Football NFLPA says teams can take their Franchise Tags and stick it - Page 4

Mr. Laz · 02-04-2011, 03:27 PM

NFL PLAYERS ASSOCIATION SENDS LETTER TO AGENTS REGARDING FRANCHISE TAG

As referenced at the NFL Players Association’s annual press conference Feb. 3, 2011, the NFLPA sent a letter to all agents regarding franchise tags. The letter in full stated:
We have received reports that the NFL is advising clubs that they can place a franchise tag on players whose contracts will expire at the end of the 2010 league year.
The current CBA provides that “each club shall be permitted to designate one of its players who would otherwise be an Unrestricted Free Agent [or Restricted Free Agent] as a Franchise Player each season during the term of this Agreement.” The 2011 season is not a “season during the term of this Agreement” so the NFL has no valid basis for claiming the right to franchise players in 2011.
If you have had any discussions with clubs about their intent to use the Franchise designation for the 2011 season please contact the NFLPA to discuss this matter. Meanwhile, we will make sure that the rights of any players improperly designated will be protected.

milkman · 02-04-2011, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

and yet again you prove that you're a complete moron

The tags are leverage which helps keep the salaries under control. No tags would hurt smaller market teams, like the chiefs, even more than most.

The salary cap keeps the salaries under control.

The tags have no effect on that, unless you take a guy like Matt Cassel, who was nearly worth the 14 mil price tag that the franchise tag put on him, and resulted in getting him a contract that was far more than he was worth.

Mr. Laz · 02-04-2011, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

The salary cap keeps the salaries under control.

The tags have no effect on that, unless you take a guy like Matt Cassel, who was nearly worth the 14 mil price tag that the franchise tag put on him, and resulted in getting him a contract that was far more than he was worth.

Of course the tags have an effect. A by-product of the salary cap is that teams and players have started looking for more front-loaded contracts. Big signing bonus of 15,20 even 30 million now to counter salary caps and non-guaranteed contracts.

Not only that, but the tricks of working around the salary cap by prorating the signing bonuses and then restructuring the contracts over and over again allow teams to push the salary cap numbers around. Teams can spend 180/190 million dollars in a year and still be under the 110 million dollar cap.

All this "front" money and cap "cheating" is more difficult for small market teams.

Especially when it comes to big name elite players.

The franchise/transition tags help smaller market teams have some addition leverage to keep those elite players.

HMc · 02-04-2011, 09:41 PM

interestingly, if the union was to decertify and players were to negotiate individually, there'd not necassarily be a draft in 2012 (the CBA provides for a draft in 2011 but not after that).

milkman · 02-04-2011, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz

Of course the tags have an effect. A by-product of the salary cap is that teams and players have started looking for more front-loaded contracts. Big signing bonus of 15,20 even 30 million now to counter salary caps and non-guaranteed contracts.

Not only that, but the tricks of working around the salary cap by prorating the signing bonuses and then restructuring the contracts over and over again allow teams to push the salary cap numbers around. Teams can spend 180/190 million dollars in a year and still be under the 110 million dollar cap.

All this "front" money and cap "cheating" is more difficult for small market teams.

Especially when it comes to big name elite players.

The franchise/transition tags help smaller market teams have some addition leverage to keep those elite players.

When you use the franchise tag on positions like kicker and guard, it pushes the salaries up for other positions.

I like the transition tag, and believe that it should still be a part of the next CBA.

They do need to work out something that eliminates the poison pill in contracts, like the one that Steve Hutchinson signed with the Vikings a few years ago.

If they do keep the franchise tag, they need to change the money to average of top ten, rather than top five, because that's where it raises the salaries.

If a guard makes 5 mil a year, then a LT will want 10 mil a year.

patteeu · 02-04-2011, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

When you use the franchise tag on positions like kicker and guard, it pushes the salaries up for other positions.

The salary cap helps to limit the amount that other position salaries can escalate on the basis of a highly paid kicker or guard.

The benefit of the franchise tag, in addition to the obvious benefit of helping a team hang on to it's most important potential free agent each off season (if they so choose) is that it prevents superstar salaries from skyrocketing and eating up even more of the salary cap than they already do to the detriment of all the non-superstar players in the league. The only players hurt by the franchise tag are the guys that get tagged. All the other players benefit indirectly (even though it doesn't seem like most of them realize that).

Bewbies · 02-04-2011, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

Why?

Franchise tags are for people like Peyton Manning, not an idiot kicker. Most of the players that are given the franchise tag today are not franchise players. If a team wants to keep a guy they should resign him before his contract is up.

If it were up to me I think I'd keep the franchise tag but make it so that you could only use it again if the guy you used it on is no longer on your team. So if we tagged Hali for instance, until he's no longer a Chief we would be unable to franchise tag anyone else.

With a system like that 2nd or 3rd tier players, or say backup QB's who weren't good enough to play in college, would no longer be the kind of player you would want to tag.

Bewbies · 02-04-2011, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

The salary cap helps to limit the amount that other position salaries can escalate on the basis of a highly paid kicker or guard.

