Let the Franchise Tag Be the Franchise Tag

*THIS PROPOSAL HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN*

Hey everyone,

I want to propose a rule change. I want to strike Article II, Subsection D, #5.

Subsection D:  Franchise Tags

1. Each team may choose to apply up to two franchise tags to prevent their players from becoming unrestricted free agents.
2. Franchise tags can only be applied to players whose contracts have expired.
3. One franchise tag may be used on offense, and one franchise tag may be used on defense.
4. If a player receives the franchise tag, he must be paid the average of top 3 salaries at his position. He is signed for one year only.
5. If the application of the franchise tag results in a salary decrease, then that player will receive a 15% raise over his final salary.
6. A player can only be franchised twice by a team (if he signs with another team, that team also has the right to franchise him two times).

Rationale:

Number 5, about giving a player a 15% raise, is an unnecessary extra step in the franchise tag process. I’d rather just let the franchise tag be the franchise tag, regardless. Why should we artificially inflate a market that’s already been set?

Julio Jones’ salary was just below the franchise tag price, so he got a $0.79 raise, when the spirit of the rule probably implies he should have around a 15% increase. Jones made $46.81, and had he made a dollar more, then his 2017 salary would have been $53.83 instead of the franchise tag of $47.80. That seems a bit arbitrary to me, especially since I “lucked out” and the franchise tag price was slightly higher than his salary.

The Bestine Banthas just placed the franchise tag on QB Matt Ryan. Last year Ryan was left off a roster because his $39.85 salary was deemed exorbitant and outside of the market value for quarterbacks. After week 1 the market was set, and the market decided that the franchise tag for QBs should be $31.47. Later, in an act that can only be described as abject desperation, the Banthas signed Ryan to a one-year deal.

I contend that they should get to pay the $31.47 franchise tag price. They took the hit on the high salary last year. Why should they have to pay $45.83 to franchise their QB when everyone else only has to pay $31.47? Again, it seems arbitrary to me.

Also, when Ryan asked me what the franchise tag cost for QBs I quoted him at $31.47 and he said, “Go ahead.” It was only after that when I remembered about the arbitrary price hike. Clearly the current market says a top QB should cost $31. If that changes in unrestricted free agency, then so be it, but I see no reason to artificially inflate the market now.

Plus, I hate doing extra steps as a commissioner.

So let’s kill it. Who’s with me?

 Loading ...

© 2017, Josh Hammond. All rights reserved.