfamiliar with Brushi's deal(s), but I wouldn't have used Martin and Chrebet as examples.

Martin signed 2 contracts in a row with the Jets, each of which (at the time) made him the highest-paid RB in NFL history. The latter of the two was a long-term, cap-crippling, $46M megadeal signed at age 29.

Chrebet's contract was also 29 and only a marginal starter when the Jets paid him like a top-level #2 or lower-level #1 WR. The only reason he even started that 2002 season is because Curtis Conway was Bradway's idea of a replacement for Laveranues Coles. After that year one of his new contract ended, Chrebet would start 6 games over his final 3 NFL seasons.

No matter how many fans loved them, these were not examples of players who took less money to stay with the team. Rather, they're examples of the exact opposite.

OK, I'll provide two better examples: Mo Lewis and Bryan Cox.

[SouthernJet]

You guys are funny.

PLAYERS PLAY FOR THE MONEY. They really don't care that much about you. Sure, they may think it's awesome that you follow the team so closely and they may get a real ego boost from all the ass kissing a lot of you do (especially on Twitter - the Nick Mangold jock sniffing is EPIC), but in the end it's about MONEY.

Now, there are exceptions to that rule. CuMart, Chrebet, Bruschi....but lets be real, they want money and glory. The team loyalty comes and goes. Doesn't mean they won't play hard - shoot - they are playing for a raise, a contract, etc....

agree

[Sperm Edwards]

OK, I'll provide two better examples: Mo Lewis and Bryan Cox.

I see what you did there. Well played.

[Garb]

I see what you did there. Well played.

that was pretty funny...

Did you know that Mo Lewis is my favorite all-time Jet? I would love the opportunity to shake his hand and say thank you..which is kind of messed up. I mean, on one hand, he accelerated the Brady era, or the other hand he nearly killed a man (Bledsoe).

[JohnnyHector]

that was pretty funny...

Did you know that Mo Lewis is my favorite all-time Jet? I would love the opportunity to shake his hand and say thank you..which is kind of messed up. I mean, on one hand, he accelerated the Brady era, or the other hand he nearly killed a man (Bledsoe).

Mo Lewis was just getting payback for that girl at the Everclear concert. Unfortunately, he screwed the Jets in the process.

[bitonti]

....I have some thoughts:

1) any idea what the cap will be next year?

2) any idea if the year will happen?

3) any idea what kind of guaranteed money he's wanting?

4) any idea how poorly PSL sales projection were off by?

5) any idea how hard it is to predict the future and avoiding salary cap hell?

1) No but it's always gone up, not down. right now the Jets are 20 mil under last year's cap.

2) 50/50 at best. but March 2011 freeagency should happen and Mangold won't be under contract at that point.

3) Probably Evans money. and he deserves it.

4) They are not good. I seriously worry about the Jets financial situation.

5) It's not as hard as they make it out to be... if they wanted to spend there are ways of spreading out the hit... they don't want to spend, that's the problem.

[Jetsfan80]

Double post.

[Jetsfan80]

1) No but it's always gone up, not down. right now the Jets are 20 mil under last year's cap.

The owners want an 18 % league-wide pay-cut. If there is a cap next year, it will be REDUCED, not INCREASED.

5) It's not as hard as they make it out to be... if they wanted to spend there are ways of spreading out the hit... they don't want to spend, that's the problem.

Uncertainty with the CBA is the issue, not spending. How many times does this have to be said in this thread before you listen?

[Sperm Edwards]

1) No but it's always gone up, not down. right now the Jets are 20 mil under last year's cap.

2) 50/50 at best. but March 2011 freeagency should happen and Mangold won't be under contract at that point.

3) Probably Evans money. and he deserves it.

4) They are not good. I seriously worry about the Jets financial situation.

5) It's not as hard as they make it out to be... if they wanted to spend there are ways of spreading out the hit... they don't want to spend, that's the problem.

Propaganda. All owners are doing this with dozens of high-priced players. How high the cap will be is only one factor. Another factor is how the amount can be spread out. For example, you can't give Mangold a deal that averages $8M per season and pay him $40M in year one. It's also affected by how much they're making this year and how much they made last year. So you couldn't even structure a deal for Revis and Mangold the same way if you wanted to. Go dig up some older threads here or just read that part of the CBA if you still don't understand why.

It's not a matter of Mangold or Revis or Ferguson or Harris or Cromartie or Edwards or Holmes. It's Mangold AND Revis AND Ferguson AND Harris AND Cromartie AND Edwards AND Holmes. To brush any of them off as though dealing with any one of their contracts is not related to any others is naive and overly simplistic to say the least. To suggest otherwise are nothing more than the ramblings of someone who has never been in charge of anything serious.

The lowest rumor of an offered deal was for $10M per year for Revis as a start to negotiations. Whether you feel he is worth more than that or not doesn't change that they offered the guy $10M per season when he was already locked in for $6M combined over the next 2 seasons.

To you $10M per season is the same as offering zero if Revis wants more, and an example of the Jets either having cash flow problems or just outright cheapness. Now THAT is some propaganda.

[Larz]

for all this revis talk, mangold's case is even more legit. Revis has 3 years left... mangold is entering his walk year.

Mangold's deal should have been done months ago. The ownership has checks to write and for whatever reason... they ain't doing it.

I agree

but

he's prolly gonna get tagged, seeing as he is the top center and he'll get top 5 money