JP-era Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 From the CBA: (i) A one year NFL Player Contract for the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position at which the Franchise Player played the most games during the prior League Year, or 120% of his Prior Year Salary Since he started at LT last year he MUST be tagged as an LT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Damn! There goes TD's super-secret plan to tag him as a Punter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 From the CBA: (i) A one year NFL Player Contract for the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position at which the Franchise Player played the most games during the prior League Year, or 120% of his Prior Year Salary Since he started at LT last year he MUST be tagged as an LT. 245914[/snapback] i think your barking up the wrong tree....... if i recall correctly, the tag value is the same for all OL, whether your a tackle, a guard, or a center......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP-era Posted February 19, 2005 Author Share Posted February 19, 2005 i think your barking up the wrong tree....... if i recall correctly, the tag value is the same for all OL, whether your a tackle, a guard, or a center......... 245994[/snapback] How did you read that some other way? So a C or G gets the same franchise pay that a LT gets. I dont believe that for a second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Well, for one thing, I can't think of a single center or guard who has ever got himself the franchise tag, and it seems like the Damien Woodys of the world would have managed to work that out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njsue Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Let him go he is way too injury prone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 i think your barking up the wrong tree....... if i recall correctly, the tag value is the same for all OL, whether your a tackle, a guard, or a center......... 245994[/snapback] You're correct, look no further then the NFLPA.org website instead of listing OT, OG and C seperately they're all lumped under Offensive Line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 thanks for that explanation, it's now clear as mud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 How did you read that some other way? So a C or G gets the same franchise pay that a LT gets. I dont believe that for a second. 245997[/snapback] yet again, your wrong....... http://www.theredzone.org/2005/freeagents/2005tags.asp Offensive linemen Franchise tender: $7,424,000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 From the CBA: (i) A one year NFL Player Contract for the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position at which the Franchise Player played the most games during the prior League Year, or 120% of his Prior Year Salary Since he started at LT last year he MUST be tagged as an LT. 245914[/snapback] Why would we ever Tag JJ. Did he make it to the Pro Bowl while I wasn't watching. Isn't he like an above average left tackle who misses several games each year. He had a nice year in 2004, a contract year. Let someone else overpay for him. You wouldn't see NE pay a player like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP-era Posted February 19, 2005 Author Share Posted February 19, 2005 yet again, your wrong....... http://www.theredzone.org/2005/freeagents/2005tags.asp Offensive linemen Franchise tender: $7,424,000 246042[/snapback] Sorry, but I FAR from by the red zone over the official CBA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Sorry, but I FAR from by the red zone over the official CBA! 246087[/snapback] From the CBA on the nflpa website.... Section 7. Salary Information: (a) No later than February 1 of each League Year during the term of this Agreement, the NFL shall compile and disclose to the NFLPA a list of each of the ten largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the following positions which shall be utilized for calculating the average Prior Year Salaries of players at the positions of Franchise Players and Transition Players: Quarterback, Running Back, Wide Receiver, Tight End, Offensive Line, Defensive End, Interior Defensive Line, Linebacker, Cornerback, Safety, and Kicker/Punter. For the 1993 League Year, such list shall be provided to the NFLPA by February 15. I don't see where it distinguishes tackle from guard from center in the CBA. It looks like the info on redzone.org is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Sorry, but I FAR from by the red zone over the official CBA! 246087[/snapback] Then it would be helpful if you actually read the text of the CBA before making your claim and also look into the FP & TP salaries for supporting info. Offensive linemen are grouped together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 so sad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 From the CBA on the nflpa website.... Section 7. Salary Information: (a) No later than February 1 of each League Year during the term of this Agreement, the NFL shall compile and disclose to the NFLPA a list of each of the ten largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the following positions which shall be utilized for calculating the average Prior Year Salaries of players at the positions of Franchise Players and Transition Players: Quarterback, Running Back, Wide Receiver, Tight End, Offensive Line, Defensive End, Interior Defensive Line, Linebacker, Cornerback, Safety, and Kicker/Punter. For the 1993 League Year, such list shall be provided to the NFLPA by February 15. I don't see where it distinguishes tackle from guard from center in the CBA. It looks like the info on redzone.org is correct. 246093[/snapback] Where JP-era is incorrect is that there is no difference whatsoever in what the CBA says and what redzone.com says. He apparently is taking your saying (accurately) that redzone.com is correct as also saying that that the CBA is incorrect. The two use the same method and essentially say the same thing and where he is making a mistake is that he does not seem to realize that. I think there is a dispute here because JP-era does not seem to realize that it is irrelevant that Jennings qualifies only as an LT because even though he played center in college has not played C as a pro, because even if he had played C as a pro or in fact played C all the time he would still be tagged at the rate of LT pay because the top 5 salaries which are LTs and Ruben in 2004 set the franchise amount for all OL players. He may not believe this as he says, but it is simply true. People are confused in this dispute because yes it is true that JJ only qualifies as an LT, but even if he qualified as a center it would not matter because the tag amount would be the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP-era Posted February 19, 2005 Author Share Posted February 19, 2005 Then it would be helpful if you actually read the text of the CBA before making your claim and also look into the FP & TP salaries for supporting info. Offensive linemen are grouped together. 