Tag:Logan Mankins
Posted on: November 17, 2011 12:56 pm
 

Top Ten with a Twist: Mojo-less NFLers

P. Rivers has struggled this season (US Presswire).

Posted by Josh Katzowitz

Where there’s a star football player*, there’s always a star football ready to fall. Sometimes, they get old overnight. Sometimes, they get satiated by a rich, new contract and lose the desire to stay hungry and work out as hard. Sometimes, their one shining season was a mirage and their talent wasn’t all that great in the first place.

*Or a football coach, executive, etc.

Earlier this season, we discussed the league’s most underrated players, the players you really should know about, and in this edition of Top Ten with a Twist, we examine the players who, for whichever reason, have fallen off the cliff. Not necessarily overrated players, but players who once were great -- or showed us the potential to be great -- but have fallen on hard times. Some of these selections still play at a very high level. That’s not the issue. The question is: are they as great as they were?

The trick for them is to rediscover what made them great in the first place, to rediscover their mojo. If they can.

10. Bernard Pollard: It was at the beginning of the 2010 season when I ranked Pollard No. 4 on my top-five safeties list, which led CBSSports.com film-watching guru Andy Benoit to write, “I like that you went with Pollard -- that shows you’re paying attention. Few people even know about the fifth-year pro.” And just two years later, after Pollard was jettisoned out of Houston, few people remember how effective he used to be. Now, he’s in Baltimore and he’s actually a starter, and really the only time he’s making news is when he’s being fined for illegal hits.

9. Logan Mankins: Once one of the best offensive guards around -- and still a top-notch player -- the contract dispute of the last two seasons seems to have taken something out of him (in August, he signed a six-year, $51 million deal). Though he emerged from last year’s holdout, in which he missed seven games, as a Pro Bowl player, he’s struggling a bit this season. He’s been whistled for more penalties, and he’s allowed more sacks than normal. Listen, he’s still one of the best guards out there, but New York’s Justin Tuck and Pittsburgh’s LaMarr Woodley found success against him this year. That rarely happened in the past.

8. Andy Reid: Is it fair that Reid, after back-to-back 10-win seasons and a plethora of success during his 12-year Eagles career, is on the hot seat for the mess Philadelphia has become this year? Maybe not. But is Reid partially -- if not, mostly -- to blame for how the Eagles season has progressed? Yes. Bringing in high-priced free agents like Nnamdi Asomugha seemed like a great idea at the time, but some of those moves have fizzled. Moving former offensive line coach Juan Castillo to defensive coordinator has not worked out well. And at this point, it seems like a lock that the 3-6 Eagles will finish outside the playoffs. Should he lose his job? Probably not. Will he? Maybe.

7. Chris Johnson: True, he’s coming off his best game of the season (27 carries, 130 yards, one touchdown), but Johnson has been a major disaster this year. Which has to give heartburn to the Titans front office, which signed Johnson to a six-year, $55.3 million contract before the season. And with that, Johnson stopped producing. He stopped hitting his holes with big-time bursts, he stopped breaking tackles and he looked lackluster. It’s hard to imagine that a big, fat contract would have caused such an appetite loss for Johnson, but all we’ve seen out of him this year are two pretty good games and a whole lot of blame deflection.

6. Bill Polian: Has an executive’s talent-spotting reputation ever fallen as far and as fast as Polian this year? With the loss of Peyton Manning imploding the Colts, eyes have shifted to Polian as perhaps a reason why Indianapolis has struggled so badly this year. No quality backup quarterback and a bushel of questionable draft picks in the past few years have us wondering if Polian’s job is in danger (owner Jim Irsay has said it’s not). But man, did the talent of Manning shield our knowledge of Polian’s ability this entire time?

Polamalu5. Troy Polamalu: Some of my colleagues (cough, cough) love to rail on Polamalu as the most overrated player in the league. I don’t think he’s that at all. Polamalu still plays at a high level, and he’s still a guy you have to gameplan against. But to say he’s the same player he was five years ago is obviously untrue. He can still lay a mean hit on a receiver, but he struggles in coverage (as shown by his inadequate defense against an A.J. Green touchdown bomb last week), and he doesn’t have the speed of his youth. He doesn’t even have the speed of two years ago. Yes, he’s been hampered by injuries (he’s missed 13 combined games in the past two seasons), but he’s not the all-world safety anymore (though he’s smart and experienced, which certainly helps). That was proven correct in Super XLV when the Packers made him irrelevant all game.

