Jason Cole article: Brees - 3rd Franchise Tag? CBA Wording

demented said

The problem I see here, is that the intent of the clause is to protect players from being franchised repeatedly. If this goes to neutral arbitration, the Union may win a verdict because they can say that their position is actually supported by the ambiguous wording and the spirit of the clause.

Click to expand...

I agre with this. On one hand, I think everyone has always read this rule as a player being franchised by the SAME team, 3 years in a row. But, on the other hand, this "3 times in history" makes perfect sense. Think about rediculous hypotheticals, in which a player could be franchised, traded, franchised... it would be get crazy. I think the point is really good, and that's why Condon get his solid 3% lol.

But all this Condon this, Condon that needs to stop. Drew is Condon's boss and could make a change whenever he wants.