The Le'Veon Bell Tolls ... To the Ravens

[dm1129]

I find it a bit ironic how many of you hate the Franchise Tag.

In the earlier CBA it was only allowed to be used one time. THE PLAYERS UNION AGREED to THE FRANCHISE TAG RULES.

This was not an oversight by the players union as some of you obviously think; This was by design.

Ask yourself why they did this? The owners certainly like the lever for one single player annually if needed but make no mistake the players union knew exactly what they were doing. Bottom line, this tool drives up market value for the collective annually. Each position has an average salary and annually when a Tag is used it drives up the market value by design for the next player.

Plenty of players have benefited from this practice by getting paid well above market price when they didn't play to elite status but hundreds more have benefited through the years as market price per position has increased as a result of the practice.

On a side note, My Guess is the Players Union are not happy at all with Bell. He not only didn't exercise the richest contract in history for 2018 at the position but showed ownership that paying a RB vast amounts isn't really necessary if you have a young talented price.

To put into some perspective, Conner will earn 641K this year and his entire contract is 3.71 Million. Bell walked away from $855,000 weekly.

So Bell in just 5 WEEKS would have made more than Conner in 4 YEARS.......

Not so,

The better players at each position negotiate off the top tier salaries. Not sure you think lock out is what you you think. If the players won't play anyway the lock out provides business protections from operations. The Players get 48.5 of revenue but the owners are on the hook for all expenses from lease payments to the clean up crew.

If anyone thinks an army of lawyers didn't know what they were doing is not a logical argument. Tags ensure better player will be compensated at a high level for that position.

Business is not a democracy or a socialist system at all. The better players and more important positions get the lions share of that revenue. The tag ensures to floor rises for guards and safeties just as it does for QB'sa. If Cousins in the earlier example is tagged a 3rd time his one year contract will be north of 40 million.

You don't think he loves the tag given his leverage is better? You don't think that number will assist in driving the market price?

This is an 8 plus BILLION dollar industry and growing. Looking at it from a 32 player max player perspective is simply not the best way to view it. We can hate the Tag for Bell but see the benefit for Cousins as an example.

BTW for anyone that thinks its only the NFL owners benefit from tags the simple test is how many times is it used. In 2017 only 7 teams exercised a F-Tag. last year only 5 teams used the Tags.

If it was so one-sided all 32 teams would use it.

Players that benefited from the Franchise tag in 2017

Chandler Jones LB AZ
Kawaan Short DT Panthers
Melvin Ingrim LB Chargers
JPP DE Giants
Cousins QB Washington 120% of 16 salary at 23,943,600

Bell was also tagged in 2016 and played for 12, 120 Million. His 2018 Tag would have 120% of that.

2018 Tags Only 5.

This year Players who benefited from the F Tag

D. Lawrence Cowboys 17,143,000 Now in a position to break the bank since he is proving not to be a one hit wonder

Ziggy DE Lions. 17,143,000 Lions gambled on his injury riddled season in 2017 and career. appear to have lost as Ziggy isn't worth anything close to that salary. This is like stealing money from the Lions.

Lamarcus Joyner F Tag 11.287 Million. Team was hoping for a bounce back year from Joyner but to date only 39 tackles. Looks like the Rams lost here and lost Watkins in the process.

Kyle Fuller DB Bears. T Tag Looks like a loss for the Bears given only 22 tackles and 11 pass defensed for the year. He does have 4 interceptions but at 12 plus Million not elite performance. This tag helped him get a 56 million dollar contract. He isn't worth it IMO.

Bell tagged but passed on 14 plus Million which was a 120% raise from 2017.

The Bottom line when one actually analyze the Tags it is obvious the risk cuts both ways and more players may actually benefit than the teams in recent history.

Some think it's horrible but the use of 5 times last time with 1696 players on active rosters it is a very small thing. Makes for good conversation but in the grand scheme it is evident the tag is a two way street. I certainly don't feel sorry for players like Ziggy that can get 17 Million to prove he can stay healthy or if Bell can get 14 plus million and choose to walk away.