4. Chad Ochocinco: We’ve over-analyzed Ochocinco to death on this blog, but man, it’s still kind of crazy that he has just 11 catches for 201 yards and zero touchdowns on the season. The guy used to be ultra-confident. Now, he’s slowly disappearing like Marty McFly’s family photo.

3. DeSean Jackson: You have to think that, with the statements Jackson has made about how protecting his health was his No. 1 priority this season and with the fact he overslept and missed a team meeting last Saturday and got himself deactivated on Sunday, Jackson is really, really interested in his new contract. Naturally, he wants to get paid, but I don’t think being tied for 71st in the league with 29 catches is going to attract a ton of positive attention.

2. Sam Bradford: This is a strange case. Bradford seemed on the verge of a breaking out in his rookie season last year, but he’s been a forgotten man this year. That’s probably because the Rams are a forgotten team and because he’s missed a few games because of an ankle injury. But his completion percentage is down this year (55.8 percent), his touchdown-to-interception ratio is a bit worse, and he’s lost twice as many fumbles (his offensive line and receivers are not helping matters at all). And it’s not just that Bradford has played worse; it’s that nobody nationally seems to be talking about him at all, good or bad. That’s just kind of strange for last year’s No. 1 overall pick.

1. Philip Rivers: He’s never had great form, but something about the Chargers quarterback seems off this season. His strange mechanics look even stranger, and Rivers leads the league in interceptions while his 4-5 San Diego unit is sinking in the AFC West. I’ve made the joke that, now that Rivers has six children, it's no wonder he’s had a tougher time. But in San Diego, this can’t be a laughing matter. Not when Norv Turner’s job is at risk and with the Chargers losing hope fast. I keep thinking Rivers can turn it around, but at this point, it’s tough to say if he will.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnNFL on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Posted on: August 11, 2011 6:25 pm
 

Pats give Logan Mankins $20 million signing bonus

Posted by Ryan Wilson

It took a while, but the Patriots and guard Logan Mankins finally came to terms on a new contract, one that will keep the team's 2005 first-round pick in New England for the next six seasons.

What wasn't clear when the deal was first announced were the terms. Now, thanks to ESPNBoston.com's Mike Reiss, we know and … well, wow. It's a six-year, $51 million contract which, as Reiss notes, makes Mankins the league's highest paid interior linemen, pulling down roughly $8.5 million a year. But it gets better (at least for Mankins): he also got a $20 million signing bonus.

Mankins' 2011 salary is now $1.5 million and together with his signing bonus means that, as PFT's Michael David Smith points out, he'll make more than twice what he would've had coming to him if he had played the season on his one-year franchise tender.

"From this perspective, it looks like the Patriots gave Mankins credit for playing 2010 at a prorated $1.5 million salary and stepped up with a top-of-the-line offer that Mankins could have commanded on the open market," Reiss writes. "One of the benefits to the team in doing so is that Mankins' salary cap charge of $10.1 million also gets reduced to about half of that."

It wasn't long ago that it appeared Mankins had played his last game in New England. Now, not only have the two sides come to an agreement, the Patriots went ahead and paid Mankins like one of the league's best guards (which he most certainly is). It just makes us wonder why they didn't do this last year, before Mankins missed most of the season looking for a new contract and trying to avoid the franchise tag.

New England might not have wanted to set a precedent for caving to the demands of players who hold out, but that "bite off your nose to spite your face" strategy can backfire, too. Luckily, the Pats managed to win 14 games last season, many of them without Mankins, so they could afford to wait to pay him.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnNFL on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Posted on: August 10, 2011 5:39 pm
 

Report: Mankins signs long-term deal with Pats

MankinsPosted by Josh Katzowitz

Last season, Patriots G Logan Mankins was one of the unhappiest men in the Patriots organization (probably even more unhappy than Bill Belichick whenever he has to meet with the media). Mankins believed he deserved a long-term contract extension, and he believed that New England owner Robert Kraft had intimated that he’d get one.

Just not last year, which angered Mankins so much that he refused to sign his tender of $3.26 million and then blasted the organization. He returned to the team midway through the season and played well in the second half of the year.

All of that acrimony, though, is over, as ESPN reports that Mankins and the Patriots have agreed to a six-year contract extension.

The first good sign that this year would not be a repeat of last season occurred when Mankins signed his $10.73 million tender and dropped his request for a $10 million settlement after serving as a plaintiff in the Brady v NFL case.

