|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,064 |
Get this settled soon, I hope. Can't always get what you want. C'mon, Mack. 
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,301
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,301 |
Quote:
Quote:
Transition tag just seems toothless to me.
If we decide to match whoever/whatever and forcefully make Alex stay, then yes... that is quite toothless.
Since I am not educated, can someone tell me if the offer that we have the chance go match or whatever, that its the offer that Mack and his agent decides which one to take (considering if multiple offers from different teams come in for Alex)?
I would say yes because that would be really, really shady if the Browns could take the lowest amount offer and match it, and force Alex to stay here. VERY SHADY!
Great question... The fair thing would be to let the player choose which offer. I don't think there would be a magic formula for determining which deal is better when they are different in duration. There is too much in the areas of age and injury history that would seem to dictate that and not just $ per year.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Easy answer: Mack would not sign an offer he does not like and instead sign the transition offer or re-negotiate with the Browns.
I still think "fair" market price will be around 8mil/season for him
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Transition tag just seems toothless to me.
If we decide to match whoever/whatever and forcefully make Alex stay, then yes... that is quite toothless.
Since I am not educated, can someone tell me if the offer that we have the chance go match or whatever, that its the offer that Mack and his agent decides which one to take (considering if multiple offers from different teams come in for Alex)?
I would say yes because that would be really, really shady if the Browns could take the lowest amount offer and match it, and force Alex to stay here. VERY SHADY!
Great question... The fair thing would be to let the player choose which offer. I don't think there would be a magic formula for determining which deal is better when they are different in duration. There is too much in the areas of age and injury history that would seem to dictate that and not just $ per year.
Mack has to agree to a contract himself (therefore he chooses the contract) and then the Browns match that contract.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
 Ty
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,301
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,301 |
Thanks guys... makes perfect sense. He signs the offer he likes the most and we respond.
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Quote:
Quote:
Transition tag just seems toothless to me.
If we decide to match whoever/whatever and forcefully make Alex stay, then yes... that is quite toothless.
Since I am not educated, can someone tell me if the offer that we have the chance go match or whatever, that its the offer that Mack and his agent decides which one to take (considering if multiple offers from different teams come in for Alex)?
I would say yes because that would be really, really shady if the Browns could take the lowest amount offer and match it, and force Alex to stay here. VERY SHADY!
They merely have to match whatever deal that Alex signs. He may get several offers, but the only one that matters is the one that he signs, the others are meaningless..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Ty
With 56 mil of cap space, it's looking daunting for any team that wants him as I would bet that Farmer and company are willing to match a high numbered contract. It's puts them in great position at the expense of the player's position/wants.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Quote:
Ty
With 56 mil of cap space, it's looking daunting for any team that wants him as I would bet that Farmer and company are willing to match a high numbered contract. It's puts them in great position at the expense of the player's position/wants.
Yeah, it's a nightmare for other teams. They can offer him a big chunk of money, but they can't offer more than they are willing to pay because what happens if the Browns don't match?
Let's say that at team puts a 20 mil a year guaranteed on a 5 year contract on the table for Mack and he signs it.
I doubt the browns match that so the offering team has to be prepared to make good on the offer.
That forces them to be reasonable. They can't do a nutty deal because they may have to pay it.
It's a nice check and balance thing.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
j/c:
I was really hoping we could work out a long term deal w/Mack. I am not a real big fan of tagging players.
I really like Mack and wanted to keep him, but $10--$11 million is a lot for a center, especially when he can walk next year.
Ward? It seems it would have been smarter to tag Ward. Once again, I am wondering if they really want to keep him.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Quote:
j/c:
I was really hoping we could work out a long term deal w/Mack. I am not a real big fan of tagging players.
I really like Mack and wanted to keep him, but $10--$11 million is a lot for a center, especially when he can walk next year.
Ward? It seems it would have been smarter to tag Ward. Once again, I am wondering if they really want to keep him.
It's not a franchise tag. it's a transition tag. The rules are different. If he signs an offer letter iwth another team, we have the opportunity to match the offer. And it's likely that it won't be at the level of a franchise tag and it's likely to be a multi year deal., Probably 4 or 5 years. So that would take him to a point where we may not want him anymore..
it's the perfect solution.. He gets to test the market, find his worth and if we agree, we match the offer and have him for a number of years going forward..
