teams in the KC race this off season

[Sportster 72]

Transition tag doesn’t yield anything. All we can do is match the contract.

My bad, I said the wrong name .... should have been non-exclusive tag.

 

[Rowdy]

You can’t use the non-exclusive tag being as it the third tag. All they can do is trans, exclusive, or sign and trade.

 

[Sportster 72]

Thanks for the education.

What I would like to see them to is

1. LTD
2. Whatever the fuck you do to get a 1st and a 3rd

I prefer the LTD

 

[Stymietee]

You can’t use the non-exclusive tag being as it the third tag. All they can do is trans, exclusive, or sign and trade.

I would really appreciate any link or information that you can provide that makes this clear. I've yet to see anything that says that the non exclusive tag can't be used if it follows two previous tags. Thanks!!

BTW: in the event that you cannot find it, this might help. It's a very telling article. Good read!


Need to Know: Can the Redskins really afford to franchise ...
www.nbcsports.com/washington/washington-redskins/need-know-can...

 

[Rowdy]

I would really appreciate any link or information that you can provide that makes this clear. I've yet to see anything that says that the non exclusive tag can't be used if it follows two previous tags. Thanks!!

BTW: in the event that you cannot find it, this might help. It's a very telling article. Good read!


Need to Know: Can the Redskins really afford to franchise ...
www.nbcsports.com/washington/washington-redskins/need-know-can...

The 5 O'Clock Club: Can the non-exclusive tag really be used on Kirk Cousins in 2018?

 

[Stymietee]

The 5 O'Clock Club: Can the non-exclusive tag really be used on Kirk Cousins in 2018?

I'm still reading the CBA, but it looks like they can only transition tag him this time around without locking themselves in as the single bargainer with Kirk. I'm currently looking to see if there is a waiver of some sort that applies to the exclusive and/or non exclusive tag.

As I understand it, they can still designate him one or the other of the two Franchise tags the difference being that the rules governing such a move a third time, guts the intent of the non exclusive tag by restricting who can negotiate with him.

I would still use the non exclusive tag on him and let the NFLPA and League clarify which set of rules apply.

Any way...Thanks, good info!

 

[Sharkinva]

I'm still reading the CBA, but it looks like they can only transition tag him this time around without locking themselves in as the single bargainer with Kirk. I'm currently looking to see if there is a waiver of some sort that applies to the exclusive and/or non exclusive tag.

As I understand it, they can still designate him one or the other of the two Franchise tags the difference being that the rules governing such a move a third time, guts the intent of the non exclusive tag by restricting who can negotiate with him.

I would still use the non exclusive tag on him and let the NFLPA and League clarify which set of rules apply.

Any way...Thanks, good info!

The rule is simple. If they give him the non exclusive tag Kirk COULD talk to other teams. In the event he signs an offer sheet the Redskins can either match... or get two first rounders (or less) in compensation for him leaving.

The draw back being, he could simply sign it and play on the tag. There is no express wording in the CBA that says they could not tag him again in 2019, but cost would be prohibitive as the tag in 2019 would be $41M and the NFLPA would pitch a major bitch as it was some what agreed in the previous CBA that the franchise tag could only be used 3 times before a player becomes an unrestricted FA.

It has been long accepted that a player can only ever be tagged three times although it has never been put to the test.

If they use the exclusive tag, Kirk will simply sign it and play, as it would be an attempt by Bruce to control WHO he could talk to. And I get the feeling he wouldnt like that as Bruce would likely only give permission for teams like the Browns to negotiate with Cousins.

 

[Stymietee]

The rule is simple. If they give him the non exclusive tag Kirk COULD talk to other teams. In the event he signs an offer sheet the Redskins can either match... or get two first rounders (or less) in compensation for him leaving.

The draw back being, he could simply sign it and play on the tag. There is no express wording in the CBA that says they could not tag him again in 2019, but cost would be prohibitive as the tag in 2019 would be $41M and the NFLPA would pitch a major bitch as it was some what agreed in the previous CBA that the franchise tag could only be used 3 times before a player becomes an unrestricted FA.

It has been long accepted that a player can only ever be tagged three times although it has never been put to the test.

If they use the exclusive tag, Kirk will simply sign it and play, as it would be an attempt by Bruce to control WHO he could talk to. And I get the feeling he wouldnt like that as Bruce would likely only give permission for teams like the Browns to negotiate with Cousins.

I know, I was merely responding to a previous post wherein an article was posted implying that they could not sign him to the non exclusive tag.

Here's the article posted by @HTTR08

The 5 O'Clock Club: Can the non-exclusive tag really be used on Kirk Cousins in 2018?

 

[Sportster 72]

My understanding from the agent I was listening to other day is they can tag him over and over but at a 20% raise. I think that where shark gets the $41 million but I will let shark speak for himself if I am guessing wrong.

