"I want to be traded. I don't need to be here anymore."

So stated New England Patriots Pro Bowl guard Logan Mankins to ESPNBoston on Monday afternoon, breaking his silence on the contract situation that has loomed over the club's offseason.

Mankins had, thus far, been keeping to himself, far away from the Patriots' voluntary organized team activities, at his ranch in California. But the lineman's frustration over being one of 212 restricted free agents (RFAs) under the final year of the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), and over not getting the contract offer he feels he would have if he were an unrestricted free agent in a normal season, has spilled over.

As many other RFA's signed their tenders, Mankins, who stood to make some $3 million this season if he inked the RFA offer by Monday night's deadline, declared to ESPN that there was "no way I'm signing that thing." He called out his team for not giving him the kind of money he feels he deserves and for not keeping their word on contract negotiations.

Shortly after his public display of dissatisfaction, the Boston Globe and Boston Herald both reported that the Patriots had in fact made an extension offer to Mankins that would have paid him approximately $7 million a season starting in 2011, making him one of the top five highest paid guards in the NFL. However, it would have required him to play out his RFA season for the offered tender.

The Globe also reported that the Patriots had exercised their right to slash Mankins' tender when he chose not to sign it, reducing his salary for this coming year to 110% of his 2009 salary, an amount just over $1 million.

This is not the first time the Patriots have had problems getting their star players locked into long-term, high-paying contracts. However, this offseason the Pats' front office did seem to be doing a better job of taking care of their own.

Nose tackle Vince Wilfork was signed, as promised, to a five-year, $40 million deal that made him one of the highest paid defensive players in the league. The Pats also resigned cornerback Leigh Bodden, who was flirting in free agency, to a four-year, $22 million deal.

These are two examples of players Patriot fans were afraid would slip through the cracks, but the organization surprised many by locking them up long-term.

So what is to be made of Mankins and his unhappiness?

Granted the full extent of the contract offer made by the Patriots has not been made public, but if it was in the ballpark being reported, it's inconceivable to many that any player would turn it down, let alone complain that they are being mistreated or undervalued.

Part of Mankins' issue with the contract on the table is that New Orleans Saints guard Jahri Evans signed a deal this offseason worth almost $60 million, setting the bar high for the position. Mankins' agent pointed out to ESPN that the deal the Patriots had extended was for 20 percent less money than the one Evans signed.

However, Mankins' comparison of himself to his fellow perennial Pro Bowler has one major flaw. When Evans' deal was inked, the Saints were coming off their Super Bowl-winning 2009 season, while Mankins is leveraging a year where the Patriots played unevenly and were blown out of the playoffs, partially because quarterback Tom Brady was poorly protected, leading to costly turnovers.

That's not to take away from Mankins' talent at his spot. He has made the Pro Bowl twice in the last three seasons and has been a solid presence on and off the field for the Patriots.

The problem for the team is that they are, in many ways, flying blind as they make these contracts. With no CBA in place, there are huge question marks when it comes to football next year.

What will a new agreement look like? What kind of cap will there be? What kind of restrictions will be placed on teams? How will the contracts they sign players to now affect their bottom line later on?

Paying Mankins too much (in the Patriots' opinion) right now could come back to seriously harm them next year.

Thus, Mankins' situation is an unfortunate one to be sure, but here's the bottom line: when he joined the NFL, he agreed to join the union of the NFL Player's Association and sometimes the union screws you.

That's a reality for plenty of people in the real world, which is part of what makes Mankins' situation so difficult for fans to digest – or to feel sympathy for him in his plight. The union didn't work out a new CBA with the owners and now Mankins doesn't get to enjoy unrestricted free agency because he had less than six years of service to his team. It's obviously undesirable.

Getting more than $3 million for one year of football, – the highest possible tender the Patriots could offer - and the promise of a raise of more than 50 percent the next year, plus a signing bonus, is a solid deal for an NFL guard, even one as elite as Mankins. The Patriots are "paying the man" as fans are want to say.

Is the offer going to pay Mankins as much as Evans? No. Is Mankins making himself look greedy now? Childish? Ungrateful? Yes, but that's partially because he is the only RFA to have come out so publicly and been so malicious when speaking of his team. Had there been an entire chorus of statements like his, the perception might be different.

For the layman, it's near impossible to grasp why anyone would turn their nose up at millions of dollars to play a game they love. While many of us struggle just to keep a roof over our heads as the economy continues to recover, Mankins is playing hardball with $7 million a year on the table.

So, what will the Patriots do with him? Trade him for draft picks or players who can help the team now? Keep him and sit him until week 11 of the season when he is required under current CBA rules to show up to play for the team? Give him more money to keep him happy?

Unfortunately, every possibility is a losing one for the Patriots, whose motto over the last decade has been to build a team, not just collect talent.

If they give Mankins more money, it takes away from the money they can use on another player – like, say, franchise Brady, whose deal expires in 2010. If they sit him and have him come back halfway through the year, he'll likely act as a cancer in the locker room. If they trade him, they are losing one of the their best offensive players.

Weighing all the options, Patriots' owner Robert Kraft should trade him. No player should be kept on a team if he doesn't want to be there. It's bad for the team. Besides, after the comments Mankins made, if they offer to pay him more, they set the dangerous precedent for the rest of their players that if they are unhappy with their contracts, complaining through the media is the way to gain leverage in the negotiations.

For a tight-lipped organization like the New England Patriots, that would be a trend they don't want to see catching on.