Originally posted by Cbus cardsfan
The problem is those guys will never see the free agent market. See,some teams actually like to keep their best players an re-sign them.If not,they use the dreaded(by the Cards anyway) franchise tag.
Depends on their salary cap situation. Yes, teams will keep their best players when they can. How many star players have we lost that we should have kept? Plummer stinks, Boston is a joke, Rice didn't want to be here and wouldn't play for us. 2 guys we're better off without and one (the only one who's been productive) who isn't here because of him, not management. Yes it would have been nice getting something for Boston but didn't we hurt San Diego enough by letting them sign him? Only 2 teams wanted him, he wasn't a hot commodity. They were already taking a risk just by signing him, I doubt we could've gotten much for him. Graves could've tagged and and removed it, but they wanted to make sure the 260lb freak WR who has 2 receptions for 20 yards didn't stay here.
Months ago there was talk about Tampa not resigning Sapp. He was upset that they weren't talking to him about an extension and many people belive McFarland is better than him anyway. Any veteran heavy team will usually be close to the max so they don't always resign all their top players. Owens might not want to stay in San Francisco but we still have a ways to go before anyone knows. As far as good teams keeping their players look at Philly. They have a policy of not resigning players over 30 and they have let go guys like Hugh Douglas, Brian Mitchel and Jeremiah Trotter.