Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- From: "MZ" <mark@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 14:56:55 -0500
"John C (tx)" <coachingclinic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1173294542.522693.135360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anyway, I think it would be good for the game to get rid of the
franchise rule. Its main function is to allow teams to underpay their
players --- or at least shift risks unfairly to the players.. Why is
that good?
Samuel is getting paid $ 8MM which is 40-50% of what he would get in
the open market in guarantees. He then is a free agent again or
franchised again. Now he is at 80-100% of guarantee money & can do it
again. Underpaid, insane, the only reason the players don't want the
franchise is because their agents hate it. 5% of franchise or 5% of
an inflated contract.
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. What would you rather have:
Samuel's franchise tender and the ability to go out next year as a free
agent, or Nate Clements' contract?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- From: John C (tx)
- Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- References:
- Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- From: shariq_tariq@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- From: McDuck
- Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- From: John C (tx)
- Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- Prev by Date: Compensatory picks
- Next by Date: Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- Previous by thread: Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- Next by thread: Re: Franchaise Tags, Long term contracts and Current Cap Status
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
