The Nitty-Gritty of the Franchise Tag
by John Gennaro on Feb 18, 2009 6:37 AM PST
Email
PrintTomorrow is the deadline for the Chargers to decide if they're going to use their franchise tag and on whom. I'm not going to go in great, great detail of what the franchise tag does and what it means and how many times it can be used and all of that. What I will show is why I think it's a bad idea for us to use it this year. The only legitimate candidate to be franchised is Darren Sproles. The franchise tag, if applies, locks a player into a one-year deal with a salary that's equal to the average of the top 5 paid players at that position. So let's figure out what a franchise tag would equate to in terms of a contract for Sproles.
Top 5 Running Backs
LaDainian Tomlinson -$5,750,000
Edgerrin James -$5,000,000
Fred Taylor -$4,000,000
Ronnie Brown -$3,658,266
Chester Taylor/Warrick Dunn - $3,000,000
I'm not sure if Fred Taylor will be included because I'm not sure if they go off of 2008 numbers or 2009 numbers, which is why I included numbers 5 and 6 (Taylor and Dunn). For the sake of this argument, we'll pretend Fred's contract is still used. Out of those 6 contracts, the only one that still makes sense to me is Ronnie Brown. Taylor and Dunn are good, but overpaid. LT is no longer the best back in the league and Edge isn't even in the top 10 anymore. A franchise tag placed on Sproles would result in a one-year contract for $4,281,653, making him the 3rd highest paid RB in the NFL. Ideally we could restructure LT's contract before applying the franchise tag and lower the amount (although I don't know if that's possible), but either way I don't know if it's wise for us to have 2 of the 5 most expensive running backs in the league when it would still leave us with a mediocre running game.
I love what Sproles brings to the return game, but outside of that I don't see what incredible value he has. So he could be useful on 3rd downs....we already have probably the best 3rd down back in the history of the NFL in LT. I'd much franchise neither of them and try and sign them to smaller long-term contracts. I don't think we can give Sproles starter's money because I don't even know if he's good enough and injury-proof enough to be a backup to LT. I think we need a young, powerful back to split carries with LT and we can work Hester in as the FB who can run and catch. That leaves nothing for Sproles besides the return game, where he could be replaced without a huge drop in production.
Let's put it to a vote.....what are you doing with the Chargers franchise tag?
10 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I think they should tag him.
And either try and work out a long term deal for less per year but more over all guaranteed money or trade him, his stock is as high as it will get right now so a team may be willing to over pay for him and at the very least the Chargers would not let him walk out the door without getting anything in return like they did with Breese.
No franchise tag
Let Sproles “explore” the free agent market and if some team is willing to overpay him so be it. The Chargers should be willing to pay him a fair and competitive salary, but AJ is not the GM who is going to overpay. I like Hester a lot and they can probably get something similar to Darren later in the draft.
Brady Hoke, Al Borges, and Rocky Long. Aztec football is back!
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Feb 18, 2009 11:40 AM PST reply actions
I don't know if you can get something similar to Darren later in the draft
He’s a pretty special little dude. 3rd highest paid running back in the NFL special? Probably not, but I don’t think you replace his offensive outbursts with a random pick.
LT needs to restucture sooner than later and hopefully this allows us to throw some cake at Sproles. I really like the idea of LT, Sproles, and Hester rushing for 300 yards a game for 19 straight games and winning it all!
I'm sayin
pay him what he deserves but if some other team is going to overpay, then eff it.
Brady Hoke, Al Borges, and Rocky Long. Aztec football is back!
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Feb 18, 2009 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
Not to be mean
But why does everyone think he’s such a great offensive weapon? How many games did he really contribute to offensively? More than two?
I’ll be the first to admit that the Colts game was spectacular, and there were some awesome returns over the course of the year, but he did nothing to make me think that he could be some sort of weapon on an every-game basis. During the regular season last year, if you take out return yards he went over 100 yards of combined rushing and receiving TWICE. Both of those games were against the impenetrable defense of the Denver Broncos.
He then did it twice in the postseason in the aforementioned Colts game (anyone else think maybe their defense was overrated?) and in the Pittsburgh game, where we had to throw him screen passes and check-downs because he average 1.4 yards per carry.
I want anyone to tell me how they can justify Sproles as anything more than a good kick/punt returner. As far as running backs go, he’s really not much of an upgrade over Michael Bennett (who had his fair share of “Whoa, where did that come from?” games in Minnesota). There’s no way he deserves to be making nearly 5 million next year when no other return specialists are making over 1 million (that’s exactly the reason Devin Hester and Dante Hall switched to WR).
by John Gennaro on Feb 18, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions
There's great offensive potential when he's on the field
and the more we see of it the more the opposing DC has to plan for him to be in the game. With a healthy LT and Hester coming into his own and getting more playing time, I could see us creating a nightmare for every defense, even the most vaunted, in the league.
If only obviousman could speak his peace to 29 GM’s in the league so they don’t make a ridiculous offer to Sproles.
It's all potential
Sproles is very fast and shifty. I understand that there’s potential in that. But there have been tons of players that were fast/shifty that had the potential to be major weapons and just never lived up to it, for one reason or another. I think Sproles biggest drawback is an inability to stay on the field.
But my original point is that you do not spend top 5 money on potential. I believe Sproles deserves a raise because he proved last year that he can be more than just a kick returner, but I don’t think he proved that he is or has the potential to be a top-flight running back. As I said before, Michael Bennet is just as good of a RB and at one point had just as much potential. The only difference is that he’s older and never reached his potential, but there’s still not much drop-off if we end up losing Sproles. In a nutshell? Not worth franchising at all.
by John Gennaro on Feb 18, 2009 2:57 PM PST up reply actions
That's why I think he can be replaced fairly easily late in the draft.
Since he did SOOOO well in the Steelers game.
Brady Hoke, Al Borges, and Rocky Long. Aztec football is back!
by Sam (sdsuaztec4) on Feb 18, 2009 3:12 PM PST up reply actions
Those numbers for RBs
Are astounding. I’m just in utter shock about how little it costs to use a franchise tag on a RB.
It wasn’t that long ago that Lamont Jordan was a backup RB going into free agency and got 5 years $27.5 mill. The franchise tag (~$6.6 mill) is only only $1.1 million more than the AAV of that contract and you don’t have to commit the extra $20 million. Of course, semi-backup RB Julius Jones signed for only $16 mill over 4 years. But still, you’re paying jut $2.6 million (although Jones actually got $5.5 mill in his first year, so you could say $1.1 mill) and you don’t have to commit to the extra $10 mill.
1-10-DEN 18 (9:52) (Shotgun) 6-J.Cutler pass short right intended for 19-E.Royal INTERCEPTED by 93-L.Castillo (95-S.Phillips) at DEN 18. 93-L.Castillo to DEN 14 for 4 yards (62-C.Wiegmann). 6-J.Cutler pouts ob to DEN 25 for 11 yards.
I say he's worth it
If we were paying him to only be a change of pace running back, or only be a return man the I would say that the franchise tag should have been used elsewhere. However, the combined production in kick returns, punt returns, rushes and screen plays is more than enough to assure his worth.
I also think he is capable of being an every down back, just not an every down back who must also return kicks and punts. In my eyes, he is an every down back, you just wouldn’t know because we spent the last season forcing the ball into the hands of an injured LT.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
BFTB Apparel Store
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