The new six-year deal, then, serves three purposes. It keeps one of the best guards in the NFL in New England through 2016. It keeps him happy. And it reduces his hit against the Patriots cap number for 2011, which would have been about $10 million.

Of course, today’s news shouldn’t be a surprise.

After all, Kraft had this to say Wednesday when meeting with the media: “If I have a vote, it will get done. But the other side has to want it, too. But it’s our desire and has always been our desire. But like I tried to explain to you, you can’t sign everyone you want, so you need to plan and I think we did our planning knowing the kind of environment we were coming into. We tried to position ourselves so we had our core veterans and we could continue to sign the people we want to sign. We very much think that Logan is among the best there is at his position. We drafted him and we want him here.”

And now he’s got him.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @EyeOnNFL on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Posted on: July 26, 2011 2:24 pm
 

Mankins, Jackson to sign tenders, report on time?

Posted by Will Brinson



Remember Logan Mankins and Vincent Jackson? Yeah, you probably do -- they held out for a long time in 2010 and then were involved in this little Brady v. NFL lawsuit that nearly caused us to lose football in 2011.

Here's some good news then: Mankins and Jackson will both, reportedly, show up and sign their respective tenders and join their respective camps on time.

Per Scott Bair of the North County Times, Jackson will sign his franchise tag on Friday. Adam Schefter of ESPN initially reported that Mankins would report and put his ink the Patriots tender.

Mankins will make $10.73 million this year, while Jackson will receive $11.93 million.

Both players are eligible for a long-term extension from their respective teams, though such a deal would need to be in place by 4:00 p.m. ET on September 20, according to the new league rules.

In other words, we'll find out quickly just how much of a relationship is remaining between the two named plaintiffs and their respective front offices.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Posted on: July 23, 2011 9:47 am
Edited on: July 23, 2011 9:56 am
 

Report: Jackson will sign off on settlement

Posted by Ryan Wilson

Friday evening, Eye on Football's Will Brinson outlined what needs to happen in the coming days for both the owners and players to agree on a new collective bargaining agreement and for there to be a 2011 NFL season.

One of the ancillary issues involves Chargers wide receiver Vincent Jackson, who also happens to be one of the named plaintiffs in the Tom Brady v. NFL lawsuit. According to a report earlier this week, Jackson was seeking either $10 million or to immediately become an unrestricted free agent before he would sign off on a settlement.

ESPN's Adam Schefter tweeted Saturday morning that Jackson is "now is willing to release his claim without compensation."

(Patriots lineman Logan Mankins allegedly made similar demands, which his agent refuted. Either way, Mankins said Thursday that he will sign off to settle the case without seeking compensation.)

There now appears to be one fewer obstacle between the owners, players and a 2011 season. More reason for optimism: CBSSports.com's Mike Freeman reported Friday that negotiations will continue through the weekend. "The players don't really need that much time to sort through the offer. … The issues remaining can be solved fairly easily and quickly if they wanted."

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Posted on: July 21, 2011 4:17 pm
Edited on: July 21, 2011 7:07 pm
 

Report: Mankins says he'll sign off on settlement

Posted by Will Brinson



UPDATE (6:30 p.m. EST): Ron Borges of the Boston Herald tweets on Thursday night that, "Logan Mankins has just informed the NFLPA leadership he will sign off on a settlement of the Brady v. NFL case without seeking compensation."

As the world turns in the NFL's Thursday afternoon labor soap opera, one critical issue remains: the financial demands of named-plaintiffs Logan Mankins and Vincent Jackson.

These demands have been characterized as a big stumbling block, since both players reportedly want $10 million each to settle the litigation. However, Mankins' agent, Frank Bauer, disputed the claim that his client ever made any sort of financial demand.

"I think it's really unfair what has happened to Logan Mankins in media characterizations that he is making monetary demands or holding up a settlement," Bauer said, per ESPN.
Latest on Lockout

"Logan Mankins is a young man who was encouraged and solicited into a lawsuit to help the union spearhead a new agreement. Logan's main concern for entering into as a plaintiff was to see if he can become free and help other players have less restrictions."

Of course, putting his name on the lawsuit WAS a tough decision and Mankins certainly put his name out there for scrutiny. So if he wanted something in return it wouldn't be shocking. But Bauer emphasized he "hasn't made any such demand."

