Most of the phans who come here probably already know that the NFL "Franchise Tag" has decreased in value under the new collective bargaining agreement... but I am just really finding out about the actual hard numbers of the deal.
Overall decrease in the value of a franchise tag contract further complicates the relationship between Eagles management and guys like DeSean Jackson (above), and puts extra pressure on players and agents to get long-term guaranteed money deals done.
Here's how the Franchise Tag values have changed by position under the new CBA:
Running Back: This year $7.7 million.... last year, $9.6 million (a DECREASE of $1.9 million);
Wide Receiver: This year $9.4 million.... last year, $11.4 million (a DECREASE of $2 million);
Tight End: This year $5.4 million.... last year, $7.3 million (a DECREASE of $1.9 million);
Offensive Line: This year $9.4 million.... last year, $10.1 million (a DECREASE of $.7 million);
Defensive End: This year $10.6 million.... last year, $13 million (a DECREASE of $2.4 million);
Defensive Tackle: This year $7.9 million....last year $12.5 million (a DECREASE of $4.6 million);
Linebacker: This year $8.8 million.... last year, $10.1 million (a DECREASE of $1.3 million);
Cornerback: This year $10.6 million.... last year, $13.5 million (a DECREASE of $2.9 million);
Safety: This year $6.2 million.... last year, $8.8 million (a DECREASE of $2.6 million);
---and finally, the only position that sees an increase in value:
Quarterback: This year $16.1 million.... last year, $ 14.4 million (an INCREASE of $1.7 million).
Beginning this Monday (February 20, 2012), NFL teams can begin to apply the franchise tag to players. They can do so up until March 5 at 4 p.m. ET. For those that don't know, the franchise tag is a method of keeping players from hitting the open market. Previously, the franchise-tag number was generated by averaging the top-five salaries at a position to determine a number for that position.
This year, the franchise tag value will be a percentage of the overall salary cap figure for the previous five years.
Exception: The only instances this doesn't apply: when a player already made more than the franchise-tag value, or when a player receives the franchise tag for the second-straight year, in which case tagging said player would cost 120 percent of their previous base salary.
Aside from the exception above, it's clearly much more cost effective to utilize the franchise tag on a player in 2012 than it was in 2011. Wide receivers like DeSean Jackson, Dwayne Bowe and Marques Colston might not be tag candidates at $11.4 million. At $9.4 million, they certainly are.
Reports are already rolling in that Jackson will be tagged and that the team will seek to trade him once they place the tag on Jackson. Philly better be comfortable rolling with DJax if they can't find a suitor, though, because the wide receiver is a good bet to swoop in and sign his tender quickly. The $9.4 million represents more than triple what Jackson's made in his entire career thus far, and you can bet he'd like to see some guaranteed money.
"Worst case, of course, is that Philly ends up giving its top playmaker one more "contract year" at turning in a big performance before hitting free agency. $9.4 million is a lot to pay for a wideout, but it's better than (a) doling out a big contract to someone new and/or a malcontent, or (b) letting Jackson walk for nothing in return." --- Will Brinson, CBSSports.com
Am I the only one in the room right now who thinks a lot of players are just now finding out how the new CBA has devalued their franchise tag numbers? And that a lot of NFL players in general are experiencing some form of reverse "sticker shock"?
One dramatic example I can give you of this is the Jermichael Finley situation in Green Bay...
At $5.5 million, the tight end is a no-doubt-about-it franchise tag choice. Finley is upset because last year the tight end franchise tag value was $7.3 million...So Finley's reportedly ready to argue that he's actually more of a wide receiver than a tight end and should be paid a $9.4 million tag as a wide receiver, based on the number of snaps he takes from a wide receiver position. (He may want to remove the words "best tight ends in the league" from his website then.)
The Packers don't seem ready to give Finley a long-term deal yet, but they're also not willing to let him go. That same spirit prevails among Eagles management with regard to playmakers like DJax... and the surprising reduction in franchise tag values is adding resistance and resentment to the mix.
Look...Like I said..I luv Djaxs style and grit...but he is absolutly NOT worth jepordizing the franchise for huge money for a guy who basically has one attribute worth some more money..speed...he has not learned how to beat tight coverages or to get open when his QB is in trouble. His route running is average at best. Why would you pay huge amounts of money for an attribute that will obviously fade over time? Learn how to play WR Djax..and then talk to us about a huge raise....
Regardless of whatever we do with Djax I really want all these issues settled before training camp. I want NO distractions that could be used as an excuse going into the season. Wipe the slate clean and get doen to the business of what it takes to bring a SB to this city..so I don't havta listen to Hmmmm or Buttsey or HisBetterHalf or Sweet Cheeks or whatever he's calling himself at the moment....thank yew very much!
@Birdcrazy you know, if desean stays, you can be prepared for him to hold out again.
