The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - How teams should (and shouldn't) use the NFL's franchise tag

Episode Date: February 24, 2023

The franchise tag...oft-discussed, little understood? The first part is certainly true, and as you dig into the tag you realize that the second part is, as well. Robert Mays and Nate Tice explore the recent history of the franchise tag on this episode of The Athletic Football Show.Follow Robert on Twitter: @robertmaysFollow Nate on Twitter: @Nate_TiceSubscribe to The Athletic Football Show...AppleSpotifyYouTubeToday's show is brought to you by...Atlassian: For projects impossible alone, visit www.atlassian.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the athletic football show. Welcome. The athletic football show. I'm Robert Mays. Join me today. It's my good friend Natei. How you doing, buddy? Joining you today for a second time.

Second time. We recorded an earlier show this morning, and this is the Friday show that you guys are listening to that we're also recording on Thursday. So if we run out of gas at any point today, this is a weird product of our offseason schedule. And an early podcast got rained out, and they're making it up with the double header. That's what you want to do. You want to do two days in the off season right before you go to the combine for six days. Hey, it keeps our Fridays free. That is the goal here.

But no, I am doing very well. I'm excited to talk about this episode because it's just a fun one that we haven't really kind of ever gone to these waters. So I'm excited to talk about it with you. Even doing the pre-show prep, it was pretty fun, just picking the brains. So our brains. One of those brains was mine. I'm picking my own brain here. But, no, I'm feeling very great right now, very good afternoon.

So the franchise tag window is open, okay? And when I was thinking about different discussions that we could have today, I was looking at the Duran Payne decision, the news that it seems like Washington is going to tag Duran Payne. And I didn't have a value judgment on that immediately. It was like, okay. Right. Is that a good idea? And it wasn't a asshole asking a rhetorical question.

Is that a good idea? It was generally like, is using the franchise tag a good idea? You know, we talk every year about which guys might get tagged, which guys might get long-term deals. There's been so much discussion about how shitty the franchise tag is. Now, we should abolish it and it's bad for players, which I think can go both ways sometimes. I think that getting the tag is a way to make a lot of money if you use it the right way. And a lot of guys have gotten very rich using the franchise tag. But that's a whole different discussion.

I wanted to talk about whether teams actually should do this. Like what is the recent history of using the franchise tag? Do you get something out of it? Does it tend to be a waste of money? Which guys get tagged? Are there certain positions you should spend it on? Are there certain times within your trajectory in the team building process that you should use it? All of these different questions because I've never really thought about it.

Really, the way we think about the tag is mostly, does that guy deserve to get tagged based on where he is in his positional hierarchy? and is the franchise tag a deterrence to players making money? Those are typically the discussions and who's going to get tagged. So we'll talk about a couple of the guys this year that are candidates, but maybe more so than will they get tagged is should they? How does that fit in the process these teams are trying to follow as they build these teams? So as you dug in to the last, I don't know, decade, I don't know how far you look back, as you dug into the last, to the recent history of the franchise tag, let's frame it that way.

Yeah, there you go. There you go. What was your number one takeaway? The number one thing we were just like, oh, I did not think about that before I went into this exercise. One is how many players get hurt when they're tagged and play on a franchise tag was a there was a fewer number of players that actually got put on IR and what happened to him afterwards.

And also there's a couple of random ones that I went back to 2019. I like to do things in force like when we do our quarterback draft and non-quarterback draft. I like to think everything in Olympic cycles. That's our presidential cycles. Four years is kind of how I think of everything. But I went back to 2019. There's 39 cases since then, since the 2019 offseason of players that are, some players got tagged twice, but 39 cases of somebody getting franchised. 22 of those players played with the tag. Four ended up on IR and one significant time. He played 11 games, Brandon Shurf. Five got traded, 12 got extended before tagged and then extended

by the same team. But I, of that 22 that played with the tag, I thought, you know, you hear the horror stories and this is, this is why guys are so worried about getting tagged is they're not going to get that long, long term deal. And that's what it's costing them. Of those five that ended up missing time, most of them ended up all right. They still ended up getting paid or a contract later down the road. So that kind of, I'm not trying to take away an argument from the players or anything, but that kind of surprised me. I kind of was like, I just remember the worst cases of this. So that's why it's stuck in my brain. Dex playing on the tag. He breaks his leg and then he makes as much as he would have before.

And a lot of the time, that's the case with these guys. You know, I think Godwin also got hurt. Budupree got hurt when he was on the tag. So a lot of these guys, I think that there's an argument to be made that if you do this the right way, the tag can be a benefit for your future contract negotiations because it sets a new bar for the number that you're going to be looking for. Brandon Shriff, perfect example. Okay.

Brandon Shirf gets tagged twice. His two tags are essentially two years, $33 million with Washington. His new deal with Jacksonville, first two years, $33 million in cash flow, $16.5 million AAB. That could be an accident. I doubt that it is. It's the market rate for him. It's to Marcus Lawrence. This is another perfect example, tagged once.

and then they tagged again, negotiated his extension on that tag. DeMarcus Lawrence's last deal over. He made a shitload of money. Right. The one that, and this was a surprise name, and we talked about this is a pre-show, but Marcus May in 2021 got tagged towards Achilles. Yes. But then the tag at that time was 10 million.

And he ended up signing a three year, 22 and a half 14.5 guaranteed contract with the Saints. And that kind of were, that was the one. Well, one, I was shocked that he was tagged. DiWiary just said this, but it was just that one. I was like, oh, I forgot about that. But that seemed like he ended up signing a deal that maybe hit his rate where he was taking basically a cut, but he still ended up signing a 14.5 guaranteed deal for a million guaranteed deal. So that one was the one where it was like, okay, some of this injury might have hurt him

because of what he could have gotten. But also, I was shocked in the first place that he got tagged in the first place. So there's kind of like a little tit for tat there. So the Marcus May example, I think, is the one that I'd want to start with when we talk about missteps, just tags that don't really make sense as you look back on that, back on them with some hindsight. The Jets won two games that year when they tagged Marcus May. That didn't need to happen.

