MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 Why is the Fina tag sticking in my head so much? Did they change the rule somewher along the way after we tagged him? If you tag a player and then sign him to a long-term deal before August I believe, then the franchise tag is lost for the life of the contract. If a player is tagged and traded, the team gets the tag back when he's traded. I don't know why the Bills signed Fina to a long-term deal and lost the tag, when they could have waited and saved it.
sfladave Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 Tag him and trade him. We could easily get a first round pick for Nate. We can't afford him when we have more pressing needs long both our offensive and defensive lines. Plus we just shelled out a bunch of money to McGee. 531660[/snapback] Quick question, if we get a 1st for Nate, how do we replace him? Granted he has not been stellar this year, but he is still a top 10 CB. They do not grow on trees. If he only costs 5.7 to tag and he's not willing to sign a realistic long term deal, tag him for the next few years until we can find a substitute. Think this through people!
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 Quick question, if we get a 1st for Nate, how do we replace him? Granted he has not been stellar this year, but he is still a top 10 CB. They do not grow on trees. If he only costs 5.7 to tag and he's not willing to sign a realistic long term deal, tag him for the next few years until we can find a substitute. Think this through people! Draft one using the extra 1st rounder?
Adam Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 Draft one using the extra 1st rounder? 531694[/snapback] Go with McGee and King, and play more zone
Lofton80 Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 I think he gets either tagged or new contract. We cannot assume to replace a good CB when we will already be in need of lineman on both sides of the ball along with a wr and a safety. I imagine he would have better numbers if we had a pass rush and an offense that could convert a third down to keep the D fresh.
sfladave Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 Draft one using the extra 1st rounder? 531694[/snapback] We have much bigger needs than drafting a CB, especially when you consider that tagging NC will only cost us 5.7M. Use the 1st round for a DT or an OL.
Tortured Soul Posted December 14, 2005 Author Posted December 14, 2005 Wow, that's a HUGE drop in price and makes franchising him (and possibly trading him for a 1st rounder) almost guaranteed and much lower-risk. Cool. Any reason given why the amount dropped? Is it something to do with the (currently) uncapped 2007 year? 531541[/snapback] The only reason I can think of is some collective drop in the contracts of CB's, such as last year, a bunch of CB's were in the last year of their contracts and were due a lot of money. I don't know for sure, but that's all I can think of. If you tag a player and then sign him to a long-term deal before August I believe, then the franchise tag is lost for the life of the contract. If a player is tagged and traded, the team gets the tag back when he's traded. I don't know why the Bills signed Fina to a long-term deal and lost the tag, when they could have waited and saved it. 531662[/snapback] I think that they have to sign him long-term at some early point in the offseason, probably around April 1st. If they don't sign him before then, they have to wait to another date, I think July 15th, because if they sign him in between those dates, they lose the tag for the length of the contract. Not sure what the exact dates are, though. He's not that expensive. Say his cap number is 5.7. We save 5 from moulds alone, and a cople more from Big Mike and Sam each. And we're already 8 mil under. So after Clements, that still puts us about 10-12 mil under. And remember, it's not like free agents are going to be beating down the door to come to Buffalo.
Bear Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 I think everyone's ignoring the most important point... When did we start listening to Clayton?
Ramius Posted December 14, 2005 Posted December 14, 2005 I think a lot of the speculation on the drop in franchise number has to do with Charles Woodson's 10+ mil cap figure being off the books. He was franchised last year, and Oak wouldnt frnachise him again, as that would cost them 12+ million. So 10 mil is no longer the top CB number.
Recommended Posts