Brees Franchised???

shadowdrinker_x · 12-08-2004, 12:52 PM

Yep...I heard it last night on ESPN that San Diego was seriously considering slapping the franchise tag on bress...

Of course this would only keep him around 1 more year..

But..I remember Euphoria saying that this would happen on a previous thread..and I, like many others, Doubted and bashed the Idea...

Good call Euphoria...you may be right...

[Edited on 8/12/2004 by shadowdrinker_x]

JKool · 12-08-2004, 01:12 PM

sdx and Euph,

Nice point. When I saw your subject line, I thought to myself that franchising Brees would make good sense.

Let me display my ignorance of NFL contracting. If he gets franchised, doesn\'t that just mean that the Chargers would get a chance to match whatever offer he gets? If they weren\'t really planning on paying him pretty big money to be a backup (or they were going to keep him), wouldn\'t they have to seriously consider letting Rivers go (I imagine he is getting paid pretty well)?

If franchising Brees means that other teams will have to pay through the nose for him, then it might be a good strategy for the Chargers, if they think that will hurt the team who takes him (in terms of financial position), otherwise, I don\'t see why they\'d do it?

saintswhodi · 12-08-2004, 01:37 PM

Hey Kool, if they do it, it is simply cause they can. they have the money, they will be like $21 mil under the cap this year, and they are already winning. So besides shoring up a few positions here and there, they really don\'t need to spend money on much else. They also have two number one draft picks this year. It makes sense for them to do it, but I doubt they will get anyone to give up a whole lot for him. Definitely not two firsts, but maybe a team like Dallas who has two this year will give them at least one and a later round pick.

And if a player is franchised, he gets the average of the top 5 at that position. If a team makes him an offer, it can\'t be accepted w/o the franchise getting compensated. If they don\'t get what they feel what a player is worth, they keep the player for that year at the franchised salary. They don\'t really get to match another team\'s offer so much as prevent that anyone else from signing him until they get theirs.

BrooksMustGo · 12-08-2004, 02:11 PM

This is only bad news if we want to add Brees in the off-season.

Such a high cost on Brees might make AB look like a bargain in comparision? January 3rd, we need to start shopping AB.

saintswhodi · 12-08-2004, 02:21 PM

If we can shop AB, and somehow fleece a first out of someone, we may be able to take a shot at Brees. Other than that, if they franchise him, it ain\'t happening. If he isn\'t franchised, Dallas has a lot of room to make a run at him also. We have a lot of other holes that need to be filled so AB has to be gone if we take a shot at Brees.

Danno · 12-08-2004, 02:41 PM

It\'ll be hard for them to afford both Rivers and Brees. I think its simply a move to force a trade instead of just losing him. I\'m no Mickey Loomis but I think the plan is to arrange a solid trade, have Brees agree and sign a long term contract for his new team.
The only risk being if Brees forces San Diego\'s hand and stays another year. That would probably kill any Charger plans to bring in high dollar free-agents.
But I could be wrong. I don\'t remember all the rules and restrictions on franchised players.

BrooksMustGo · 12-08-2004, 03:01 PM

http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/qa

The franchise tag requires the club to pay the player the average of the top 5 salaries at the position or 120% of last year\'s salary, whichever is highest.

If the club is willing to entertain offers from other teams (as the Chargers certainly must), then they have the right of first refusal. They can match any offer for the player. If the club chooses not to match the offer made for the player, then they get 2 first round draft choices in return.

2 first rounds plus a lot of money doesn\'t seem like a bargain to me. I don\'t think Brees is worth that much. But I also have no doubt that some team will be happy to give that for him. My fear with Brees is that he would be to QB\'s what Nick Saban is to coaches: a flash in the pan.

In contrast I think Brooks for some combination of picks and players would be a steal for some QB starved club and at least he has several years of performance behind him.