You don't need to spend $10 million to tag a guy to keep that team together. And that lesson, I think, is one of those. If a coach is on a hot seat, if a regime is on its way out, we see some mistakes made with the franchise tag. I think that's one of them. Anthony Harris getting tagged in 2020 for this kind of weird Vikings team that is in transition where are they a contender, are they not? That one didn't really make a lot of sense.

And then the one that obviously just pains me deep into my soul is Alan Robinson getting tagged by the Bears in 2021. And that's again, regime on a hot seat. You're trying to squeeze everything you can out of that final last year. It's like, oh man, we've really got to turn this around. like anything in life. When you're negotiating or operating from that position of urgency and weakness, it's probably not going to go well for you.

The argument in favor of the Allen Robinson tag is that I think there are a couple examples of other ones that have sort of worked out. You have a rookie quarterback potentially. You don't want to lose your number one option or that security blanket or a receiver that that guy can rely on. And you have this surplus value created by that rookie quarterback contract to afford that guy. So I understand the argument for it in that way, but that one did not work out. The one that I think you can justify in that way in 2020, Hunter Henry got tagged by the Chargers.

You think, eh, you know, like, do you really, does Hunter Henry need to be franchise tagged? Like, is that worth it? But you draft Justin Herbert that year. So you have a guy that you drafted in the top 10. Obviously, that came later, but they had the sixth pick. I think they probably had a decent idea that they might try to draft a quarterback. And that season, Hunter Henry caught 60 pass-eastern. on 93 targets for that team.

And I think it served as a little bit of a security blanket for your rookie quarterback that nice to have some options. So I can understand that. And when you have the rookie quarterback contract, it's almost like front loading a deal. Like one of the downsides of the franchise tag is that even if it's, you sign a guy to a three or $30 million contract like Todd Ed and like Hunter Henry. So the AAV is the same as the salary as the franchise tag. You could spread that out.

You can make a lower cap hit in your, one. You can make it bigger in your two. You can backload it a little bit. So it creates flexibility that the tag doesn't give you. The tag is one big hit to your cap that season. But if you're on a rookie quarterback deal, then it's almost like front loading an extension that you'd give out and you're using that flexibility you have in the moment. I think that's exactly what the Hatter Henry example is. Yeah. And it's your in some cases, you're keeping a guy around because you don't want to overpay for a replacement. Yeah. That's a good point. You look around and you're like, do I want to pay $9 million for a guy that's worse?

All right. I'll just pay an extra million just to have this guy around, just the replacement. The Orlando Brown with the Chiefs is the current example of this. And Alan Robinson with the Bears would have been my other example where they looked around. They're like, we need somebody to catch these balls. Well, I can't like hodgepodge this together. We're going to end up overpaying for somebody else that's worse.

You know, of course, you know the result of everything, but the process I understand. But that's a great example of the Hunter Henry want is just, you want sometimes you're just overpaying for that competence and also there's certain positions this is another lesson I had with tight end being one of them certain positions you're kind of like you it seems like a lot of teams with safety and tight ends they don't want to set the market for anybody unless they have that truly elite guy especially at tight end. Last year's franchise the group of franchise guys franchise tag guys makes that's Gisicki and Dalton Schultz David Nujoku they end up resigning them and giving them the extension but it's kind of one of those where everyone's playing a game of chicken. It's like, I don't want to be the one left holding the bag of this. I just gave Gisickey a three-year deal and now we're overpaying him and nobody else signed their other tight end. So I think tight end and safety were positions where I see, you frequently see names getting tagged and you understand why it's because I think it's a lot of those kind of good tier players that teams are like, I don't want to set the market with this guy. But then the guys that do get the extensions are the true kind of difference makers, you know, Simmons with the Broncos is a great example to bring up that where they kept them.

They understood what the market was for safety. Okay, we're comfortable giving this to him. He's proven it. We give it to him after that. So that was the other kind of lesson I got from who's been recently tagged anyways. So the tight end one, I had another thought that was kind of similar about, okay, where are you creating value of positions? Okay. So now this year specifically, okay, let's look at the franchise tag numbers for this season.

All right. 2023, the tag for receivers is $19.7 million. Okay. the tag for tight ends is 11.3. Right. So if you need a pass catcher, would it make sense to use the franchise tag on a tight end for one year because you're paying almost half of what you do at receiver?

Kind of similar to what Barnwell and I were talking about the day that the Hawkinson train happened, where if you can get that guy on a slight discount as a secondary pass catcher when the market for receivers is exploding, is that worth doing? So the Cowboys last year were a really good example. they give the tag to Dalton Schultz for about $10 million. They trade Amari Cooper, who was going to make $22 million against the cap. They take on $6 million dead money.

So they save $16 million by trading Amari Cooper, and they give $10 million of that to Dalton Schultz on the cap. So they save $6 million overall. Is that worth it? I would say in the aggregate, no. But I think that that idea of tight ends are so much less expensive, maybe we use. the franchise tag on tight ends in a way we can't with receivers now. Do we see more tight ends tagged if that market doesn't explode at any point? It kind of feels like that position of all because there's only a couple of elite guys and there's a lot of, I wouldn't say interchangeable, but kind of interchangeable type of talents, you know.

And I love always, I love the point you're bringing up about the secondary options in a passing game. And I think that's something and we have to wrap our brains around, especially as, you know, running backs are more past catch heavy. you know, like we talked about the value of CMC, basically being a number three in a passing attack, as well as your number one option in the run game, touches, snaps played and touches. But if a tight end is your, T.J. Hockinson, a great example, Dalton Schultz, Dalton Schultz, you're paying for basically that number three option and a passing attack. Who doesn't matter? Every team is built different.

Some teams are the Bengals who throw every ball to all three of the receivers and the tight end barely gets targeted. Hurst got a few of those years. But then you look at the chargers, the number three in their passing attack, really, number one this year because of injuries was Austin Eckler. Yeah. And it's every team is built different. So I just kind of I want to kind of dovetail off your point that

just because it's a tight end or a receiver, I think we are becoming better just going, they're past catchers. And then they just do other things in their auxiliary roles, which is blocking or you know, other things that they have to do. But I just want to kind of reiterate that point that that's where you can find that discount or that surplus. I think one of the other places you can find a discount. You mentioned his name already. Yeah. Left tackle.

is a spot where the franchise tag can really benefit you. We've seen that over the last three years, okay? Orlando Brown made $16 million on the salary cap last year. You compare that to the top of the market for left tackles. For whatever reason, if I was a left tackle, I'd be pissed about this. Yes. Offensive Wyden gets the same number. So it's centers, guards, and tackles together.

