Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year

saintswhodi · 01-13-2005, 09:27 PM

Ok, first you say they can\'t do it twice, and you were wrong. But that\'s cool. Then you say we wouldn\'t sign him and give him a bonus and then try to trade him, which was wrong also. Not it is, we just aren\'t gonna do it? Okay. Now that is funny. You can\'t franchise another team\'s free agent. If I have to explain that, we really shouldn\'t go on. He is an unrestricted free agent from the Saints. They are the only team that can apply a franchise ot transition tag on him. Second, if they sign a top tier free agent, he will have a multi-year contract with a signing bonus. Hello. HUGE difference. Number 3, once you get compensation for said player, the other team can negotiate his salary. The franchise tag GUARANTEES a player a certain amount under the franchise designation. But if he is traded and compensation gained for the franchsing team, the team he was traded too works out a contract with that player and it doesn\'t have to be for the amount a franchise tag would be. Again, LIKE BUFFALO DID WITH PEERLESS PRICE WHEN THEY TRADED HIM TO ATLANTA. If a team wants a player that is franchised, and they give the opposing team what they want, they then negotiate a salary. I didn\'t know it was this hard to understand, or maybe you are just being difficult. You do also know different teams have different amounts of spce under the cap right? So a team with more cap money than us may want to take a shot on Howard. Damn dude. So every team has the same CAP LIMIT, but teams have different amounts of room UNDER THE CAP to spend.

shadowdrinker · 01-13-2005, 09:30 PM

Your right..we will franchise him..and trade him away...what was I thinking?

Howard more or less said they wouldn\'t

The F.O. said more or less they couldn\'t

You can slap an imaginary tag on whatever or whomever you think would make this scenario swing to your view..but.. the simple fact is...The only cap we have to worry about is our own..and we have an owner that screams poverty...and the story told me..both sides were realizing the money issue is a hurdle to great to get over...

Signing Price to a long-term deal is Donahoe\'s stated purpose but the man who swung the unlikely trade for quarterback Drew Bledsoe last year isn\'t exactly predictable. The juicy speculation has Donahoe signing Price, then trading him to a team out of Buffalo\'s division, perhaps recouping the first-round pick he gave up for Bledsoe. Pull that trick off and Copperfield\'s out of a job.

It isn\'t something that happens every year...And..it takes one heck of a GM to pull something like that off..

http://bengals.enquirer.com/2003/02/21/wwwben4b21.html

[Edited on 14/1/2005 by shadowdrinker]

saintswhodi · 01-13-2005, 09:55 PM

You are right, it doesn\'t happen every year, but it is better than letting Howard walk for nothing. You don\'t have to get two firsts, Buffalo didn\'t for Price. You can negotiate whatever compensation both teams agree to. There are very few rusher in the draft or free agency with Howard\'s skill. They said Kearse was injury prone too. Looks like he played a whole year in Philly to me, no injuries. A team will see that, a player at his same position, and it can work. Be skeptical if you like. You don\'t see him doing it, I don\'t see them letting him walk for nothing if they aren\'t gonna keep him.

Last explanation. Just cause you tag someone, it doesn\'t count immediately against your cap. They have to sign the offer first. So just cause he is tagged none of that money has to count against our cap, unless we get stuck into signing him. I am pretty certain they will have some semblence of a deal worked out with another team before they actually tag him though. It just makes too much sense. Letting him walk for nothing doesn\'t.

shadowdrinker · 01-13-2005, 10:09 PM

So just cause he is tagged none of that money has to count against our cap, unless we get stuck into signing him.

Exactly...The Price deal was different..It was widely known that Atlanta wanted Price..and wanted him bad...The Franchise tag was simply a tool used to hasten the deal...Luckily..for Buffalo..Atlanta bought it..and now they suffer from the misdealings..

I mean..Yor right..it could happen..but ..You could survive a plane crash too ..I just wouldn\'t suggest trying to do so

ScottyRo · 01-13-2005, 10:15 PM

I would think that the Saints could tag him in hopes of trading him and if they can\'t and don\'t want to sign him, then they\'ll just cut him. I believe they could do it this way, but I\'m not sure on the timing.

The other thing is: if they do work out a trade for him, their contract can be signed stipulating that he will be traded and avoid having a signing bonus. The new team would be left to deal with him on a new contract or face a hold out. That\'s where he\'d get his signing bonus.

I don\'t know any of this for sure, but the last couple of years this has happened. Falcons got Price. Saints got Jones.

shadowdrinker · 01-13-2005, 10:25 PM

They franchised him last year..and have yet to go ahead and make the long term deal..which is what ultimately..will spell his departure

they paid him..6 million or more for last year..failing to resign him means..they will likely have to franchise him again..and he and his agent will take them to the bank...

