Things that Won't Happen Update:

CardinalChris

Big Man Himself
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
3,929
Reaction score
0
Location
Fresno, CA
Maybe he and Lance Briggs could leave the 7 mil on the table and play Arena League.

My guess is they sign the tender, with the stipulation that they cannot be tagged next year (a-la Shaun Alexander) and earn their tag number this year.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
40,129
Reaction score
24,605
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
I don't blame the guy one bit. The system is being manipulated to screw players and to withhold long-term deals from star players. He's manipulating the system right back in their faces. I mean, if New England had shown any good faith in trying to work out a deal, then I'd feel differently, but they pretty much just showed him a closed door. I'm glad he's sticking it to them.
 

nurnay

whatever
Joined
May 4, 2005
Posts
1,508
Reaction score
0
Location
Chico, CA
I don't blame the guy one bit. The system is being manipulated to screw players and to withhold long-term deals from star players.

The "system" that was agreed to by the player's union...
 

Shane

Comin for you!
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
69,471
Reaction score
40,072
Location
Las Vegas
Oh, I know. That's why it's always up in the air as to who is right and who is wrong--the player or the team. In this instance, I think the player has a legitimate gripe.

I actually agree.
 

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
38,962
Reaction score
26,432
It wasn't too cool that he didn't attend Marquise Hill's wake or funeral though.
 

CardinalChris

Big Man Himself
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
3,929
Reaction score
0
Location
Fresno, CA
I don't blame the guy one bit. The system is being manipulated to screw players and to withhold long-term deals from star players. He's manipulating the system right back in their faces. I mean, if New England had shown any good faith in trying to work out a deal, then I'd feel differently, but they pretty much just showed him a closed door. I'm glad he's sticking it to them.

I disagree. It is set up so that you get the average of the top 5 players or a 20% increase of your previous year's salary. It keeps teams from repeatedly using the tag on the same player, while still handsomely rewarding the player.

Now, I have no problem with a tagged player sitting out camp, but to sit 10 games and give up that money is silly. Sign a tag with the stipulation you can't be tagged next year, play for top 5 money and get your huge bonus in less than a year. From what I understand, Samuels is asking for a LOT of money, so I see the Patriot's side also. Wasn't Samuels the guy with the tattoo "Get Paid" on his arm?

Neither is getting over on this one. Basically, both are losing. Samuels doesn't get his bonus money and the Pats may be missing a corner for 10 games.
 

CardinalChris

Big Man Himself
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
3,929
Reaction score
0
Location
Fresno, CA
And the "unappreciated" thing is like listening to a teenage girl complain about not being first chair in her high school choir.
 

blindseyed

I'm saying you ARE stuck in Wichita
Joined
Mar 20, 2003
Posts
8,075
Reaction score
5,889
Location
Verrado
Here's what doesn't make sense. He has until July 15th to sign the franchise offer. If he doesn't sign, he loses money, if he does sign and sits out until the 10th game...he loses money...if he's trying to make a statement, it's gonna just cost him $$
The Pats don't sign like that, just like a few years ago with Seymour, Branch etc...the Pats do what they want (I hate the Pats by the way)
 

RugbyMuffin

ASFN IDOL
Joined
Apr 30, 2003
Posts
30,485
Reaction score
4,877
Anytime you can make around 7 million in a matter of a few months it is a good deal.
 
OP
OP
kerouac9

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,654
Reaction score
30,437
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Here's what doesn't make sense. He has until July 15th to sign the franchise offer. If he doesn't sign, he loses money, if he does sign and sits out until the 10th game...he loses money...if he's trying to make a statement, it's gonna just cost him $$
The Pats don't sign like that, just like a few years ago with Seymour, Branch etc...the Pats do what they want (I hate the Pats by the way)

Actually, the way I remember it, Seymour sat our of the beginning of camp, and then the Pats gave him a little raise for that season and extended his contract later on.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
40,129
Reaction score
24,605
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
I disagree. It is set up so that you get the average of the top 5 players or a 20% increase of your previous year's salary. It keeps teams from repeatedly using the tag on the same player, while still handsomely rewarding the player.

Now, I have no problem with a tagged player sitting out camp, but to sit 10 games and give up that money is silly. Sign a tag with the stipulation you can't be tagged next year, play for top 5 money and get your huge bonus in less than a year. From what I understand, Samuels is asking for a LOT of money, so I see the Patriot's side also. Wasn't Samuels the guy with the tattoo "Get Paid" on his arm?

Neither is getting over on this one. Basically, both are losing. Samuels doesn't get his bonus money and the Pats may be missing a corner for 10 games.

I don't think it does. I know there didn't used to be a limit on the amount of times a player could be franchised--just ask Walter Jones. I think they changed that somewhat recently, but I think you could still get the tag two or three years in a row. Someone in the know, could you help me out here?
 

blindseyed

I'm saying you ARE stuck in Wichita
Joined
Mar 20, 2003
Posts
8,075
Reaction score
5,889
Location
Verrado
Actually, the way I remember it, Seymour sat our of the beginning of camp, and then the Pats gave him a little raise for that season and extended his contract later on.

Oh yea, that's right. They didn't 'give in' right away I guess is what I was thinking. I doubt he'll sit for 10 weeks
 
OP
OP
kerouac9

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,654
Reaction score
30,437
Location
Gilbert, AZ
I don't think it does. I know there didn't used to be a limit on the amount of times a player could be franchised--just ask Walter Jones. I think they changed that somewhat recently, but I think you could still get the tag two or three years in a row. Someone in the know, could you help me out here?

No, you're right, technically speaking. But I think the point being made is that at most positions (Donovin Darius was given the Franchise Tag multiple times, as well), even giving the Franchise tag twice can cripple most teams' salary cap flexibility.

Now, after Shaun Alexander, designees are going to demand that one-time-only stipulation to their tenders. I can understand that there's a very small chance that Asante will be able to duplicate his 2006 productivity this season. That's why he's pissed that he can't cash in on it. But it didn't seem to hurt Nate Clements too much, so Samuels should stop bitching and cash his giant guaranteed check.
 

CardinalChris

Big Man Himself
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
3,929
Reaction score
0
Location
Fresno, CA
No, you're right, technically speaking. But I think the point being made is that at most positions (Donovin Darius was given the Franchise Tag multiple times, as well), even giving the Franchise tag twice can cripple most teams' salary cap flexibility.

Now, after Shaun Alexander, designees are going to demand that one-time-only stipulation to their tenders. I can understand that there's a very small chance that Asante will be able to duplicate his 2006 productivity this season. That's why he's pissed that he can't cash in on it. But it didn't seem to hurt Nate Clements too much, so Samuels should stop bitching and cash his giant guaranteed check.

Yeah, it states that you get the larger of top 5 paid players at that position OR 120% of the previous year's salary. The year Peyton Manning almost hit the market because his salary was so high that the tag would have meant a franchise number of something insane like 18 million. It is set up so that it gets harder and harder to tag the same guy on purpose. I agree, more players are going to sign those tenders with the "you can't tag me next year" because they still make their coin and get that big bonus the following year.

As for Samuel repeating his performance.... it is only the fans that look at the INT numbers. A lot of those can be "right place, right time". Reports are already that several teams have contacted NE and are willing to give Asante his $, but don't want to give up the picks for him. Those scouts watch film and know how good a guy is, regardless of INT # going from 10 to say 5.
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
556,256
Posts
5,434,772
Members
6,329
Latest member
cardinals2025
Top