Injuries like Pollard's

[jterrell]

Fair points here, but really when you look back at it I'm not sure they used the tag poorly.....at least most of the time. Spencer that was probably the right move. Solid player, but not worth a long term deal. DLaw I forget the circumstances around so no comment. Dak was a bad move, but I get the feeling the Cowboys hadn't actually made up their minds on how good he was at that point. The Schultz tag I think was fine too. Again you have a guy who you'd like to keep, but I'm not sure it makes sense to pay him top TE money over a 3-4 year deal. Same situation with Pollard. I dont love the idea of locking him up for 3+ years, so the tag seems like the best option in the long run so you can find a reliable replacement instead of praying you hit in the draft.

Overall though I think the tags have been fine. Really the 1 year tags dont kill your cap, especially if we are talking about a TE/RB. The issues are the guys you do intend to lock up longer like the Dak situation because as you mentioned the price only goes up and up every year, which for a QB can be significant.

Anthony Spencer: Was a solid 2nd OLB but you paid him FARRRR too much. 20M CASH over 2 years and eating every bit of that cap hit was terrible resource mgmt on much smaller caps.
Dallas got HOF Demarcus Ware for about 12M per year.

DLaw had some injury concerns but flashed major ability when healthy.
By not giving him a longer deal his agent dug in his heels and they got a monster deal after a full franchise tag.
His agent went on a full celebration tour.

Schultz is and was a solid TE. But he is not elite.
You won zero games last year because of Schultz.
I am not tagging a guy unless I am going all-in and Dallas clearly wasn't.

My biggest overall point is these moves need to make sense in context of what you are trying to achieve.
A FT hits you really hard on the cap and gives you zero leverage going forward.
A 2nd tag is 15% more expensive and once you've established a guy is worth X amount per year you can't put that genie back in the box offering a lesser AAV.

The way the franchise tag is constructed it is really best used to prevent your guy getting to free agency day 1 and then it is either pulled later after the big money is spent or you make the long-term deal.
Paying a player the full franchise tag for 1 season is basically GTD money and the types of contracts players love.
The have to survive one year but at high pay and then hit free agency AGAIN.

 

[jterrell]

Anthony Spencer: Was a solid 2nd OLB but you paid him FARRRR too much. 20M CASH over 2 years and eating every bit of that cap hit was terrible resource mgmt on much smaller caps.
Dallas got HOF Demarcus Ware for about 12M per year.

DLaw had some injury concerns but flashed major ability when healthy.
By not giving him a longer deal his agent dug in his heels and they got a monster deal after a full franchise tag.
His agent went on a full celebration tour.

Schultz is and was a solid TE. But he is not elite.
You won zero games last year because of Schultz.
I am not tagging a guy unless I am going all-in and Dallas clearly wasn't.

My biggest overall point is these moves need to make sense in context of what you are trying to achieve.
A FT hits you really hard on the cap and gives you zero leverage going forward.
A 2nd tag is 15% more expensive and once you've established a guy is worth X amount per year you can't put that genie back in the box offering a lesser AAV.

The way the franchise tag is constructed it is really best used to prevent your guy getting to free agency day 1 and then it is either pulled later after the big money is spent or you make the long-term deal.
Paying a player the full franchise tag for 1 season is basically GTD money and the types of contracts players love.
The have to survive one year but at high pay and then hit free agency AGAIN.

More on this:
I'd prefer to pay a longer deal out but manage the cap hits and cut them if need be.
And you can in fact trade dudes on deals.

For instance if Dallas had signed Dalton Schultz last year for a 40m 4-year deal with 12M up front.
His cap hit would have been about half the franchise tag last year.
Then this year with his cap hit up more in that 9M range you could still trade him and in fact get more than the likely R4 comp he will get as a free agent.
You have to eat dead cap but get real draft compensation to do so.

There is seldom any NFL player I want badly but also only want them for one year.

 

[shabazz]

He's a great player and I wish him the very best

We all do……just have to hope that the FO makes the right decision with him.

 

[thunderpimp91]

More on this:
I'd prefer to pay a longer deal out but manage the cap hits and cut them if need be.
And you can in fact trade dudes on deals.

For instance if Dallas had signed Dalton Schultz last year for a 40m 4-year deal with 12M up front.
His cap hit would have been about half the franchise tag last year.
Then this year with his cap hit up more in that 9M range you could still trade him and in fact get more than the likely R4 comp he will get as a free agent.
You have to eat dead cap but get real draft compensation to do so.

There is seldom any NFL player I want badly but also only want them for one year.

I get what you're saying, but you're also assuming asking prices & trade returns and sort of playing Madden instead of NFL GM.

Personally I think the FT give you more cap freedom (excluding premium positions that are $20+MM) as it's only 1 year you have to plan around. You can restructure other deals, backload cap hits on other free agents, etc. to make it work.

I also don't see someone trading a high draft pick for a guy like Schultz if hes making top money at his position, it just doesnt make sense to. Cooper only netted us a 5th, Bobby Wagner just got released. It's tough to move these guys in the offseason with big money attached to them at a time when cash is king. Teams would rather keep their picks and spend that FA money on other players instead of go all in on an overpaid TE.

Plus if you get in the habit of doing these sign and trade deals you're going to eat a lot of dead money and guys are going to start to be hesitant in resigning.

I like the way you're thinking outside the box here, I'm just not sure it's realistic as a repeatable model.