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

[Guitarzan]

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....

Unless the new CBA says otherwise, I too felt that the tag only accumulated with the same club.

Why should the Saints have to pay extra for a decision that San Diego's GM (AJ?) made?

 

[livefromDC]

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

Thanks for pointing me pass Jason Cole, Sarcastic. Otherwise I wouldn't have looked at the thread.

Here's my opinion: It doesn't say any CLUBS that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time.... Meaning, different ball clubs are thought of as a collective group. It specifically says "any club that designates a player". The club, here the New Orleans Saints, that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time has to pay upwards of 144% of the previous contract. In simpler terms, it means if the Saints pick the same player 3 times to be the franchise player. Not, if any team has picked the same player 3 times combined. It's a team by team designation with emphasis on each specific team's right to make such a designation. If it were written the other way around like say "a player designated to be the franchise player for the third time by any club", it could be received totally differently because the emphasis is on the player being designated 3X not the TEAM designating a player 3X.

 

[Domeination]

Loomis and Condon need to stop all the posturing competition and just meet in the middle already.

This.

 

[Booker]

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?

Just to spin that around, from the players perspective they feel they are being penalized when they get the tag. They care far less about who franchised them than they do about having lost their ability to shop their services and secure a long term deal.

Consider, this. A player get's franchised three years in a row. During the third year he is traded to another team, but does not sign a new contract. The following offseason, should the new team be able to franchise him a fourth year in a row because it would only be the first time this team tagged him? And because this was only the first year they attempted to franchise the player, would they only be required to tender him at the average of the top 5 players at his position, as opposed to the mandatory boosts incurred when a team tags someone in back to back years?

Now I'll admit that this scenario is highly unlikely, but its something to think about, and I totally agree with Sarcastic on this -- this is a huge issue that needs to be resolved.

 

[AARPSaint]

Thanks for pointing me pass Jason Cole, Sarcastic. Otherwise I wouldn't have looked at the thread.

Here's my opinion: It doesn't say any CLUBS that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time.... Meaning, different ball clubs are thought of as a collective group. It specifically says "any club that designates a player". The club, here the New Orleans Saints, that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time has to pay upwards of 144% of the previous contract. In simpler terms, it means if the Saints pick the same player 3 times to be the franchise player. Not, if any team has picked the same player 3 times combined.

Not advocating either way--but if you stress ANY, it comes out the opposite. It would be best if the issue did not arise at all.

 

[Quickdraw]

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.

I used to agree with your "mind-boggling" comment. I grew up on a crawfish farm in rural Louisiana but my ambition wanted to swim in the big pond so I moved to Houston to test my mettle. My career has taken my in the boardrooms and behind the scenes of large corporations that are very outwardly successful. What consistently surprises me (not so much anymore) is how poorly run large, institutionalized organization really are. They get too big to catch those little things or have the right people with the appropriate incentive to do so.

Which the beauty of a (recently much maligned) free market is that it allows for smaller organizations to correct those flaws and offer the rest of us a better product or service. Except in the case of a government sponsored monopoly such as the NFL.

Oh well...

 

[darkhornet]

Thanks for pointing me pass Jason Cole, Sarcastic. Otherwise I wouldn't have looked at the thread.

Here's my opinion: It doesn't say any CLUBS that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time.... Meaning, different ball clubs are thought of as a collective group. It specifically says "any club that designates a player". The club, here the New Orleans Saints, that designates a player as a Franchise Player for the third time has to pay upwards of 144% of the previous contract. In simpler terms, it means if the Saints pick the same player 3 times to be the franchise player. Not, if any team has picked the same player 3 times combined.

Of course it says "club", because multiple clubs can't all designate a player for the third time in his career. The singular nature of the quote doesn't answer the question, unfortunately. I personally believe the intent of the rule is to be the same club. However, it's not written that way and may have to go to an arbitrator.

 

[Merl]

i'm not buying Condon's theory on this. It has always been understood that the rules 2nd and third tags ate for when they are used in consecutive years. If he does won this though her could end up with less for himself. Under the NFLPA's agent regulations the most he gets is 3% when the player has a regular contract. A franchise tag drops that to 2%. Second tag 1.5% and a third 1%.