The benefit of the franchise tag, in addition to the obvious benefit of helping a team hang on to it's most important potential free agent each off season (if they so choose) is that it prevents superstar salaries from skyrocketing and eating up even more of the salary cap than they already do to the detriment of all the non-superstar players in the league. The only players hurt by the franchise tag are the guys that get tagged. All the other players benefit indirectly (even though it doesn't seem like most of them realize that).

Doesn't the NBA have a system where one of your guys can be resigned at it doesn't effect the cap at all? The Larry Bird rule or something like that?

royr17 · 02-05-2011, 03:46 AM

The league, the NFLPA, and the Union need to quit worry about telling each other to go screw them selves and tellin teams to shove the Franchise Tag up their rears and get this damn thing agreed to so that there isnt a lockout.

It is really goin to suck if there is a lockout next year, I dont know what I would do, cause their are two sports that I truly enjoy watching that is the NFL and College Basketball, and it is goin to really suck if their aint no NFL next year.

**notorious** · 02-05-2011, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

The franchise tag system helps more players than it hurts.

So why does the NFLPA want it gone?

patteeu · 02-05-2011, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bewbies

Franchise tags are for people like Peyton Manning, not an idiot kicker. Most of the players that are given the franchise tag today are not franchise players. If a team wants to keep a guy they should resign him before his contract is up.

If it were up to me I think I'd keep the franchise tag but make it so that you could only use it again if the guy you used it on is no longer on your team. So if we tagged Hali for instance, until he's no longer a Chief we would be unable to franchise tag anyone else.

With a system like that 2nd or 3rd tier players, or say backup QB's who weren't good enough to play in college, would no longer be the kind of player you would want to tag.

That's not really an answer to why your position makes more sense than the current system. It's really more of a restatement of that position. Would you feel better about the current system if they changed the name from "franchise tag" to "retention tag"?

The way the current system works reduces the team to team mobility of a larger group of the leagues better players than your system would while still giving most players a shot at free agency that they didn't have under the pre-free agency system. As a fan, I like having more continuity on the roster.

patteeu · 02-05-2011, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bewbies

Doesn't the NBA have a system where one of your guys can be resigned at it doesn't effect the cap at all? The Larry Bird rule or something like that?

Yes, they do.

patteeu · 02-05-2011, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notorious

So why does the NFLPA want it gone?

I think there's a widespread misconception based on (a) the fact that the downside to tagged players is more obvious than the upside to non-tagged players and (b) players tend to believe that they will someday be good enough to be tagged even though many of them never will be. The NFLPA responds to all players, but the superstars have more clout and influence than the guys who barely make the 53 man roster.

Chiefshrink · 02-05-2011, 10:10 AM

DeMaurice Smith

No way in hell the NFLPA moves at all unless it is in their favor

Do some research on Smith and you will see why

Bewbies · 02-05-2011, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

Yes, they do.

That's what the NFL should do then. Forget the tags and have one guy who you can pay without any restriction.

patteeu · 02-05-2011, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bewbies

That's what the NFL should do then. Forget the tags and have one guy who you can pay without any restriction.

I prefer the way it is, particularly since the Chiefs don't have a Payton Manning, but that would be another way of doing it.

02-04-2011, 03:27 PM
Mr. Laz Don't Tease Me Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: KS Casino cash: $11047037	NFLPA says teams can take their Franchise Tags and stick it NFL PLAYERS ASSOCIATION SENDS LETTER TO AGENTS REGARDING FRANCHISE TAG As referenced at the NFL Players Association’s annual press conference Feb. 3, 2011, the NFLPA sent a letter to all agents regarding franchise tags. The letter in full stated: We have received reports that the NFL is advising clubs that they can place a franchise tag on players whose contracts will expire at the end of the 2010 league year. The current CBA provides that “each club shall be permitted to designate one of its players who would otherwise be an Unrestricted Free Agent [or Restricted Free Agent] as a Franchise Player each season during the term of this Agreement.” The 2011 season is not a “season during the term of this Agreement” so the NFL has no valid basis for claiming the right to franchise players in 2011. If you have had any discussions with clubs about their intent to use the Franchise designation for the 2011 season please contact the NFLPA to discuss this matter. Meanwhile, we will make sure that the rights of any players improperly designated will be protected.
Posts: 95,626

02-04-2011, 09:41 PM	#48
HMc from the very deep south. Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Sydney, Australia. Casino cash: $9944900	interestingly, if the union was to decertify and players were to negotiate individually, there'd not necassarily be a draft in 2012 (the CBA provides for a draft in 2011 but not after that).
Posts: 2,792

02-05-2011, 03:46 AM	#53
royr17 MVP Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Lovin my kids Casino cash: $-1681324	The league, the NFLPA, and the Union need to quit worry about telling each other to go screw them selves and tellin teams to shove the Franchise Tag up their rears and get this damn thing agreed to so that there isnt a lockout. It is really goin to suck if there is a lockout next year, I dont know what I would do, cause their are two sports that I truly enjoy watching that is the NFL and College Basketball, and it is goin to really suck if their aint no NFL next year.
Posts: 6,244