OUTSTANDING MOVE.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,161
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,161 |
Quote:
j/c:
I was really hoping we could work out a long term deal w/Mack. I am not a real big fan of tagging players.
I really like Mack and wanted to keep him, but $10--$11 million is a lot for a center, especially when he can walk next year.
Ward? It seems it would have been smarter to tag Ward. Once again, I am wondering if they really want to keep him.
Vers, it is a little different than a Franchise tag.
• A club can designate one franchise player or one transition player in any given year.
• The salary level offer by a player's old club determines what type of franchise player he is.
• An "exclusive" franchise player -- not free to sign with another club -- is offered a minimum of the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of April 16, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater.
• If the player is offered a minimum of the average of the top five salaries of last season at his position, or 120 percent of the player’s previous year’s salary, he becomes a “non-exclusive” franchise player and can negotiate with other clubs. His old club can match a new club's offer, or receive two first-round draft choices if it decides not to match. The signing period for non-exclusive franchise players to sign with new clubs is March 3 through November 9 (10th week of the season).
• A transition player has received a minimum offer of the average of the top 10 salaries of last season at the player's position or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater.
• A transition player designation gives the club a first-refusal right to match within seven days an offer sheet given to the player by another club after his contract expires. If the club matches, it retains the player. If it does not match, it receives no compensation. Transition players can be signed from March 3 through July 22."
Transition tag gives Farmer a little longer to negotiate a contract. The last bullet point is key. They can let Mack hit FA and match any offer. Mack may not get the 10 million desired if the highest bid is 6 million.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856 |
jc
This is certainly a good move imo,
WE know the high end of what we will pay at Center this year
Gives us an opportunity to continue to negotiate with Mack on long term deal
Allows us to focus on Ward or Byrd.
Byrd vs Ward, injury was alluded too somewhere in this thread... both have missed about the same number of games I believe.
Byrd Knows MP and his D, plus brings more to the party and I would pay a little more for him.
Yes it is a risk that we may end up with neither, but I would rather chance getting a safety than a C.... both are pro bowlers, Mack has been healthier and assuming we are looking at a rook QB, Mack is needed more.
Looking at our guard situation, that really solidifies the need in the middle, two new guards and a new center no thanks.
letting Ward walk... meh... we had to chose one or the other.
Mack said he wanted to test the FA market, well he still gets to do that,,, why would that . him off?
I still say win/win
Last edited by texaslostdawg; 03/03/14 07:51 PM.
#gmstrong
A smart person knows what to say.
A wise person knows whether or not to say it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Thanks. I don't have very much knowledge about such situations. I appreciate the education.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,831
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,831 |
Quote:
Quote:
i really dont understand letting ward walk. Both him and byrd have injury issues....but especially byrd. Not to mention we could get ward much cheaper then byrd. Also, we dont know if byrd will even come here.........big risk for a guy you are going to have to pay lots of money and he will probably be hurt much of the time.
Just so your informed....Byrd has missed 7 games in 5 years. 5 of those he missed in 2013 due to foot injuries. That's 4 years missing only 2 games. Byrd held out during camp and it was widely reported he took his time returning from injury after feeling disrespected by the Bills handling of his contract. Can't say I blame him. I wouldn't risk my contract by rushing back before I'm 100% for a team that disrespected me.
Ward has missed 10 games in 4 years. The idea that Byrd is more of an injury risk is not true. Please don't make things up to further your ideas.
big difference between making things up and being misinformed......though ill take the blame for that one......... 
" Now here you are running these dirty old streets tattoo on your neck fake gold on your teeth, got the hood here snowed but you can't fool me, we both know who you are"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,186 |
I agree with what you're saying. If the guy is hell bent on leaving, he will probably take his chances, and sign the 1 year deal. If he is after the long term deal right now, I think he will sign elsewhere, knowing the browns will probably match. But as you have said, he might not get lots of interest, knowing the browns will probably match unless it's some crazy amount. It's all up to mack, if he wants to stay here long term.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
This is dumb in my opinion.
Maybe not CleveSteve.
My logic in the maybe not is this:
1. We want to sign him.
2. Franchise tag not a soul will offer him a contract he will jump on the TAG n the 11 mil. Maybe do it again next year and then the rules change up a bit but he would probably hit the FA market.
