Source: No progress made in negotiations with Goldson

[ChrisPozz]

Source: No progress in Goldson talks

 

[Cut My Red I Bleed Gold]

He should be kissing the 9ers fuzzy bean bag to play on their defense!!

 

[MHSL82]

What do you guys think about franchise tags? We might have offered him a better deal by now or someone else might have taken him already if not for the tag. We could pull the tag at any time and he can't play elsewhere since we tagged him, but otherwise, he has no incentive not to keep bargaining until Monday. Should free agents really be free to leave or is the tag the special way to keep our guys and therefore a good thing? It really doesn't hurt teams until the second or third time, as a one year overpayment may be better than long term commitment.

 

[numone9er]

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

 

[MHSL82]

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

You didn't think my questions were real? Just kidding.

As far as costs go, it looks to be around the same for either guy. Next year would be the second time for Goldson so it would be, 120% of this year (6.2) or the average for the position (top five), whichever is greater. 7.44 M if I have the numbers right.

Franklin was paid 7.003 Million in 2012. I'm not sure if that was 120% of the previous year's salary or the average of the top five. If that stayed true, the amounts would be relatively the same. If the average is lower, 5.95 M is 120% of Soap's current salary.

1 million is a LOT to me, but not enough in football terms to go based upon money. Franchising a QB versus franchising a nose takle, different story.

 

[Bemular]

What do you guys think about franchise tags? We might have offered him a better deal by now or someone else might have taken him already if not for the tag. We could pull the tag at any time and he can't play elsewhere since we tagged him, but otherwise, he has no incentive not to keep bargaining until Monday. Should free agents really be free to leave or is the tag the special way to keep our guys and therefore a good thing? It really doesn't hurt teams until the second or third time, as a one year overpayment may be better than long term commitment.

Tags are a negotiation strategy with the advantage clearly going to the owners; especially with the non-exclusive tag designation. They are a tradeoff for quicker FA designation for the players so I don't mind them. As you alluded to, we surely would have lost Goldson by now if we had not tagged him.

To the bolded, if we rescind the tag, Goldson is free to go where he wants without restrictions to him or the team that signs him.

 

[MHSL82]

Tags are a negotiation strategy with the advantage clearly going to the owners; especially with the non-exclusive tag designation. They are a tradeoff for quicker FA designation for the players so I don't mind them. As you alluded to, we surely would have lost Goldson by now if we had not tagged him.

To the bolded, if we rescind the tag, Goldson is free to go where he wants without restrictions to him or the team that signs him.

Oops, my bad. I put those two ideas too close to each other. I meant we have the power to rescind and he doesn't... plus, if we don't rescind, he can't go anywhere else, even if they offer more, depending on which tag we used on him. Or we get two first round picks if they can. Man, I need to fix the order of my sentences!

You're right about the quicker FA designation, that could be pretty big if things fall into place for the players.

 

[Bemular]

Oops, my bad. I put those two ideas too close to each other. I meant we have the power to rescind and he doesn't... plus, if we don't rescind, he can't go anywhere else, even if they offer more, depending on which tag we used on him. Or we get two first round picks if they can. Man, I need to fix the order of my sentences!

You're right about the quicker FA designation, that could be pretty big if things fall into place for the players.

Goldson is non-exclusive and nobody, not even Mike Ditka would be willing to offer two 1st round picks for Goldson; and, we are not going to rescind so he is ours for the year. His only two options left are to sign and play for a bigger contract (whether from us or another team) or holdout.

 

[MHSL82]

Goldson is non-exclusive and nobody, not even Mike Ditka would be willing to offer two 1st round picks for Goldson; and, we are not going to rescind so he is ours for the year. His only two options left are to sign and play for a bigger contract (whether from us or another team) or holdout.

LOL, I miss Ditka. Mainly for the SNL skits. We're in good shape for Goldson, I was just saying how for the players, it seems stacked against them because for most players, including Goldson, there's no one's going to offer two first round picks, many are non-exclusive, and rescinding doesn't happen often. I was thinking in general, but as it applies to Goldson, we're getting him back this year.

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

(Yes, I stole numone9er's question) What are your thoughts on using it for Soap or Goldson next year?

 

[deep9er]

LOL, I miss Ditka. Mainly for the SNL skits. We're in good shape for Goldson, I was just saying how for the players, it seems stacked against them because for most players, including Goldson, there's no one's going to offer two first round picks, many are non-exclusive, and rescinding doesn't happen often. I was thinking in general, but as it applies to Goldson, we're getting him back this year.

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

(Yes, I stole numone9er's question) What are your thoughts on using it for Soap or Goldson next year?

tough question......Sop is a solid player against the run, but the NFL is about passing. so while a good NT is still essential, is the tag amount now too high? cause run stopping NT's like Sop play what.....50% of the snaps?

on the other hand, IMO good safeties are easier to obtain, than solid NT's.

 

[Bemular]

LOL, I miss Ditka. Mainly for the SNL skits. We're in good shape for Goldson, I was just saying how for the players, it seems stacked against them because for most players, including Goldson, there's no one's going to offer two first round picks, many are non-exclusive, and rescinding doesn't happen often. I was thinking in general, but as it applies to Goldson, we're getting him back this year.

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

(Yes, I stole numone9er's question) What are your thoughts on using it for Soap or Goldson next year?

Well, for the tagged player the deck is stacked against them but for all the other players the deck is stacked in their favor. So, there is a tradeoff.

As for who do we tag next year - that is really tough to say. There are so many factors and strategies that influence who gets tagged. I would like to not lose either of Sopoaga or Goldson.

