DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Players receiving the Franchise Tag

Yeah, sometimes it is hard to find certain threads. And again........I wasn't ragging on you. Who knows.......maybe this topic deserves it's own thread?

I would say it does. This is a DUMB move by the Bengals. You don't tag a borderline guy (who has upside) who hasn't solidified a position yet on the line. For such a cheap organization, the Bengals sure do love spending Franchise Tag money on so so players.

I can't believe this. I couldnt imagine him being hard to resign in the first place say nothing about tagging him and completely over paying for a so-so player.

lol, I half wonder if Phil let it leak that he was going to try to sign their other Guard this year... and they bought it and panicked

No it was a smart move by the Bengals. Willie Anderson isn't getting any younger. He didn't play a full season last year. He has to be replaced eventually.
Levi Jones hasn't played been %100 for 2 years now.
Stacy Andrews was a raw prospect drafted by the Bengals. Now he's gotten to the point where the Bengals are looking for him to be the heir apparent to Anderson.
Why would the Bengals turn their head away from Andrews and overpay for a free agent RT?
You can't have enough continunity on the offensive line.

No one's disputing that they need the guy and that the investing in continuity on the offensive line is important... just that they did it with a franchise tag, whiich designates Top 5 $ at the position for a slightly above average player.... which is not smart when they could save money actually giving him a solid contract and be done with it all... that's what seems stupid

I always thought that Stieny was better,, wonder why they tag this guy and let stieny get away? Confusing

The Bengals let Steiney get away cause they already committed upper tier money to their bookend tackles. The Bengals had to resign some of their own free agents(i.e DE Robert Geathers) on the other side of the ball.
On the Bengals o-lines the OT's are always gonna be paid more than the OG's.Its not just the Bengals that do it that way.
Its harder to find bookend OT's than OG's...Guards seem to move alot more in the NFL via free agency.....

Thanks playa

Should be of no surprise.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d806be830&template=with-video&confirm=true


Chiefs place franchise tag on DE Allen
NFL.com


The Chiefs have placed its franchise tag on defensive end Jared Allen, according to NFL Network's Adam Schefter. The move could keep Allen in Kansas City for one more year, but it will likely be the last one for Allen.

"If I play under the franchise tag, this will be my last year with the Chiefs," Allen told NFL.com at the Pro Bowl. "I would like to be a part of (the team) but there is a business aspect of this, too."

Allen was suspended for the first four games of the 2007 and later had it trimmed to only two games. Allen responded by having one of the best seasons of his career. Allen registered a career-high 15.5 sacks in only 14 games and almost single-handedly won a few games for the Chiefs with his defense, to earn his first Pro Bowl invitation -- the first for a Chiefs defensive player in five years.

The franchise designation will guarantee that Allen is paid $8.88 million next season, the average salary of the five highest-paid defensive ends. Teams can name a player an exclusive franchise tag, committing to a minimum offer of the average of the top five salaries at a player's position, a 20 percent raise from his 2007 salary or the average of the top five salaries at his position -- whichever is highest. That keeps other clubs from talking to the player

Profootballtalk.com is reporting (unreferenced) that Allen was Non-Exclusively franchised.

So anyone who wants him can sign him, but the Chiefs get two first round picks out of the deal.

Quote:

---

Andrews helped anchor an offensive line that allowed just 17 sacks last season. Only New Orleans gave up fewer sacks, surrendering 16 in 2007.

---

I did not know they gave up so few sacks...

That is really good considering how many times they had to drop Palmer back to pass to make up for their horrid defense.

NUTZ....
Guess I'll have to change my signature now...

Quote:

---

"If I play under the franchise tag, this will be my last year with the Chiefs," Allen told NFL.com at the Pro Bowl. "I would like to be a part of (the team) but there is a business aspect of this, too."

---

I'm not sure how to take this, I understand somebody wanting to test the market, & get the best contract he can possibley get, but common he's gonna get paid 8.8 mil for one season to stay with the team he's with...8.8 million for one year, Yes there is a business aspect of this leauge and 8.8 mil for one year is a pretty good business deal with more to follow.