Transition Tag there is a good possibility that somebody will make him a good offer that he likes - good all we have to do is match it. Not beat it. We don't even have to negotiate it. A lot of Franchise tags end up alienating the players cause it takes away FA - Transition tag does not cause teams are willing to make offers as there is no compensation.
So actually we can benefit if a team signs him for 3-5 years and we match the contract. If its just a silly high contract. So be it...but who has the cap room to get silly?
I think its a good move. Surprised a little we did not Tag Ward...we'll see what comes of that...do we want him? Haven't heard much about negotiations.
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,858 |
Quote:
This is certainly a goof move imo,
this is just a guess on my part, but I'm thinking you believe it to be a GOOD move. not a GOOF move.....Right? lol
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856 |
Quote:
Quote:
This is certainly a goof move imo,
this is just a guess on my part, but I'm thinking you believe it to be a GOOD move. not a GOOF move.....Right? lol
Do'oh Corrected it.
typing is not my strencth (  )
#gmstrong
A smart person knows what to say.
A wise person knows whether or not to say it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,161
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,161 |
Quote:
I think its a good move. Surprised a little we did not Tag Ward...we'll see what comes of that...do we want him? Haven't heard much about negotiations.
Tab, teams are only allowed one tag.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
yeah I read it bugs after I wrote that...still surprised a little but actually understand it now - Mack was the priority always was so it was good use of the Tag available.
Thanks for the correct info 
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,447 |
Quote:
big difference between making things up and being misinformed......though ill take the blame for that one.........
Context just made it seem so. Either way not a big deal. So many try to further their point with "facts" I just thought I'd say something.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,161
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,161 |
Quote:
yeah I read it bugs after I wrote that...still surprised a little but actually understand it now - Mack was the priority always was so it was good use of the Tag available.
Thanks for the correct info
Sorry, I didn't mean it as a "correction." With so many new CBA rules, it is hard to keep up.
I disagree. Pettine stated he likes ball hawks. That pretty much said Ward does not fit at the salary he'll demand.
As for Mack, I'm not sure there is a better center available in FA. Draft looks a little sparse too. There are other areas of need and you stabilize the OL simply paying Mack. I believe the Center position has evolved more in the new NFL era. Also, if Farmer does go with a rookie QB, you want the best center.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,301
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 13,301 |
I'm impressed with this move. Especially since I've never heard of a "transition tag". The Browns are playing this smart - Mack has to play his cards and we do nothing until other teams do their due diligence. We focus on our needs during the free agency chaos and sit down at the table with a yes or no decision on Mack when it's time. Whoda thunk the Browns would pull a rabbit out of their hat on this one? lol
HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,212 |
j/c
at first glance 10m seems outrageous for a center. But if its actually prorated out, its not much different then a 5 year/35 million deal with a 15 million signing bonus. That actually seems fair for one of the better centers in the league.
Are we allowed to use the transition tag on Mack next year as well???? I know the franchise tag comes with penalties, but haven't seen that for the transition tag.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
This takes out all of the hard work of negotiating numbers with Mack. Let some other teams do that for us. Then we say yes and get to keep him.
This allows us to focus on TJ and other guys while letting Mack look around.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
I'd rather sign TJ than Byrd...
we already lost chemistry with DQ.. which is cool.. but losing an important piece like Ward on top of that is bothersome to me.
Not to mention the relationship he has formed with Joe Haden. Think long term Farmer.. Ward and Haden are almost a combo package imo. Its a business I know.. but these two have formed a bond that I haven't seen in a while here in cleveland.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,544 |
j/c
Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot · 27m
#browns coach mike Pettine said he flew to California over the weekend to meet with C Alex Mack w/ OC Kyle shanahan and OL coach.
being a browns fan is like taking your dog to vet every week to be put down...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Ward over Byrd? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
My only complaint with Byrd is that to put it in my friends terms "Byrd acted like a bitch this year about his contract." He went on to mention he was milking injuries to get paid and not have to play for Buffalo. If a guy is willing to do that, what would he do here if we start losing?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,635 |
Quote:
j/c
Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot · 27m
#browns coach mike Pettine said he flew to California over the weekend to meet with C Alex Mack w/ OC Kyle shanahan and OL coach.