So the BMG plan: deal Brooks, go out and get a McMahon, Schaub or Garrard or someone like that and draft some defense and quality LT.

saintswhodi · 12-08-2004, 03:18 PM

My fear with Brees is that he would be to QB\'s what Nick Saban is to coaches: a flash in the pan

BMg, I generally agree with you but this baffled me. Saban, a flash in the pan? His championship team lost it\'s starting qb(Mauck), both wide receivers(Clayton and Henderson), a guard(Peterman), it\'s best two lineman(Lavalais and Hill), a corner(Gay, who now starts for New England) and strong safety(Hunt). And these players(with the exception of Hunt and Gay) were all drafted by the by the 3rd round, which means they were pretty good. Mauck went int he 7th though. Not to get off topic, but for him to only have lost to the number 3 and number 7 teams in the country on the road with those kinds of losses with a red-shirt freshman qb, a back-up senior qb, and Webster missing games and playing hurt is nothing short of amazing. Is he supposed to win it every year? Can you tell me the last back to back national championship coach? I am not trying to argue, just trying to see how you have drawn the conclusion Saban is a flash in the pan.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 12-08-2004, 03:36 PM

sdx and Euph,

Nice point. When I saw your subject line, I thought to myself that franchising Brees would make good sense.

Let me display my ignorance of NFL contracting. If he gets franchised, doesn\'t that just mean that the Chargers would get a chance to match whatever offer he gets?

Nope. It means that Brees would get the average cap number of the top 5 QBs in the league. Cap number is important because typically blockbuster contracts are organized with huge signing bonuses and small salaries at least initially. The signing bonus is divided among the years of the contract.

So for example Peyton\'s contract came with a $35 million signing bonus. A Washington post article on the contract and its impact quotes

The Colts were desperate to save salary cap space for the 2004 season by completing a long-term deal with Manning and Condon. If they hadn\'t, Manning would have counted $18.429 million against this season\'s salary cap as the franchise player...

And obviously with Manning\'s contract in the mix Brees would be the $20 million QB if he were franchised.

If they weren\'t really planning on paying him pretty big money to be a backup (or they were going to keep him), wouldn\'t they have to seriously consider letting Rivers go (I imagine he is getting paid pretty well)?

If franchising Brees means that other teams will have to pay through the nose for him, then it might be a good strategy for the Chargers, if they think that will hurt the team who takes him (in terms of financial position), otherwise, I don\'t see why they\'d do it?

I believe it\'s the transistional tag give matching rights. Franchise means you have to pay IIRC.

BAJ

JKool · 12-08-2004, 03:42 PM

Heya all.

Thanks for the info!

SFIAH, what is a BAJ?

12-08-2004, 12:52 PM	#1
shadowdrinker_x Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 218	Brees Franchised??? Yep...I heard it last night on ESPN that San Diego was seriously considering slapping the franchise tag on bress... Of course this would only keep him around 1 more year.. But..I remember Euphoria saying that this would happen on a previous thread..and I, like many others, Doubted and bashed the Idea... Good call Euphoria...you may be right... [Edited on 8/12/2004 by shadowdrinker_x]

12-08-2004, 01:12 PM	#2
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Brees Franchised??? sdx and Euph, Nice point. When I saw your subject line, I thought to myself that franchising Brees would make good sense. Let me display my ignorance of NFL contracting. If he gets franchised, doesn\'t that just mean that the Chargers would get a chance to match whatever offer he gets? If they weren\'t really planning on paying him pretty big money to be a backup (or they were going to keep him), wouldn\'t they have to seriously consider letting Rivers go (I imagine he is getting paid pretty well)? If franchising Brees means that other teams will have to pay through the nose for him, then it might be a good strategy for the Chargers, if they think that will hurt the team who takes him (in terms of financial position), otherwise, I don\'t see why they\'d do it?
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

12-08-2004, 01:37 PM	#3
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Brees Franchised??? Hey Kool, if they do it, it is simply cause they can. they have the money, they will be like $21 mil under the cap this year, and they are already winning. So besides shoring up a few positions here and there, they really don\'t need to spend money on much else. They also have two number one draft picks this year. It makes sense for them to do it, but I doubt they will get anyone to give up a whole lot for him. Definitely not two firsts, but maybe a team like Dallas who has two this year will give them at least one and a later round pick. And if a player is franchised, he gets the average of the top 5 at that position. If a team makes him an offer, it can\'t be accepted w/o the franchise getting compensated. If they don\'t get what they feel what a player is worth, they keep the player for that year at the franchised salary. They don\'t really get to match another team\'s offer so much as prevent that anyone else from signing him until they get theirs.

12-08-2004, 02:11 PM	#4
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	Brees Franchised??? This is only bad news if we want to add Brees in the off-season. Such a high cost on Brees might make AB look like a bargain in comparision? January 3rd, we need to start shopping AB.