So weird. So if you're a left tackle and Trent Williams is making 23 at the top of the market, you made 16 last year if you're Orlando Brown. So he had the fifth highest cap hit among left tackles in the league last year. And that's for any like cap funniness where people are converting things and everything else. He was 10th in AAV among left tackles last year at $16 million. If he's tagged again this year, Orlando Brown is by the Chiefs, that'd be $36 million in two-year cash flow over those two contracts because he'd go up to $20 million this year. that is right in line with the two-year cash flow that Jake Matthews got,

the Cam Robinson got on his extension, we'll talk about him in a second, Dionne Dawkins, Donovan Smith. We've talked about this tier of left tackle. That is a position specifically where the unknown and the replacement value, having a guy there is hugely important. And that's the exact tier of players that we're talking about. So if you're paying $17 million a year for your left tackle in the current financial market, that's totally fine over a two-year period.

That's two tags for a player. So I think the chiefs have done a really good job of understanding that and may do it again. And Cam Robinson was the same deal two years ago. When they signed him, when they gave him the tag, I was like, man, Cam Robinson, really? But then you think about what you're paying a left tackle on the franchise tag. And also, where are you? Okay. Trevor Lawrence is the number one overall pick.

You know you have the number one overall pick. he's going to be there day one as your starter. Having a competent player at that spot is so important to your offense and so important to just the overall development of your quarterback. So that spot specifically, just because you need one of those to function, I think it's a really good place to utilize this if you can't. And especially what they gave up for him originally, which was like the 31st pick or whatever it was, to the Ravens, is what we have reiterated with how you find.

tackles. Every team's in a different boat. They have different resources. They have different team circumstances. The chiefs already have their quarterback. All right, we're picking in the high 20s or 30 or 31 or 32. Well, 31 actually because we lost the dolphins pick. We're picking there. You're not usually finding a bona fide left tackle at that point in the draft. And you don't have the salary cap to pay a guy, not that those guys hit the market at all. We talked about a few days ago. There's a right tackle market usually. There's not a left tackle market usually. So this is But you have to pay a premium sometimes. But the thing is, that's actually good business.

They're not, it's not the overpaying for, I'll call Orlando Brown an above average left tackle. But you're paying more that good, very good tier. That's not that crazy. You're paying for the competence. And that makes sense for your team makeup, especially offense align. Offensive line is about getting your best five out there. You're paying for him to be your third best, your third best offense alignment. And that makes sense to me completely.

As far as where the chiefs are, if you're a team just started out from scratch and you're like, this is our building block. Okay, that's a little dicey in figuring that out. But I just think it's a good business sense where it makes sense for what they're trying to do. And again, that's where it is. All these are going to be team and player specific in which, again, makes sense. He wanted a market setting deal. They didn't want to give him a market setting deal.

So ideally, you would sign your left tackle to a multi-year contract. You wouldn't have to worry about this. You'd have a guy under wraps that, again, you'd have some financial flexibility. We can move some money around. We've seen that with all the guys I mentioned, Matthews, Dawkins, Donovan Smith, all of them. But if he's not going to, he wants a market setting contract and you're not willing to give it to him, this is a really good consolation. It's a good recourse that you have as a team and the chiefs have used that. And the Jacks did the same thing with Cam Robinson before signing him to one of those extensions. Yeah. When you look at the market for left tackles or just tackles, it's really fine when you look at the AAV. You know, Trent Williams gets 23, Bactiari gets 23. Tonzel gets 22. Stanley gets Ronnie Stanley, it's just under 20. You know, this is the AAV.

Ryan Ranche gets about 19 and changed. Brian O'Neill gets 18 and a half. So Orlando Brown is making less, really, than Brian O'Neill. And that's huge. Okay. That's okay. It makes so much more sense when you put in that type of perspective.

That position, and I love that you keep bringing up this point about it, the fact that that's all offensive line to pay left tackle is such a huge detail. And obviously the chiefs have taken advantage of it. I'll be careful about this. It's bullshit. that all the offensive linemen come out of the same thing. But those are the rules. So if you're a team, you operate under the rules, this is where you can find some value.

Yeah. Same with the edge. You know, with, you know, figuring out. Actually, not really because D.N. and linebacker get paid about the same. Well, this is. So it's funny because it's a couple different examples of this. 2020, Shack Barrett gets the outside linebacker tag, which is like 15.8.

And Judon got paid 16.8 on the franchise tag that year. And I was like, how? I was looking at all of the numbers. I was like, that wasn't the number. It wasn't the DN tag. He got in the middle. They gave him exactly in the middle of the outside linebacker tag and the defensive end tag in 2020 for Matt Judon.

That's funny. A little bit of the team being like, you know what? We'll help you out a tiny bit here. Those two guys, I think, are interesting examples. Okay. Yes, Shaq Barrett especially. Shaq Barrett is kind of one of the stranger ones we've seen over the last five or six years because sometimes when you're getting a tag, it's just bad planning.

you haven't done this the right way as a team where it's like, oh, man, like, we're really going to have to tag a guy because we didn't have to force it. That's why the Cowboys have to do it over and over. And Washington has to do it over and over. So Shaq Barrett, they signed him on a one year four million dollar contract because he was a rotational rusher on the Broncos. Then he gets a 19 and a half sex. Could ask Robert Mays and Nate Tice what we thought about Shaq Barrett. That was before our show. but that was an original guy where like Shaq Barrett,

you like Shaq Barrett? He's good, man. And Shaq Barrett's been good. So he signs a one year four million dollar deal. He gets 19 and a half sacks. So we talked about this this morning. We were talking about the Titans. This is three, four year plans in advance.

You don't have $20 million on an extension earmarked for Shaq Barrett if you're Jason Light in that moment. But you also don't want to lose him. You have a team that you feel really good about. The rest of your roster is strong. they probably had a sense that they would be able to sign Tom Brady. They franchise tagged Shaq Barrett four days before signing Tom Brady to that deal in 2020. So you know that, all right, we have a team we think can win right now.

