Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    90,498

    Should running backs be exempt from the franchise tag?

    Reading bell saying he would hold out or retire got me to thinking just how unfair the franchise tag is for running backs with how short the life span is for said position and how dangerous said position is.... Any player could get hurt but the wear and tear of the running back position to me and the age running backs seem to die out should make things like the franchise tag not be possible.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    45,620
    No. Why should any position get preferred treatment?

    PROCESSING

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Punta Gorda, FL
    Posts
    27,485
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    No. Why should any position get preferred treatment?
    Pretty much this.

    Bell is doing what he needs to do to make sure he gets his deal - he is just an idiot to talk about it in the middle of the playoffs.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    45,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Wrench View Post
    Pretty much this.

    Bell is doing what he needs to do to make sure he gets his deal - he is just an idiot to talk about it in the middle of the playoffs.
    Exactly. As much as I love him on the field he's been a PITA with contract crap.

    PROCESSING

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,600
    Why? Technically you can make more if you were to be tagged say 3 straight years as opposed to what you would have made for those 3 years had you signed a contract originally. Either way he is going to get paid.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Emmaus, PA
    Posts
    27,011
    I say it's good for them, they generally have shorter careers, so why not get paid when you can.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    10,850
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    Reading bell saying he would hold out or retire got me to thinking just how unfair the franchise tag is for running backs with how short the life span is for said position and how dangerous said position is.... Any player could get hurt but the wear and tear of the running back position to me and the age running backs seem to die out should make things like the franchise tag not be possible.
    Playing on the franchise tag two times in a row is probably about equal in guaranteed money to a contract signed before the first franchise tag, maybe even more.

    If Bell got franchise tagged for 2018 as well, he would earn $14.54M + $12.12M for 2017 = $26.66M.

    Compare this with the $22.047M Devonta Freeman received in guaranteed money when he signed his contract extension before the 2017 season.

    Now arguably Bell is better than Freeman and would deserve a bigger contract. But the point is, if both suffered career ending injuries in 2018 then Bell did earn more money. When RBs sign contracts, their career trajectories are factored in already. So they in turn go into determining the value of the franchise tag for RBs. One way in which Bell probably could have received more money in a contract is if teams had gotten into a bidding war over him in free agency. But then that's a general criticism of the franchise tag and not specific to RBs. And the only thing Bell can do to force his becoming a free agent is threatening to retire if the franchise tag is applied to him again.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,866
    The only thing that should change with the tag is they should separate OL into OT/OG/C.


    CAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Annapolis MD
    Posts
    13,600
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    The only thing that should change with the tag is they should separate OL into OT/OG/C.
    Agreed. Perfectly fine the way things are. Bell is in a different era as far as contracts are concerned for RBs, but that's happened to other positions in the NFL across the years, and also in different sports. It is always a changing dynamic.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,711
    I wish there wasn't a franchise tag TBH. I hate the notion of protecting teams who are:

    A) unwilling to give long term deals to their star players.

    or

    B) unable to convince their star players (i.e. quarterbacks) that they can win sustainably.

    It's bad for the league when an incompetent franchise like Indy gets to keep Andrew Luck just because they were bad the year he was available. Just like it sucks for players like Bell or Kirk Cousins or whoever to get strung along for years without the security of a long term deal. Make it a free market. When a player's contract expires, he should be free, or at least set very stringent limits on when the tag can be used. If it were a once every five years thing? Fine, I could live with that. Giving teams the perpetual right to screw over their players is bad for the league.

    The problem with the NFL union though is that the rank and file members outnumber the star-level members so greatly that the stars will never get protection in CBAs. Why would Joe Backup care if Le'Veon Bell is losing long term security if he's getting one guaranteed year that will pay him more than 90%+ of players make in their entire careers? There has to be a proper balance so that all classes of players are represented.
    POOP

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    6,401
    I personally don't like it, but if is not taken out, i'd like to see a limit of 1 only. You can only be tagged once in your career ever. If they don't, maybe if you're tagged after the 1st one, you get guaranteed contract for both the year and and money by taking the average length and money of top 5 or 10 players in your position. So let's say the average length of the top 10 RBs is 4 years and 25 mil, that contract kicks in if you get injured and injured only. Teams can tag the player as much as they want, but it does carry risk by having to give out that guaranteed contact if they dont come up with an extension. At the same time, the players gets value protection. If they had an MVP caliber season then gets tagged, they have that average guaranteed contract to fall back on if they get injured after being tagged. Btw, this is for all positions.
    Last edited by mikekhelxD; 01-12-2018 at 05:34 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,049
    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most:32094838
    Reading bell saying he would hold out or retire got me to thinking just how unfair the franchise tag is for running backs with how short the life span is for said position and how dangerous said position is.... Any player could get hurt but the wear and tear of the running back position to me and the age running backs seem to die out should make things like the franchise tag not be possible.
    No way dude. It makes no sense to give special treatment to RBs. If he wants to retire, let him. PIT wouldn't give a ****... They franchise tag him, he retires, they move on... Or they don't tag him, he signs elsewhere, and they have to move on anyway while having to play against him.

    PIT should be able to tag him just like anyone else...

    Now... If you wanna talk about how the franchise tag is stupid in the first place and should go away, that would be a better argument.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    10,850
    Quote Originally Posted by Quinnsanity View Post
    The problem with the NFL union though is that the rank and file members outnumber the star-level members so greatly that the stars will never get protection in CBAs. Why would Joe Backup care if Le'Veon Bell is losing long term security if he's getting one guaranteed year that will pay him more than 90%+ of players make in their entire careers? There has to be a proper balance so that all classes of players are represented.
    If Joe Backup is on his late-round rookie contract, he's getting screwed harder than any franchise-tagged player.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bethlehem
    Posts
    37,632
    No.

    I think it should be limited to only one time you can tag a player though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack of Blades View Post
    I don't consider Brand New indie. I consider them ****ing awesome and don't belong to a genre.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    A city in the United States.
    Posts
    3,384
    Quote Originally Posted by koldjerky View Post
    No.

    I think it should be limited to only one time you can tag a player though.
    Yes.
    Screw sabermetics.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •