Chiefs Chiefs can rescind the tag on Albert - Page 9

**FRCDFED** · 03-05-2013, 09:22 AM

I thought I saw a comment yesterday that Albert could hold out if he thought there was a chance they were going to have him play guard. I am in no way condoning that; however, it appears from this article that it would be in his best interest to sign his tender and show up.

13 fewer tags than last year

Posted by Mike Florio on March 5, 2013, 8:39 AM EST

The dust has settled on the franchise-tag designation period. Unlike last year, when 21 tags flew, only three were applied in 2013.

So what gives?

The easy explanation is that this year’s crop of players eligible for the tag wasn’t as good as last year’s. But it’s likely more complicated than that.

Ravens quarterback Joe Flacco would have been this year’s Drew Brees, if the Ravens had been willing or able to carry his exclusive franchise tender, like the Saints did last year with Brees. These deals get done on a deadline basis, and for the Ravens the real deadline was having to choose between two equally bad evils: more than $19 million under the exclusive tag or nearly $15 million under the non-exclusive tag, along with an opportunity for the Browns to try to steal the Super Bowl MVP.

The Titans got cold feet regarding the possibility of using the franchise tag on tight end Jared Cook. or he would have been No. 9. If he’d signed the offer and if he’d then won the inevitable grievance arguing that he’s a receiver, the Titans would have been paying Cook more in 2013 than they’ll be paying Chris Johnson.

The Titans could have instead used the tag on kicker Rob Bironas. Last year, the tag was applied to six punter/kickers. But with the market for kickers and punters expected to be soft this year, teams other than the Colts apparently opted not to invest nearly $3 million in a veteran, given that low-cost options like Blair Walsh and Greg Zeuerlein were floating in last year’s draft pool.

The biggest factor for the lack of tags could have been the salary cap. Even though the franchise tenders are now based on the five-year average cap percentage consumed by the five highest-paid players at each position, it becomes more difficult to give one large chunk of cap space to one player at a time when the total cap grew by only 0.5 percent in 2012 and 1.9 percent in 2013. For too many teams, the upward pressure of salary increases coupled with a relatively static total spending limit has made eight-figure salaries for non-superstar players a luxury that no longer can be afforded.

It should be no surprise, for example, that the Patriots didn’t use it. At a time when quarterback Tom Brady’s cap number will be $13.8 million, how could they justify tying up $10.8 million in cornerback Aqib Talib or $9.8 million in tackle Sebastian Vollmer or $11.4 million in receiver Wes Welker?

The next question is whether the one-year franchise tenders will become long-term deals. Teams have until July 15 to make that transformation.

If not, the players who have received the franchise tenders but who won’t be signing them any time soon need to worry about something that hasn’t happened in eight years: A team rescinding the tag.

Chiefs left tackle Branden Albert should be specifically concerned about that. After all, his new head coach, Andy Reid, did it twice in Philly, to defensive tackle Corey Simon in 2005 and to linebacker Jeremiah Trotter three years earlier. If/when the Chiefs take left tackle Luke Joeckel with the first pick in the 2013 draft, Albert may want to quickly put pen to paper for his $9.828 million salary, or the chance to do so may permanently evaporate.

Then, he would end up on the open market in May, long after the big money has flowed for the year.

Given the new realities of a cap-strapped NFL, that’s a real concern that every franchise player should now have.

ToxSocks · 03-05-2013, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Why would they trade him?

They have openly said that they want to sign him long term.

They're not going to trade him. It's just idiots desperately trying to hang on to Luke Joeckel.

Fish · 03-05-2013, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

I assume the backup LT for the Ravens was Michael Oher, but I don't know for sure. I'm not sure that helps you make your point.

The point is that the Superbowl champions didn't feel it necessary to have a LTotF even on the roster. Their starting RT was their backup LT. They won the Superbowl with that approach.

Yet you're advocating that a 2-14 team spend a first round pick on a LT this year, when we not only already have a 1st round pick already playing there, but we spent the #74 overall pick on his backup just last season. You outright admit that we still don't know how good Stephenson is. Yet you're ready to spend a high pick on a replacement already.

Sassy Squatch · 03-05-2013, 01:29 PM

Who would trade for him anyway? Jake Long, Sebastian Volmer and Andre Smith could all be had without losing draft picks. Albert is better than all of them but not by enough to give up the compensation we would want.

ChiefsCountry · 03-05-2013, 01:30 PM

This fan base has a weird obession with offensive lineman.

ToxSocks · 03-05-2013, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superturtle

Who would trade for him anyway? Jake Long, Sebastian Volmer and Andre Smith could all be had without losing draft picks. Albert is better than all of them but not by enough to give up the compensation we would want.

