so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

[camelcowboy]

No one said anything about the transition tag. I can see the bills going this route. It gives them the right to match any offer. if the money gets sick they can walk away

[kernowboy]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

Can you go transition after franchise?

[ICE74129]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

We can't use the transition tag. Each team gets one period (at least that is what keeps coming up in print) and we used it on John Fina I think

[SquishDaFish]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

You can use the trans or franchise tag every year if you wish. The only way you lose them is if you put the tag on the player and after he is signed to it he signs long term deal then you lose the tag for the length of that said contract.

[Ickybaluky]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

Given what happened with the Steve Hutchinson contract last year, and then the Seahawk response with the Nate Burleson contract, the transition tag is obsolete and may never be used again by any team. The league tried to bargain out those types of "poison pills" in the new CBA, but the NFLPA refused and they still remain.

Any team that wants to sign a transition player just has to insert some nonsense like he becomes the highest paid player on the team if he plays more than 2 home games in a certain state, and it makes the contract impossible to match.

[ICE74129]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

Bottom line...marv screwed up. You NEVER put in a contract you will not franchise someone. We could get a first from someone like washington EASY had he not screwed up.

and The homers can bite me...MARV SCREWED UP!! 'but he wanted him in camp on time' ...for what? To go 7-9 and not make the playoffs? At what point does anyone with any common or football sense at all would think nate clements being in camp on time would be THE thing that got us into the playoffs?

It was a royal screwup by marv that I feel will come back to bite us. Do I forgive him, sure but it was a screwup none the less.

[RockStar36]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

I assumed that Marv was just being honest with him. He said I'll franchise you this year but we aren't going to keep going year to year to next year I promise not to franchise you. I looked at it as a classy move by Marv.

[venis2k1]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

with our rookie dbs it was important to get clements into camp as THE veteran presence in the secondary.

[Mitchy moo]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

Maybe the Bills should file that you cannot put a DO NOT FRANCHISE tag in any contract language. They have lawyers and better find a way out of it.

[Ickybaluky]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

Maybe the Bills should file that you cannot put a DO NOT FRANCHISE tag in any contract language. They have lawyers and better find a way out of it.

Actually, it is put into contract language at times, and probably was with Clements as well. There is standard language for a Franchise/Transition tag prohibition.

I also don't think it is uncommon to promise not to franchise a player for a second year. The Seahawks did so with Shawn Alexander (it was put into his contract), and then subsequently re-signed him prior to his becoming a FA.

Keep in mind, when a player is franchised he gets the tag amount or 120% of his previous year's salary, whichever is greater. Clements would have qualified for a 120% increase, which would have put his cap number at $8.671,200 for this year if franchised again. The Bills probably figured they weren't going to pay him that much anyway and would take the chance they would either re-sign him move on.

That is hardly screwing up, that is strategy. Guys come and go.

[ICE74129]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

I assumed that Marv was just being honest with him. He said I'll franchise you this year but we aren't going to keep going year to year to next year I promise not to franchise you. I looked at it as a classy move by Marv.

Its not classy its STUPID! We owe nate NOTHING. Marv owes the Bills to do everything he can in his power to make us better. That means NOT agreeing to franchise Nate.

What would an additional first rounder do for us this year? TONS. Marv screwed up, plain and simple. Quit making excuses for him. I pray he never does it again.

[ICE74129]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

Actually, it is put into contract language at times, and probably was with Clements as well. There is standard language for a Franchise/Transition tag prohibition.

I also don't think it is uncommon to promise not to franchise a player for a second year. The Seahawks did so with Shawn Alexander (it was put into his contract), and then subsequently re-signed him prior to his becoming a FA.

Keep in mind, when a player is franchised he gets the tag amount or 120% of his previous year's salary, whichever is greater. Clements would have qualified for a 120% increase, which would have put his cap number at $8.671,200 for this year if franchised again. The Bills probably figured they weren't going to pay him that much anyway and would take the chance they would either re-sign him move on.

That is hardly screwing up, that is strategy. Guys come and go.

its called stupidity by a rookie GM. No way in hell they didn't have an idea on how much cap room theywould have this year. That said, franchise his ass then trade him to get the cap room back.

It was a **** up plain and simple.

[RockStar36]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

You're right. You should be the GM. You're obviously smarter than everyone else.

[Mitchy moo]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

You're right. You should be the GM. You're obviously smarter than everyone else.

He's ruder anyways.

[ICE74129]

Re: so we promised not to give clements the franchise tag...

You're right. You should be the GM. You're obviously smarter than everyone else.

See you can't admit it was a pure screw up on marvs part, which it was. Instead you have to try and turn it to a slap at me.

Marv ****ed up. Thats all there is too it. Your GM needs at all times to do whats best for the team and if slapping a tag on one of the most sought after FA's gets you another first, then that is whats best for your team instad of just letting him walk.