And Brady was not making a ton of money. They had the flexibility to do it. They do it. Shaq Barrett leads the league in pressures that year, even if you had a down year in sacks. They win the Super Bowl in part because their pass rush was so ridiculous. So that's one of those where I told. understand how it happened and it works out great. Judon gets tagged the same year.

2020, you're coming off a year where Lamar Jackson was the MVP of the league. You were arguably the best team in the league. You fall short in the playoffs. You're thinking, man, we got to just, we should try to squeeze everything we can out of this. Like, we are right there on the doorstep. Judon was a rotational rusher.

You know, it's not somebody you spent a ton on in the draft. Maybe you didn't have him as part of your future clients. You've let these guys walk over and over again Zadarius Smith being an example of that. But you're thinking, okay, we can afford it. We have a rookie quarterback contract. Let's try to win the fucking Super Bowl. And they tag him.

He was 11th in AAB among edges that year. And they were a 12 and 14. They were really good again. And then another kind of similar example of that to me is Jesse Bates this year. You haven't paid any of these guys. You know you're going to have to pay them. You have financial flexibility this year. You went to the Super Bowl.

last season. Continuity among your secondary is really important. You draft a guy in Daxhill that's going to be the heir apparent to this position. So you have a future plan. You're not caught looking here. But you say, all right, we're going to do everything we can to try to push these chips into the middle. He'll walk in free agency and hopefully we'll get a compick for it. So I think that there are applications of it that absolutely makes sense in some of these circumstances. Yeah. Those are all great examples. Like the Shack Barrett one is just that sometimes you get a breakout year and you're just like, okay, all right. And then do you have to go, was that real or, you know, so we got a great, great point. We got to prove it or just to make sure or you're buying time to hash out

the extension, of course. But let's just make sure Shaq Barrett, I think is the perfect example of that. And then also, we haven't talked about trades, but you buy time for a trade market to develop. But also, sometimes you tag a guy. And none of the guys that you just brought up are this example. I do have a great historical example of this. Pat myself on the back already. But they, Sometimes you don't want to give that long-term contract for a guy you don't want to give a long, like you know he's a good player, but you're like, I don't really want to build around this guy because we know kind of how his professional ethic is, his work ethic and everything. The number one example is Albert Hainsworth with the Titans in 2008. Like, of course the Titans wanted to resign Albert Hainsworth, but I think they knew his, his MO. So they franchise tagged him.

He goes to Washington a year later. And sure enough, it's like one of the biggest like free agency fails of all time. But that is honestly another avenue why teams would do it. There's not really a great example that in recent years, but that is one historical one where it's like, oh, we don't really trust this guy in long term unless you count the Cowboys with Dak, but that's just Cowboys land and figuring out all that kind of stuff. But I just think that sometimes it turns into a prove it deal after they've already kind of like unexpectedly proven it.

Unexpected breakouts is where you see the tag happen a few times. Another, I think similar application to the Jesse Bates one would be a Lamarcus Joyner when he got it in 2018 with the Rams. You're three of golf's rookie deal. You're a playoff team. You try to keep that group together. The Marcus Jordan had a really nice year that season. The Rams went to the Super Bowl.

They almost won the Super Bowl. It's a window maximizer. Yes. And it's about understanding where you are, right? Yes. If you're franchise tagging a safety, Jesse Bates, the Marcus Joyner, and you rightly are a team that can win a Super Bowl, I can understand that.

You're giving the franchise tag to Marcus May and you're winning two games. it's a little bit different. You're franchising with Marcus Williams when you have James Winston as your quarterback. It's a little bit different. And so I think that there are good ways and bad ways to do this. And the other way that you can wield this, and to be the best example is the 2019 group of franchise tagged guys, is just buying yourself time.

So if you're not ready to make a decision, you just buy yourself time to get yourself in a different financial spot and also maybe to move someone. So in 2019, there were seven guys who were franchise tagged, one of them being a kicker, which is great. It was so funny. All seven of them were either extended by the teams that franchised them or traded.

Deveen Clowney was traded to the Seahawks right on the eve of the season. Frank Clark was traded to the chiefs right on the eve of the season. D. Ford was traded to the Niners. DeMarcus Lawrence got a five-year $105 million extension. What we're talking about if you said a new book. bar for yourself. Grady Jerrick got a big extension. Donovan Smith got a big extension.

So that is also something that you can do with this. If you just want to give yourself a little bit more time, if you want to create a trade market for a guy because you think they eventually you can deal on, but now is not the right time, whatever. That is another thing that teams have used to their benefit in the past. Yep. And those are just that year is a perfect thing. It's just that, like you said, you're buying time.

Sometimes the trade market, you're like letting that sit a little bit. The following year, our very first podcast, Yonik and Gokwold, Well, talk about him and getting traded. He was another one the following year. He got tagged and traded. That was a whole ordeal with the Jags in that offseason before he got traded right before the season started. Ended up signing. It's kind of fun when you see the kind of like sign in trades of the NFL.

Like they get the extension right after it happens. Some guys don't. Yannick was one of them. Genevian Clowny was not one of them. But then Frank Clark and D. Ford that got traded. They signed an extension right after or Devante Adams last year. And so sometimes it's just timing of contract language too. Some guys have league years.

stuff, some summer June stuff like June 1st designations. Like there's just certain language that sometimes these teams have to get creative with. That's just another way to get creative. I can't talk about the poison pill and talk about creativity. You certainly can. I was glad I got reminded of this because one of my favorite kind of, because you don't really see this in the NFL. This is like feels like a, poison pills are definitely an NBA kind of thing to me. It's from a different era because it is from a different era. It is. It is from a different era. 2006, Steve Hutchinson from the Seahawks, signed a contract with the Vikings and Rob Brzezinski. He had a transition tag and not a franchise tag, transition tag being that other teams are going to negotiate and there's compensation, yada, yada, yada.