The facts are getting in the way of reality when one thinks the players will win an argument for doing away with the tag. Players like Lawrence or any of the above listed outside of maybe Bell are winning big time because of the tag system.

Thinking the owners are winning in a landslide is fantasy.

No.

The owners will always have a huge advantage over the players in negotiatiing the CBA. The owners are essentially a monolith. For the sake of argument, let's say there is a work stoppage and an entire season is lost. Would the owners be mad as hell about it? Of course. Would it affect their lifestyels one iota? No. On the other side of the table, the average length of career for an NFL player is a little over 3 years. Any work stoppage greatly affects the average player. For this reason, the representatives of the players union know that if the tags were the cause of a work stoppage, support from the rank and file would disintegrate almost immediately. There will never be severe push back by the players as a whole in regard to the tag for this reason.

Again, the use of the tag in no way increases salaries nor does it ensure that elite players will be paid more. The salary cap is a function of all revenue streams. The tag simply has no effect on the level of salaries in total. If elite players are paid more, then there is less to pay other players. If average players are paid more, then there is less for elite players. It will always be a 'Robbing Peter to pay Paul' situation when dealing with a salary cap.

To list players signed to a tag and then played poorly ignores the fact that if the tag was not used, in almost all cases, the same players would have been signed to multi-year deals with higher guaranteed money. In other words, the tag is still a disadvantge to players because their perceived value at that time warranted it. The idea that if the tag was an advantage to the team, then all teams would use the tags again ignores the reality of the situation. Teams only use the tag on players that they feel are at the very least worth the equal amount if allowed to test the market. Usually the truth is a player is worth more and would also receive higher guarantees on a multi year deal in the free market.

It keeps being said that Bell was asking for insane money. Maybe, maybe not. That is only for the market to determine. The very purpose of the tag is to be used as a tool for the advantage of the teams in dealing with elite players.

[rubber_duck]

How much fun would it be if the Ravens signed Bell in 2019?

[dynastyninja]

How much fun would it be if the Ravens signed Bell in 2019?

I'm predicting he does sign with Baltimore. Don't know enough about their cap space, but they could absolutely use a stud RB and Bell would probably be thrilled to go at Pittsburgh twice a year.

[jetsfan5757]

No.

The owners will always have a huge advantage over the players in negotiating the CBA. The owners are essentially a monolith. For the sake of argument, let's say there is a work stoppage and an entire season is lost. Would the owners be mad as hell about it? Of course. Would it affect their lifestyles one iota? No. On the other side of the table, the average length of career for an NFL player is a little over 3 years. Any work stoppage greatly affects the average player. For this reason, the representatives of the players union know that if the tags were the cause of a work stoppage, support from the rank and file would disintegrate almost immediately. There will never be severe push back by the players as a whole in regard to the tag for this reason.

Again, the use of the tag in no way increases salaries nor does it ensure that elite players will be paid more. The salary cap is a function of all revenue streams. The tag simply has no effect on the level of salaries in total. If elite players are paid more, then there is less to pay other players. If average players are paid more, then there is less for elite players. It will always be a 'Robbing Peter to pay Paul' situation when dealing with a salary cap.

To list players signed to a tag and then played poorly ignores the fact that if the tag was not used, in almost all cases, the same players would have been signed to multi-year deals with higher guaranteed money. In other words, the tag is still a disadvantage to players because their perceived value at that time warranted it. The idea that if the tag was an advantage to the team, then all teams would use the tags again ignores the reality of the situation. Teams only use the tag on players that they feel are at the very least worth the equal amount if allowed to test the market. Usually the truth is a player is worth more and would also receive higher guarantees on a multi year deal in the free market.

It keeps being said that Bell was asking for insane money. Maybe, maybe not. That is only for the market to determine. The very purpose of the tag is to be used as a tool for the advantage of the teams in dealing with elite players.

