So....Who's Getting the Franchise Tag for the Giants???

[RandolphScott]

Also with the franchise tag you can just use it until you get a contract worked out so you don't have to pay them top 5. Although there is the gamble that they'd refuse a new contract and just want the top 5 for 1 year contract. Considering the Giants have made no real attempt to sign Smith I think they don't care if he walks. To be honest with how cheap the Giants have been this season I think they don't care if all the FAs walk.

 

Jerry Reese has been quoted as saying that he will not sign any free agents until a new CBA is agreed upon. That's the sentiment for most NFL franchises....

[Mr. P]

Franchise tag makes no sense for Giants

 

The Giants have less than a week to use their “franchise player” tag on one of their 21 free agents-to-be. So far they’ve given no indication they plan to use it. Several team and league sources expect they won’t.

 

It’s not just that the NFL Players Association has warned teams, agents and players that it considers the tag “meaningless” since there’s currently no collective bargaining agreement after March 3. Eight teams have already used or announced their intention to use it. And all teams, including the Giants, have until Feb. 24 to officially decide.

 

So the Giants could still use it. But using the "franchise" tag -- or even the “transition player” tag, which is also theoretically available -- on one of their current free agents doesn’t make much financial sense.

 

Let’s assume, for a moment, that the tag exists as usual. The NFLPA rightly points out that the tags are collectively bargained and there’s no guarantee they’ll exist in the new CBA. But let’s say they do and they’re using the same rules. That means any player who gets “franchised” is guaranteed to be paid a salary in 2011 equal to the top five salaries at his position in 2010 (It's Top 10 for the "transition" tag).

 

The NFL hasn’t released official “franchise” numbers yet, but a league source gave what I’m told are pretty accurate numbers to NFL.com. The numbers, as they always are, are staggering. Other than for kickers, whose franchise number would be $3.1 million, the franchise tag salaries range from $7.3 million (tight ends) to $16 million (quarterbacks).

 

Of the Giants’ 21 players without a contract for 2011, none of them made more than $1.776 million in 2010.

 

There are essentially two reasons to use a “franchise” tag. One is obvious: A team locks up a player for one year and keeps him away from free agency. Basically, it’s protecting an asset.

 

But the price has to be reasonable. In the Giants’ case, they’d be locking up that player about 6-10 (or more) times their current salary. Sure they’d love to keep RB Ahmad Bradshaw, but he made $1,001,000 last season. If they franchise him, he’d be guaranteed $9.5 million next year. That’s an 850% raise.

 

The other reason to use it is to temporarily lock up a player while a team works on a long-term extension. That’s what the Giants did the last time they used the tag – on running back Brandon Jacobs in 2009. They tagged him for $6.6 million, which at the time was a pretty good raise for him.

 

That number, though, became the base number in their negotiations for a long-term deal. The tag was only good for the Giants because they knew they were willing to pay him somewhere around that in a long-term deal. He ended up getting a four-year, $25 million contract – an average of $6.25 million per season. It included $13 million in guarantees and about $15 million in the first two years (or $7.5 million per).

 

They could do the same for Bradshaw or DT Barry Cofield, for example. The problem again is the tag numbers are incredibly high at those positions now, so it’s only worth it if the Giants are going to be willing to pay them near those numbers over the long term. It's hard to see them going that high, especially when they don't know the salary cap or other financial rules that will be in use under a new CBA.

 

The Giants have a total of 21 free agents. Only three – Bradshaw, Cofield, maybe TE Kevin Boss – figure to be in line for lucrative long-term extensions. DE Mathias Kiwanuka (neck) and WR Steve Smith (knee) would’ve been strong “franchise” candidates if they hadn’t suffered injuries that have put their football futures somewhat in doubt.

 

Are any of them worth “franchise” money? I don’t believe the Giants think they are. Here’s a look at the numbers, so you can judge for yourself:

 

Bradshaw

 

The good: In his first almost-full season as a starter, he rushed for 1,235 yards and eight touchdowns. He’s only 24 years old.

 

The bad: He also fumbled seven times, lost his job as a starter, broke his wrist, and needed surgery on his left ankle after the season. In his young career he’s needed surgery on both his feet and both his ankles.

