Cards tag Campbell.

[Crazy Canuck]

The more things change, the more things stay the same.

I have to vehemently disagree with you, Joe. When have the Cards ever franchised someone and then signed them to a long-term deal? It isn't in Graves's wheel house to get this deal done under that kind of pressure.

Can we even use the franchise tag on the same player two seasons in a row any more? If so, I see a repeat of the Dansby situation--two tags and then hasta la vista. If not, we pay him the franchise this season, and see the last of him this season. I have ZERO confidence that Graves will get this done.

But, but... Graves and Dansby's agent did have a deal and Dansby nixed it and fired his agent.

 

[joeshmo]

The more things change, the more things stay the same.

I have to vehemently disagree with you, Joe. When have the Cards ever franchised someone and then signed them to a long-term deal? It isn't in Graves's wheel house to get this deal done under that kind of pressure.

1 Player in 5 Years. How many since Graves has been here or under Mike regime? I cant even name that last player to get franchised since Dansby?

1 Player isn't exactly a trend.

You know what was pressure worthy, Dockett coming to camp pissed off. The backlash that would come with not handling the Fitz contract right, one of if not the most beloved Cardinal of all time, face of the franchise stuff. Admittedly they have failed under pressure, but they have also flourished when it comes to players Coach Wiz likes and likes a lot

Can we even use the franchise tag on the same player two seasons in a row any more?

Yes

If so, I see a repeat of the Dansby situation--two tags and then hasta la vista. If not, we pay him the franchise this season, and see the last of him this season. I have ZERO confidence that Graves will get this done.

You don't have to have confidence, I have enough for the both of us and my confidence is the only one that matters, so there. My confidence has been right three years running, soon to be four by the summer time.

 

[Fitz Rulz]

Calais Campbell ‏ @Campbell93
Well I'm happy to be a Cardinal for at least one more year but I look forward to the possibility of getting a long term deal done as well
Retweeted by Darren Urban

 

[ajcardfan]

Best option they had was xeroxing Darnell Dockett's 2010 extension and putting it in front of Campbell in August when it was clear that he was a core player but not one of the Top 5 3-4 DEs in the National Football League.

That would've worked anytime in 2011, including later in the season, IMO.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

That would've worked anytime in 2011, including later in the season, IMO.

See post #16

 

[juza76]

i hope thay start to work on daryl washinton contract too cause he is the best player in our defense

 

[tnmike]

In what world do you live in that teams negotiate with Franchise players? A franchise designate hasn't been signed under that tender since Joey Galloway in 1999.

Non-exclusive means he can shop and receive offers if some team chooses. The union negotiated these rules so they have to live with them

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Non-exclusive means he can shop and receive offers if some team chooses. The union negotiated these rules so they have to live with them

They can seek offers until they sign the tender.

 

[Cheesebeef]

CC wasn't elite until this year. I don't have a problem with them waiting until after the season. Some are acting like he's dominated for 4 years, he hasn't.

this is NOT true. Players don't have to be elite to be core members of the team and get contract extensions. No one's acting like he's dominated for 4 years.

 

[Darkside]

No big deal. He will be signed long term, period. Doesn't matter if its today or two months from now. I have only said that about three players each of the last three years, during a time when everyone was wringing their hands over it, Wilson, Dockett, and Fitz. Campbell will be my fourth, bank on it. He is a Wiz guy and Wiz guys get re-signed.

His agent Ben Dogra makes the human snail look like Usian Bolt. He sometimes doesnt even give counter proposals for weeks at a time. He beyond any other agent out there uses time to his advantage. A deal was never going to get done last year and it was never going to get done until he got franchised because his agent Dogra would not allow his client to do it. It puts maximum pressure on the team by using time and that is how he does business.

Agree with everything you posted, but the bolded part cracked me up.

 

[ajcardfan]

See post #16

Lot of talk with no backing source.

 

[Treefiddy]

Lot of talk with no backing source.

I don't ever recall a time when Joe has been wrong about contract issues or the people involved in them.

I'm really glad he's posting again.

 

[kerouac9]

Non-exclusive means he can shop and receive offers if some team chooses. The union negotiated these rules so they have to live with them

But because teams aren't willing to give up draft pick compensation, they never open negotiations with franchise designees. Why would some
Other team do the Cards' negotiating for them?

Same reason teams rarely sign others' restricted free agents.

 

[Dayman]

Not the greatest start to the offseason. Who was the last player on this team to be franchised and later signed to a long-term deal? I'm thinking back as far as Kwame Lassiter, and I can't remember one.

But as long as talks are progressing toward a new contract, I'm fine with the tag. It's much better than losing him for nothing.