[jetsfan5757]

How much fun would it be if the Ravens signed Bell in 2019?

I'm predicting he does sign with Baltimore. Don't know enough about their cap space, but they could absolutely use a stud RB and Bell would probably be thrilled to go at Pittsburgh twice a year.

Oh man would that be fun!!!

[badbuddah]

As a Foreman owner I pray to GOD he goes anywhere but Houston. However it feels more and more like they may be his best landing spot. I don't think he wants to play for a crap team like the Jets.

[jenkins.math]

I don't think he wants to play for a crap team like the Jets.

Well he doesn't want to play for good teams either...

Bell will take the largest contract he is offered, regardless of winning, scheme, fit, etc.

[Jfever]

Any chance Philadelphia takes a look at making it work? Man.... would that be a dangerous / productive fit. That, I think would be THE best case for Bell and Bell owners.

[CubfanAA]

Any chance Philadelphia takes a look at making it work? Man.... would that be a dangerous / productive fit. That, I think would be THE best case for Bell and Bell owners.

I honestly think Chicago would be best case for Bell. I don't think it's going to happen, but I also don't think Howard is a good fit in that offense and will be traded this offseason. Cohen is never going to be a bellcow back and Bell would be an absolute perfect fit for that offense. Cohen could still be used to spell him occasionally, but also start lining up at WR even more often than he is now. Cap space though makes it very unlikely.

[jetsfan5757]

My best guess is the Vegas Raiders as a team that is desperate to sell tickets and maybe even PSLs if they go that route. What other superstar can they possibly get?

[Ice]

No.

The owners will always have a huge advantage over the players in negotiating the CBA. The owners are essentially a monolith. For the sake of argument, let's say there is a work stoppage and an entire season is lost. Would the owners be mad as hell about it? Of course. Would it affect their lifestyles one iota? No. On the other side of the table, the average length of career for an NFL player is a little over 3 years. Any work stoppage greatly affects the average player. For this reason, the representatives of the players union know that if the tags were the cause of a work stoppage, support from the rank and file would disintegrate almost immediately. There will never be severe push back by the players as a whole in regard to the tag for this reason.

Again, the use of the tag in no way increases salaries nor does it ensure that elite players will be paid more. The salary cap is a function of all revenue streams. The tag simply has no effect on the level of salaries in total. If elite players are paid more, then there is less to pay other players. If average players are paid more, then there is less for elite players. It will always be a 'Robbing Peter to pay Paul' situation when dealing with a salary cap.

To list players signed to a tag and then played poorly ignores the fact that if the tag was not used, in almost all cases, the same players would have been signed to multi-year deals with higher guaranteed money. In other words, the tag is still a disadvantage to players because their perceived value at that time warranted it. The idea that if the tag was an advantage to the team, then all teams would use the tags again ignores the reality of the situation. Teams only use the tag on players that they feel are at the very least worth the equal amount if allowed to test the market. Usually the truth is a player is worth more and would also receive higher guarantees on a multi year deal in the free market.

It keeps being said that Bell was asking for insane money. Maybe, maybe not. That is only for the market to determine. The very purpose of the tag is to be used as a tool for the advantage of the teams in dealing with elite players.

Of Course the Owners have a strong hand. That is a Captain Obvious Statement if I ever heard one.

I will leave with the following:

I find it amusing many fail to see any benefit to the players of the tag system. Anyone that even loosely follows contract negotiations knows differently.

Go back to each tag the last two years and enlighten me how the teams benefited more than the player. You might find 1 or even two you could you make a case for but majority, if you look fairly, would see both sides benefited with some players benefiting more.

The tag is a last best resort to retain a player or trade a player to get back some value.

You are arguing solely about how much a player could get without giving any credence to how the player benefits from signing the tag. Players like Lawrence and Ziggy jumped at the chance to sign their tag. WHY?