12-08-2004, 02:21 PM	#5
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Brees Franchised??? If we can shop AB, and somehow fleece a first out of someone, we may be able to take a shot at Brees. Other than that, if they franchise him, it ain\'t happening. If he isn\'t franchised, Dallas has a lot of room to make a run at him also. We have a lot of other holes that need to be filled so AB has to be gone if we take a shot at Brees.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

12-08-2004, 02:41 PM	#6
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Brees Franchised??? It\'ll be hard for them to afford both Rivers and Brees. I think its simply a move to force a trade instead of just losing him. I\'m no Mickey Loomis but I think the plan is to arrange a solid trade, have Brees agree and sign a long term contract for his new team. The only risk being if Brees forces San Diego\'s hand and stays another year. That would probably kill any Charger plans to bring in high dollar free-agents. But I could be wrong. I don\'t remember all the rules and restrictions on franchised players.

12-08-2004, 03:01 PM	#7
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	Brees Franchised??? http://www.nfl.com/freeagency/qa The franchise tag requires the club to pay the player the average of the top 5 salaries at the position or 120% of last year\'s salary, whichever is highest. If the club is willing to entertain offers from other teams (as the Chargers certainly must), then they have the right of first refusal. They can match any offer for the player. If the club chooses not to match the offer made for the player, then they get 2 first round draft choices in return. 2 first rounds plus a lot of money doesn\'t seem like a bargain to me. I don\'t think Brees is worth that much. But I also have no doubt that some team will be happy to give that for him. My fear with Brees is that he would be to QB\'s what Nick Saban is to coaches: a flash in the pan. In contrast I think Brooks for some combination of picks and players would be a steal for some QB starved club and at least he has several years of performance behind him. So the BMG plan: deal Brooks, go out and get a McMahon, Schaub or Garrard or someone like that and draft some defense and quality LT.
	http://www.blackandgold.net/site/signature/buddysig.jpg

12-08-2004, 03:18 PM	#8
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Brees Franchised??? My fear with Brees is that he would be to QB\'s what Nick Saban is to coaches: a flash in the pan BMg, I generally agree with you but this baffled me. Saban, a flash in the pan? His championship team lost it\'s starting qb(Mauck), both wide receivers(Clayton and Henderson), a guard(Peterman), it\'s best two lineman(Lavalais and Hill), a corner(Gay, who now starts for New England) and strong safety(Hunt). And these players(with the exception of Hunt and Gay) were all drafted by the by the 3rd round, which means they were pretty good. Mauck went int he 7th though. Not to get off topic, but for him to only have lost to the number 3 and number 7 teams in the country on the road with those kinds of losses with a red-shirt freshman qb, a back-up senior qb, and Webster missing games and playing hurt is nothing short of amazing. Is he supposed to win it every year? Can you tell me the last back to back national championship coach? I am not trying to argue, just trying to see how you have drawn the conclusion Saban is a flash in the pan.

12-08-2004, 03:36 PM	#9
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	Brees Franchised??? sdx and Euph, Nice point. When I saw your subject line, I thought to myself that franchising Brees would make good sense. Let me display my ignorance of NFL contracting. If he gets franchised, doesn\'t that just mean that the Chargers would get a chance to match whatever offer he gets? Nope. It means that Brees would get the average cap number of the top 5 QBs in the league. Cap number is important because typically blockbuster contracts are organized with huge signing bonuses and small salaries at least initially. The signing bonus is divided among the years of the contract. So for example Peyton\'s contract came with a $35 million signing bonus. A Washington post article on the contract and its impact quotes The Colts were desperate to save salary cap space for the 2004 season by completing a long-term deal with Manning and Condon. If they hadn\'t, Manning would have counted $18.429 million against this season\'s salary cap as the franchise player... And obviously with Manning\'s contract in the mix Brees would be the $20 million QB if he were franchised. If they weren\'t really planning on paying him pretty big money to be a backup (or they were going to keep him), wouldn\'t they have to seriously consider letting Rivers go (I imagine he is getting paid pretty well)? If franchising Brees means that other teams will have to pay through the nose for him, then it might be a good strategy for the Chargers, if they think that will hurt the team who takes him (in terms of financial position), otherwise, I don\'t see why they\'d do it? I believe it\'s the transistional tag give matching rights. Franchise means you have to pay IIRC. BAJ
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

12-08-2004, 03:42 PM	#10
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Brees Franchised??? Heya all. Thanks for the info! SFIAH, what is a BAJ?