Now..if you put a deal on the table..franchise him..and try to trade him away...you stand the chance of..bieng stuck paying him top dollar..or..pulling the tag..letting him go..and getting nothing in return...and it\'s too big of a risk for most teams to even fathom trying...It\'s too one sided..all or nothing..what would you do?

ScottyRo · 01-13-2005, 10:31 PM

I don\'t think it\'s risky. It\'s like this...

I franchise him and try to work a trade. I\'m guessing that NFL rules would say I have to sign him or trade him by June 1. If I can\'t trade him and I don\'t want to pay the huge contract, then I cut him prior to June 1. (I think that is within the rules.) Thus, I did everything I could to get something for him - it just didn\'t happen and he left without my team getting compensation.

That all seems preferable to not franchising him by the feb. deadline and just letting him walk. That way I have kept my options open.

shadowdrinker · 01-13-2005, 11:12 PM

Options are something Howard has as well..We don\'t own any rights to him...Even if we signed him and tried to trade him..he doesn\'t have to comply..(Owens)

Too big a risk to even attempt in my opinion..

I hate to let him go for nothing too..

Loomis and Co. should have signed him...He still may yet decide to come back and play for us...But..As the Story implied..he is going to want huge money...And one team or another has to pay it..whether it be some form of Incentive based deal or whatever...Ultimately..unless a team is jumping through thier a**es to get this guy..franchising him would only hurt trade value, and make it even harder to ttrade him away..unless your happy with a 4th round pick..or something like that

Euphoria · 01-13-2005, 11:19 PM

I think we need to keep him. Something should be done to keep him... Frees up Smith to roam to other positions and blitz. Smith is not a run stopper, blitzing is his specialty.

WhoDat · 01-14-2005, 09:32 AM

It\'s not all or nothing here guys. You can use the Franchise Tag or the Transition Tag, which requires lesser compensation. Likewise, you can use the Franchise and then back off of the two first round picks, like Buffalo did with Price and Atlanta.

I would like to see the Saints keep Howard if they can. I didn\'t think Howard had a monster year this year, but he still managed to have more sacks then Grant, and I thought Grant was a monster. Plus, Howard was splitting time with Smith and often rushing from the inside instead of the edge. This guy sure seems premier to me, and I want to keep him. I don\'t know if it\'s possible, but I hope so.

01-13-2005, 09:27 PM	#11
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year Ok, first you say they can\'t do it twice, and you were wrong. But that\'s cool. Then you say we wouldn\'t sign him and give him a bonus and then try to trade him, which was wrong also. Not it is, we just aren\'t gonna do it? Okay. Now that is funny. You can\'t franchise another team\'s free agent. If I have to explain that, we really shouldn\'t go on. He is an unrestricted free agent from the Saints. They are the only team that can apply a franchise ot transition tag on him. Second, if they sign a top tier free agent, he will have a multi-year contract with a signing bonus. Hello. HUGE difference. Number 3, once you get compensation for said player, the other team can negotiate his salary. The franchise tag GUARANTEES a player a certain amount under the franchise designation. But if he is traded and compensation gained for the franchsing team, the team he was traded too works out a contract with that player and it doesn\'t have to be for the amount a franchise tag would be. Again, LIKE BUFFALO DID WITH PEERLESS PRICE WHEN THEY TRADED HIM TO ATLANTA. If a team wants a player that is franchised, and they give the opposing team what they want, they then negotiate a salary. I didn\'t know it was this hard to understand, or maybe you are just being difficult. You do also know different teams have different amounts of spce under the cap right? So a team with more cap money than us may want to take a shot on Howard. Damn dude. So every team has the same CAP LIMIT, but teams have different amounts of room UNDER THE CAP to spend.

01-13-2005, 09:30 PM	#12
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year Your right..we will franchise him..and trade him away...what was I thinking? Howard more or less said they wouldn\'t The F.O. said more or less they couldn\'t You can slap an imaginary tag on whatever or whomever you think would make this scenario swing to your view..but.. the simple fact is...The only cap we have to worry about is our own..and we have an owner that screams poverty...and the story told me..both sides were realizing the money issue is a hurdle to great to get over... Signing Price to a long-term deal is Donahoe\'s stated purpose but the man who swung the unlikely trade for quarterback Drew Bledsoe last year isn\'t exactly predictable. The juicy speculation has Donahoe signing Price, then trading him to a team out of Buffalo\'s division, perhaps recouping the first-round pick he gave up for Bledsoe. Pull that trick off and Copperfield\'s out of a job. It isn\'t something that happens every year...And..it takes one heck of a GM to pull something like that off.. http://bengals.enquirer.com/2003/02/21/wwwben4b21.html [Edited on 14/1/2005 by shadowdrinker]
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517