Making an argument based on one player is a pretty weak argument. The Players union had no issue expanding the tag over multiple years from the previous agreements.

It is a ridiculous position to take that NO layer benefits from the tag and it is not factual to think the Tag doesn't help drive market value. This is one reason the tags are used less and less. The owners don't like using the tag. They use it as a last resort because of the risk and INSTANT CAP hit they absorb.

Sure a Player wins with guarantees if they get hurt or bust after they get paid but that is a double edge sword as the owners and fans lose given ultimately we pay for all this through ticket prices, direct tv payments, concession purchases, and apparel purchases.

The Owners have far more risk overall than the players overall. The entertainment industry pays well but siding with the players exclusively is straight up dangerous. I get in the world of fantasy football, team allegiance suffers but total FA is also a horrible idea. The F tag system and the salary cap help the players more than you realize.

Without them, there would very few teams with any chance of winning. Tags and salary cap are two check and balance systems designed to not only help owners protect themselves from each other but it helps the league maintain some sense of competitive balance.

Without Tag options and the salary cap the smaller market teams would have no chance. The Dynasty Jerry Jones created with the Cowboys back in the day is the primary reason we see the system we have today and why the NFL is so successful. People may hate him but the guaranteed contracts and upfront signing bonuses he set up gave him a huge advantage over all teams.

The players benefit more than you realize from competitive balance given so many small market teams in the NFL.

Looking at this from a WIN/LOSE perspective is simply not the way it is. That doesn't mean some teams or players lose with the tagging process but this process is woven into the very fabric of the league and both sides have benefited greatly.

The Tag helped further set the market for mid range QB's like Cousins. The Tag will certainly continue to help set the market for DE's in 2019. The tag has helped set the market for DT's and most certainly helped mid range DB's get way more money, (go see Fuller's contract.) Obviously it is not a huge a part but it does help play a role as the floor averages increase each time it is employed.

While the Tag won't go away, no one can argue that salaries in the NFL are skyrocketing. The Tag is one part of that equation but is used less frequently due to the cost. The ability to spread out signing bonuses helps with cap management. The F Tag hurts cap management.

Teams, especially small market teams should have the right to try an retain their one best player coming off contact annually. This was the ultimate reason it came into existence.

Owners have far bigger issues to worry about. They need to figure out how to keep fans in the seats or the gravy train for players and owners will suffer. Have you scene in recent history how many empty seats there are at games? Eventually ticket sales will also decline. While Revenues have been rising, it is primarily a function of TV contracts, that will not continue if fans stop going the games at significant levels. There are three teams this season running under 80% capacity.

[Cameron Giles]

Any chance Philadelphia takes a look at making it work? Man.... would that be a dangerous / productive fit. That, I think would be THE best case for Bell and Bell owners.

Best case for him is the Colts:

-Elite QB
-Elite offensive line
-Team wants to run more to preserve Luck's shoulder
-8 games indoors a year (at least)
-Massive cap space to afford the luxury of overpaying an RB for 3-4 years.

Eagles don't project to have much cap space to work with.

[dm1129]

Of Course the Owners have a strong hand. That is a Captain Obvious Statement if I ever heard one.

I will leave with the following:

I find it amusing many fail to see any benefit to the players of the tag system. Anyone that even loosely follows contract negotiations knows differently.

Go back to each tag the last two years and enlighten me how the teams benefited more than the player. You might find 1 or even two you could you make a case for but majority, if you look fairly, would see both sides benefited with some players benefiting more.

The tag is a last best resort to retain a player or trade a player to get back some value.

You are arguing solely about how much a player could get without giving any credence to how the player benefits from signing the tag. Players like Lawrence and Ziggy jumped at the chance to sign their tag. WHY?

Making an argument based on one player is a pretty weak argument. The Players union had no issue expanding the tag over multiple years from the previous agreements.

