Will the Constant use of the Franchise Tag Hurt the Ravens?

**Boulderraven** · 03-05-2012, 10:03 PM

It depends on the agent, if the agent has crazy demands you have to use the tag. But always tagging, if you don't get a deal done hurts you in who you can sign in FA, then in turn limits your draft options to fill need more than taking better players instead.

**RavenScallywag** · 03-06-2012, 03:59 AM

The Ravens have used the tag on...

Rice
Ngata
Suggs (x2)
CMac (x2)
Boulware?
Wally Williams?

I think they key is that the Ravens are using the franchise tag the way it was intended. It's supposed to be a tool to help you extend negotiations with a premier player for your franchise without fear of losing them without compensation. The Ravens have never used the tag without the goal of doing a long term deal. In fact, I don't think we've ever done it without exhausting negotiations up to the tag deadline.

The "wrong way" to use the tag would be what the Chargers did with Vincent Jackson. It's becoming clear they had no plans to sign him to a long term deal, they used the tag to just retain his rights until they couldn't anymore. I think the players' key issue with the franchise tag is the lack of security against injury. The one year deal is fully guaranteed, and they get a nice chunk of money, but if you get injured while playing on the one year tender, that's all she wrote. You have no bonus check to sustain you for a few more years. Your value is suddenly impacted by that.

The Ravens are a solid organization. No one has ever accused them of being cheapskates or not taking care of their players. We poured money into a top notch facility for players to train at. It has even won over some free agents. No one has ever come back after negotiating with the Ravens and said "Man, Ozzie is ridiculous, he wouldn't pay ANYTHING for a good player". The tag is a necessary evil because of how well we draft. Look at the guys we've tagged...each one is a top player at their position. These deals don't come together that easy. I think some guys might get frustrated that the Ravens wait until the end of their deals to re-negotiatem but that is within our rights as a team and all we're doing there is getting maximum value out of the contract.

**GOTA** · 03-06-2012, 04:36 AM

Originally Posted by RavNMadMan

To the OP question, I have no problem with the Ravens use of the tag so far. The results indicate the Ravens have used the tag to retain the best players, extend the negotiation window and to eventually sign the aforementioned players to a responsible and generous contract that may not always be the "top of market".

That being said, the use of the tag can make me a bit nervous. You go into a one-year deal with a player that can help the team be successful. So far I think the Ravens have made pretty smart use of the tag. I'm not worried.

Don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with the way the Ravens used the tag either. I even posted in the Ray Rice thread that they had no choice but to use the tag. What I'm trying to do is look at this from a players perspective. Things have really changed in the NFL under the new CBA. I'm not going to be shocked if we wake up one day and one of our RFAs decided to look elsewhere which is something that didn't happen much in the past. That doesn't mean the Ravens are handling things the wrong way. It just means that with a different NFL world out there than we've seen before they may have to adjust the way they do things. If they do sign Flacco and Webb and year early like they talked about that would be a great change.

**RavenScallywag** · 03-06-2012, 05:08 AM

Does RFA prohibit a player from initiating the dialog with another team? I'd be willing to bet our RFAs at least talk to other teams, even in the past. Generally, we haven't had a "risky" RFA who was a clear upgrade to other teams, so most of the guys were "simple re-signings" where other teams didn't offer them anything because the draft choice compensation wasn't worth it.

**GOTA** · 03-06-2012, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

Does RFA prohibit a player from initiating the dialog with another team? I'd be willing to bet our RFAs at least talk to other teams, even in the past. Generally, we haven't had a "risky" RFA who was a clear upgrade to other teams, so most of the guys were "simple re-signings" where other teams didn't offer them anything because the draft choice compensation wasn't worth it.

In the past there was rarely dialog because it was a waste of time for both sides. My front office doesn't want to spend all that time negotiating a deal so my competition can turn around and match it and then I end up with nothing. We had a couple of guys that other teams I'm sure were interested in. Ngata and Yanda being the most recent. If Ngata had a 1st round tender under this new system, teams would be lining up to sign him to an offer sheet if he was interested. For the Patriots giving up the #30 pick for Ngata would be a no brainer, especially in bad draft year.

**srobert96** · 03-06-2012, 06:38 AM

I don't think the constant use of the tag is going to hurt the Ravens. I do think that the Ravens need to give extension when young players still have a year left on their rookie contract. For instance now is the perfect time to extend Webb. It will give the Ravens a little bit more leverage in negotiations. If they don't sign Webb this year they will need to franchise him next year. That is assuming that they get Flacco signed this year.

**blah3** · 03-07-2012, 01:59 PM

Does it hurt the Ravens in not being able to resign players? Doubtful. The team has the majority of leverage. The only thing a player can do is not sign the tender and hold out.
I think the main problem here is that the Ravens seem to always have to use the tag to keep players. IMO they need to be proactive in extending players. It generally keeps the price down, and is more cap friendly. Grubbs for example could have been had cheaper if he were extended a couple of years ago. So the way the Ravens handle contracts could have them losing Grubbs this year because of not enough cap space.