But you have the right to match. The Bears did it with Cal Fowler in 2018 and ended up getting screwed because the Packers decided to screw them. That's fun. But this is where you can see where teams are doing their work. But I loved it. Rob Brzezinski. Shout out to Rob Brunsonski, but he with the Vikings. there still a president with the Vikings been there for a very long time.

My dad hired him, moved him up. He's still there. Yeah, but not hired him originally, but he worked his way up. But he, the provision in the contract or the amendment in the contract was that if Steve Hutchison was not the, if wasn't the highest paid offense alignment on the roster, then his contract be fully guaranteed, which, okay, fine. If you sign with the Vikings, why that mattered was the Ciox that just signed Walter Jones. To a record setting contract a year before.

So that's where the poison pill comes in. I just love the tit for tat with it with Nate Burles. The Seahawks went, well, this is what we're going to do. And they signed Nate Burleson. And their version of the poison pill was that his contract, it was the exact same amount, too, $49 million. His contract became fully guaranteed if he played five or more games in the state of Minnesota. And I just love that little, that little window of history where two teams got petty with each other. And it kind of, I mean, it worked out great for Minnesota with Hutchinson.

But that is just another kind of way teams got creative with it. They did away with it, I think, in the most recent CBA. Yes. Yeah, you can't do that anymore. You can't do that something anymore. Again, it's a product of a different era. It is, I know, especially with GMs now. That would have been a lot of fun to see who could be petty with it.

So that was just another one that I wanted to bring up just the historical usage of the franchise tag, because teams can get creative with it, sometimes in a negative sense. A couple from recent history that just, you look at him and it's like, I can't believe that happened. Ziggy Ansah got tagged in 2018. That's right. That's another team where it's like, the Lions went six and ten that year. You need to do this?

That feels like a name I haven't heard forever. I feel like Obi-Wan right now. So one of the lessons here, have some self-awareness. Have some self-awareness about where you are. I think that's the number one lesson. That really is the number one lesson, I think, from doing this. It's like, know what you are. Know what your window actually is.

So you talked about the Cowboys. I want to discuss the history of quarterback tags because in the last decade, there's been two guys that have gotten a franchise tag as quarterbacks. We know them. They are Kirk Cousins and Dak Crescott. Do you think either one of those teams is happy that that's the way, that's how they handled that situation? I think the Cowboys ended up being okay, but definitely not Washington. Why? They could have signed him to an extension two years earlier.

You're saying both two years earlier and getting there. 60% of the money. Yeah, but I mean, Cap kept going up. I'm fine with it. Oh, no. I think it's a huge. 40 is a new 30.

It's a huge mistake. So he got the tag in 2020 and in 2021. So 16, 17, 18, 19 was his last year. So if they had signed him to an extension during the 2019 season, right? Which they should have. They could have locked him into a 33, million a year deal if they wanted to. They could have saved $7 million a season if they wanted to.

Because Russ signed his extension in April of 2019. So that Russ number was like $35 million a year. So the Russ number was before the Deshaun Watson contract and before the Mahomes deal. So I believe both of those came after Dak got the tag. So he easily could have come in at less than Russ or right around that. So even it's $5 million a year. You're still saving money. My point here is that if the guy is worth tag.

and you are even almost thinking about signing him to a long-term extension, just sign him to the extension. Because it's only going to get more expensive. And that's what the Washington, it's a slightly different situation with Kirk Cousins. But Washington gives him all that money over two years. Okay. Those two seasons, Kirk Cousins makes a combined $44 million. Okay. Why wouldn't you just try to sign him to a deal with 50 million guaranteed or whatever that

allows you to kind of reap the benefits of year three and year four rather than walking through the quarterback wilderness in the way that you had to. I just don't think that the recent history shows us that giving the tag to a quarterback is usually worth it. No. If you're, well, and it also kind of just speaks a lot of team situation stuff. If you're at the point where you haven't hashed out how we signed our franchise guy, and I'm just considering what Kirk Cousins and Washington was at that time, like obviously with his market. If he's worth tagging, obviously they liked them enough to tag them, you know, and find a replacement.

But that's just what it is. It's like the teams with the plan actually figured this stuff out. And that's why it's really curious with like what's going on with like Lamar. It's just that we knew this was coming. And sure enough, that's being dragged out and everything. That's why it's an interesting case for them too. I think in Baltimore's case,

there is no sense in having him tagged and playing on the tag this year. I think it's tagging him to find a trade partner over the next six months. It's a time buying yourself time. So that's one. quarterback example this year. The other one that people keep talking about with the tag is Daniel Jones. Yeah. We've talked about this a little bit.

What are you accomplishing? And I'm genuinely asking you this. What are you accomplishing if you give Daniel Jones one year $32 million for the non-exclusive franchise tag? Kick in the can on the decision. That's all. That's it. To me, it's you're buying the one year to like figure it out. Figure out whether he's your guy.

he's your guy, but then the price goes up. If he is your guy, that's kind of the tradeoff with it. So if Daniel Jones really wants $45 million a year, and you're not willing to pay him $45 million a year, right? What decision are you kicking the can toward? Because if you're not willing to pay him $45 million a year, do you want him to be your long-term starting quarterback? Probably not. And that's why we're here. If they were they wouldn't have turned down

It was a fifth year deal You know the fifth year option If they already had like real incentive That they could turn it around and everything That's that's that's all you need to know I'm just justifying what they possibly could be thinking on it But to me It's just competency at the position a guy you know

But that's what that's what you're paying But it just still seems like such a premium for that For that when you can find other competent Quarterbacks especially in the market right now So you give him one year 32 It allows you to be the offense you were this year to kind of continue being competitive. You made the playoffs this year. You really built something.

You're sending a message to the rest of your building that we're taking this seriously. We don't want to start over. We're building on this. All that I think is justifiable. But if he's going to be pissed off because you gave him the one year 32 and you're not really rewarding him, I don't know. Who wins? Yes. Like who wins in that situation?

He's pissed off. You have to figure out your quarterback spot next year. You burn $32 million in cap space for a one year rental that you didn't really want long term. Like part of me is I'm sitting here looking at this play out in public where the $45 million thing has been put out there. It's almost like the Giants like, well, you know, we tried. He wanted $45 million. And then if you want to just move on, what you can say to your building, what you could say people was we gave it our best shot. We just couldn't figure out a number that made sense for everybody.

And it frees you up to move in a different direction of quarterback. Right. I mean, and I think Daniel Jones is might be ticked off. He hired a new agent, didn't he? He's clearly not happy with how this is going. He's clearly not happy.

He's hired a new agent. And there's so much smoke out there with what he's getting paid, which is always just, to me, it's always funny. As soon as the number just keeps growing, it's like, man, they're really putting some smoke out there with the stuff.

But the, no, I'm with you because I just don't, that's why I say you're kicking the can on it. all you're doing is just kind of going like, yeah, this is what we can do. And it's expensive kick. That is an expensive swing of a leg. It's not doing the tight end for $10 million.

You know what I mean? Like when I say, there's not better out there. But that's the thing is for Daniel Jones, how much did we even breaking down the Giants this year so many times? I called the gum and toothpicks offense and everything. They maxed out what they possibly could be. And when I say that, they maxed out what Daniel Jones's skill set can be. And that was just the overthrow. and using him as a runner.

They got the most out of him. And they still were like, I don't know if I want to pay this guy. You listen to what the teams are telling you, even if they don't straight up say it. If they were really like, man, this guy, man, there's more to Daniel than we thought. Wow, let's get this done. This will already be done. You know what I mean? There's so much smoke about how they're retaining him and said it's more of the Sequan or Daniel Jones.

What do you decide? The fact that you have to ask that kind of tells you the answer about where Daniel Jones is standing is as a quarterback in the league. When we talked about the on the quarterback carousel show, I was fine with the idea of signing him to a multi-year deal that was modest. You know, if it's... Yeah. It's an average of 35, but really it's you're paying him 25 in year one.

You have some flexibility after year one. Yes. How, my big, my question here, how does a one-year $32 million deal for Daniel Jones fit into your trajectory as a franchise? What are you building on if that is part of the plan? Right. I think a lot of it is optics and messaging. That's what it feels like to me. I just, I don't know.

I just, it's very naughty. It's a tangled situation that. It is. I just, I don't know. I just don't know what the benefits are. Because I think a lot of the conventional wisdom now is, if he doesn't get the 45, if they can't find neutral ground, then they'll just tag him. It's like, all right.

And what does that do? What does that do? Because he's pissed off. If the whole thing is that it's a good locker room presence, people like him, we want him around. Well, if he's pissed off from the get go, is that good for anybody? Is he a good enough guy that it's not going to matter? Like, these are all questions worth asking. I just think it's more complicated than, well, if we can't reach a long-term deal, we'll just tag them. Right, because it's almost better off. And also, we talk about there's a lot of quarterbacks out there on the market.

Do you find someone in his tier of play for $20 million cheaper? You know, if we're talking low teens for a guy that's a stopgap on another, a two-year deal that we're talking about, That's the thing. If you're finding some stop gap until you do maybe want to take the plunge into drafting a guy, you can find the stop gap in his tier for $20 million cheaper a year. Like, I mean, you really can't. That's my just guess is where I'm at it is. Yeah.

I mean, that just leads it just, you just listen to kind of like with the tie rod's on the roster. Right. I don't think, I don't think you can do that. I think they made, they sign that deal with a thought that if they needed to, he could be a bridge guy for that second year. but I think after making the playoffs, it's a little bit harder to kind of go back to a guy. They have a plan.

Yes. And it's just, I don't know. There's just so much here. So the other one that I. There really is. The other couple of guys that I think in this class that I wanted to touch on. The Duran Payne one,

I think I made my feelings known about it before. It's like, it kind of reminds me of the Brandon Shurf thing. It's like, this one's really popped your brain. Well, I mean, because I don't,

he's a good player. He had a great season. Great year. I can understand that. But what are you trying to do if you're at the, Washington team this, like one, if it's one year, if you're truly just having him for this season and Sam Howe is your quarterback, what's the end game? Yeah. Like, you're not winning a Super Bowl this year probably with Sam Howe. You're building, if that's what you're trying to build with a rookie quarterback contract, see what you have this year. You got a nice core. Maybe you can spend some money in 2024. If Sam Howell hits, it's like, okay, that makes sense. You know, it's a year two of him as a starter. We can really build around him with this flexibility. But if Duran Payne's walking as part of that thing, then I don't know about that. Maybe the argument is that you're buying yourself time to where if Sam out is worth building

around, you know, Payne isn't just a free agent. You can try to negotiate that long term deal with him next year. I don't know. That one is, again, just kind of a, what are we doing here? Like, why are you doing this? What is it in service of? But even if, say, okay, Payne has another great year and you have them on the tag and okay, we do assignment extension.

They have so much young talent on that defensive front. They have to figure out and sort through. And then that you're just making, you're just, again, kicking the can, but you're pushing the decision down the road. But it's like you're still going to have to come to the same questions, I guess, or answer the same questions or similar ones.

Yeah, that one doesn't make sense. Like it's like pain on the chiefs would make sense as far as tagging them and where they're at as a team where they're constantly contending and trying to be in the final four every year. But with Washington who, like you said, the only quarterback on the roster really is howl,

that's dice with a new OC and new, all that stuff. You have no idea with your long, projection is it just seems like they did it, they're doing it just to do it kind of thing, unless they are trying to hash out something behind the scenes. They have $34 million in cap space right now after moving on from Carson West,

which I have to assume they will. If they give Duran Payne the franchise tag, it's $19 million. Which is, I was going to say, yep. So then you have $15 million in flexibility before whatever other moves you're going to make. Jonathan Allen's making $21 million against the cap. Yep.

So you've got two guys making $40 million against the cap combined at that position just in 2023. And that's, again, the downside of the cap is it's just one number one year. There's no fake funny money. There's no converting bonuses. There's no. Which is what you get. Think about like when you look at the Niners this year.

It's hilarious. It's like, how is George Kittle making $7 million? It's like, oh, because he's making $24 next year. You know, there's none of that with the cap. So that was just a little bit more confusing to me. The one I find fascinating. The arguments for it, why you wouldn't want to do it, is what happens with Josh Jacobs.

