Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Franchise Tag: To Tag or Not to Tag?
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Miami Dolphins
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mercury22


Most Valuable Poster (1st Ballot)

Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 12818
Location: the 50 yard line
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:09 pm    Post subject: Franchise Tag: To Tag or Not to Tag? Reply with quote

So yesterday was the first day teams could officially name pending free agents with the franchise tag. The Dolphins have a ton of free agents and a ton of dollars (around a reported 44 million). The question becomes, who will they, or who should they use the franchise tag on, if anyone. Candidates include: Sean Smith, Jake Long, Randy Starks, Reggie Bush, Anthony Fasano, or Brian Hartline.


I've heard arguments made to keep many of these players and I've heard arguments made for Franchising Smith, Long, Bush and Starks.

My question to you. Do you use the franchise tag if you are the GM? If so, who are you going to tag?


Here is a list of what it would roughly cost to use the tag on each position:

CB: Franchise: $10.668

DE: Franchise: $10.984

DT: Franchise: $8.306

K/P: Franchise: $2.926

LB: Franchise: $9.455

OL: Franchise: $9.660

QB: Franchise: $14.642

RB: Franchise: $8.079

S: Franchise: $6.798

TE: Franchise: $5.962

WR: Franchise: $10.357


I'd use it on Jake Long. Its an easy way to put the decision about Long on hold one more year. It allows us to see what we have in Jonathan Martin for one more year, and it gives Long one more year to learn the ZBS. Worst case scenario we overspend on Long for one more year and then we are free to start Martin in the spot next season or draft someone to fill the LT spot. I know I am virtually alone with wanting to retain Long, but that's what I would do. How about you?
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mercury22


Most Valuable Poster (1st Ballot)

Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 12818
Location: the 50 yard line
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, and here is a blog by Salguero about the same issue:

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/dolphins_in_depth/2013/02/where-if-anywhere-the-miami-franchise-tag-belongs.html
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stepover


Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 408
Location: London, England
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But as Salguero explains the problem is Long is not a typical tag - the rules are that it's the greater of the average of top 5 at position OR 120% of last year's salary - in Jake's case cos his salary is already huge it means tagging him costs $13.5m for the year. You still sure you want to pay an injury prone player $13.5m for a year when this is a deep tackle draft class and you could lock one up for $1m per year and spend your dollars on weapons like Wallace, seam threat TE, FA corner etc?

If I tagged anyone it would be Starks for a reasonable $8m - Starks is turning 30 so we would get him for one more year at a premium and then next summer we would let him go when we've had his best years.

But personally I would NEVER use the franchise tag unless it was really an emergency and with $40m+ in cap and a slew of draft picks this doesn't strike me as an emergency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jaytotha


Joined: 27 Jan 2008
Posts: 4460
Location: Spokane Valley, Wa
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Long will take around $15 million to tag so ill pass. I don't feel that there is anyone worth tagging because there is not much drop off. Starks is a guy that could be tagged but I think Odrick moving inside would produce the same if not grow into a better player. I say we roll without the tag
_________________


Adopt a Dolphin: RB Knowshon Moreno

Rushing: 24- 134yds 5.6 Avg 1TD
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fishfan4life


Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 1947
Location: santa rosa california
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 2:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stepover wrote:
But as Salguero explains the problem is Long is not a typical tag - the rules are that it's the greater of the average of top 5 at position OR 120% of last year's salary - in Jake's case cos his salary is already huge it means tagging him costs $13.5m for the year. You still sure you want to pay an injury prone player $13.5m for a year when this is a deep tackle draft class and you could lock one up for $1m per year and spend your dollars on weapons like Wallace, seam threat TE, FA corner etc?

If I tagged anyone it would be Starks for a reasonable $8m - Starks is turning 30 so we would get him for one more year at a premium and then next summer we would let him go when we've had his best years.

But personally I would NEVER use the franchise tag unless it was really an emergency and with $40m+ in cap and a slew of draft picks this doesn't strike me as an emergency.
Its kind of a cutthoat way of buisness but reality and I agree I would think about Starks. I want him to stay but dont want to lock him up long term so over pay a little for one year and use a little more tread on the tires. When push comes to shove I wouldnt tag anyone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skatewood2


Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 5745
Location: Kent, WA
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would not use the Franchise Tag this season. We do not have one player that is top of their position that we need to keep with the exception of Jake Long. JL will be extremely expensive for a player that doesn't fit in the scheme that we will be paying him to play in. I don't like giving Starks the Tag because I think Odrick will be just as good as him once he is moved inside. As for Sean Smith, he would be the only one that I would consider using the tag on but I still don't know if he is worth the amount of money the tag would require.

My vote is no, let's move on to FA and pick up the players we need and then draft the rest.
_________________



NFL - Miami Dolphins
College - THE Ohio State University Buckeyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mercury22


Most Valuable Poster (1st Ballot)

Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 12818
Location: the 50 yard line
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not using the franchise tag anywhere ensures more holes. We already have holes at DE, WR, TE, and S. If we lose all of our free agents we create needs at OT, CB, RB, WR and DL.

