The Franchise Tag Is Still An Issue For The Players

by Brandon on Feb 16, 2012 7:01 AM CST in Green Bay Packers Free Agency

@AaronRodgers12
Aaron Rodgers Great article by Howard Bryant on Espn today
Feb 16 via Twitterrific Favorite Retweet Reply

Green Bay Packers QB Aaron Rodgers says it's a great article, and I dutifully read it. Plus, he's sending traffic to ESPN's site. Who, other than himself, says he doesn't like ESPN?

Anyway, the article is about how it sucks to receive the franchise tag. Specifically as it relates to Rodgers's old college teammate. Yes, it means you're going to get paid an insane amount of money for one year. But if DeSean Jackson has really had it with the Philadelphia Eagles, he's out of luck, because he's not going anywhere. From ESPN:

Jackson will receive big money, probably about $10 million for the 2012 season. As a franchise player, he'll be one of the highest-paid receivers in football. But the lack of an opportunity for him to be an unrestricted free agent is exactly what the players should have been fighting against during last year's lockout.

The owners spent most of the lockout trying to get the players to accept a pay cut, so I'm not surprised the players gave in on the franchise tag issue to make a deal happen. Jackson, who has taken some big shots in the past, is only one more big hit away from not being worth $10 million per year. Very recently, Peyton Manning was considered one of the best two or three players in the NFL, and four neck surgeries later, he may never play again.

There was also a mention of Rodgers, though the comment would've had the same meaning using any player as an example:

In the NFL, the teams still have the power and they use it. But no convincing argument can be made that pro football will collapse if, say, Aaron Rodgers is given the option to test the open market after five years with his current club.

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I may never be worth $10 mil...

don’t have much sympathy – it’s the career they chose, and the deal they negotiated

aaaaaaaaahh, I gotta go!!

by b3nihana on Feb 16, 2012 8:44 AM CST reply actions 1 recs

Exactly

They are acting as if $10 million isnt a lot of money. When the fact is, in one season Desean Jackson will make more money than most of us will in a lifetime.

by Katsuya89 on Feb 16, 2012 10:11 AM CST via Android app up reply actions

Everyone seems to think we'll tag Finley...

I sure hope we don’t… Personally, I hope TT tries to get a deal done, and if Finley and his agent want to play the WR card and want to much $$,$$$,$$$.$$ I say let him walk!

www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/tagging_finley_is_wise_but_it_wont_be_easy/9938776

Just seems to me that we may be better off taking our chances. Sure TT will handle it the way he wants to, but, a year on the tag if we can’t get a deal done, may be a distraction that the Packers don’t need! Just saying…

"SOUTHERN HILLS KENNEL" ~ We Breed The Best Bitches In TEXAS!!!

GO PACK GO!!!

by BirdDogUni on Feb 16, 2012 10:28 AM CST reply actions

So then who gets the tag?

Since Wells would cost too much.

by Chief Oshkosh on Feb 16, 2012 4:05 PM CST up reply actions

Hey Chief ~ It isn't mandatory that we tag anyone... There have been years we haven't used

the franchise tag. I’m sure TT will do what’s necessary, yet if it were me, I’d say this is what we’re willing to offer, and if you want to test the waters, feel free.

I’m not one of the guys that thinks it’s crucial to re-sign 88…

As I’ve said many times before, we won a Super Bowl without him, so, it’s not like it can’t be done.

Giving 88 an offer and telling him we’re prepared to go to war without him, may just be the kick in the pants the kid needs to know we’re serious. Either get your act together totally, and be the tremendous talent you are, or take your potential and lack of focus down the road…

Just saying!

PS ~ I would still love to see TT roll the dice and tag Flynn! lol

"SOUTHERN HILLS KENNEL" ~ We Breed The Best Bitches In TEXAS!!!

GO PACK GO!!!

by BirdDogUni on Feb 16, 2012 9:33 PM CST up reply actions

Oh I know...

I was just assuming you had someone else in mind (like Wells or Flynn)

As I’ve said many times before, we won a Super Bowl without him, so, it’s not like it can’t be done.

Yes we won without him… but with him on the field we are a better offensive team. You can’t even argue that.

by Chief Oshkosh on Feb 17, 2012 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

Tag

I think tagging Finley is the best way to proceed. Its keeps an extremely talented playmaker in GB. I would rather the tag be a means to get a long term contract worked out before the season starts tho. Not cuz it might be a distraction, but becuz if we wait t sign him during the season or after it, the price is only going to go up! We have him coming off a productive year, but not an earthshattering one by any means. I think he will definitely put up bigger numbers next year and he won’t be dropping them nearly as much. Tag him and use it to get a long term contract worked out before training camp.

Our Biggest Challenge is how we deal w/ Success!

by Strohman on Feb 16, 2012 6:54 PM CST up reply actions

what the..

In the NFL, the teams still have the power and they use it. But no convincing argument can be made that pro football will collapse if, say, Aaron Rodgers is given the option to test the open market after five years with his current club.

I don’t agree with this at all. Look at the NBA for a perfect example of “yeah I’m getting out of this small market as soon as possible.” ruining smaller market franchises with talent consolidation

by vitaminx on Feb 16, 2012 10:51 AM CST reply actions 4 recs

thats a bad comparison

In the NBA you can afford to get 3 all-stars on your roster and fill the rest with average to bellow average players and have 60% of your team being all-stars while still being under the cap. Like the Heat. In order to do some thing comparable in the NFL you would need a team to Attract 13 Prow-bowl players (60%of starters) and still be under the cap. It could never happen. Mr Apple please meet Mr Orange and note how you are nothing alike.

by gvtspook on Feb 16, 2012 11:29 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

You've missed the point entirely.