I guess I should go back and listen to that agent on Cooley and Kevin again.

 

[Rowdy]

Yes they can tag again and again, but not the non-exclusive, because after two consecutive tags he can only negotiate with the redskins therefore, it would be an exclusive tag.

 

[Edonidd]

If they tag him it doesn't matter who he CAN negotiate with. He's already proven he'll happily play for the one year guaranteed money, especially with the way NFL contracts work where nothing else is guaranteed and you can even be forced to repay a portion of your "guaranteed" signing bonus if you don't play out the contract.

So many dumb athletes complain about the franchise tag, but it is hugely in their favor. Make top money and still be eligible for a huge contract next year. I think Cousins gets it though, and would happily sign the tag the day they gave it to him, wouldn't ever budge in negotiations though, in fact he would probably ask for even more since he would have even more leverage then.

 

[Sportster 72]

Cousin's hasn't complained at all and he has assumed all the risk. He would have been screwed if there was a career ending injury. I bet he has a good insurance policy though in the case something bad did happen.

 

[Stymietee]

Yes they can tag again and again, but not the non-exclusive, because after two consecutive tags he can only negotiate with the redskins therefore, it would be an exclusive tag.

There's NOTHING in the CBA that says they cannot use the non-exclusive tag on him. Just that if they do, the negotiating platform changes. What's not clear in the CBA is, should they use the non-exclusive tag what governs such a move.... the original intent of the non exclusive tag or article 10 sub section 2B?

Should they actually employ the non-exclusive tag it will be very interesting to see how that all shakes out because let's be clear here, the union will stand for Kirk and his ability to bargain league wide for his services while the NFL will want to hold to article 10 sub-section 2B, limiting Kirk to bargain with this team only.

 

[ehb5]

Of course I discredit the passing of a collegiate QB who is also running a gimmick offense as a runner. Like I said, his running affords him opportunities that won’t be there in the NFL. When you are a 60% passer and you have the benefit of running and what it does to a defense, then yes, you should be discredited as a passer.

I don’t compare Jackson to RG3 because they are different type runners. RG3was straight line speed and LJ is allusive as well as fast. I actually like that part of LJ much better. If you go back to RG3’s rookie year, I mentioned the same things on how it improved RG3because of his run threat and how that helped Reed and Ammo. He made players around him better in a way. When his legs were taken away, he isn’t even an NFL back up.

Oh, I don’t take away from Russell Wilson even though he can run. I don’t think he would be an NFL QB if he couldn’t though.

If you think he's running a gimmick offense you might wanna check again. Does his running help make things easier? Sure. Would he still be a successful passer without it? Most likely. That's why you evaluate prospects. You can watch them and see how strong they are at different parts of their game.

What part of having a strong arm, pocket presence, touch, the ability to read a defense, and throw guys open doesn' translate without your mobility?

With Griffin I agree. He was a bad nfl passer. Which is what I've been saying all along. A QBs rushing ability is just gravy. I think you should totally ignore it when evaluating prospects and only look at their passing ability. If they have enough in that department THEN you can talk about what their rushing brings to the table. But if you look at Jackson as a passer he checks most of the boxes. Of course that never guarantees he'll hit...a ton of guys have checked the boxes and still failed but...that's just how it works. You can't predict everything.

Unless you mean Russell Wilson literally doesn' have functioning legs in your hypothetical that is the craziest thing I've ever heard. Thats coach level BS.

 

[ehb5]

A guy that rushes for over 1300 yards as a QB is not a pass first guy. Running is a crucial piece of his game and it also has had a significant affect on his passing in that it freezes the defenses and leaves wide receivers WIDE open at times. An yet, he still can't compete 60% of his passes........hmmm.

The comparison to Wilson is way off base. Wilson was never a running QB. The most yards he ever rushed for in one season was around 400 in college. That is a far cry from 1300 yds and clearly that aspect of his game was not a primary feature.

I think what everyone is trying to say is that Jackson's ability to run has had a major impact on his success in his passing game. That feature will not be nearly as available to him in the NFL. So it is reasonable to think that he is going to have to redefine his game to become an NFL QB as he is not rushing for 1300 yards in the NFL or his career will be very short lived. Can he do it? Anything is possible, its really up to him and how hard he is willing to work. But he has to be viewed as a project at this point.

I recall all the talk at the beginning of the season as to how deep this draft class will be at QB. Honestly, I don't see anyone coming out that i view as a can't miss prospect. I'm sure one or two may emerge as future NFL franchise guys, but I bet its not who everyone thinks it will be (Rosen, Mayfield, etc). Look for sleepers the have been overlooked because of all of the hype surrounding the top 5 or so.

Maybe this is just a difference of opinion but I don't consider designed runs to be relevant in whether a QB is run first or not. He simply isn't going to be asked to run the ball 20 times a game in the nfl. Nobody would ever do that. And I think it's unfair to knock him for being run first where the play design is literally for him to run.

