Jason Cole article: Brees - 3rd Franchise Tag? CBA Wording (1 Viewer)

[Sarcastic]

Here's the article - <a href="http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=1141&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fsaintsreport.com%2Fforums%2Ff2%2Fssf-slacking-230908%2F&v=1&libid=1337970813836&out=http%3A%2F%2Fsports.yahoo.com%2Fnews%2Fnfl--saints-qb-drew-brees--contract-efforts-could-be-aided-by-language-in-cba.html%3B_ylt%3DAkvUQDY8UPiI69I0tOetphFDubYF&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fsaintsreport.com%2Fforums%2Ff2%2F&title=SSF%20Slacking%3F%20-%20SaintsReport%20Community%20Forums&txt=here%20it%20is&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13379710498463">Link</a>

Brees/Condon are arguing that the franchise tag next year would be a THIRD tender, worth 23.5 million. Basically there's your three million divide, and it's not going anywhere until someone rules on this dispute.

Here's the CBA, Op by SaintsW1n, <a href="http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=1141&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fsaintsreport.com%2Fforums%2Ff2%2Fssf-slacking-230908%2F&v=1&libid=1337970813836&out=http%3A%2F%2Fnfllabor.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F01%2Fcollective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fsaintsreport.com%2Fforums%2Ff2%2F&title=SSF%20Slacking%3F%20-%20SaintsReport%20Community%20Forums&txt=here&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13379711433564">Link</a>

See page 44. Very vague wording:

Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of

 

[SaintsFanatic]

yawn. let me know when the deal is done

 

[SaintsFanatic]

Brees will sign a long term deal before July 15th. All will be good. This offseason will be just an afterthought in a few months. Now go lad, sleep, rest, drink and be fruitful.

 

[Sarcastic]

Fanatic, I really really don't think you get how important this is. It goes beyond Brees. It's a classic Condon power move.

 

[darkhornet]

It would be huge if that stood, but I don't understand how it can. How can one team possibly be penalized for how another team used their franchise tag?

 

[Sarcastic]

That's what makes it a power move

 

[tenordas]

The real question is just how quickly will someone (and who is on the Management Council anyway?) rule as to whether the Charger tag counts or not. So, is there any idea about that?

Regardless of this, Loomis and Condon need to stop all the posturing competition and just meet in the middle already. So much nonsense over "who wins" the contract dispute. Get over yourselves and make a deal. We need our QB and he needs to practice with his team.

 

[darkhornet]

This seems to be the relevant language in the CBA:

Article 10, Section 2(b)

(b) Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time shall, on the date the third such designation is made, be deemed to have tendered the player a one-year NFL Player Contract for the greater of: (A) the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) with the highest such average; (B) 120% of the average of the five largest Prior Year Salaries for players at the position (within the categories set forth in Section 7(a) below) at which the player participated in the most plays during the prior League Year; or (C) 144% of his Prior Year Salary. (By way of example, a kicker designated as a Franchise Player for the third time in the 2014 League Year would have a Required Tender equal to the greater of: (i) the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for quarterbacks; (ii) 120% of the average of the five largest 2013 Salaries for kickers; or (iii) 144% of the player&#8217;s own 2013 Salary.) If the Club designates the player as a Franchise Player for the third time, the designating Club shall be the only Club with which the player may negotiate or sign a Player Contract. In lieu of designating such a player as a Franchise Player for the third time, any Club may designate such player as a Transition Player pursuant to Section 3 below.

The question here is does this language indicate that the same club made all three tags, or does it just mean the club happened to be the team that placed that player's third tag. I don't know the answer to that question...

 

[saintsinNO]

That would be horrible precedent, but great for the players. Either way, the fact that the two sides can argue for as long as they did and have that many lawyers working on this thing and still come out with ambiguous language like that is mind-boggling.

 

[Guitarzan]

I know Drew is a Pro's Pro, but still think the longer he holds out the slower our offense will start.
And don't forget, if Drew holds out throughout TC Loomis' job becomes exceedingly difficult. Beginning in week #1 he can't negotiate with Drew for 8 games.

 

[Bartyboy]

Second tag is 120 percent more 3rd is 144 percent more.
Superchuck we need a filling.

 

[Saint_Ward]

If this is the case, I think it would also affect the Club's ability to sign Drew to a long term contract if they were forced to Tag him again next year. I can't find it, but I thought something is triggered in the 3rd tender that prevents a team from then tagging them again or from signing them to a long term deal.

Also, it would change the rules for this Tag to become a "second tag". the NFL clearly doesn't see it that way.

EDIT: if I"m dead wrong, sorry. I know I hate misinformation too.

 

[SaintStephen]

If the NFL as a whole keeps up this litigiousness, they are going to eventually do the unthinkable and start losing fans. Heard SVP at lunch on XM and he actually made a goood point that every day there seems to be a new lawsuit about something in the league. Not a good sign when less than a year after the last CBA and there is this kind of disconnect between the NFLPA and owners. Agents like Condon certainly don't help this matter....

 

[AceTW]

Any Club that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time

I don't see how this can be misconstrued. It's quite obviously (to me at least) written to reference a specific club and a specific player. I guess if you wanted to argue for the sake of arguing you could see it another way, I just don't see how the alternate definition could be made to stick....

 

[gboudx]

This seems to be the relevant language in the CBA:



The question here is does this language indicate that the same club made all three tags, or does it just mean the club happened to be the team that placed that player's third tag. I don't know the answer to that question...

It seems straightforward to me by the language that it's not meant to be the same Club. But can any Franchise designations made during the prior CBA be carried-forward to this CBA? That may be more of what Condon is after. Is there anything in the CBA about these designations being carried-forward?