 

The money: Bradshaw made $1,001,000 last season. The reported franchise number for running backs is $9.5 million. A long-term deal at that rate would be five years, $47.5 million and probably $20 million or so guaranteed. That’s about what Adrian Peterson is expected to get this offseason from the Vikings.

 

Cofield

 

The good: He was a force in the middle last season, playing strong against the run and picking up four sacks (ninth among NFL DTs). He’s only 26 years old.

 

The bad: He needed offseason shoulder surgery. One year ago it was microfracture knee surgery.

 

The money: Cofield earned $1.759 million last season and was none too pleased about missing his chance at unrestricted free agency due to the stalled labor talks. The DT franchise number is reported to be a whopping $12.5 million (or a 610% raise). That’s $62.5 million over five years, which figures to be way out of the Giants’ range considering they’re already paying Chris Canty $7 million per year at the same position. Do they really want $20 million per year tied up at defensive tackle? It is the going rate for the top ones, though. Detroit’s Ndamukong Suh got a five-year, $68 million deal with $40 million in guarantees as the second pick in last year’s draft. That’s about what Haloti Ngata wants from Baltimore, after they franchised him last year.

 

Boss

 

The good: He averaged 37 catches for 494 yards over the last three seasons, and the feeling around the league is that the Giants have only scratched the surface of his potential as a receiver. He’s tough as nails and an improving blocker, too.

 

The bad: For two years everyone has waited for him to finally break out as a receiver, but it hasn’t happened yet. He’s 27 now and he takes a lot of big hits that have left him with multiple concussions, ankle and hip surgery, and a whole bunch of other injuries.

 

The money: Boss earned $1.35 million last season and the reported franchise number for tight ends is $7.3 million. Over five years that’s a $36.5 million commitment. It’s too much considering the pounding he takes and the fact the Giants may never use him enough in the passing game to turn him into a 70-catch tight end.

 

Smith, Kiwanuka

 

I’ve lumped them together because I think they would’ve been the two strongest candidates to get the “franchise” tag had they not gotten hurt.

 

The good: Kiwanuka was the Giants’ best defensive player early in the season with four sacks in three games, has shown flashes of being a premiere pass rusher and has the flexibility to play in coverage (or at linebacker), too. … Smith is the Giants’ best receiver and one year ago set a Giants record for catches (107 for 1,220 yards), became their first Pro Bowl receiver in 41 years. Though Hakeem Nicks is coming on strong, Smith was still Eli Manning’s favorite target.

 

The bad: Kiwanuka has a herniated disc in his neck, and while he seemingly intends to play again that is a career-threatening injury. He’s only 27, so maybe it won’t end his career the way it did for Antonio Pierce. But unless he has it surgically corrected, it could always be a problem. If he does have it surgically corrected, it’s not an easy surgery to recover from. … Speaking of that, Smith’s microfracture knee surgery offers no guarantees either. No one knows if he’ll ever be the same. He’s also not expected to begin running until June, about a month before the theoretical start to training camp.

 

The money: Kiwanuka made $1.776 million last season. Smith made $555,000. The reported franchise number for defensive ends is $12.9 million (about a 626% raise for Kiwanuka). Over five years that’s $64.5 million. The franchise number for receivers is reportedly $11.3 million (or a 1,936% raise for Smith), or $56.5 million over five years. … Both of those are enormous financial commitments to players who may never be the same. That’s why the Giants have indicated both may need to sign one-year deals for far less to prove how much they’re really worth.

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants/2011/02/franchise-tag-makes-no-sense-for-giants?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+nydnrss/blogs/giants+%28Blogs/The+Blue+Screen%29

[Nas]

Which of our FAs do?

 

Bingo. I was waiting for someone to say ask that.

[NightFire]

Can you give examples of their alleged cheapness?

 

I meant this year. Teams are still signing players to multi-year contracts and franchising players right now while the Giants sit around and twiddle their thumbs. To be honest I think the Giants are using CBA issues to not have to sign any players. I guess after March 3 everything is out the window anyway until there is a new agreement. If a new agreement is found in let's say May would FA start right away?