Mm-hmm. I want to talk about career or contract year. Somebody did it right with him. I think he ends up getting tagged, if I'm going to be honest. Just kind of, I don't know. I realize that rate, what's the rages cap room actually right now?

It's a ton. They have a ton. They have a ton of salary cap space. Yes. Oh, yeah, they do. I mean, That would make sense to me and where his age is at too.

But that's the thing don't pay the runnerback and all that type of thing. Like repaying him for trying to sign an extension with him doesn't make sense. It's almost like just guaranteeing them to a one-year deal.

That's really what it is. That's how I view him. It's just like, hey, we want another good player here. Let's just keep him around as opposed to give him the three or four year

to your contract. All right. Let's look at running back contracts in the NFL, okay? Because that would, yeah. CMC's top, right? Yeah. So I think that's,

That's the question. If he wants like the CMC deal where beyond just being at $16 million a year, the practical guarantees in the CMC deal are $38 million. Okay. The deal I come back to where it's like, all right, how can you pay a running back, have it makes sense with where you're at and the value of the position is the contract that the Browns gave to Nick Chup.

It's three years, $36 million or $20 million guaranteed. So the first two years are essentially guaranteed. You're paying them $12 million a year. if the Raiders did that and they front-loaded the deal. So hopefully if they're going to be on a rookie quarterback deal this year and that this plays into it where how much you pay in your quarterback? Where's your quarterback coming from all that stuff? They want a draft quarterback this year and then they sign a one year, $8 million a year guy just because you don't know if you're going to be able to draft one when you're drafting seventh overall.

But it's a bridge guy that is the placeholder for before you draft a guy, which you've seen teams do that all the time. Okay. So you're spending against the cap met next $10 million. on your quarterback in 2022. Can you front load a deal for Josh Jacobs where you're essentially giving him the franchise tag, but it's a multi-year contract with a little bit more guaranteed. So you're keeping a guy who played very well for you and was a team captain, all of that stuff,

happy with a market appropriate contract that is really not that much different than the tag. Yeah, like signing, it's like a multi-year tag, but it's more team friendly. As far as just how it breaks down. It's not even necessarily more team friendly, but you're finding a compromise that makes sense for both parties with where you're at financially because you're paying a quarterback pennies over the next couple years. Yes. That's why that QB can.

It's really funny when you look at how the A.A.V. for runningbacks and how $12 million really seems to be that tier. Like, there's so many guys, so many running backs are making either like 12 or 12. And a half like Dalvin Cook, Derek Henry, Nick Chubb, Aaron Jones, Joe Mixson, all 12, 12, 1, 12, 7, 12, 12, 6, somewhere in that range. So it's kind of, and I think what is it this year for running backs? It's 11. It's 11 million dollars. It's 11.

Kind of see how that breaks down, too. I could get giving him that, but I also could get him being really pissed off that he got that. And so then you're introducing that element into your locker room with the guy who played very well for you last year. It was probably the most valuable player on your offense. It was one of the best players in the league. Those are just the kind of considerations where I try to move beyond the numbers on a spreadsheet bullshit, it where it's like, okay, even if it makes sense financially, like the guy deserves it. Well, that's like Kurt Cousins.

As soon as Kirk Cousins got franchise tagged, you knew he'd never sign with Washington like ever again. Yes. Like it was just, and that led to a whole thing. I know Washington's Washington, they're in their own Twilight Zone sometimes, but that, the human element's very real with this. Players get pissed off when they get tagged. We're throwing around 20 million, 12 million. Yes, that sounds like a lot.

Long-term stability really matters to these guys in a sport where a career is going to end like that. So that's why my. first point with all this and not to take away a player's argument with this because it's a very real argument was how many guys did get hurt after they got tagged and the repercussions of that because that this does matter these are short careers especially running back they want to maximize as much as they can get they don't want to be on this one-year deal and like you said that leads a lot of pissed off players and that you never know how how how locker rooms are and how guys are Josh Jacobs is fantastic firsthand account going to do the wind of clock video with him there you go

I had a huge Josh Jake with fans after I got to talk with him for a little bit for about a half hour. He's great. But it is. You never know how these guys react to that stuff because the damage can be really done. You don't know which guys are best friends with each other too. And players talk. Who in your mind is the most random double-tagged guy of the last 10 years? Is it Trumane Johnson or is it Anthony Spencer?

Anthony Spencer. No, it's not a name. Some of these tag names, the Anthony Harris one was the one I was like, wait, he got tagged. That one of all the guys I just saw, even single tag guys, that was the one that really popped my brain a little bit. Two years in a row, Anthony Spencer got tagged by the Cowboys. So in the past 11 seasons, the Cowboys have tagged the same player twice three different times. Unbelievable. How many times have they used it every year?

Like, it feels like they're like one of the teams that has. There's no way. There's no way. That would be hilarious if they did. There's no way. So, okay. All right, wait. So they used it in 2020.

2020, they used it on DAC before assigning him to extension. 2020, they used it on DAC. 2019, they used it on DeMarcus Lawrence before signing him to an extension. 2018, they used it on DeMarcus Lawrence. 2015, they used it on DES, but you got an extension. 2013, Anthony Spencer. So there have been some off years.

And they didn't use it from 2009 through 2013. team or 2012. Okay. Okay. They might have had a... They have used it a lot. Yeah, but they also got penalized for going over the... Actually, the two teams we've talked about a lot with this franchise tag, Washington and Dallas, were also the two teams that got punished for going over the sour cap when there

was that uncapped year. Related? That's right. I don't know. I don't know if that's related or not. But there really seems to be a lot of signs. There's not a lot of foresight with these teams. No, but there's been some random names.

AJ Green. I forgot he got tagged by the Bengals and his last year with the Bengals. Again, can understand that. It seems silly in retrospect, but you draft the quarterback number one overall.

You want him to have a veteran weapon. I totally get that. Oh yeah. I'm not saying bad or good. I'm just saying that's a name I forgot that he got tagged because that was going over the list. I triple check that one to make sure. Yeah.

And then you sign with the Cardinals next year. But Kenyon Drake. What the fuck is happening here? I'm looking at the 2012 season. Something weird had to have happened. in the 2012 season, there were one, two, three, four, five, six, six, kickers or punters franchise tagged. Hmm. Matt Prater, Connor, Barth, Steve Weatherther, Josh Scobie, Mike Nugent, Phil Dawson, all tagged in 2012.

