|
|
Post by Panthers GM (Jesse) on Mar 23, 2023 8:53:55 GMT -5
The idea of the franchise tag is typically to keep an elite player off the market with the intention of using the time to sign the player to a longterm top of market extension. in Legacy, it's simply a "please don't go" to those players. If approved, moving forward beginning in 2024, teams WILL have the option to extend franchise players. Too keep this idea somewhat affordable, the 150% Extension fee will be reduced to 120% when using this method. Using this "Tag and Sign" would create an up to 4 year contract, 3 years would be above franchise tag rates. I don't expect it to be used more than once or twice a year. As in the proposal thread, I will use Patrick Mahomes as an example candidate for this idea. here is a view of the potential lifetime of his contract:
Patrick Mahomes 3/3/3/3/3[EXT1]15/15/15[FTandEXT]22.5M/27/27/27/27
A candidate for this tag and sign this year would have been George Kittle, a 2022 UFA who was tagged by Green Bay for a 23: 6.55 contract. In the future, this scenario could allow the Packers to Tag and Sign this star player, resulting in the following contract:
George Kittle 6.55//7.86/7.86/7.86
|
|
|
|
Post by Browns GM (Dan) on Mar 23, 2023 9:56:55 GMT -5
I would approve if this was only usable if the player hadn't previously been extended by any team.
As it reads now it means teams can lock up players for 13 years by using both the regular extension followed up by the tag + extension
I will vote NO at the moment but would switch my vote if the wording was adjusted to prevent a double extension.
|
|
|
|
Post by Panthers GM (Jesse) on Mar 23, 2023 10:22:43 GMT -5
I would approve if this was only usable if the player hadn't previously been extended by any team. As it reads now it means teams can lock up players for 13 years by using both the regular extension followed up by the tag + extension I will vote NO at the moment but would switch my vote if the wording was adjusted to prevent a double extension. To Dan's point here, he is correct. This would allow expiring FAs to be extended off the franchise tag. While not "technically" a 2nd extension on the original contract, in spirit it would allow 4 more years of team control without the player hitting the UFA pool albeit at a big price tag. If the vote fails and there is popular support, we may re-propose disallowing the use of this option on previously extended players. |
|
|
|
Post by Ravens GM (Nate) on Mar 23, 2023 11:36:31 GMT -5
I'm open to different language, but I would love to see this go through in some way, shape or form, simply because it's a part of the NFL, and brings realism to the league. While it does have the potential here to give someone control of a player for a career, the hefty price tag to do so would make it a strategic move, more likely to be used on solid players rather than stars. A 27mil QB or 20mil WR/RB would destroy a roster long term and help prohibit wide use. I voted yes, but would be fine with working through the rule more. One possible fix could be that it could only be used on a tag and trade candidate? We could go with if you tag your own guy, hes unhappy and would move on after the season anyways. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Washington GM (Blaine) on Mar 23, 2023 11:39:53 GMT -5
One thing I might have missed is does this count as a team using their 1 extension? Or is this a separate extension?
|
|
|
|
Post by Panthers GM (Jesse) on Mar 23, 2023 11:44:36 GMT -5
This would not be an additional extension. This would count as your one off-season extension
|
|
|
|
Post by Washington GM (Blaine) on Mar 23, 2023 11:45:49 GMT -5
This would not be an additional extension. This would count as your one off-season extension That is making me reconsider my vote, I’ll keep thinking |
|
|
|
Post by Eagles GM (Joe) on Mar 23, 2023 15:33:42 GMT -5
My original request had been if a player hadn’t been extended already. If there were to be a 2nd extension rule in there I think this could definitely be taken advantage of by some teams. Anyway I like that we are debating this though
|
|
|
|
Post by Panthers GM (Jesse) on May 5, 2023 9:50:05 GMT -5
with a 60-40 margin and 20 votes, I am going to consider this proposition PASSED. This rule will be in effect for the 2024 offseason.
|
|
