New England Patriots Tender Brian Hoyer

[Patriots GM (Daniel)]

I'm just saying that that is what I was basing my offers on and if that was approved I presumed that consistency would see this approved

[Deleted]

I guess you assumed wrong, sorry.

[Patriots GM (Daniel)]

Well if those 2 vote it should be approved from them

[Deleted]

May 10, 2012 18:08:10 GMT Patriots GM (Daniel) said:

I was looking at Woodyard one where 2 TAB members said that future shouldn't be taken into account. Take a look but when one is an admin I thought that they might be a bit more consistent. May have misjudged it and it bring taken on an offer to offer basis. Bit disappointing though if it is

I think it was Colts and Bengals who said that

And you'll note I got an offer vetoed for using the same logic. My vote is one of many...

[Bengals GM (Darryl)]

May 10, 2012 18:08:10 GMT Patriots GM (Daniel) said:

I was looking at Woodyard one where 2 TAB members said that future shouldn't be taken into account. Take a look but when one is an admin I thought that they might be a bit more consistent. May have misjudged it and it bring taken on an offer to offer basis. Bit disappointing though if it is

I think it was Colts and Bengals who said that

It is definitely admirable to argue your point - but let's not twist and bend when making a comparison and somewhat "quoting" others. Quoting is fine, just make sure they are correct.

In comparing back-up players to other back-up players, the QB position differs in that it is probably the least likely to be needed, as they are better protected from injury. There is also nothing wrong with having "hopes" that a back-up player will become a starter in the near future - and of course we would all like to lock-up a deal at the cheapest salary possible for the long-term security and probability of any given player.

As is the case NOW, Hoyer IS the back-up, so outside of what wasn't clear in FA last year according to the Colts analysis, there isn't a guess as to who will be the back-up this upcoming season. One could make the argument that he "might not be", but that is just more assumption of probability.Therefore what could be in the future (whether he will or won't be OR whether he might or might not get a starting gig in FA next year) isn't the issue when taking the future into account - as those also are just probabilities.

What does count towards the future imo, is that since it is known that he is the back-up, and in a position somewhat related to the likes of Flynn, Cassel, and maybe even Kolb as an example, simply meaning he plays for a prolific passing offense, and a team KNOWN to place emphasis on developing their back-up for such a role. The value of that player is instrumental to the teams overall success. Again, IF Brady was to go down 5 or 6 games, what would you pay to acquire Hoyer in his place?

[Patriots GM (Daniel)]

Using that logic though then players who are in the primary backup role will need to be given quality salaries like you guys think need to be put here. $1m for a guy who might not score a point in the contract length is kind of high though and you think it needs to be higher. I do see the arguement about him having a chance of becoming a starter at some point, and I know where you are coming from. I have probably just used the Woodyard example and it has tainted my bids for Hoyer as the main point of that being approved was him being a back-up with a big chance of him playing significant snaps.

I would pay a decent amount for Hoyer, but not over the top as he is a backup and would return to that role the year after. But that is under the same logic that we are working on the current status. I asked the question what sort of raise and didnt get an answer apart from that. I didnt really get the point as valuing players is different person to person, a more exact answer would have made it a bit clearer.

[Bengals GM (Darryl)]

May 10, 2012 20:32:54 GMT Patriots GM (Daniel) said:

Using that logic though then players who are in the primary backup role will need to be given quality salaries like you guys think need to be put here. $1m for a guy who might not score a point in the contract length is kind of high though and you think it needs to be higher. I do see the arguement about him having a chance of becoming a starter at some point, and I know where you are coming from. I have probably just used the Woodyard example and it has tainted my bids for Hoyer as the main point of that being approved was him being a back-up with a big chance of him playing significant snaps.

I would pay a decent amount for Hoyer, but not over the top as he is a backup and would return to that role the year after. But that is under the same logic that we are working on the current status. I asked the question what sort of raise and didnt get an answer apart from that. I didnt really get the point as valuing players is different person to person, a more exact answer would have made it a bit clearer.

With all TAB not being equal, I try to consider a full range of thought into decisions - and you are right as far as a primary back-up role at the position of QB. I think we really have to take into consideration the importance of this position, especially for primary back-ups vs. those who are passed along the waiver wire or signed by a different team from year to year.

In any case, I don't think giving an opinion of a specific suggested salary amount for a player is in good taste. if it was absolutely necessary to do so, given the length of the contract I would personally suggest a range of $1.4 - $1.9 MIL. I mean after all, there are back-ups who make more and QB's come into the league at draft for that amount or more - also for the most part without guarantees of ever starting.

All in all, whether draft, UFA, or re-signing players, there are no guarantees of performance, again, exception given to the back-up QB who is always least likely to play during the season, but just as essential to a teams success.

[Deleted]

I approved the earlier offer of this and I'll let it stand again. I disagree with the other TAB about the value of Hoyer from being a backup QB perspective (and that's why we're all here). Rather, I want him to be payed for the value he has serving as the QB there and having a chance to join the list of backup QBs to start for another team. But for now, this is going to squeak by for me because it's hazy and undefined. The same can't be said for the Redman one that I had to veto.

Approve (2-1)

[Bengals GM (Darryl)]

I vetoed the 1st time, and am inclined to veto this time around as well as your beginning argument wasn't too convincing (btw, Woodyard is now earning more than 3X his original salary, which is where I would place Hoyer) BUT - being that there is no set precedent on the value of a primary back-up QB...Namely in looking at FA this position has been devalued or deemed of less importance, while other positions have been over-valued.

AND given benefit of the doubt due to re-signing your own player at a home town"discount", I'll approve. Approve (3-1)

[Bengals GM (Darryl)]

won by Patriots Brian Hoyer (QB-NEP) $1MIL (2015)