LabattBlue Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Is there a limit to the number of years that a team can franchise the same player? I know Seattle has done it with Walter Jones for at least a couple of years.
Beerball Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Is there a limit to the number of years that a team can franchise the same player? I know Seattle has done it with Walter Jones for at least a couple of years. 235918[/snapback] I believe this will be his third. Not sure if the CBA has a limit.
Snorom Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Is Seattle going to franchise him ? I haven't seen any news about it. But their is no limit to how many times a player can be franchises. I also believe Pace has been franchised for 2 years now as well. If Jones gets franchised again you can expect him not to show up until the last pre-season game of the season again.
Roland Deschain Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 A team can franchise a player every year if they want to. The franchise tag is like a one year contract...when that runs out, they can frachise them again and again if they really want to. Thats not really beneficial to the team though.
stuckincincy Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Is there a limit to the number of years that a team can franchise the same player? I know Seattle has done it with Walter Jones for at least a couple of years. 235918[/snapback] I think that if you franchise a player, you can't use the tag again until that player's contract expires. Not sure. No idea about repeatedly tagging the same player. I don't think it would make for a happy family, though...
HopsGuy Posted February 11, 2005 Posted February 11, 2005 Results of a quick Google search: Q: Please explain applying the franchise tag to a player. Does this exempt this player's salary against the cap? Answer Man: It most definitely does not mean that Clint, which is too bad, because that could really help a team out. The basic effect of applying the franchise tag to an impending free agent is to bar him from signing with any other team. Obviously, that’s quite a disadvantage for that player, so in turn he has to receive, at the very least, a one-year contract with a salary that matches the average of the top five highest paid players in the league at his position, or is 120% of his previous year’s salary. The first thing I should mention is that there are actually two types of franchise tags. There is the “exclusive rights” franchise tag, which keeps the player from negotiating with any other team; and there is the “standard” franchise tag, which allows the player to negotiate with another team, but the salary stipulation above must still be met, and more importantly, if he signs with another team that club must give his original team two first-round draft picks. Despite the high salaries that come out of being “slapped” with the franchise tag (that’s the way it usually written, with an obviously negative context), players often react negatively to it, preferring the opportunities of the free market. The idea behind including it in the original collective bargaining agreement (CBA) that took effect in 1993, ushering in free agency, was to allow teams at least a limited opportunity to hold on to their best players. Obviously, you have to pay to do so, and that salary does indeed count against the cap. One thing we should reiterate from our previous discussion of the franchise tag, in Volume 22: Each team is only allowed to have one franchise tag in use at any given time. And if you sign a player while you have the tag on him, the tag is then committed to that player for the life of the contract, whether or not the player actually finishes the contract with your team.
Recommended Posts