Truth is, all the franchise tag does is ensure we pay top dollar for a player and keep one hole from being created on our roster. So I get why not using the tag makes some sense. However, I don't see how we are going to fix all the holes we create each and every off season. We are perpetually in the bottom of the league, because we continually have more holes than we can fill. The cycle never seems to end and this season while we have more space and picks than virtually any year before, we also have more holes than ever before.
_________________
"22 players are involved in every football play. To value precisely the activity of one of them, it is first necessary to account for the actions of the other 21"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fishfan4life


Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 1947
Location: santa rosa california
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mercury22 wrote:
Not using the franchise tag anywhere ensures more holes. We already have holes at DE, WR, TE, and S. If we lose all of our free agents we create needs at OT, CB, RB, WR and DL.

Truth is, all the franchise tag does is ensure we pay top dollar for a player and keep one hole from being created on our roster. So I get why not using the tag makes some sense. However, I don't see how we are going to fix all the holes we create each and every off season. We are perpetually in the bottom of the league, because we continually have more holes than we can fill. The cycle never seems to end and this season while we have more space and picks than virtually any year before, we also have more holes than ever before.
Very true and we can all agree or disagree on who should or shouldnt but this point is one of the reasons why I would debate Starks for one I am not convinced Odrick can do the same job and losing langford and starks back to back years creates depth problems and if vernon doesnt pan out we are really thin and this still puts Soliai in on passing downs. Jake might be a little to pricey for me but I see what your saying
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ovaw8lover


Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Posts: 9065
Location: Dolphins Stadium
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are not any franchise worthy players this year. Having said that, the Fins will tag Jake Long. Its the Paul Solai situation all over again.
_________________
"Yesterday Is History, Tomorrow Is A Mystery, And Today Is A Gift. That Is Why It Is Called The Present.""
Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dolphinemidget


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 3805
Location: Florida
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think if we are using the Tag Long or Bush would probably be who I would use it on. Smith can be replaced as can almost anyone, wish we could bank it and use it maybe next year.lol
_________________


Adopt a Phins 2014, 1st Pick Ryan Tannehill
Tannehill (2014 Season stats Week-6)
60.8% CMP - 1133 yards -8 TD's - 5 INT's - 81.2 Rat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cddolphin


Joined: 23 Mar 2009
Posts: 6659
Location: Gainesville, FL
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MAYBE I'd tag Smith but only since our CB depth is horrible.
_________________
Maddogg wrote:
Also, Joe Philbin denies knowing who won the presidential election in 2012 because as quoted "I don't go anywhere where people talk about anything."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Russ57


Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 692
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nobody is worth tagging. The team will allow its FA's to discover this sad fact on their own. Smart move that keeps us from looking like that bad guys that low ball their players. Then we offer those we want fair contracts.

No doubt we will see a few go to other teams such as Long, Smith, and Bush. I think we will come to terms with Hartline and Fasano. I would try the hardest to keep Starks out of all of our guys. Personally I'd trade Odrick while his contract is team friendly. I see him best used as a 3-4 DE. I have even said I'd trade Solia as we don't need a NT as much as a disruptive, penetrating DT. I'll take a high to mid 2nd round pick for either (and I think they are easily worth that). This draft has some DE/DT talent.

Those that look at my posts will know I'm big on preaching fiscal responsibility. Right now the team has far too much money allocated to the defense. Therefore it makes more sense to let the defensive guys leave, draft defense, and fill our offensive needs with FA's. I know most will cringe at those words but it is the honest truth.

So I propose we sign a proven WR, TE, and OG/OT and draft CB/DE/DT/FS (not saying those should be our first four picks nor that we shouldn't draft any offensive guys). Consider if we were to resign Smith, and keep Patterson and Matthews, will would have like 18 million tied up in 3 CB's alone. That is crazy money for the skill levels involved. We "have" to get younger (as in cheaper) on the defense.

And to make you guys hate me even more....next year we need to replace Dansby and Burnett.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fishfan4life


Joined: 15 Mar 2012
Posts: 1947
Location: santa rosa california
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I actually wouldnt mind depending how everything turns out in free agency and rounds 1 and 2 is to draft a LB in round 3 for depth this season and to groom him to become a starter the following year. Misi is a free agent next year and dansby and burnett will be a year older
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Maddogg


Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 1749
Location: A Galaxy Far Far Away......
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not one player in our free agency pool is worth a tag. So no Marco Polo coming from my lips.
_________________



Jared Odrick 2014 Adopt A Player : Games - 6, Tackles 7 Assists 2 Sacks 1 Forced Fumbles 1

Joe Philbin Death Watch - After Week 7 : Death 24 Joe 21
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JCool333


Most Valuable Poster (5th Ballot)

Joined: 13 Mar 2005
Posts: 12767
PostPosted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

While Long isn't worth it, I'd consider the tag just as an attempt to get some value for him and trade him. Worst case scenario, you're taking a chance on Long returning to form next season as a Dolphin (and overpaying by a good few mil, sure, but for a one year test-run contract). Best case scenario, some team trades a pick for Long.

We played the whole Long situation incorrectly, I think. I'm not sure it would work but the right play would have included Ireland saying every time that Long will definitely be a Dolphin, and pretending that we have no plans to see him go elsewhere. And leak that message to everyone. Then tag him right away and trade him while everyone thinks we still believe he has a lot of value.

Still, it may be too late now to actually attempt to get any trade value for Long. But I think that's always the case when we try and trade someone because we don't play our hand close enough to our chest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Miami Dolphins All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group