 

[imac_21]

Goldson is non-exclusive and nobody, not even Mike Ditka would be willing to offer two 1st round picks for Goldson; and, we are not going to rescind so he is ours for the year. His only two options left are to sign and play for a bigger contract (whether from us or another team) or holdout.

For about 24 hours he has one other option: He can sign a long term deal. The deadline for that is 1:00 pm pacific tomorrow I believe.

 

[RobertPhD01]

We have been successful in building from the front to back. We need to continue moving towards the secondary!:bump2: Go 49ers!!

 

[Crimsoncrew]

LOL, I miss Ditka. Mainly for the SNL skits. We're in good shape for Goldson, I was just saying how for the players, it seems stacked against them because for most players, including Goldson, there's no one's going to offer two first round picks, many are non-exclusive, and rescinding doesn't happen often. I was thinking in general, but as it applies to Goldson, we're getting him back this year.

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

(Yes, I stole numone9er's question) What are your thoughts on using it for Soap or Goldson next year?

On the flip side, a guy like Goldson, who has some issues in coverage for a FS despite his ball-hawking (and an awful lot of those INTs came on deflections last year) is going to make $6.2 million when he might struggle to see that on the open market. Goldson had a good year last year, but he got no bites last year. How many teams completely changed their evaluation on him based on that one season, to the point that they'd offer $5 million + when they wouldn't even offer him $2 million for last year.

If a guy truly is among the top-5 at the position, the tag hurts. But for guys who aren't, and an awful lot of those get tagged these days, it can be a decent one-year windfall.

 

[MHSL82]

Great points Bem and Crimsoncrew. I guess the franchise tag is so isolated to me that it seems like it's unfair for players not wanting to be somewhere, when it's easy to forget that everyone else has it good. If it's just money (not team, speaking generally because of course Goldson would love to be on this defense), then the bigger issue is commitment and security because 6.2 is likely more than any other team would give for one year. If he really just wanted commitment, he could sign the current offer and have it. The year averages would be less than 6.2 and the guaranteed per year would be even less. Do you think our long term offer to him is more than other teams would offer? (In a situation where we could match.)

 

[mem49er]

How many teams completely changed their evaluation on him based on that one season, to the point that they'd offer $5 million + when they wouldn't even offer him $2 million for last year.
If a guy truly is among the top-5 at the position, the tag hurts. But for guys who aren't, and an awful lot of those get tagged these days, it can be a decent one-year windfall.

This is what I have been thinking since this started. The guy basically had to come back after an embarrassing time trying to land somewhere else. I think he's good (not great) and would like him on the team, but I have complete faith in the front office's valuation on him. If he takes something like what Tennessee gave Griffin, I think it's fair for both sides.

 

[Bemular]

For about 24 hours he has one other option: He can sign a long term deal. The deadline for that is 1:00 pm pacific tomorrow I believe.

Whoops - forgot about the obvious - Thanks Imac - and yes it is 1:00PM PST

 

[NinerSickness]

The real question is what do we do if we don't get a deal done with him? Do we tag Goldson or Soap next year?

Well, Soap >>> Goldston in terms of importance.

 

[CalamityX11]

Goldson really playing hard ball here.... good for him but oh well....

Sucks that he's coming off a pro bowl year, hope to see him continue his success this upcoming season and beyond but if beyond means another team, so be it.

 

[Bemular]

On the flip side, a guy like Goldson, who has some issues in coverage for a FS despite his ball-hawking (and an awful lot of those INTs came on deflections last year) is going to make $6.2 million when he might struggle to see that on the open market. Goldson had a good year last year, but he got no bites last year. How many teams completely changed their evaluation on him based on that one season, to the point that they'd offer $5 million + when they wouldn't even offer him $2 million for last year.

If a guy truly is among the top-5 at the position, the tag hurts. But for guys who aren't, and an awful lot of those get tagged these days, it can be a decent one-year windfall.

I have just a few thoughts here. First of all, you raise an excellent point about the windfall, however, the FT tender is now the average of the top five players at the respective position for the previous 5 years so I think those windfalls are going to be significantly fewer than before.

Additionally, as for players being tagged into a windfall situation, it should be noted that GMs tag players primarily for their "team" value and secondarily for their "league" value. Even with that said, I don't think there are too many players "tagged" into windfalls, perhaps a sprinkle here and there, AF is probably a good example of my point.

Regarding Goldson's issues, every FS gets beat, it is the nature of the position; However, that is certainly not an indication of a FS having issues. Goldson was a pro-bowl FS and performed among the best in the league last year, so these "issues" you are referring to were certainly minimal.

Having said that, I gotta reel you in a little and perhaps re-direct you on your claim that "(...an awful lot of [Goldson's] INTs came on deflections last year)".

First, intercepting passes that have been deflected and/or tipped demonstrates excellent concentration and is therefore a positive, not a negative. With that said Goldson had one INT that came as a result of a deflection (vs. Pit) and one that came by way of being tipped (vs. Ari).

Both INT's demonstrated excellent concentration; furthermore, 2 INT's hardly constitutes "an awful lot". Whether the event is seen in its proper context of being a positive or in its improper context of being negative – not even in a small number environment would that constitute "an awful lot".

Regarding Goldson not being offered a contract in 2010 I thought I had read last year and thus believe he was offered a contract by the Patriots; that offer notwithstanding, we offered him a 5yr/$25m contract as well.

As for how many teams completely changed their evaluation on him based on last year's performance - plenty! You know how this business works. While it may be forever unknown the ‘who’ and the ‘how much’, one thing is certain, had Goldson hit the market, he would have been snapped up in a heartbeat for more than the $6.2m tag tender.

Based on Griffin's contract I would put Goldson's market value at somewhere between $7-7.5m based strictly on a performance comparative.