**B-more Ravor** · 03-07-2012, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by festivus

And these posts insinuating the FO is at fault for leaving negotiations until the last minute often carry, unsaid, the premise that the players and their agents were willing to negotiate. For myself, I reject that premise. It may sometimes be true, but I imagine often it's not.

Agreed. It takes two to tango.

After all, at this time last year, Tony said he had heard that Ngata would get a 6 year/$72M deal ($12 per year). As the lockout was ending, it came out that Ngata was seeking "Peppers" money as the top paid defender in the game - 6/$92M.

Where did it end up? At $12M/year (5/$60M).

Originally Posted by RavenScallywag

The Ravens have used the tag on...

Rice
Ngata
Suggs (x2)
CMac (x2)
Boulware?
Wally Williams?

Boulware was never tagged.

And, CMac was a special case. The team was actually using the tag to protect themselves because they weren't willing to commit a lot of bonus money to him because of his maturity issues and off-field behavior. They were plenty flush with cap space during those year, so that wasn't as much of an issue either.

Once they felt he had proven himself, they gave him the big contract - which was still structured to lessen the bonus money.

Yes, in the long run it, they paid more, but had he screwed up again and been suspended or whatever, it would have been more costly after a big bonus payment.

**srobert96** · 03-09-2012, 07:15 AM

I have been thinking about why the Ravens constantly use the franchise tag. One of the things that came to mind on top of them drafting well is that the Ravens do not put contracts in place over inflated numbers in the out years. For the most part the Ravens top players finish out their contracts. You do run into situations where the players performance has regressed to the point where the Ravens will cut them but not because the last year or two of the contract was over inflated. You look at some of the deals that guys sign and you know they will never reach the end of the deal. Putting deals in place like that is probably easier to do because it feeds the players ego. But it also means you are more than likely headed for a divorce when you cut them. I think it takes longer to hammer out a fair deal that both parties will be happy with for the life of the contract. If you compare the Haloti Ngata deal to the Charles Johnson Deal. Johnson has a cap number of 15m and 16m his last two years. His signing bonus portion is 5m in each of those years. If they were to cut him they would have a savings fo 5 and 6m for each of those seasons. Where as Ngata's contract the final two years are 13.5 and 13.5 with the same 5m bonus each year. If the Ravens cut Ngata they are only saving 3.5m each year. The yearly average of each deal is 12.2 for Ngata and 12.6 for Johnson. Ngata will play out his contract Johnson more than likely wont.

**HoustonRaven** · 03-09-2012, 07:23 AM

It's a tool. And like any tool it can be used the right way and a wrong way.

The Ravens, by and large, use it the right way -- Suggs, Ngata and now Rice.

So no, use of the tag isn't hurting this team nor will it so long as the same philosophy on its use continues into the future.

**pslholder96** · 03-09-2012, 07:27 AM

We know how often the Ravens have used the tag but how does that look relative to the rest of the league? Proportionally is it really that much more frequent than everybody else?

**GOTA** · 03-09-2012, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

It's a tool. And like any tool it can be used the right way and a wrong way.

The Ravens, by and large, use it the right way -- Suggs, Ngata and now Rice.

So no, use of the tag isn't hurting this team nor will it so long as the same philosophy on its use continues into the future.

The future is what I'm thinking about. The rules are different under the new CBA. If you are Webb and you think you are going to get tagged because Rice, Ngata and Suggs were tagged do you look to sign an with another team as a RFA? Up until this year that wouldn't have happened. Now there is a real opportunity for these high tendered RFAs to sign elsewhere. The question is, will they?

**HoustonRaven** · 03-09-2012, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by GOTA

The future is what I'm thinking about. The rules are different under the new CBA. If you are Webb and you think you are going to get tagged because Rice, Ngata and Suggs were tagged do you look to sign an with another team as a RFA? Up until this year that wouldn't have happened. Now there is a real opportunity for these high tendered RFAs to sign elsewhere. The question is, will they?

He can't sign with another team once he's tagged. Maybe I am wrong, but the new CBA changed the tag in terms of the pay the player gets once tagged. The ability to tag a player and keep him from going to another team has not changed. If Webb is tagged, it doesn't matter if he's an RFA at that point. Exclusive rights belong to the Ravens and the Ravens alone. Sure, I suppose they could then work a trade but they can do that anytime really.

So yes, I see it working out just fine for the team going forward. The Ravens have rewarded players whom they have tagged and I do not see that changing going forward.

**GOTA** · 03-09-2012, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

He can't sign with another team once he's tagged. Maybe I am wrong, but the new CBA changed the tag in terms of the pay the player gets once tagged. The ability to tag a player and keep him from going to another team has not changed. If Webb is tagged, it doesn't matter if he's an RFA at that point. Exclusive rights belong to the Ravens and the Ravens alone. Sure, I suppose they could then work a trade but they can do that anytime really.

So yes, I see it working out just fine for the team going forward. The Ravens have rewarded players whom they have tagged and I do not see that changing going forward.

Webb is a UFA next year. What worries me is that he tries to leave as a RFA this year. That was never an issue in the past but now it's very possible. That is an issue that every team has to think about which they really didn't have to until this season.