Add in the abundance of "Ogden" quality LT's in the draft, a team would be stupid to trade for Albert.

nychief · 03-05-2013, 01:32 PM

Dorsey said they'll continue to work toward a long term deal.... I don't know why that wouldn't be true.

Sorter · 03-05-2013, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

This fan base has a weird obession with offensive lineman.

I blame Carl.

KC_Lee · 03-05-2013, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

This fan base has a weird obession with offensive lineman.

And other team's back up QBs.

Fish · 03-05-2013, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu

Offensive line isn't a place where you want just-in-time replacements, particularly if you're going to rely on mid-to-late round picks. Waiting until next year to decide that you need an immediate replacement for BA and that Stephenson isn't going to cut it is a bad position to end up in.

Yes it is. It absolutely is. Many teams only carry 7-8 offensive linemen on their final roster. You don't have depth at OLine as deeply as you do most other positions. Which is why many teams, such as the Superbowl champ Ravens, don't carry a full-time backup LTotF, let alone spend draft picks on it when they already have a solid starting LT.

Sorter · 03-05-2013, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC_Lee

And other team's back up QBs.

Also Carl's fault.

Setsuna · 03-05-2013, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRCDFED

It would be nice to pick up Barrett Jones in round 3-4 if he is still there.

Alabama people said he was 3rd/4th best OL they had on the team. Just relaying information...

patteeu · 03-05-2013, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing

See, your logic makes sense when it is applied to the QB position, not the LT position. Sure, LT is an important position, but its importance is far over blown with the "Truefans" and isn't nearly as important as the QB.

Your concern shouldn't be developing the next LT, it should be developing your next QB. We have a young LT, and a young developmental LT. We have nothing at QB.

You're so concerned with Albert's back. Why aren't you just as concerned with Alex Smith's injury history?

You're so concerned with grooming a LT in case Albert doesn't work out. Why aren't you concerned with grooming a QB, the most important position the field, in case Alex Smith doesn't work out?

Maybe you're right, maybe Albert's back is an issue. Maybe im right, and Alex Smith isn't going to work out well for us either.

Maybe.....after the 2013 season both of these guys have failed to live up to expectations.....if that scenario were to occur, which of the following scenarios would be best:

1. A Geno/Barkley that has been under the tutelage of Andy Reid for the past season, knows the offense and his teammates + Some mid round LT

or

2. Joeckel + Some mid round QB who will be expected to come in and turn the franchise around?

Basically.....Which is the better investment; LT or QB? Which position will benefit the Chiefs more from sitting and learning for a season? If both Albert and Smith live up to their expectations and are retained, which position would have higher trade value, LT or QB? I think the answers are pretty damn obvious to anyone who's followed the NFL.

I'm no less concerned about Alex Smith's health and viability as a starter than Branden Albert's.

The guy that is more valuable is the guy who ends up being a successful NFL player instead of a bust, even if that guy is a LT. If Geno Smith is that guy, he's obviously the better pick.

patteeu · 03-05-2013, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGM

You don't need a Munoz to win a Super Bowl, let alone BACKUP Munoz's

You do need a quality QB though and we didn't have one.

You don't need Munoz, but you can't live with Barry Richardson or Jordan Black either. The point though, is that Donald Stephenson didn't prove himself last year. It's too early to pass judgment on him and he may still end up being a front line LT starter, but we haven't seen it yet.

You need quality at both QB and on the offensive line. This shouldn't be an either/or situation.

patteeu · 03-05-2013, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish

The point is that the Superbowl champions didn't feel it necessary to have a LTotF even on the roster. Their starting RT was their backup LT. They won the Superbowl with that approach.

Yet you're advocating that a 2-14 team spend a first round pick on a LT this year, when we not only already have a 1st round pick already playing there, but we spent the #74 overall pick on his backup just last season. You outright admit that we still don't know how good Stephenson is. Yet you're ready to spend a high pick on a replacement already.

The Ravens are going to have challenges in 2013. I won't say their window is closed, but it's not nearly as open as it was last year. They were in "win now, and I mean right now" mode last year. Unless you think the Chiefs are ready to take a run at the Super Bowl in 2013 and you're willing to take a step back in 2014 to rebuild/retool, it's not really an apt comparison.

The Chiefs should be building toward a freshly opened window over the next 2 years, not acting like the window is about to close.

Hootie · 03-05-2013, 02:19 PM

I'm envious the Ravens won another Super Bowl but I don't see them as a contender next year...I see them as a quality, but aging team that would need another Rahim Moore to go their way...honestly, gun to head, I feel like they could miss the playoffs next year.

I could be wrong, I'm anti-flacco so that plays a part in it for me

03-05-2013, 09:22 AM
FRCDFED Line'em up Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: somewhere out there Casino cash: $8966297	Chiefs can rescind the tag on Albert I thought I saw a comment yesterday that Albert could hold out if he thought there was a chance they were going to have him play guard. I am in no way condoning that; however, it appears from this article that it would be in his best interest to sign his tender and show up. 13 fewer tags than last year Posted by Mike Florio on March 5, 2013, 8:39 AM EST The dust has settled on the franchise-tag designation period. Unlike last year, when 21 tags flew, only three were applied in 2013. So what gives? The easy explanation is that this year’s crop of players eligible for the tag wasn’t as good as last year’s. But it’s likely more complicated than that. Ravens quarterback Joe Flacco would have been this year’s Drew Brees, if the Ravens had been willing or able to carry his exclusive franchise tender, like the Saints did last year with Brees. These deals get done on a deadline basis, and for the Ravens the real deadline was having to choose between two equally bad evils: more than $19 million under the exclusive tag or nearly $15 million under the non-exclusive tag, along with an opportunity for the Browns to try to steal the Super Bowl MVP. The Titans got cold feet regarding the possibility of using the franchise tag on tight end Jared Cook. or he would have been No. 9. If he’d signed the offer and if he’d then won the inevitable grievance arguing that he’s a receiver, the Titans would have been paying Cook more in 2013 than they’ll be paying Chris Johnson. The Titans could have instead used the tag on kicker Rob Bironas. Last year, the tag was applied to six punter/kickers. But with the market for kickers and punters expected to be soft this year, teams other than the Colts apparently opted not to invest nearly $3 million in a veteran, given that low-cost options like Blair Walsh and Greg Zeuerlein were floating in last year’s draft pool. The biggest factor for the lack of tags could have been the salary cap. Even though the franchise tenders are now based on the five-year average cap percentage consumed by the five highest-paid players at each position, it becomes more difficult to give one large chunk of cap space to one player at a time when the total cap grew by only 0.5 percent in 2012 and 1.9 percent in 2013. For too many teams, the upward pressure of salary increases coupled with a relatively static total spending limit has made eight-figure salaries for non-superstar players a luxury that no longer can be afforded. It should be no surprise, for example, that the Patriots didn’t use it. At a time when quarterback Tom Brady’s cap number will be $13.8 million, how could they justify tying up $10.8 million in cornerback Aqib Talib or $9.8 million in tackle Sebastian Vollmer or $11.4 million in receiver Wes Welker? The next question is whether the one-year franchise tenders will become long-term deals. Teams have until July 15 to make that transformation. If not, the players who have received the franchise tenders but who won’t be signing them any time soon need to worry about something that hasn’t happened in eight years: A team rescinding the tag. Chiefs left tackle Branden Albert should be specifically concerned about that. After all, his new head coach, Andy Reid, did it twice in Philly, to defensive tackle Corey Simon in 2005 and to linebacker Jeremiah Trotter three years earlier. If/when the Chiefs take left tackle Luke Joeckel with the first pick in the 2013 draft, Albert may want to quickly put pen to paper for his $9.828 million salary, or the chance to do so may permanently evaporate. Then, he would end up on the open market in May, long after the big money has flowed for the year. Given the new realities of a cap-strapped NFL, that’s a real concern that every franchise player should now have.
Posts: 3,200

03-05-2013, 01:29 PM	#123
Sassy Squatch The man you could post like. Join Date: Oct 2010 Casino cash: $-1440345	Who would trade for him anyway? Jake Long, Sebastian Volmer and Andre Smith could all be had without losing draft picks. Albert is better than all of them but not by enough to give up the compensation we would want.
Posts: 42,094

03-05-2013, 01:30 PM	#124
ChiefsCountry The Insider Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Lake of the Ozarks Casino cash: $-1581248	This fan base has a weird obession with offensive lineman.
Posts: 52,125

03-05-2013, 01:32 PM	#126
nychief MVP Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: NYC Casino cash: $5369466	Dorsey said they'll continue to work toward a long term deal.... I don't know why that wouldn't be true. __________________ Good Time Charlie, Uncle Doobie and the Great Frisco Freakout.
Posts: 8,169

03-05-2013, 02:19 PM	#135
Hootie Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Casino cash: $10004900	I'm envious the Ravens won another Super Bowl but I don't see them as a contender next year...I see them as a quality, but aging team that would need another Rahim Moore to go their way...honestly, gun to head, I feel like they could miss the playoffs next year. I could be wrong, I'm anti-flacco so that plays a part in it for me
Posts: 56,356