 

[SAINTS 12]

That's what makes it a power move

So Drew and his agent wants to handcuff the organzation..Inflated numbers my behind..Drew.....
............

 

[Guitarzan]

So what happens if Loomis can't reach a deal before the end of TC and his suspension goes into effect?

 

[livefromDC]

The wording of official documents can be very tricky. I lived in Aztec, NM for a little while. Aztec is an extremely small community that shares a county with Farmington, NM. Farmington isn't big by a long shot but it is significantly larger than Aztec. However, Aztec is the county seat which has caused some dispute between the two. A group of Farmington residents devised a plan to move the county seat based off of the wording of county documents. The documents read as such:

The county seat will be where the county records are held.

Seems innocent enough right? Well, this group came up with a plan to break in and physically move the country records to Farmington during a big holiday event that was taking place in Aztec (told you, it was a small town). Their logic was that if the county records were brought to Farmington, Farmington would now be the county seat because it would be where the records are currently held (even if they were gotten and moved via an illegal break-in).

If it would have read, "The county records are held in the county seat" instead, no one could have questioned it. Wording is everything. The Franchise Designation wording can be deceiving at first glance but it is actually very clear in that it refers to one team, any of the 32, designating a player as the franchise player for a third time.

 

[thebutler007]

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:

Without a precedent who will interpret the spirit of the clause.... it is vague...IMO....
good post... makes sense to use it as leverage for the contract drew wants...the contract will be cheaper than the third tag cost especially with the bonus spread over the six years

 

[InThatNumber]

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?

I'll play Condon's role:

It's not about a team being penalized, it's about figuring out fair compensation for the elite players in the league. If a player has been franchised three times, he deserves to be paid at the top of his position... ESPECIALLY when two different teams have valued him highly enough to tag him.

 

[Breeze It]

So what happens if Loomis can't reach a deal before the end of TC and his suspension goes into effect?

The deadline is July 16th, way before the beginning of Loomis' suspension. No more real negotiation is going to happen after that.

After July 16, all Drew can do is:

1. Sign the tag and come to camp
2. Sit out of training camp and then sign right before the Redskins opening game
3. Sit out a few more games and then sign
4. Sit out the entire season

 

[livefromDC]

Of course it says "club", because multiple clubs can't all designate a player for the third time in his career. The singular nature of the quote doesn't answer the question, unfortunately. I personally believe the intent of the rule is to be the same club. However, it's not written that way and may have to go to an arbitrator.

That wasn't my point. I didn't indicate that 2 clubs could both franchise a player. We all know that's not possible. My point is that it states that a "club" can designate a player 3 times. It does NOT state that a player designated 3 times by "a club". In the former, we know we're talking specifically about the actions of 1 club. The latter puts the emphasis on the player and makes the designating club non specific. THAT's THE DIFFERENCE. As the subject of the sentence, if it were meant to mean all the clubs together, it should have been plural.

Not advocating either way--but if you stress ANY, it comes out the opposite. It would be best if the issue did not arise at all.

I'm starting to see the confusion and it arises from the meaning of "any" and understanding sentence structure. I'm being dead serious.

"Any" is an adjective that modifies the noun.
an·y   /ˈɛni/ Show Spelled[en-ee] Show IPA
adjective
1. one, a, an, or some; one or more without specification or identification: If you have any witnesses, produce them. Pick out any six you like.

If the noun is plural, than "any" means more than one without being specific or identifying any out of many (well, a number more than 1). Ex: any donuts, any books, etc.
If the noun is singular, than "any" refers to just one within that group without specification or identification. Ex: Any person, any state, etc.

There's a difference. If I ask, "name any states that have a pro football team" vs "name any state that has a pro football team", you're going to answer those questions differently.

The noun in the sentence is Club, which is singular. This is important because it is followed by the action verb, designate. I'm being dead serious here. As it's written, the sentence in question is referring to one team doing an action 3 times to a player and not the cumulative effort of all teams doing an action 3 times to a player.