And the best we could get outta it was a transition tag. Sounds like either Alex just absolutely really doesn't want to be here, or the new scheme/rhetoric with Kyle and Pettine isn't enough to sell anything to anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
Good point. I shared that same concern earlier.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,532 |
My question is how did they kill the poison pill on transition tags?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,856 |
Quote:
Quote:
j/c
Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot · 27m
#browns coach mike Pettine said he flew to California over the weekend to meet with C Alex Mack w/ OC Kyle shanahan and OL coach.
And the best we could get outta it was a transition tag. Sounds like either Alex just absolutely really doesn't want to be here, or the new scheme/rhetoric with Kyle and Pettine isn't enough to sell anything to anyone.
IDK, Mack said all year he was going to test the FA market, we did him a favor by using the transition and not the franchise.
Maybe they agreed to do that, maybe the cards were all on the table and this comes as no surprise, maybe Mack is on board with it as it allows him to do what he wanted ... test FA and still gives him the security of $10 mil for one year.
It always doesn't have to be the negative side.
#gmstrong
A smart person knows what to say.
A wise person knows whether or not to say it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
You are asking the wrong guy. Someone else will know, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 42,413 |
Quote:
My question is how did they kill the poison pill on transition tags?
Teams were putting in clauses that said things like, "If [Player X] plays [a certain number of games] in [state of team that tagged the player], that player's salary goes through the roof."
Or something along those lines.
I would guess that the league has to approve all contracts and they just wouldn't approve a contract with that type of language.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,445 |
Quote:
My question is how did they kill the poison pill on transition tags?
Here's a good read on that: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...t-poison-pills/
Quote:
In 2006, retired guard Steve Hutchinson became the last high-profile player to change teams under the transition tag. Slapped with the device that gives the current team only a right to match an offer sheet signed by another team, Hutchinson ultimately left the Seahawks for the Vikings.
The move occurred thanks to a so-called “poison pill,” which would have made Hutchinson’s seven-year, $49 million contract fully guaranteed if at any time during the life of the contract he wasn’t the highest paid offensive lineman on the team. At the time the offer sheet was signed, the Seahawks were paying more to left tackle Walter Jones.
Thus, the deal would have become instantly guaranteed in Seattle. For the Vikings, only $18.5 million was guaranteed on signing.
The Seahawks challenged the move, the Vikings won, and then the Seahawks retaliated by signing receiver Nate Burleson, who was a restricted free agent at the time, to an offer sheet that would have guaranteed the full amount if he had played five or more games in Minnesota in any year of the deal, or if Burleson had been paid more on average per year than all of the team’s tailbacks.
The tit-for-tat worked for Seattle, but both teams were reportedly dressed down at the subsequent league meetings. Efforts to remove the “poison pill” tactic from the labor deal, which was brand new at the time, went nowhere when the NFL and the NFLPA couldn’t agree on the corresponding concession to the players for removing the tactic.
So the teams simply quit using it, and the union never alleged collusion.
In 2011, when the next labor deal was negotiated, the league secured an agreement to remove poison pills from offer sheets. Article 9, Section 3(e) defines the “Principal Terms” of an offer sheet that much be matched for transition-tagged players and restricted free agents. Subsection (iii) explains that “no Offer Sheet may contain a Principal Term that would create rights or obligations for the Old Club that differ in any way (including but not limited to the amount of compensation that would be paid, the circumstances in which compensation would be guaranteed, or the circumstances in which other contractual rights would or would not vest) from the rights or obligations that such Principal Term would create for the Club extending the Offer Sheet (i.e., no ‘poison pills’).”
In English, the 2011 CBA eliminated the ability to include terms that would operate differently for the current team than the new team.
Per a source with knowledge of the negotiations, the players received in return an elimination of the highest restricted-free agency tender, which required compensation in the amount of a first-round and third-round draft pick. Also, the players obtained a new formula for calculating the franchise tender, which ties the amount of the tender to the growth of the salary cap.
As a result, the Browns and Steelers need to assess only whether they want to (or can) match the salary, the bonus money, and most importantly (especially for the Steelers) the cap numbers created by the offer sheet.The same analysis applies to any of the teams who tender restricted free agents, a class of players that will be smaller than in the past, now that all draft picks must sign four-year deals. Restricted free agency applies only to players who have three years of service.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 55,499 |
It's cool when this board works together to help educate others. Thanks guys.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Alex Mack and T.J. Ward
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)