**HoustonRaven** · 03-09-2012, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by GOTA

Webb is a UFA next year. What worries me is that he tries to leave as a RFA this year. That was never an issue in the past but now it's very possible. That is an issue that every team has to think about which they really didn't have to until this season.

I see. And I see your point.

But how is that a function of the tag? Certainly a team can now pony up the dough (and the 1st rounder) and snag Webb but is that realistic?

I just don't see a team out there giving up that kind of coin on top of a first round pick for defensive back.

**GOTA** · 03-09-2012, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by HoustonRaven

I see. And I see your point.

But how is that a function of the tag? Certainly a team can now pony up the dough (and the 1st rounder) and snag Webb but is that realistic?

I just don't see a team out there giving up that kind of coin on top of a first round pick for defensive back.

All players want a big contract. If you look at the top players that came before you and see that no matter how well they played they still got tagged and suddenly another team is calling you might take that call. In the past I don't think the other teams were calling. This year I think it's very possible. We'll see what happens.

**HoustonRaven** · 03-09-2012, 09:50 AM

Yes, all players want a big contract, but most of them (the more level headed ones anyway) understand that the tag is the price of doing business in the NFL.

We rarely see hold outs anymore and I don't see that changing anytime soon. 21 teams have tagged players so far and not one is rumbling about holding out.

I have maintained and continue to believe that the tag does not have the stigma it once had.

**callahan09** · 03-09-2012, 11:21 AM

I have a rather uncouth interpretation of how players should view the franchise tag.

I personally have no sympathy for players who want to be resigned and are upset about being tagged instead. These players go on about long-term job security or financial security, or whatever, but here's how you need to look at it:

If you were ever good enough to warrant a team choosing to place their tag on you, then by them placing that tag on you they are showing that they believe in your abilities and are happy with what you've done. It *is* a sign of respect, frankly. But that's not the end of my opinion on this matter...

The tag for any position is going to be worth millions of dollars. This means that for one year of work, you absolutely ARE getting a guarantee to be set for life. A $50,000 dollar salary is good money in the United States, and it would take 20 years of work to get to $1 million at that rate. When we're talking about running backs and making 7 million dollars for a single year of work under the franchise tag, these players are making a few times more money in that one year than most middle-class families make in their lifetimes. That's enough money to not only live comfortably, but luxuriously, without working another day of your life thereafter. And if your production drops off or you get injured and can't play, frankly, I don't have any sympathy for you because you've already got yourself set for life on that 1-year contract that you thought was an insult, and why should the team have to pay you for work that you're not going to be contributing to them when you're no longer in the league?

If you get a contract that ensures a pay-day for you even if you can't work or the team chooses to terminate you because your performance becomes crap, then you're just one unbelievably fortunate son of a bitch and should count your lucky stars. But if you were good enough to get a lucrative 1-year deal that also sets you up for a worry-free life then you should count yourself fortunate for that as well. Just play the game. If you continue to play well, you'll ever get another ludicrous amount of money for another year from another franchise tag, or you'll get a ludicrous salary from a ludicrous contract, or you'll get injured or your performance will be terrible and you won't be playing football anymore and you should just accept that you made a lifetime's worth of money at the beginning of you adulthood for playing a game and if you don't get paid any more than that because you're no longer a player, then you know what, whatever.

But nobody ever seems to look at it that way.

**Ravenous1** · 03-09-2012, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by GOTA

Webb is a UFA next year. What worries me is that he tries to leave as a RFA this year. That was never an issue in the past but now it's very possible. That is an issue that every team has to think about which they really didn't have to until this season.

I really do not see a team giving up a #1 for Webb. A #2 pick yes, but not a first. I think we all agree that Webb is a pretty good corner with some room to grow but giving up a first is a pretty good deterrent when you consider the market has a few guys who while may not be as young or have as much of a upside as Webb, they are pretty decent and wont cost you a first you can use to address other issues. Add in that the Ravens have right of first refusal to match a contract, I think Webb will be back. Even if someone takes a shot at him, I doubt they go outlandish far as the money. Most of the teams who have the money to make that kinda offer are in the upper half of the draft and if they do then you have to take the pick or pay, which ever works best based on the cap and other factors.

**srobert96** · 03-09-2012, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by GOTA

Webb is a UFA next year. What worries me is that he tries to leave as a RFA this year. That was never an issue in the past but now it's very possible. That is an issue that every team has to think about which they really didn't have to until this season.

I understand what you are getting at. You are suggesting that the Ravens lock up their own earlier. I would like to see that as well. With Webb there was really not much choice. Before last season I don't think anyone was clamoring to sign him to a long term contract. This year the Ravens are in a tough spot with the cap so extending anyone is difficult. Things should ease up next year and the year after.

I watch film and evaluate players so I am not sure how Webb ranks among corners in the league. I think his value may be inflated among Baltimore fans because he made some very timely interceptions this year. Again, I don't watch film so I don't know how he does in coverage form play to play. If he were a top 5 corner or even a top 10 corner I think people would be talking him up more nationally.