- Thread starter
- #1
redskinsfan
Well-Known Member
Great watching this Twitter tete-a-tete between Chris Russell and Rich Tandler regarding what tag should've been used on Kirk during free agency. Russell has been a huge proponent of using the transition tag, as opposed to the franchise tag, on Kirk. I think most of us here would agree that that's garbage. Paying $2M more for the franchise tag has basically given us the security we need in retaining Kirk and has allowed us the opportunity to negotiate the deal we believe is best with him. Russell's view is premised on the fact that a transition tag would allow Kirk to fetch a "market" deal, which we would then match. The problem with this hypothesis is Russell's assumption that the market will act rationally. That's certainly not the case in many instances, and, as we can all see with the deals getting done yesterday, there are some seriously irrational players that are overpaying for QBs and d-linemen in the current league year's market.
I don't follow these guys much, but from what I've seen from both of them, I think Tandler is the better analyst between the two. In fact, some things Chris Russell says are bat sh*t insane (e.g., suggesting the Redskins let Trent Williams walk in FA because he was injured and/or couldn't play well through injuries). This is just another instance of that.