I've heard a few story's about him which might lead me to believing he could have a me first attitude, If this is true than he best go elsewhere.

J/C

Andrews' tag may be end for Smith


BY MARK CURNUTTE | MCURNUTTE@ENQUIRER.COM

The announcement Monday that the Bengals are using their franchise tag designation on offensive lineman Stacy Andrews could spell the end of Justin Smith's time in Cincinnati.

The offseason decisions to retool a roster do not happen in a vacuum. They are related. Unable to reach a multi-year deal with Smith, the Bengals removed the tie that bound him last season and placed it on Andrews this year.

By choosing to place the franchise designation - which severely limits an unrestricted free agent's ability to move to another team - on Andrews, the Bengals appear to be dropping a major clue that they are moving to a three-lineman defensive scheme and are worried about the health of offensive right tackle Willie Anderson.

Smith, the No. 4 overall pick in the 2001 draft, was the Bengals' franchise player in 2007. He earned $8.64 million, the average of the top five defensive end salaries in 2006, but to use the tag on him again this year would have cost the Bengals 120 percent - $10.372 million for one year - of what he was paid last season.

A phone message left Monday for Jim Steiner, Smith's agent, was not returned.

Andrews has evolved from fourth-round pick and backup offensive lineman to indispensable. The Bengals essentially showed Andrews the money and will pay him a one-year tender of $7.455 million, the average of the top five offensive linemen's salaries, if they can't reach a long-term deal.

The Bengals gain the right to match any offer sheet Andrews might sign with another team in free agency. If the Bengals were to decline to match an offer sheet Andrews might sign with another team, they would receive first-round draft picks from that team for 2008 and 2009.

Andrews started 14 games in 2007, 11 at right tackle in place of the injured Willie Anderson. Andrews started the first three games at left tackle. If Anderson is healthy in 2008, he more than likely would be the starter. There's the possibility Andrews could be the sixth man on the offensive line.

"I'm not worried about that at all," Andrews said Monday of his potential role with the Bengals in 2008. He spoke by cell phone from his hometown of Camden, Ark.

"They have something in store for me, whether it's at guard or tackle. Whatever is going to help the team I'll do."

Anderson said coach Marvin Lewis called him over the weekend to tell him of the club's plan to designate Andrews as the franchise player. Andrews said he found out Monday afternoon when reached on the phone by Bengals public relations director Jack Brennan.

"It's smart business sense for the Bengals to lock up their future," Anderson said Monday of the decision to tag Andrews.

"If you look around the NFL and the playoffs, the Giants and other teams had depth on their offensive line and were able to rotate guys and have other guys fill-in for injuries."

Anderson said he plans to play three more years.

"If I have three productive years left in me, it's still smart to get young guys sewed up," he said.

Andrews has 17 starts and 47 games of NFL experience. He played in just five games in college at Ole Miss in 2003 after coming out for football in 2002 for the first time.

"Stacy has been a productive young player for us," Lewis said in a statement released by the club.

"He has shown the flexibility to start and play well at a number of different positions on our line. This move helps us keep our core players together, and it gives us an opportunity to continue negotiating for a longer-term contract with Stacy."

Andrews called the designation "an honor. I was hoping I was going to be able to get a (long-term) deal. I am excited, man. I've worked hard. I'm going to keep working hard."

His brother, Shawn, is a Pro Bowl offensive tackle for the Eagles.

Now Stacy Andrews, at least in salary, has joined his brother's elite company.

"The franchise option is designed to help a team retain the rights to a top player," Bengals vice president Troy Blackburn said in a release. "The players' union supports it because it guarantees that player a salary commensurate with what he has accomplished."

The NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement permits a new agreement between Andrews and the Bengals to be reached at any time prior to July 15.

web page

I found out he was a me-first type of guy just by reading his quote in this thread: "If I play under the franchise tag, this will be my last year with the Chiefs"

I don't really think it's a me first type of thing to want the best for you and your family. In this case I think it's a long term deal. There is a lot more security and piece of mind in a long term deal.

As for the 8 mil. That sounds great to us but he would probably make that anyway if he signed long term with the signing bonus.

I don't think the money is the problem it's the lack of commitment by the team for more than 1 year.

Quote:

---

It's funny that you guys keep bringing up the money.If it was about the money I don't think Allen would have a problem with the situation. It's more about the Chiefs not making a commitment to him long term.

---

Obviously we dont know JA like you do, but what contract are the chiefs offering him, $$ / Years of contract. I ask becuase in most cases...an bye that I mean not all but normally the team offers some sort of contract to the player, they go back and for a few weeks / months and end up not getting a contrat done so the team in order to keep this player from going to FA the team tags them which is good for the team they keep the player and can continue working on a contract and is good for the player because they are paid at a high average of that position for a year. So i guess the only way we really know if it's the money or the stability of his family is to know if the Chiefs offered a contract and for how long.

Ravens franchise Suggs at LB; he says he should be DE

With no long-term contract in sight before Thursday's deadline, the Baltimore Ravens applied the team's franchise tag to linebacker Terrell Suggs on Tuesday.

The interesting twist to Suggs' franchising is whether or not it's being done at the right position. The Ravens franchised Suggs as a linebacker, which gives him a one-year tender offer at $8.065 million. Suggs claims he played more than 50 percent of the Ravens defensive snaps at defensive end, which has an $8.879 million tender offer.

Suggs is expected to challenge the designation in order to have a complete breakdown of the defensive snaps to determine if he should be an end or a linebacker. If the league and the NFL Players Association determines more than 50 percent of the snaps for Suggs happened at defensive end, a ruling may allow him to get the defensive end designation and get a raise of $814,000.

Regardless, the mission of both sides is to get a long-term deal before mid-July to prevent a holdout.

"I talked to [general manager] Ozzie [Newsome] earlier [Monday], and he said they would put the tag on me [Tuesday]," Suggs told The Baltimore Sun. "I'm disappointed because I really wanted a long-term deal, and I think I earned it. But this also keeps me in a Ravens uniform, and this is just another way of eventually getting it done.

"I'm a Raven at heart. That's my identity," Suggs told the newspaper. "I started my career here in Baltimore and want to end it here in Baltimore."

Newsome is hopeful a long-term deal with Suggs will get done.

"We will continue to negotiate with [Suggs] with the intention of signing him to a long-term contract," Newsome said in a statement released by the team. "He is one of our best players, and our success with re-signing our best players is very good. We've done this with players like Jonathan Ogden, Ray Lewis, Todd Heap, Ed Reed and Chris McAlister -- and that was after we franchised Chris."

Suggs has evolved into one of the league's most dangerous pass-rushers whether he is blitzing a linebacker or rushing from defensive end with one hand on the ground when the ball is snapped. The Ravens didn't want to lose him, and even though they don't like to franchise their top unsigned players, they didn't want to lose him to free agency.

Unable to reach long-term deal, Colts franchise tag Clark

After failing to reach a long-term agreement with Dallas Clark, the Indianapolis Colts placed the franchise tag on their tight end on Tuesday.

Negotiations with Clark, whose contract voided after the 2007 season, heated up toward the end of the season, but without resolution. The Colts instead reached agreement on a five-year, $37.5 million contract with safety Bob Sanders, the NFL's Defensive Player of the Year. Talks with Clark resumed in the past week, but with no deal in sight, the Colts felt it necessary to designate him as their franchise player.

The one-year franchise tender for a tight end is $4.522 million. If any team tries to sign him, they would have to surrender two first-round draft choices, which is unlikely. Clark is the second tight end to be franchised this offseason. The Eagles did the same with L.J. Smith.