 

[Darkside]

Not the greatest start to the offseason. Who was the last player on this team to be franchised and later signed to a long-term deal? I'm thinking back as far as Kwame Lassiter, and I can't remember one.

But as long as talks are progressing toward a new contract, I'm fine with the tag. It's much better than losing him for nothing.

Yeah, but the CBA changed the franchise tag options. They can franchise Campbell as long as they want for a lot less money than they could in previous years. I doubt they do that, but if it comes to it they can keep him here a lot longer than people think for a lot less than it would take to get a long-term deal done.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

Best option they had was xeroxing Darnell Dockett's 2010 extension and putting it in front of Campbell in August when it was clear that he was a core player but not one of the Top 5 3-4 DEs in the National Football League.

Yep...they're gona lose him Dansby style...

 

[Duckjake]

Yeah, but the CBA changed the franchise tag options. They can franchise Campbell as long as they want for a lot less money than they could in previous years. I doubt they do that, but if it comes to it they can keep him here a lot longer than people think for a lot less than it would take to get a long-term deal done.

The tag goes up 120% in year two and 144% in year three. So the Cards would have to pay Campbell $13.2 million in 2013 and $19 million in 2014.

Couldn't the Cards get a better deal long term than 43.2 million for three years especially when the hit to the salary cap is figured in?

 

[Darkside]

Yep...they're gona lose him Dansby style...

There's no way we lose Campbell Dansby-style. The franchise tag is different nowdays, it kind of motivates guys to sign, and I think Campbell will, eventually.

 

[Darkside]

The tag goes up 120% in year two and 144% in year three. So the Cards would have to pay Campbell $13.2 million in 2013 and $19 million in 2014.

Couldn't the Cards get a better deal long term than 43.2 million for three years especially when the hit to the salary cap is figured in?

Oh, totally agree, but it depends, because now they take the average over the last, what, 7 years, as opposed to the past 5 years. With the new CBA I mean. Perhaps I'm figuring it wrong (correct me if I'm wrong). I definitely think long term they'd be better off signing the dude, I'm just saying the franchise tag isn't as detrimental to teams as it used to be, that's one thing in the CBA they did that benefits the team.

(Oh and Duck I have no clue where you get your escalations man, as far as 120% and 144%, where did you catch that in the new CBA, I haven't read that)

 

[Proteus]

I guess this means we should draft his eventual replacement this year so we're ready when he leaves Dansby style after being tagged twice.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

I guess this means we should draft his eventual replacement this year so we're ready when he leaves Dansby style after being tagged twice.

Michael Brockers at 13 .

 

[Duckjake]

Oh, totally agree, but it depends, because now they take the average over the last, what, 7 years, as opposed to the past 5 years. With the new CBA I mean. Perhaps I'm figuring it wrong (correct me if I'm wrong). I definitely think long term they'd be better off signing the dude, I'm just saying the franchise tag isn't as detrimental to teams as it used to be, that's one thing in the CBA they did that benefits the team.

(Oh and Duck I have no clue where you get your escalations man, as far as 120% and 144%, where did you catch that in the new CBA, I haven't read that)

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...-franchise-tag-salary-cap-happened-for-reason

Teams can continuously franchise players, but it'll cost them to do that. As had been the case previously, a player tagged a second straight year would have his number set at 120 percent of the previous figure. A third straight year? That's where things change, and the percentage goes up to 144.

Here's an example: Drew Brees' franchise tag number is estimated to be a relatively affordable $14.4 million this year. If he's tagged a second straight time, it'd cost the Saints, based on the estimates, $17.28 million. In Year 3, because of the change, the number goes all the way to $24.88 million. That means Brees gains some leverage in negotiating a long-term deal, in that the tag numbers add up to about $56.6 million over three years, or nearly $19 million per.

 

[ajcardfan]

I don't ever recall a time when Joe has been wrong about contract issues or the people involved in them.

I'm really glad he's posting again.

don't get me wrong. I'm glad he's posting too. I've even wondered if he's a Cards employee at times.

But, I'm a scientist so I'm trained to be skeptical of any claim made without supporting evidence.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

don't get me wrong. I'm glad he's posting too. I've even wondered if he's a Cards employee at times.

But, I'm a scientist so I'm trained to be skeptical of any claim made without supporting evidence.

Such as this, I'm sure...

Re: Contract for CC in 2011 based on DD's deal.

That would've worked anytime in 2011, including later in the season, IMO.

 

[TJ]

Yep...they're gona lose him Dansby style...

Apples and oranges, IMO.

Dansby made it abundandlty clear that his motivation was to get paid and his loyalties were to no team. Campbell has stated multiple times that he wishes to remain with the team for the long haul and is optimistic he and the club will eventually come to a long-term agreement.

I'm 85% sure we'll see an extension by Week 1.