That's, that's an anomaly. That's kind of funny. I mean, there had to be a reason, right? I'm trying to think. Market went up. So the tags went down that year. Because that was CBA kicked in an 11 or 12. Would it kicked in an 11, right?

Yeah, would it kick in an 11? Yeah. They renegotiated in 11. Hmm. Okay, so it was the new franchise tag formula. Ah. So that was the reason that they went down. So with 2010 being an uncap year, a number of teams through massive years of spending on particular deals into that contract year, which in turn drove up 2011 franchise tags.

So that's why the 2012 franchise tags went down. Well, that's like in 2020, there was 15 players that got tagged. And that's because that was the last year, the old CBA. And then they could use a franchise tag and a transition tag, yada. But that was, I thought that was interesting, too. You can tell when the CBAs are getting renewed is based on how many. franchise tags there are. It's kind of a funny correlation. What a weird history of tag tags. So there are some really fun names in here that I did not expect to see today. I think that Anthony

Spencer was probably one of them. But I remember that Anthony Spencer got tagged twice because he was always the example I would use for when people complain about how terrible the franchise tag is. It's like Anthony Spencer made like $20 million combined in two years. He's fired up. He loves the franchise. It's also very different and different positions, right? So I think that what we learn from the Kirk Cousins contract negotiations and from the DAC, DAC could get hurt and still get a top of market deal because he's a quarterback. It's different for quarterbacks. And what Kurt Cousins did is that by wielding the tag in the way that he did,

he had a fully guaranteed deal from the Vikings. Like the baseline that it sets for you is pretty darn good, but that position is different. Yes. It's the QBs. Yeah. But you've got a five year run. I mean, there's a reason that they have,

they have like amendments in it. If you got tagged, I think it was a three years in a row or something, that you get paid based on the highest position as opposed to just your position or based on the average of that. And they always go in parentheses, likely the quarterback. It's just always quarterbacks are just always in their own world with all this stuff. But I, I'm going to come back to it.

But just even the injuries that happen to the guys that got tagged, I do want to bring it down. I've noticed I'm harping on this point. But it's just, it was fascinating to me. You got Godwin, Tours ACL, got tagged again and then signed his extension. Marcus May, Tours Achilles, signed with the Saints in the offseason. and then whatever the other one's Dak tore his ankle and got an IR Bud Dupree got paid all these guys were getting

paid though and Brandon Shirt was the other one he ended up getting paid by the Jaguars which was that little anomaly you brought up but I just thought that was interesting if you have a market you're going to get a market you know what I mean like these guys if there's always you only need one suitor sometimes with the injury and stuff so I just thought that kind of was interesting to me about what happened

the repercussions of that afterwards turns out none all right that's all right that's all we got we'll see what happens This is a tag this year. We'll see who gets one. It was a great homework. Homework assignment. I love this.

This is, I loved going over this stuff. All right. That's all we have for today. We will be back not for a while. We have a fun little twist with the schedule next week. You guys are going to get prospects to pros on Monday. Instead of Wednesday,

Andy, Dane, Lance are going to be coming to you with a combine preview because it's combine time. I leave on Sunday. When do you leave? When do you get there? Leave on Sunday. All right. So we will be at the combine for a very long time this year.

Much longer than I typically am. Not used to getting there on Sunday, but we've got some meetings on Monday, very excited about seeing our entire NFL staff there. We will have shows coming to you guys every single day that we're at the combine. So we will have the prospects to pros combine preview on Monday. Andy and Dan will be talking about which guys have a lot to gain. And the guys to watch for, you know, guys that can kind of break the testing. My guy, Lucas Van Ness, from the pride of. Barrington High School apparently is going to do ridiculous things

when to Utah sons up. Apparently. Next week. So beyond that. Wait too see Bill Musgraves nephew. Luke Musgrave from Oregon State. Is he a tight end? Oh my God.

Yeah. And want to talk about like this. This is my knowledge. I remember seeing like his name in a tweet once and that's why I know he is a tight end. We are not into the draft class yet by the way. If you're me, just for anyone who's curious. So on Monday, you guys get prospects to pros.

All throughout the week next week, We're going to have check-ins with some of our team writers. We did this last year. I really enjoyed it. It's kind of called it the most interesting teams of the off-season. So the 10 most interesting teams of the 20-23 off-season, we're going to have those 10 writers on the show, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and then me and you are going to chat on Friday about the week that was about things we ate about some football elements. But we're also going to hopefully have a team writer chat that I don't want to spoil yet on that Friday show. We'll still have between the lines on Tuesday with DeShan.

We'll still have the football GM next week with Randy and Mike. So we have a lot of podcasts coming your way from Indianapolis. But that's the way it should be. It's combine time. Very excited to get back and eat some shrimp cocktail. We're branching out. What was your tweet? The athletic football show.

It's always on. Yeah, it's always on. It might not be good, but it's always on. So one of my favorite tweets of all time, Casey, my fiance, showed it to me at one point. And it's the one about Little Caesars. You've ever seen it? It's like, Little Caesars.

It's hot and ready. And somebody goes, is it good? It's hot and it's ready. The athletic football show, is it good? It's hot and it's ready. That is what we have for you. I love it. Put that neon side.

I'm going to put that behind me. Hot and ready. It's hot and ready. That's all we got. It's five bucks. It's free and it's hot and ready. That's the athletic football show. So I will eat some shrimp.

cocktail from St. Elmo's next week, but I'm also going to eat other things. Yeah, I think that's too often people just hit the steakhouses and any, it seems like there's some really good food options. Appreciate everyone who reached out and gave me some recommendations. All the reservations have been made. So, really excited to dig in and we will have some feedback for you guys by the end of next week. But until then, please rate and review the show on your podcast platform of choice. Go on Apple Podcasts. Really appreciate if you guys could do that. Please subscribe to The Athletic. Theathletic.com slash football show is where you can read all of the wonderful writers that we're going to talk to you next week. And please enjoy your weekend.

We'll be back on Monday. This was The Athletic Football Show.