What matters is...when he's asked to pass...is he run first or pass first? And I believe he's pass first in those situations. That's what he'll be asked to do in the NFL and that's what's worth evaluating. How does he look when he's asked to pass.

I like this class. I think all 5 of the top guys seem to have legit superstar potential (even though I rip on allen all the time). Some of them certainly carry some risk but that's just kinda the name of the game when you draft a QB.

Fwiw I haven' watched much of Rosen yet but I think I've heard more positive things about him from the people i trust than I have about any QB since probably Luck.

 

[Sleepy T]

The rule is simple. If they give him the non exclusive tag Kirk COULD talk to other teams. In the event he signs an offer sheet the Redskins can either match... or get two first rounders (or less) in compensation for him leaving.

The draw back being, he could simply sign it and play on the tag. There is no express wording in the CBA that says they could not tag him again in 2019, but cost would be prohibitive as the tag in 2019 would be $41M and the NFLPA would pitch a major bitch as it was some what agreed in the previous CBA that the franchise tag could only be used 3 times before a player becomes an unrestricted FA.

It has been long accepted that a player can only ever be tagged three times although it has never been put to the test.

If they use the exclusive tag, Kirk will simply sign it and play, as it would be an attempt by Bruce to control WHO he could talk to. And I get the feeling he wouldnt like that as Bruce would likely only give permission for teams like the Browns to negotiate with Cousins.

Why do you think he would only give the Browns and similar teams the option? I mean outside of possibly the G-Men and Maaaybe the 49ers (not likely now), why would Bruce give a damn who Kirk talked to? Assuming the trade value is fair, I doubt he would prevent him from talking to most teams. Not sure why you think this?

Cousins wants a LTD done, whether it be here or elsewhere. If he gets a good deal from someone he would like to play for, then he will take it. You are making this whole thing out between The FO camp and the KC camp to be much more personal than it really is. I don't think that the FO would prohibit KC to talk to half the league out of pride and ego.

 

[Stymietee]

If you think he's running a gimmick offense you might wanna check again. Does his running help make things easier? Sure. Would he still be a successful passer without it? Most likely. That's why you evaluate prospects. You can watch them and see how strong they are at different parts of their game.

What part of having a strong arm, pocket presence, touch, the ability to read a defense, and throw guys open doesn' translate without your mobility?

With Griffin I agree. He was a bad nfl passer. Which is what I've been saying all along. A QBs rushing ability is just gravy. I think you should totally ignore it when evaluating prospects and only look at their passing ability. If they have enough in that department THEN you can talk about what their rushing brings to the table. But if you look at Jackson as a passer he checks most of the boxes. Of course that never guarantees he'll hit...a ton of guys have checked the boxes and still failed but...that's just how it works. You can't predict everything.

Unless you mean Russell Wilson literally doesn' have functioning legs in your hypothetical that is the craziest thing I've ever heard. Thats coach level BS.

In yesterday's game, Marcus Mariota, literally made this point.

 

[gkekoa]

If you think he's running a gimmick offense you might wanna check again. Does his running help make things easier? Sure. Would he still be a successful passer without it? Most likely. That's why you evaluate prospects. You can watch them and see how strong they are at different parts of their game.

What part of having a strong arm, pocket presence, touch, the ability to read a defense, and throw guys open doesn' translate without your mobility?

With Griffin I agree. He was a bad nfl passer. Which is what I've been saying all along. A QBs rushing ability is just gravy. I think you should totally ignore it when evaluating prospects and only look at their passing ability. If they have enough in that department THEN you can talk about what their rushing brings to the table. But if you look at Jackson as a passer he checks most of the boxes. Of course that never guarantees he'll hit...a ton of guys have checked the boxes and still failed but...that's just how it works. You can't predict everything.

Unless you mean Russell Wilson literally doesn' have functioning legs in your hypothetical that is the craziest thing I've ever heard. Thats coach level BS.

Gimmick collegiate offense...yep.

There is no reason to believe he would be a successful QB without his legs.

If he is properly reading a defense, he wouldn’t consistently throw into coverage. If he had touch, he would complete more passes. Everything he does throwing the ball is created by his legs.

 

[ehb5]

Gimmick collegiate offense...yep.

There is no reason to believe he would be a successful QB without his legs.

If he is properly reading a defense, he wouldn’t consistently throw into coverage. If he had touch, he would complete more passes. Everything he does throwing the ball is created by his legs.

Oh. Right. My bad. I forgot you already had your mind made up and wont actually watch him with an open mind. My b.

 

[gkekoa]

Oh. Right. My bad. I forgot you already had your mind made up and wont actually watch him with an open mind. My b.

Yes. It is my mind that is closed when you refuse to see his legs open up the passing.