"For people to say he has made monetary demands, he hasn't made any such demand," Bauer said. "We don't know terms. We haven't talked to (NFLPA attorney) Jeff Kessler. There has been no communication, but it's irresponsible to report Logan has made monetary demands.

"Are we disappointed there has been no communication? Hugely. He trusted the union and Kessler to fight for Logan Mankins and the other players."

So, yeah, wow, that's kind of a game-changer. If Mankins doesn't want money and if Jackson doesn't want money in exchange for settling the lawsuit, it's only going to crank up the vitriol for Kessler, the NFLPA lawyer.

And it means there's a pretty simple solution sitting out there: make Mankins and Jackson franchise-tag-free players going forward. If those two plaintiffs would agree to that in part of their settlement, it could move things along much more speedily than having the two sides quarrel about demands that apparently weren't ever made.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
Posted on: July 19, 2011 9:08 pm
Edited on: July 19, 2011 11:51 pm
 

What will the Brady v NFL plaintiffs receive?

BreesPosted by Josh Katzowitz

We’ve written the past day or two about the labor negotiations from the perspective of the plaintiffs in the Brady v NFL case and what they might want individually in return for settling the lawsuit against the league.

For example, Patriots G Logan Mankins and Chargers WR Vincent Jackson apparently are asking for $10 million apiece. Which naturally led to Vikings P Chris Kluwe calling the two of them, plus Saints QB Drew Brees and Colts QB Peyton Manning, “douchebags” on his Twitter account Tuesday.

The reason for Kluwe’s ire against Brees and Manning? The reports that they want a lifetime exemption from the franchise tagging system.

Brees, on his Twitter account, said to be wary of media reports on this subject, writing, "All media claims about me wanting a personal reward for this deal are false. I hope you all know me better than that." The Boston Globe’s Greg Bedard tweeted that Brees, Manning and Jackson have softened their stances in regards to individual lawsuit compensation.

Meanwhile, it seems like Jackson is willing to return to the Chargers and sign the $11 million franchise tag for 2011 (if there actually is a tag system in the new CBA), according to The San Diego Union-Tribune. Still, he’d (obviously) like a long-term contract and not the one-year tag money, but this way, I don’t see how Kluwe could be mad at him.

UPDATE 11:41 P.M. ET: According to the Boston Globe, the NFLPA's executive committee will recommend that the plaintiffs receive no special considerations as part of the lockout's end.

Writes Ron Borges: "It was determined it would be too cumbersome to try and work out individual deals. Since the bulk of plaintiffs were well-placed NFL veterans, the best way to go, it was decided, was to stick simply with the larger deal negotiated between the NFLPA and the league’s owners."

As far as "well-placed NFL veterans" go, I imagine Broncos rookie LB Von Miller would beg to differ on that point.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.

Posted on: July 19, 2011 4:12 pm
Edited on: July 20, 2011 8:12 am
 

Vikings punter calls 4 named plaintiffs greedy

Posted by Ryan Wilson

This morning we noted that, as two of the 10 plaintiffs in the Brady v. the NFL case, Vincent Jackson and Logan Mankins could each ask for $10 million in compensation. At the time, the thinking was that the other plaintiffs wouldn't seek similarly high payouts because they either weren't in position to (free agents, already under contract, retired, etc.) or, as elite quarterbacks, already had all the leverage they needed.

Turns out, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees are also looking for settlements of their own. CBSSports.com's Mike Freeman writes that "Multiple sources say that Manning, one of the named plaintiffs, wants immediate free agency in order to settle the lawsuit. Those sources also say Brees wants to be a free agent next year. The sources say lawyers for the NFLPA have asked NFL owners for those two things in addition to the reported demands from Mankins and Jackson."

So, yeah, tying a nice little bow on a new collective bargaining agreement doesn't seem as close as it did just a few hours ago. That said, Freeman is confident a deal will get done this week.

So while all hope isn't lost, Viking punter Chris Kluwe is wholly unimpressed with the news that four of the 10 named plaintiffs (who, by the way, are supposed to be representing the other 1,896 NFL players) appear to be cutting their own deals. So, naturally, Kluwe took to Twitter to voice his displeasure.



That doesn't leave much room for interpretation. The problem, of course, is that, as Freeman pointed out this morning, a new CBA can't be agreed upon unless all the plaintiffs settle the case.

That's much easier when some of them aren't looking out just for themselves.

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed.
 
 
 
 
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com