Then get rid of him...simple as that....
You know when a player tweets like that - it sounds like one of two things:::
1) He thinks it's a foregone conclusion and marketing himself to the fans alone. It's a passive aggressive move against a franchise that exemplifies putting himself first in all instances.
2) A very deep person that knows how the business side of the NFL works and making a poor attempt at humor in a fluid and possible stressful situation. This same deep person will play every play with passion and purpose and strive to win, no matter if an Eagle, or whatever team he plays for.
You be the judge....
IMO - I am leaning to the first.
it made me very uncomfortable, this tweet, yesterday. i lean towards the first idea as well. asante is shrewd as a business man. no way does he have the wit to act like your second hypothesis. @donpardo
Wesley Crusher resigned his commission to dwell on "different plains of existance"...Methinks Kyle Busch came from one of those other plains of existance.....On Franchise tag...still an enormous raise for Dajx regardless of the obvious devaluation under the new contract...again, this fan does not support paying Jackson #1 receivers money..simply...because he ain't a true #1 under historical diefinitions...I like he grit but he showed glimpses of "sulking" last year..and until he ups his ante as a WR by learning soem of the nuances of the position...he ain't worth a huge contract..dem is da facts as I see it ladies....
This is innaresting: https://twitter.com/#!/Thepresidentcb/statuses/170989753372639232
Seriously needs a CB. Already a need in place and looks like Ronde bArber is going to retire. In my opinion this is a good team to 'deal' with. Fairly strong Northeast connections and lots of needs at positions the Birds seem to have excesses.
Heck, Te'o is here - actually made a tackle - all by himself.
Well, it is most interesting that Asante is indicating that he believes that he WILL be traded...That being said, Tampa is a good spot, they have tons of cap room to pay out the years remaining on his fairly reasonable salary, and they definitely need a CB...My question about them is, with a new head coach coming in, how far away from contention do they believe they are, because if they think they are far away, I can't see any reason to deal what is sure to be a valuable draft pick for a 31 year old...@Palm Feathers
OK - you win - I'm sticking out my tongue at you - AGAIN !!!
Gotta run for a little while - "I'll Be Back".
I ain't from Philly or the surrounding area... @Palm Feathers
she's a Philly girl too - hmmmmmmmmmm.
What article?...There's a huge difference between $5 millz and $7 millz... @Palm Feathers
OK - $7 mil.
I think you're working for my ex-wife - love her dearly to this day but that girl could argue about the color of a green light.....
Forgot to say to you---
Your article the other night - very nicely done !!!
Per year?...I'm not so sure he would settle for that, remember, he's got Drew Rosenhaus whispering in his ear...I'd offer him around $7 millz per year... @Palm Feathers
Make him happy to what expense though?...What would his salary figure look like?... @Palm Feathers
If I were the King of all there was to be King of -
I'd keep D-Jack - make him happy. All things considered for a man-child he has behaved fairly well.
I feel he makes the opposing D react - just because he is on the field - let alone whether or not he puts up numbers.
No, it's a perfectly valid point...And I don't doubt that Howie and Andy could even trade back and make a lot out of that #5 pick with all the teams wanting RG3, etc...I'm just playing devil's advocate, don't be discouraged...@Palm Feathers
I just based this one on that point=thing the NFL has for draft values. #5 pick = 1700. That's just under our #1 and BOTH #2's. Seemed like everyone was talking 2-round pick for Asante anyway.
Ahhh - I shouldn't waste our time on this because it's not gonna happen anyway.
I'd say that would be paying too much for that pick...Too much risk for us in exchange for two bona fide players...What if that #5 pick is a bust, we're screwed!...If it works out then we only got 1 star to replace 2... @Palm Feathers
Yah - we were actually thinking they were going to have trouble finding a HC that would accept $10.00 per hour to start. Not real big spenders here.
On a serious note > my question / 'Fantasy trade would have been a Samuel / DJack package for the #5 pick. Is that paying too mucj for that pick? Too little?
Just some mental "wanking-xxx anyway - won't happen.
@Palm Feathers hello
Mornin'... @Palm Feathers
Another great article Lupes...
Pertaining to your earlier post about the concussion mob, I really think it will end up just being a push for a "player fund." As you mentioned, medical science didn't know about the dangers of concussions in previous years. And even if the players could somehow skirt that, then who do they sue? The NFL, the coaches, the training staff, the other player who hit him? Then you have the entire career of the player to look at, from pee-wee right up to retirement. Who gets assessed what portion of the liability? It could and would turn into a circle of finger pointing and blame shifting. Then you have to look at the ramifications of allowing players to successfully sue for injuries. Once the precedent is set that players can sue for concussion, the door is opened for any type of injury. Players could sue for shortened careers due to bad hits, etc. It's Pandora's box and it is best to leave it closed.
@n.akuatuta Some girls give me money..