Is a team wrong to use the Franchise Tag?

[Diehardblues]

I read the 1st paragraph, skipped the 2nd. I know exactly how these deals work. But if it was so simple and sweet, why wouldnt EVERY team lock up their guys after 3 years? Wh benefits from this? Especially when... and tri-ust me, this is where this is headed, Micah signs an extension right now for 5 years 240 million with 160 million guaranteed.

Then in 3 years from now, Micah is the 10th highest paid defender so he says Im not coming to camp (Martin) until you give me more money?

So my question about who is benefitting from this was really rhetorical.
Point being, the CBA spells out the rules to which the teams and players play by.

Yes. And those rules are in place to govern the league. And does on the most part very well. But there is a very small segment of the most talented which are in a position to challenge.

If the owners always stood firm it would end. Any idea why the owners are standing more firm. Therein lies the answer.

 

[Diehardblues]

Why doesn't every team lock up their players after 3 years? Ask them. But if you think the Martin hold out was the same as Lamb's, you really do need to read the 2nd paragraph. It's not complicated at all. There are real life examples available for everyone to see. Just look at the Trevor Lawrence contract. It's exactly what my 2nd paragraph points out. You keep bringing up the CBA, and he's doing nothing to violate the CBA money wise. absolutely nothing. He is not asking for his rookie contract to be more money. Nor would he ever get more money in his rookie deal even if he had 2500 yards receiving. Rookie deals are written in stone.

Right. He’s just negotiating his 2nd contract early. Rookie contracts are set in stone.

 

[TwentyOne]

The union and the owners both agreed to terms on a franchise tag, when it can be used, and the amount a player is to be paid if the tag is used. The players and owners agreed, that taking the top 5 salaries at a position averaged out is fair for ALL players. This tag protects the players from a ridiculously low offer from a team and protects team from unreasonable demands from a player.

The most important part f this, is that both PLAYERS and owners agreed to this process.

So why is it that if a team uses the tag on a player that they are deemed as evil? In any union, the contract is simply the rules that both sides my pay by... so what is the problem here?

Why do so many of you view the owners as mistreating a player in someway if they use the tag?

I doubt that the owners and the nflpa unanimously agreed to the FT. What the nflpa and owners agreed to is the CBA. Thats a difference.

There are many things the nflpa wants to have, and there are a lot of things the owners want to have. In the end its a compromise.

Maybe owners insisted on the FT where the nflpa didnt want it. But the owners were willing to agree to something else which was very important to the nflpa. So the nflpa was giving in on the FT.

Then also not every player agrees to what the nflpa does.


So who knows what is the real reason for the bad rep the FT gets. I tried to give some reasons for the situation.

IMO the FT is a very good thing for a player. And i dont understand the bad rep it gets from players.

 

[Reid1boys]

You continue to use the extreme examples to support your opinion but it actually falls more in the middle.

Theres been several franchises this era who have won or even played for Super Bowls without a Mahomes or Brady.

Wait...you mean like the Falcons? Showed up, waved at everyone, lost, and went back into their hole.

No kidding, read my posts. I said that, and I dismiss all of that "Success." I don't care about 1 hit wonders.

 

[Reid1boys]

Why doesn't every team lock up their players after 3 years? Ask them. But if you think the Martin hold out was the same as Lamb's, you really do need to read the 2nd paragraph. It's not complicated at all. There are real life examples available for everyone to see. Just look at the Trevor Lawrence contract. It's exactly what my 2nd paragraph points out. You keep bringing up the CBA, and he's doing nothing to violate the CBA money wise. absolutely nothing. He is not asking for his rookie contract to be more money. Nor would he ever get more money in his rookie deal even if he had 2500 yards receiving. Rookie deals are written in stone.

I guess I'm making to many assumptions in what I'm writing. I'll say it again, I know how it works. My comment about the Cba Is that those are the rules. Lamb is in fact, under contract, right now. But he's skipping work, isn't he?

 

[Reid1boys]

I doubt that the owners and the nflpa unanimously agreed to the FT. What the nflpa and owners agreed to is the CBA. Thats a difference.

There are many things the nflpa wants to have, and there are a lot of things the owners want to have. In the end its a compromise.

Maybe owners insisted on the FT where the nflpa didnt want it. But the owners were willing to agree to something else which was very important to the nflpa. So the nflpa was giving in on the FT.

Then also not every player agrees to what the nflpa does.


So who knows what is the real reason for the bad rep the FT gets. I tried to give some reasons for the situation.

IMO the FT is a very good thing for a player. And i dont understand the bad rep it gets from players.

I am on the bargaining committee for my union....I know exactly how contracts work. And whet all people in a union agree on specifics or not is irrelevant. The FT is part of their contract, she players like it or not.

 

[Reid1boys]

Yes. And those rules are in place to govern the league. And does on the most part very well. But there is a very small segment of the most talented which are in a position to challenge.

If the owners always stood firm it would end. Any idea why the owners are standing more firm. Therein lies the answer.

I've been saying forever they should stand firm. You see owners have something on their side that the players don't.......time. Lamb has a small window. The Jones family is playing the long game....like 30, 40, 50 year game as that family will likely own this team for 60 more years.

 

[KingCorcoran]

I dont care if it is early. There is a reason the CBA has the AGREED upon terms for 1st contracts. The players wanted this, and this is what they got. Now, years later we get to hear this whining about "Out performing" their deal. Sorry, no such thing. They are getting paid EXACTLY what the CBA calls for. The players want to have 1 set of rules for 99% of the players and then have the 1% get to have a separate set of rules.