It is a ridiculous position to take that NO layer benefits from the tag and it is not factual to think the Tag doesn't help drive market value. This is one reason the tags are used less and less. The owners don't like using the tag. They use it as a last resort because of the risk and INSTANT CAP hit they absorb.

Sure a Player wins with guarantees if they get hurt or bust after they get paid but that is a double edge sword as the owners and fans lose given ultimately we pay for all this through ticket prices, direct tv payments, concession purchases, and apparel purchases.

The Owners have far more risk overall than the players overall. The entertainment industry pays well but siding with the players exclusively is straight up dangerous. I get in the world of fantasy football, team allegiance suffers but total FA is also a horrible idea. The F tag system and the salary cap help the players more than you realize.

Without them, there would very few teams with any chance of winning. Tags and salary cap are two check and balance systems designed to not only help owners protect themselves from each other but it helps the league maintain some sense of competitive balance.

Without Tag options and the salary cap the smaller market teams would have no chance. The Dynasty Jerry Jones created with the Cowboys back in the day is the primary reason we see the system we have today and why the NFL is so successful. People may hate him but the guaranteed contracts and upfront signing bonuses he set up gave him a huge advantage over all teams.

The players benefit more than you realize from competitive balance given so many small market teams in the NFL.

Looking at this from a WIN/LOSE perspective is simply not the way it is. That doesn't mean some teams or players lose with the tagging process but this process is woven into the very fabric of the league and both sides have benefited greatly.

The Tag helped further set the market for mid range QB's like Cousins. The Tag will certainly continue to help set the market for DE's in 2019. The tag has helped set the market for DT's and most certainly helped mid range DB's get way more money, (go see Fuller's contract.) Obviously it is not a huge a part but it does help play a role as the floor averages increase each time it is employed.

While the Tag won't go away, no one can argue that salaries in the NFL are skyrocketing. The Tag is one part of that equation but is used less frequently due to the cost. The ability to spread out signing bonuses helps with cap management. The F Tag hurts cap management.

Teams, especially small market teams should have the right to try an retain their one best player coming off contact annually. This was the ultimate reason it came into existence.

Owners have far bigger issues to worry about. They need to figure out how to keep fans in the seats or the gravy train for players and owners will suffer. Have you scene in recent history how many empty seats there are at games? Eventually ticket sales will also decline. While Revenues have been rising, it is primarily a function of TV contracts, that will not continue if fans stop going the games at significant levels. There are three teams this season running under 80% capacity.

Seriously? No.

The salary cap is going up because revenues are going up. It has absolutely nothing to do with the tag. The tag does not set anything. The tag does not drive anything. The tag is calculated by taking the average of the top 5 player salaries at a position. How are those 5 salaries detemined? BY THE MARKET. Why is taking the average of other salaries seen as anything but what it is, a market manipulation, a distortion? The only way to set the price is through the market. This is not complicated. If a team thinks a player is worth less than the tag price, they will not tag the player. The very structure of the tag process ensures this.

Your arguments about small market vs big market teams and checks and balances is a completely different issue and has no relevance to the fact that the tag is to the advantage of the team. If the process was truly equatable as you argue, the player would have the right to say no to the tag. In other words, both parties would have to agree to the tag or the player goes to free agency. There is an obvious reason why only the team has the option to tag and the player does not Some may even say it is 'amusing' you do not comprehend that. Only players viewed as at least worth the price of the tag are ever tagged by a team. Most are worth more than the tag, that is the very reason they are tagged. Hence the unfairness.

Lastly, your own argument supports that the tag is to the benefit of the team when you state that small market teams should have the right to tag a player.


Signed, Captain Obvious

[Jigga94]

The length of some these posts makes me laugh

Someone mentioned Baltimore. As a fan, I really hope we dont spend 10M plus a year in a RB. Although cutting Flacco would save that much and having Lamar, RG3 and Bell running the triple option would be amusing

[ArrylT]

Signed, Captain Obvious

If you're wrong do you owe us a free nights stay at a hotel?