Post by Baltimore Ravens on Mar 28, 2011 21:38:38 GMT -5
I've been thinking about our ability to use the Franchise Tag,Transition Tag, and the contract extension.
I think there are too many ways to keep teams from changing. I welcome the desire to descover a diamond in the rough,and the desire to keep him forever. But, In the current policies you could easily transition tag and contract extension a person until they retire with very little effort. I've been thinking of suggesting something similiar to the Restricted Free Agent status that they use in the NFL that allows a team to receive compensation in the form of a draft pick if they lose a player,but i feel that would be too difficult to explain or implement. I was thinking of this....
Do away with contract extension, and franchise tag. And allow two transition tags a year. My new idea for transition tag:
Any player that is transition tagged is bid on like usual,but instead of Roster Bonus you bid a compensation bonus.(up to max of 4mil maybe) and you bid a salary like usual(except maybe limit to a mil or two above top positional player),then the original owner can decide to take the discount, if he does the comp. bonus is converted to RB, if he gives up the player he gets the compensation bonus in the form of a lump sum cap bonus on the year,from the winners cap. If we do decide to limit the salary bidding(to keep from killing players/teams caps) we could have tied bidders bid player/pick compensations and the original owner can pick which to accept.( but thats getting a bit ahead of things )
I think this forces/allows people to keep ,but fight for the players they really wanna keep,and allows teams who are less established to build. This would make transition tags helpful to both sides in the end. The winning bidder gets a building block player, and the team losing a star players gets awarded salary cap to go back to free agency and pick up players. But our overall goal is to increase the ability for all to compete, and if a large percentage of players are locked, the competition is severly hampered.
ex:
Team A-transition tags a player
Team B-bids say 2mil sal,2mil comp. bonus for 3yrs
scenario 1-Team A keeps player and gets at discounted salary and 2mil RB
scenario 2 Team A declines player, gets 2mil cap added,loses player
Team B gains player at 2mil salary,0 RB 3yrs(loses 2mil in cap on top,total loss 4mil)
What do you think?(if confusing , sorry, kinda tired lol )
I think there are too many ways to keep teams from changing. I welcome the desire to descover a diamond in the rough,and the desire to keep him forever. But, In the current policies you could easily transition tag and contract extension a person until they retire with very little effort. I've been thinking of suggesting something similiar to the Restricted Free Agent status that they use in the NFL that allows a team to receive compensation in the form of a draft pick if they lose a player,but i feel that would be too difficult to explain or implement. I was thinking of this....
Do away with contract extension, and franchise tag. And allow two transition tags a year. My new idea for transition tag:
Any player that is transition tagged is bid on like usual,but instead of Roster Bonus you bid a compensation bonus.(up to max of 4mil maybe) and you bid a salary like usual(except maybe limit to a mil or two above top positional player),then the original owner can decide to take the discount, if he does the comp. bonus is converted to RB, if he gives up the player he gets the compensation bonus in the form of a lump sum cap bonus on the year,from the winners cap. If we do decide to limit the salary bidding(to keep from killing players/teams caps) we could have tied bidders bid player/pick compensations and the original owner can pick which to accept.( but thats getting a bit ahead of things )
I think this forces/allows people to keep ,but fight for the players they really wanna keep,and allows teams who are less established to build. This would make transition tags helpful to both sides in the end. The winning bidder gets a building block player, and the team losing a star players gets awarded salary cap to go back to free agency and pick up players. But our overall goal is to increase the ability for all to compete, and if a large percentage of players are locked, the competition is severly hampered.
ex:
Team A-transition tags a player
Team B-bids say 2mil sal,2mil comp. bonus for 3yrs
scenario 1-Team A keeps player and gets at discounted salary and 2mil RB
scenario 2 Team A declines player, gets 2mil cap added,loses player
Team B gains player at 2mil salary,0 RB 3yrs(loses 2mil in cap on top,total loss 4mil)
What do you think?(if confusing , sorry, kinda tired lol )