Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

2009 Franchise Tag numbers


panthers55

Recommended Posts

Here are the franchise tag numbers for 2009

http://dal.scout.com/2/834624.html

So if Gross were franchised it would be 120 of his current salary or 8.45 million whichever was greater. Salary in 2008 was 7.45 so his tag amount will be 8.95million.

Peppers we already know.

Amazing that the franchise tag for a QB is over 14 million. while they are important of course it means that over 10% of the total cap is in one salary. Much like us with Peppers. In fact Gross and Peppers combined almost account for 1/5 of our total cap. Sure they are good but I really think the numbers are getting out of control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. the cornerstones of any great franchise are QB, LT and a pass rushing RDE so that is where a good chunk of your cap room should be.

Those are the positions which command a high amount. Still there are many teams who do well and pay quite a bit less than we do.

But if you notice RDE and LT have escalated quite a bit for us in the last few years to the point that our RDE is the highest in the league if we don't trade him (by a large margin) and our LT also wants to be paid the highest in the league. I am not convinced either of them are worth that kind of money.

Teams like NE have built a dynasty trading away or letting high priced guys walk and replacing them with much cheaper guys. Now they have the same dilemma at QB with almost 29 million committed to the QB position. Wonder if they will trade Cassells late if Brady fully recovers or eat both salaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Teams do some super stupid stuff with mid-fairly good QBs. I think they are just absolutely terrified they will be stuck with a QB that is not the quality of the QB they have now, even if its someone like Daniel Jones. Lots of trash QBs go in the first round. I encourage you to take a look at the sad, sad list of first round QBs in the last 15 years.  
    • No, it will be a raw 6'7" 17-year-old European who just played basketball for the first time in March and who the idiot GM "had first on our board." He'll play the whole G-League season, get in 42 games for the Hornets and average 1.1 ppg on 35% shooting. Been there, seen that.
    • We missed on Burns at his peak value. That’s the problem with trading for picks 2-3 years away (which people were convinced the Rams would suck by now and these would be higher picks btw). Each year away the pick is the further in value it drops. Fitt was clearly hired based on turning us around quickly. It’s one of the many reasons tanking isn’t really a thing as our player JJ is telling you in this original article. It would take the whole organization from the owners down admitting they aren’t winning soon with Burns and picks 2-3 years away having more value because that’s when we are still rebuilding. It would only make sense if Fitt had a longer leash and would more than likely be the ones making these picks anyway which you wouldn’t want. The question is would you rather have those Rams picks with the strong possibility of Fitt still being here or would you rather Fitt try to “win now” like he did and expedite his firing? Altering the timeline would affect more than just the Rams picks. 
×
×
  • Create New...