The Colts and Clark have until mid-July to try to reach a long-term deal. With the franchising of Clark, six players have been given the franchise designation before Thursday's deadline. Any team wishing to franchise or transition a player has to record that transaction by 4 p.m. ET Thursday.

The Colts locked up another starting offensive player on Tuesday by reaching a five-year deal with guard Ryan Lilja.

Terms of the deal weren't available, but the franchising of Clark and the re-signing of Lilja leaves guard Jake Scott and defensive end Josh Thomas, who started seven games in 2007, as the team's only unsigned unrestricted free agents.

Lilya, 26, is one of the great finds of the Colts over the past several seasons. He was cut by the Chiefs as an undrafted rookie in 2004. The Colts claimed him on waivers, and he's started 43 games at guard over the past four seasons. Re-signing either Lilja or Scott was considered one of the team's top priority this offseason. Scott and Lilja each played close to 100 percent of the Colts' offensive snaps in 2007.

Corey Williams Tagged

Packers use franchise tag on Williams
By Tom Silverstein
Wednesday, Feb 20 2008, 04:59 PM
Green Bay -- Choosing to protect themselves against the almost certain loss of defensive tackle Corey Williams in free agency, the Green Bay Packers designated him as their franchise player Wednesday.

The deadline for using franchise and transition designations is Thursday, but the Packers went ahead and filed the appropriate paperwork with the NFL Wednesday and the move showed up on the league's personnel wire late this afternoon, according to a league source.

The move all but takes Williams off the market come the start of free agency Feb. 29 and allows the Packers more time to try to work out a long-term deal with their starting tackle. As a franchise player, Williams is free to negotiate with other teams in the NFL, but if a team signs him to a deal and the Packers don't match the offer, the team must give up two first-round draft picks for Williams.

In exchange for having his free agency rights diminished, Williams receives a minimum one-year deal of $6.363 million, which is the average of the salary (in salary cap dollars) of the top five players at his position. Williams has the option of signing the deal right away, thereby guaranteeing him the money regardless of whether the Packers cut him or to not sign it and sit out mini-camps and training camp waiting for a long-term deal.

Until Williams signs a contract, he cannot participate in any on-field activities with the club.

Tight end Bubba Franks received the transition tag in 2005 and missed all of the mini-camps and four weeks of training camp while waiting for an acceptable long-term deal. The chances of Williams missing the same amount of time depend on how far the two sides are apart in negotiations at this point.

The fact the Packers used the franchise designation indicates they aren't close to signing Williams.

Had Williams gone to the free agent market, chances are he would have hit it pretty big. There is a big market for defensive tackles who can rush the passer and Williams has 14 sacks over the last two seasons.

Update: The Packers announced the move a short time ago and released this short statement from general manager Ted Thompson:

"Corey is a good young football player and has been a consistent performer for our team."

In the release, the Packers did not say whether they made Williams an "exclusive" franchise player, which means he would not be allowed to negotiate with other teams in exchange for receiving the average salary (in salary cap dollars) of the top five players in 2008. That figure is determined after free agency is completed and the new salaries are added in.

Chances are the Packers did not go that direction. They'd gladly take two first-round picks for Williams if someone offered it.

Corey Williams getting hit with the tag hurts-- he was one guy i was hoping we would make a run at.

Williams was the guy I really liked in FA. This is bad news for us. Who is really left in FA that can make a real impact on the DL?

Rats!

Quote:

---

Corey Williams getting hit with the tag hurts-- he was one guy i was hoping we would make a run at.

---

Yep, that sucks!

The only one i see left that i would consider starting material would be Tommy Kelly if he's healthy. I guy i would consider for depth would be Randy Starks.

Dumb move. If someone gives him a poison pill, the Steelers get nothing. This also means Faneca will probably see the open market...

Steelers tender offer of nearly $7 million to Starks

By John Clayton
ESPN.com

Updated: February 20, 2008, 6:19 PM ET

The Steelers have been trying to work a deal with right tackle Max Starks, but instead of losing him in free agency Pittsburgh has chosen to give him its transition tag.