It’s not about the big market teams having too much talent, it’s about the small market teams not having any talent left.

13.

"Skip, once again, stop it; Be an analyst; don't be a douchebag."

by Wiedmann on Feb 16, 2012 2:01 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs

I see how my post could easily confuse you.

many people get confused by math. so let me put it another way. the nfl had 120 prowbowlers from 32 teams. that’s ruffly 4 prowbowlers a team. where as the nba had 20 all-stars for 30 teams. that means there are alot of nba teams that are already without even one very good player. so you can’t compare the NFL to the NBA as far as not every team having a all-star /probowl player. and as far as people leaving a small market team for a big market it is not true in the nfl. they are most often going from a crap team to a good team. greenbay is one of the smallest markets in the nfl but since we turned the franchise around in the 90s how maney players that the organization wanted to return left for a bigger market?

by gvtspook on Feb 16, 2012 2:56 PM CST via Android app up reply actions

Hey, here's an idea, why don't you not talk down to me?

Don’t tell someone who studied mathematics at University that people get confused by math. You can take your arrogant attitude & go fuck yourself. Your point was way off base, and you were looking at the opposite spectrum than what I was talking about. Not to mention your numbers are completely wrong; there are not 120 “prowbowlers” per year in the NFL. Even if you had correct numbers for the NFL, there are clearly different degrees of players who made the Pro Bowl (Jon Condo was a Pro Bowler this year, and I bet you can’t even name what team he plays for without looking it up)

Regardless of the ratios between the leagues, the point is that making it easier for players to leave smaller markets is a bad thing. An NBA team fields 5 players at a time & an NFL team fields 11 players at a time (HOLY SHIT, THEY HAVE DIFFERENT NUMBERS OF PLAYERS, SO THERE’S OBVIOUSLY NO PARALLEL THAT CAN BE DRAWN BETWEEN THE TWO).

13.

"Skip, once again, stop it; Be an analyst; don't be a douchebag."

by Wiedmann on Feb 16, 2012 3:52 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs

dude just a heads up

I think your caps-lock got stuck at then end of your post you can get that fixed at your local geek squad. I see you still don’t get the point so ill try to break it down even more for you.

1: A large number of NBA teams would not have even have one high quality player if you tried to distribute one all-star to each team. So you cant say the reason a lot of small market teams don’t have a big time player is because the NBA doesn’t have a version of the franchise tag.

2: if you look at the ten smallest NFL markets the ten years prior to the implementation of the franchise (1997-2006) they went to 5 super bowls, won 2 super bowls and the , Colts, Ravens, Titans, Jaguars, packers combined to make the playoffs 50% of the time. That was all before the franchise tag so i don’t think you can say that the lose of the tag would kill the small market teams.

3: I went to the NFL website and looked at the 2012 pro-bowl roster. There was 60 players on the AFC roster so i doubled that to get the number of both teams.120.

by gvtspook on Feb 16, 2012 6:48 PM CST up reply actions

Nope.

I already told you! I deal with the god damn receivers so the linebackers don’t have to! I have coverage skills; I’m good at covering people! Can’t you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?!

by msc32887 on Feb 16, 2012 6:59 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs

I admit I was wrong

The list I looked at on NFL.com was the of all the original pro-bowl player and all the replacement players and i dint realize it before I posted. So I stand corrected on that point.

by gvtspook on Feb 16, 2012 7:09 PM CST up reply actions

what a chode post...

football does not build character, it reveals character.

by sheehan on Feb 16, 2012 5:11 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs

Ruffly?

I see how standard English spelling and syntax could easily confuse you.

by mpbMKE on Feb 16, 2012 5:32 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs

Griping about the franchise tag after year 1 of a 10-year deal

doesn’t seem like the best idea to me. If Desean didn’t want to get tagged, he should’ve worked his ass off and proven that he deserved a big extension. Instead, he held out, dogged it at times, was a part of the problem and now the team doesn’t trust him. Rodgers is sticking up for his college buddy, I get it, but paying a guy who is not a top-5 receiver in the league, top-5 money for a season, is not a great travesty.

by Archibaldcrane on Feb 16, 2012 12:42 PM CST reply actions 4 recs

I think the tag should have this included

That NFL teams can’t tag a player two years in a row. I’m all for the tag, and this little clause should make the players happier about their long term future.

by Shoes31 on Feb 16, 2012 1:02 PM CST reply actions

I agree

but when is the last time a player has been tagged two years in a row?

by Archibaldcrane on Feb 16, 2012 1:50 PM CST up reply actions

Good question

After some research, a few as long as we are talking about any form of tag. Going back to 07 brings up this list: Karlos Dansby (08 and 09), Terrell Suggs (08 and 09), Jeff Reed (08 09 10) and Ryan Pickett (09 10). However, they were tagged as a non-exclusive the first year and exclusive the second year, so it’s a bit different than getting an exclusive tag each year.

by Shoes31 on Feb 16, 2012 2:06 PM CST up reply actions

Ah ok

didn’t realize it happened that frequently.

by Archibaldcrane on Feb 16, 2012 2:08 PM CST up reply actions

franchise tag

Players should be more than happy to play under the tag. With the amount of money that any position player, well any NFL player really, gets who is tagged, he should be able to set his family up for life. Hell, most people who make $40K a year can budget enough money to retire off from if they live w/i their means. So if the players don’t want to play under the tag, I say let them not play football and see if they can do better elsewhere in the world. Most of these athletes are probably too stupid to realize how good they have it compared to the average fan.

by AH-1W on Feb 20, 2012 5:35 PM CST reply actions