01-13-2005, 09:55 PM	#13
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year You are right, it doesn\'t happen every year, but it is better than letting Howard walk for nothing. You don\'t have to get two firsts, Buffalo didn\'t for Price. You can negotiate whatever compensation both teams agree to. There are very few rusher in the draft or free agency with Howard\'s skill. They said Kearse was injury prone too. Looks like he played a whole year in Philly to me, no injuries. A team will see that, a player at his same position, and it can work. Be skeptical if you like. You don\'t see him doing it, I don\'t see them letting him walk for nothing if they aren\'t gonna keep him. Last explanation. Just cause you tag someone, it doesn\'t count immediately against your cap. They have to sign the offer first. So just cause he is tagged none of that money has to count against our cap, unless we get stuck into signing him. I am pretty certain they will have some semblence of a deal worked out with another team before they actually tag him though. It just makes too much sense. Letting him walk for nothing doesn\'t.

01-13-2005, 10:09 PM	#14
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year So just cause he is tagged none of that money has to count against our cap, unless we get stuck into signing him. Exactly...The Price deal was different..It was widely known that Atlanta wanted Price..and wanted him bad...The Franchise tag was simply a tool used to hasten the deal...Luckily..for Buffalo..Atlanta bought it..and now they suffer from the misdealings.. I mean..Yor right..it could happen..but ..You could survive a plane crash too ..I just wouldn\'t suggest trying to do so
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517

01-13-2005, 10:15 PM	#15
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year I would think that the Saints could tag him in hopes of trading him and if they can\'t and don\'t want to sign him, then they\'ll just cut him. I believe they could do it this way, but I\'m not sure on the timing. The other thing is: if they do work out a trade for him, their contract can be signed stipulating that he will be traded and avoid having a signing bonus. The new team would be left to deal with him on a new contract or face a hold out. That\'s where he\'d get his signing bonus. I don\'t know any of this for sure, but the last couple of years this has happened. Falcons got Price. Saints got Jones.

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

01-13-2005, 10:25 PM	#16
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year They franchised him last year..and have yet to go ahead and make the long term deal..which is what ultimately..will spell his departure they paid him..6 million or more for last year..failing to resign him means..they will likely have to franchise him again..and he and his agent will take them to the bank... Now..if you put a deal on the table..franchise him..and try to trade him away...you stand the chance of..bieng stuck paying him top dollar..or..pulling the tag..letting him go..and getting nothing in return...and it\'s too big of a risk for most teams to even fathom trying...It\'s too one sided..all or nothing..what would you do?
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517

01-13-2005, 10:31 PM	#17
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year I don\'t think it\'s risky. It\'s like this... I franchise him and try to work a trade. I\'m guessing that NFL rules would say I have to sign him or trade him by June 1. If I can\'t trade him and I don\'t want to pay the huge contract, then I cut him prior to June 1. (I think that is within the rules.) Thus, I did everything I could to get something for him - it just didn\'t happen and he left without my team getting compensation. That all seems preferable to not franchising him by the feb. deadline and just letting him walk. That way I have kept my options open.

01-13-2005, 11:12 PM	#18
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year Options are something Howard has as well..We don\'t own any rights to him...Even if we signed him and tried to trade him..he doesn\'t have to comply..(Owens) Too big a risk to even attempt in my opinion.. I hate to let him go for nothing too.. Loomis and Co. should have signed him...He still may yet decide to come back and play for us...But..As the Story implied..he is going to want huge money...And one team or another has to pay it..whether it be some form of Incentive based deal or whatever...Ultimately..unless a team is jumping through thier a**es to get this guy..franchising him would only hurt trade value, and make it even harder to ttrade him away..unless your happy with a 4th round pick..or something like that
shadowdrinker Banned Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 517

01-13-2005, 11:19 PM	#19
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year I think we need to keep him. Something should be done to keep him... Frees up Smith to roam to other positions and blitz. Smith is not a run stopper, blitzing is his specialty.

01-14-2005, 09:32 AM	#20
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Darren Howard, and why he won't be a Saint next year It\'s not all or nothing here guys. You can use the Franchise Tag or the Transition Tag, which requires lesser compensation. Likewise, you can use the Franchise and then back off of the two first round picks, like Buffalo did with Price and Atlanta. I would like to see the Saints keep Howard if they can. I didn\'t think Howard had a monster year this year, but he still managed to have more sacks then Grant, and I thought Grant was a monster. Plus, Howard was splitting time with Smith and often rushing from the inside instead of the edge. This guy sure seems premier to me, and I want to keep him. I don\'t know if it\'s possible, but I hope so.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"