246096[/snapback] If thats what it says thats what it says and Im wrong. Thats a very stupid rule. The best G or C in the whole damn league isnt worth 7.3 mill per! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 If thats what it says thats what it says and Im wrong. Thats a very stupid rule. The best G or C in the whole damn league isnt worth 7.3 mill per! 246101[/snapback] This definition in the CBA may be stupid in itself, but is probably necssary to make the whole thing work (which is really what determines what is stupid and what isn't). The tags are not about the sport primarily they are about the business. Unfortunately, there is a disconnect between how players are paid (supply and demand of folks capable of playing the LT role) and how these roles can be transferred between players in terms of how they play. It is simply too easy to flip-flop players back and forth between the OL line positions to separate out the franchise/transition tags between these positions.. OL players are lumped together because it is simply too easy to do what was propsed with Jennings to purport you are going to use him as a center (or even to use him that way enough in his pre-FA season) simply to hold his price down. Things can get real silly fast if anyone asserted that the letter of the law mandates that because Bannan played DT when he hits FA his cap level is now determined by OL salaries, but no one even goes there because the result would be dumb for everyone. Incongruities would be created more frequently if the partnership between the NFL and the NFLPA tried to divide out cap numbers between OL positions even if the play in the sport are pretty static because it is working. The current framework may be stupid but it works and that is the key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP-era Posted February 19, 2005 Author Share Posted February 19, 2005 This definition in the CBA may be stupid in itself, but is probably necssary to make the whole thing work (which is really what determines what is stupid and what isn't). The tags are not about the sport primarily they are about the business. Unfortunately, there is a disconnect between how players are paid (supply and demand of folks capable of playing the LT role) and how these roles can be transferred between players in terms of how they play. It is simply too easy to flip-flop players back and forth between the OL line positions to separate out the franchise/transition tags between these positions.. OL players are lumped together because it is simply too easy to do what was propsed with Jennings to purport you are going to use him as a center (or even to use him that way enough in his pre-FA season) simply to hold his price down. Things can get real silly fast if anyone asserted that the letter of the law mandates that because Bannan played DT when he hits FA his cap level is now determined by OL salaries, but no one even goes there because the result would be dumb for everyone. Incongruities would be created more frequently if the partnership between the NFL and the NFLPA tried to divide out cap numbers between OL positions even if the play in the sport are pretty static because it is working. The current framework may be stupid but it works and that is the key. 246138[/snapback] clearly you didnt read the original post from the CBA, the player must receive the pay for the postion that he played the most games in from the prior year. That statement alone prevents what you are referring to. The teams would nto be able to start a guy at LT the majority of the year and then switch him to C and franchise him to save money. Like I said its a stupid rule because C or G should never make even close to 7.3 mill per even if they are all world. I was wrong about what I said, but only because it is the dumbest rule I think I have heard of and so illogical that it only made sense to be untrue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 I was wrong about what I said, but only because it is the dumbest rule I think I have heard of and so illogical that it only made sense to be untrue. 246142[/snapback] ...and here I thought you were wrong because you didn't take a closer look at the CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 clearly you didnt read the original post from the CBA, the player must receive the pay for the postion that he played the most games in from the prior year. That statement alone prevents what you are referring to. The teams would nto be able to start a guy at LT the majority of the year and then switch him to C and franchise him to save money. Like I said its a stupid rule because C or G should never make even close to 7.3 mill per even if they are all world. I was wrong about what I said, but only because it is the dumbest rule I think I have heard of and so illogical that it only made sense to be untrue. 246142[/snapback] I agree its a dumb rule, but people do dumb things all the time to make life work (marriage and parenthood for example are all about doing things which are specifically dumb, but necessary to make the whole deal work). The CBA and redzone,com reflect the real world that it simply works to have all the OL players have the same franchise and tag numbers. It may be stupid but it works. If you want some objective showing that this is the case that all OL players are tagged based on the same amont, go to NFLPA.com. In the media section on the side there is a link to be clicked for frequently asked questions. Thw first link in this section takes you to a listing of the actual franchise and transition tag numbers. They are divided by position and all the OL players operate under the same salary number with guard Ruben Brown prominent among the OL numbers as 1 of only 2 guards among this LT crew that sets the tag level for Ts (be they RT or LT), Gs, and I assume Cs (as they have no separate listing. It is simply the reality of how these players are tagged even if it is stupid in a lot of cases because it simply works. The key here is not be to be addicted to logic but to be addicted to reality when the two differ (sort of the same situation as why you never draft a QB in the first rounf there is simply no record of this being a choice for delivering an SB win since Dallas chose Aikman in 1989). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts