NFL Off Topic

[ubernoob]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Isnt the only way to raise a franchise tag number for a position is to have top players at that position make more money? Jimmy would have to raise the curve with his next deal to benefit the guys behind him getting tagged.

Yeah.

The minimum amount is 1 year and (whichever is greater between these two) either no less than the average of the top-5 paid players at the position, or 120% of the players previous salary.

Seriously, though. Jermichael Finley (2012) and Jared Cook (2013) brought this same discussion/argument prior to Graham. It's nothing new.

[N51_rob]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The Payton thing is one thing, but c'mon what else do you expect the QB of your team to say "We need Graham or were screwed"? Kind of puts the roster of the team in a weird spot.

I expect my QB to keep his mouth shut. He has his contract and for him to say anything about me and my negotiations is bad form. If you have your deal STFU about me and mine.

Same as when Favre spoke out about Javon Walker. Easy for a guy making upwards of $15 mill per year to say "get to camp" or "we'll be fine without him" while he knows he has a signed deal.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Watson]

Re: NFL Off Topic

This actually happened? Yikes.

Yes and no

“We’ve had a lot of different guys in there. Jimmy’s only been here four years. He’s only been here half the time. We were putting up some pretty big numbers before he got here, and we’ve been putting up some big numbers since he’s been here. Hey, we do what we do. It’s nice when you can have guys like Jimmy, and obviously he’s a big part of our offense. If he’s in there, we’re going to try to get him the ball. We’re game-planning ways to get him the ball, ways to put him in the best position to succeed. But if he’s not, somebody else is going to get those touches. We’ll put those guys in position.”

I don't see an issue with the quote. It wasn't like he's completely telling fibs. Absolutely positively could have been worded better, but he's basically saying he doesn't have a problem with spreading the ball and he's comfortable with whoever is on the field.

[wwharton]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I expect my QB to keep his mouth shut. He has his contract and for him to say anything about me and my negotiations is bad form. If you have your deal STFU about me and mine.

Same as when Favre spoke out about Javon Walker. Easy for a guy making upwards of $15 mill per year to say "get to camp" or "we'll be fine without him" while he knows he has a signed deal.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I agree 100% but had to laugh at the post considering the issues your QB has with keeping his mouth shut, lol. I don't think Robert would speak on something like this though.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

So Brees basically said what any QB would say if they were in the same situation or proposed the same question.

And does saying "no comment" still work nowadays without that getting twisted into something else? Because we've seen how when Athletes say that, it's still not enough as far as what people want to hear.

[kingkilla56]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Id probably want him to say something like "Jimmy is one of the best at what he does and we really want him here in NO and I hope it works out" [/interview]. Didnt really need to get all "we gonna be fine without him anyway" on it. Cant have QB1 shooting at his top receiver.

What did Sean Payton say about Graham?

[N51_rob]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Peyton testified at the hearing that he considers Graham a TE regardless of where he lined up.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Chrisksaint]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I don't think Payton has said anything publicly but he was used in the NFL's case. Which I imagine is a weird situation given how close he works with management and the players.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

Peyton testified at the hearing that he considers Graham a TE regardless of where he lined up.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

What else could he really say?

Remember, he's trying to help his team save money even if it is just $5 Mil.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: NFL Off Topic

I guess this is how you know it's July 2.

[N51_rob]

Re: NFL Off Topic

What else could he really say?

Remember, he's trying to help his team save money even if it is just $5 Mil.

Really nothing but Peyton also has in his back pocket a season w/o him at the helm to support his resume with NO. I don't blame him for toeing the company line. After all this is a business. But how can he look Graham in the face after that and say anything too him when he knows he "didn't support his guy" when he "needed him"? It's an uncomfortable situation but all of this could've been avoided if NO made Graham the highest pats TE with a reasonable offer.

Gronk makes $9 mill and had played sparingly the past two seasons Jimmy should've been offered a 4 or 5 year deal worth $10 mill pet and everyone wins. The franchise tag for TE is (perceived by Graham and his representation) as a slap in the face so are the comments by Brees and the testimony of Peyton.

I have no dog in the fight but you hear athletes talk about value and respect all the time New Orleans has IMO failed Graham on both.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dsallupinyaarea]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The franchise tag just needs to go away, period. Either give a guy a market value long term contract after his rookie deal or let him walk. Teams shouldn't be allowed to "shack up" or, even worse, use the threat of the tag to strong arm a player into a lower value deal.

[SPTO]

Re: NFL Off Topic

The franchise tag just needs to go away, period. Either give a guy a market value long term contract after his rookie deal or let him walk. Teams shouldn't be allowed to "shack up" or, even worse, use the threat of the tag to strong arm a player into a lower value deal.

I'm a little surprised the players didn't make more of a push to get rid of the Franchise Tag during the last CBA negotiations. I have a sneaking suspicion that that's going to be a big deal when the next negotiations are under way.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NFL Off Topic

When has the Franchise Tag ever strong armed a player into a lower value deal? Obviously, players would rather have a long term deal(Read: Security/More money)but for the ones who weren't making much prior to the end of their contract, most of them will live with being tagged especially if they know a deal will get done in which case, they already do know.

The Tag isn't the issue here nor has it ever been.

[dsallupinyaarea]

Re: NFL Off Topic

When has the Franchise Tag ever strong armed a player into a lower value deal?

The Tag isn't the issue here nor has it ever been.

Players sign long term deals before hitting the market to avoid the tag all the time. Or a team can tag a player and negotiate a deal using that number as a starting point. The player has no negotiating leverage because he only has one suitor and he assumes all the risk of playing on a one year deal.

The tag is actually a big problem. Why should a team have any control over a player that has completed his contract? With the new rookie wage scale and the tag rules, a player could realistically go his entire prime without ever testing his market value. The tag effectively allows the NFL to have free-agency, but not really have free agency.

And again, why do teams need it? After 4 or 5 years, you should know what you have in a player and know whether you want to pay him or not.