ny92mike Posted January 30, 2018 Author Share Posted January 30, 2018 The one thing I'm not seeing is that the player has leverage when tagged. I can't imagine a player guaranteed that much money would take less. It's why when most players are tagged, they get that value or more in APY / Guarantees. No need to accept less. And if this is his third tag, which I haven't looked, but if it is. The only tag the team is allowed to provide is the transition tag, which comes with no compensation and a extremely high price tag. The only way irl I see him getting tagged is if WAS is going to give him a long term deal, and even then that amount will be huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 11 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: Not the same day as you said. The problem with all of this is speculation, in Cassels case he signed his tender two days after he was tagged. Jared Allen was likely different. How many times with this make that Kirk was tagged? According to the CBA, the third time he's tagged must be a transition tag. You and the broncos team are the only ones wanting the ability to tag and trade. No one else is pushing for this. I understand though, you've found someone willing to take Kirk Cousins and allow you a chance at moving up in the draft without giving up anything. All this does is allow teams to bypass not only the tender offer sheet but allows teams to tag any player regardless of talent and trade them to someone willing to pay the cap and just opens the door to trading signed UFA players. The Good Faith Negotiation is designed to prevent tagging or signing players to contracts with the intention of trading them. https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf Relevant portion here 2011 CBA - Article 10, Section 2 (b): Quote If the Club designates the player as a Franchise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 2 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: The one thing I'm not seeing is that the player has leverage when tagged. I can't imagine a player guaranteed that much money would take less. It's why when most players are tagged, they get that value or more in APY / Guarantees. No need to accept less. And if this is his third tag, which I haven't looked, but if it is. The only tag the team is allowed to provide is the transition tag, which comes with no compensation and a extremely high price tag. The only way irl I see him getting tagged is if WAS is going to give him a long term deal, and even then that amount will be huge. Again...incorrect. See my response above. 2011 CBA - Article 10, Section 2 (b): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHooligan00 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 (b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker designated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Franchise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, IrishHooligan00 said: (b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker designated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Franchise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below. Which means...what... exactly? You do realize a sign and trade is done the same way right? The Redskins can sign him to a contract favorable to the other team as part of the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHooligan00 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 1 minute ago, IrishHooligan00 said: (b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker designated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Franchise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below. NON Exclusive TAG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted January 30, 2018 Share Posted January 30, 2018 6 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said: https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf Relevant portion here 2011 CBA - Article 10, Section 2 (b): Just read all sections of the exclusive franchises player section, there’s nothing in it that prohibits trading the player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 6 minutes ago, MKnight82 said: Omg 1 day. You are wrong about the 3rd having to be transition tag. Im not asking for an exception for the redskins I’m saying all teams should be able to trade franchise players. Not one day. February 5, 2009 he was tagged. February 28th, 2009 he was traded. Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker desig-nated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Fran-chise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below. This ruling was a bit confusing because it says that the only club the player is allowed to negotiate or sign with is the team tagging him, but then it mentions Instead of designating such a player the franchise, the Club may designate such player as a transition player. So if I was incorrect that is why. I understand that you aren't looking for an exception to the rule, and that you don't want the rule included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 2 minutes ago, IrishHooligan00 said: NON Exclusive TAG I think you need to re-examine what exclusive and non-exclusive mean. If the Redskins are the only player that Kirk can negotiate with, then that is the exclusive tag. Which is what I said happens on the 3rd tag. The Redskins can work out a trade pending Kirk signing. And then sign him to a contract favorable to that team. Kirk signs with Washington. Then is traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, ny92jefferis said: Not one day. February 5, 2009 he was tagged. February 28th, 2009 he was traded. Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker desig-nated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player’s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Fran-chise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below. This ruling was a bit confusing because it says that the only club the player is allowed to negotiate or sign with is the team tagging him, but then it mentions Instead of designating such a player the franchise, the Club may designate such player as a transition player. So if I was incorrect that is why. I understand that you aren't looking for an exception to the rule, and that you don't want the rule included. You asked when we should be able to trade franchises players, I said the start of free agency. You asked Day 1, I said yes. You then posted he was traded Feb 28th, and free agency started Feb 27th. One day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHooligan00 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Everything i have read has stated that WAS and Cousins and say Denver would have to agree to a deal before he signs the franchise tag. Kinda confusing imo lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, IrishHooligan00 said: Everything i have read has stated that WAS and Cousins and say Denver would have to agree to a deal before he signs the franchise tag. Kinda confusing imo lol Not really. That is how a tag and trade could work. Contingency deals are done in business all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKnight82 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, IrishHooligan00 said: Everything i have read has stated that WAS and Cousins and say Denver would have to agree to a deal before he signs the franchise tag. Kinda confusing imo lol It’s hella confusing. Dude we (Washington) fans have been trying to figure this crap out for months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishHooligan00 Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Why would WAS sign him long term and trade him makes no sense. They would take a cap hit from the contract as well as dead $ next year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thaiphoon Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 Just now, IrishHooligan00 said: Why would WAS sign him long term and trade him makes no sense. They would take a cap hit from the contract as well as dead $ next year I KNOW!! LOL... Answer: #Redskins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.