Quote:
Originally Posted by Chaka
You are looking at this like its baseball-type free agency, but it isn't. The NFL system allows a team to use the franchise tag to keep one player a year. Those are the rules everyone agreed to. The downside for the team is that it is costly to do so - in Bell's case, because it was the second year in a row he was tagged, he was entitled to a 20% increase over his prior year's $12 million+ salary (or $14.5 million). What's more, this salary is fully guaranteed once the tag is signed. Because it's a one-year, fully guaranteed contract, the team can't do any of the financial engineering that it would otherwise be able to do with a longer contract containing up front bonuses and guarantee limits. So it's not a perfect solution for the team either.
As to your point that it was not intended to be used over multiple years, that is simply not correct. The NFL and the player's union anticipated this exact scenario, and agreed to allow the tag to be used repeatedly if a team desires to do so. The catch is that it will cost the team dearly to do so, because in the second tag year (like Bell this year), the team has to increase the player's salary by 20%. The third tag year is even more expensive, as the player gets another 44% salary bump.
Kirk Cousins is a great illustration of this, and how a player with enough guts can use this situation to their advantage. In the first year he was tagged (2016), he received the normal initial tag price - the average of the top five salaries at his position (something like $20 million for QBs). He signed the tag and played out the season. In 2017, he made aggressive contract demands and the Redskins tagged him again, but by doing so under the above rules they were forced to increase his salary by 20% to $24 million . Again, he refused to accept a contract offer he felt was too low, signed the tag and played out the year. The third year (this last offseason), he maintained his aggressive demands and put the Redskins in the unenviable position of either tagging him a third time at the astronomical cost of a fully guaranteed $34 million (a 44% increase over the prior year), or to finally wave the white flag and let him become a free agent. He became a free agent.
Bell was just one year from putting the Steelers in a similar financial predicament (though if my calculations are correct, Bell's tag price would have been $21 million this coming off season - still a massive guaranteed amount for a RB).
|
I am looking at it like an NFL FA situation. They created the tag so a team isn't screwed when losing its best player, but teams do not lose their best players as much anymore. With an ever-increasing cap and better cap management than two decades ago, this is not as common an occurrence anymore. The Colts are 70 million under the cap and could be a playoff team. The cap has outdistanced the salaries now. The player's union miscalculated because they did not anticipate the cap skyrocketing like it did. It is a system created over 20 years ago that needs to be updated.
Again you are using a QB money in a RB contract situation. QB's are not the model for this comparison because QB's have, by far, the most exorbitant contracts in the league. QB's can force the hand of the team because the averages the tag uses to base the one year salary off of are so big they can actually be a detrimental influence on the team's cap. RB's are paid much less money as an average, they are on par with say safties. I reject your comparison because it is not a good analogy and the situation is not the same for every position. Some positions are valued more and are paid more. Also, QB's have a longer average career in the league. A QB can play well into his 30's, they can wait 2-3 years for that escalating tag to add up. That is a lifetime in a RB's career and will directly affect his next contract negotiation. The Steelers are obviously using the tag to get enough years of Bell's prime, then they will cut bait once that is done, or they have found a replacement for him. That is not what the tag was intended for and it screws some players and positions more than others. The tag wasn't meant just to be used for QB's.
Bell has a legitimate argument that he is more valuable than the average RB on the Steelers and should be paid accordingly. That is backed up by unprecedented production from his position. The tag, even after a second year, does not even match what he was asking for yearly. So they actually saved money by using the tag twice to secure their best offensive player. Not to mention saving bonus money that they would have to pay right away. If they did it a third year, he would hit an estimated 25 million which is QB money. Only then would it really affect them. However, if they did the proper cap predicting, and the savings they had from the previous two tag years, they could make a judgment call whether to do it or not for one more year. Whether they were still in the SB window or not. But this outcome still costs Bell millions that he would find in FA. There are definitely two types of RB's in the league, the upper echelon that account for a large amount of the team's offense, and the committee systems that may approach the same as the stars. The tag is weighted down by the lower paid backs and it is not a fair system.
In my opinion, everybody loses here, and that is why they should address the tag. The Steelers window is closing and James Connor, while good, is not Bell. Bell loses an entire year's salary. But even more important, he loses another year in RB halflife and is forced to sit out because getting a second lucrative contract is in serious danger now. The Steelers are obviously not going to cut him loose and to me that is just sour apples and is fucking a guy that has been a good player for them.