Th current CBA was ratified by the players before Lamb was an NFL player. Obviously veteran players wouldn’t continue to agree to a salary cap if rookies were going to take all the salary available. And since you can’t vote on the CBA until after you’ve signed a contract the vets are going to agree to what is best for them. Now the highly regarded college players, the ones who then become 1st round draft pick, will have banked NIL monies and will be in a better position to consider whether or not they want to sign with the team that drafts them, or wait for the draft the next year.

if you’re a top college receiver and you’re drafted by the Bengals, Cowboys, or 49ers in 2025, you may want to think hard before signing a deal. Everyone is now aware of those teams’ willingness to acquiesce to top receivers salary demands.

 

[big dog cowboy]

how did tagging Dak hurt them> Id argue it was great for them. They ended up with a 5 year deal, with the tag year. The deal was very team friendly the last 2 years.... as far as pay goes.

Are you kidding me??? It put Dak into the top 5 highest paid QB conversation.

Tagging him was a disaster. Huge HUGE mistake. He hadn't done anything to prove he was worth that kind of money. He still hasn't only now he will end up with a deal making him the highest paid player in the league.

 

[Diehardblues]

Wait...you mean like the Falcons? Showed up, waved at everyone, lost, and went back into their hole.

No kidding, read my posts. I said that, and I dismiss all of that "Success." I don't care about 1 hit wonders.

Again, you are using the extremes . Would you like a list of teams that have had more success this era ?

 

[Diehardblues]

I've been saying forever they should stand firm. You see owners have something on their side that the players don't.......time. Lamb has a small window. The Jones family is playing the long game....like 30, 40, 50 year game as that family will likely own this team for 60 more years.

Yep but why aren’t most standing firm . Therein lies the answer.

 

[Reid1boys]

Th current CBA was ratified by the players before Lamb was an NFL player. Obviously veteran players wouldn’t continue to agree to a salary cap if rookies were going to take all the salary available. And since you can’t vote on the CBA until after you’ve signed a contract the vets are going to agree to what is best for them. Now the highly regarded college players, the ones who then become 1st round draft pick, will have banked NIL monies and will be in a better position to consider whether or not they want to sign with the team that drafts them, or wait for the draft the next year.

if you’re a top college receiver and you’re drafted by the Bengals, Cowboys, or 49ers in 2025, you may want to think hard before signing a deal. Everyone is now aware of those teams’ willingness to acquiesce to top receivers salary demands.

lol.... when Lamb signed his rookie deal, he agreed to the CBA.

 

[Reid1boys]

Are you kidding me??? It put Dak into the top 5 highest paid QB conversation.

Tagging him was a disaster. Huge HUGE mistake. He hadn't done anything to prove he was worth that kind of money. He still hasn't only now he will end up with a deal making him the highest paid player in the league.

no, im not kidding you. Dak was in the same position with his first deal as he is now. You are going to pay me... pretty simple when a QB wins. I guess Lawrence, Herbert, and any other QB finishing their first deal and have not been in a SB has done nothng to earn the big money?

 

[Reid1boys]

Again, you are using the extremes . Would you like a list of teams that have had more success this era ?

nope, weve been down this yellow brick how many times? You have what you think is success, just like I have my thoughts on the QB, and neither of us is going to change the others mind.

 

[Reid1boys]

Yep but why aren’t most standing firm . Therein lies the answer.

so is not standing firm helping those teams? If you are the Chiefs currently, or the pats before them.... yep, they were genius for standing firm, GENIUS I tell you.

Whats that saying, something about insanity??? well, hows caving to players been working out for us?

 

[Diehardblues]

so is not standing firm helping those teams? If you are the Chiefs currently, or the pats before them.... yep, they were genius for standing firm, GENIUS I tell you.

Whats that saying, something about insanity??? well, hows caving to players been working out for us?

Not too well. More reasons to criticize our leadership.

The bigger question remains why are they usually caving in.

 

[Diehardblues]

nope, weve been down this yellow brick how many times? You have what you think is success, just like I have my thoughts on the QB, and neither of us is going to change the others mind.

It’s not about changing minds. It’s about establishing evidence and factual data for all to see.

Much like we see in societal issues and divisions some believe what they believe despite evidence to the contrary.

 

[darthseinfeld]

The union and the owners both agreed to terms on a franchise tag, when it can be used, and the amount a player is to be paid if the tag is used. The players and owners agreed, that taking the top 5 salaries at a position averaged out is fair for ALL players. This tag protects the players from a ridiculously low offer from a team and protects team from unreasonable demands from a player.

The most important part f this, is that both PLAYERS and owners agreed to this process.

So why is it that if a team uses the tag on a player that they are deemed as evil? In any union, the contract is simply the rules that both sides my pay by... so what is the problem here?

Why do so many of you view the owners as mistreating a player in someway if they use the tag?

You seem to be a big fan of owners

 

[Reid1boys]

It’s not about changing minds. It’s about establishing evidence and factual data for all to see.

Much like we see in societal issues and divisions some believe what they believe despite evidence to the contrary.

factual data you refuse to accept. Mahomes and Brady make what those teams appear to be the way... the right way. Except if you dont have those guys, that way wont work.

 

[Reid1boys]

You seem to be a big fan of owners

IM a fan of the team... so I am all for what is best for the team. I dont give 1 damn about the players.