The Steelers gave Starks a one-year tender offer of $6.895 million. Come March, if another team wants to sign Starks, the Steelers would have seven days to match an offer.

Unlike the franchise tag, the transition tag does not carry any draft choice compensation if the team that transitions a player decides to let him go.

Two years ago, the Seahawks placed the transition tag on guard Steve Hutchinson. The Vikings inserted two "poison pill" clauses in the contract, and the Seahawks did not match. They came back and signed wide receiver Nate Burleson from the Vikings, who was a restricted free agent that year.

Senior writer John Clayton covers the NFL for ESPN.com.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3255502

Yes, stupid move. Unless, of course, there's a gentleman's agreement not to poison pill the Steelers. In which case, that team we all hate are guilty of collusion.

With IMO the overuse of the franchise tag this off season I can't help but wonder what the Browns strategy is at this point.

My initial thought was that the Browns would try to bring in as many as 3 players on the defense, but any ideas they may have had to that end seems to have been shot in the ass IMHO. Then you come too, what is going to be out there is going to be over priced to say the least. To some degree the LB position remains pretty much uneffected by the franchise tag, but the area we need to address the most the D line has seen player after player recieve the tag. It don't look as good as it did, to say the least.

I still think the Browns will try to get some sort of upgrade on the line, but nothing near what I had hoped for. If it comes down to it I hope if the Browns get desperate enough to over pay they back load the contract and cut the guy when better talent becomes available.

As I see it at this moment the Browns are nearing the point where whether they want to or not, their going to be forced to make a decision on DA. If we can't get D Line help through FA then we have got to consider a trade or DA for draft picks.

I was solidly in the corner of holding onto DA, but the FA class doesn't look good, and a trade may be the only real option left. So that brings you back to DA IMHO..


Brown to the Bone

B, you have a point,, some awefully good guys have been Tagged and will just not be available for us to go after.. But then again, look at the Smith boys last year. They almost flew under the radar. Both did a decent job but frankly, there wasn't depth and there wasn't a dependable 3rd guy,,

It's kinda like Savage said on the Jimmy Donovan interview thread, beyond the Smiths on the Dline, it's up in the air.. (paraphrasing a bit, but you get the drift)

So, as much as I'd like a Haynesworth level talent, maybe, and I bet this is true, maybe Savage and his guys have thier eye on another "under the radar" type player or three.. That would be my guess anyway.

This may be too much homerism, but I trust Savage and his thinking.. The guy has a handle on things now..

Looks like someobdsy closed the lid on the cookie jar this year.

I can honestly see Savage adding a few piece via FA, maybe a LB, a WR CB and a DL...than in the draft adding a couple DL men a RB a CB, I dont think with the talent left FA by itself is gonna improve our D or the Draft bye itself is gonna improve our D I think it might be a combination of both to improve our D.....Thats improve our D there is not enough availble to bring our D into the top 5 in the leuage, maybe in 2009 .

Oh I trust Savage, but the pickings are getting thinner by the day, and while the Smiths where good pickups we have to look to move onto or up too the next level of player, and that player isn't out there for us to even go after, they have all been tagged.. I agree that most of the players we have targeted are likely to be solid not great, but I think we had a burning desire to land at least one elite D Linemen, that no longer is on the market. The franchise tag has removed any hope of the Browns landing anything better then Smith quality, and I for one find that disturbing to what I had hoped we would have been able to get done this off season. Lets put it this way we needed to land an elite player to make the Smiths seems better then they are, now we won't be able to do that. Our options are limited at this point...

I don't know what the Browns will do, but at this point any hopes of landing an elite player for the D line are gone, and now I look to what is still left to be explored.. Trade or draft ?? It's not what I had hoped for. I have to say i am shocked to see so many players recieving the franchise tag.. I wonder if this isn't the most it has ever been used??

Brown to the Bone