Brees and Manning request exemption from franchise tag.

[Kurb]

Obviously they both want to tutor :cam:

[jtnc]

They call themselves "leaders" but start whining like little bitches.

[carpanfan96]

The agents of Jackson and Mankins are asking to be FA or for 10 million dollars.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6783030/report-vincent-jackson-san-diego-chargers-logan-mankins-new-england-patriots-eye-freedom-10m?campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines

Manning and Brees are asking for themselves to be exempt from the Franchise Tag forever or completely removed from the new CBA all together.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2011/07/brees_manning_r.html?camp=localsearch:on:twit:pats

Odds are the players listed on the Anti Trust Lawsuit will be exempt from the Franchise Tag, similar to the players in the 1993 Lawsuit.

[Kurb]

Removed from the CBA all together ? Get fuged both of yas

[Kurb]

The request from Manning and Brees is not without precedent. When the 1993 antitrust lawsuit was settled, all the lead plaintiffs were exempt from the tag for their careers.

Now I see why that rookie LB'er wanted in on that suit as well.

"But its for everyone guys!!!"

[KSpan]

Well, isn't that special... because getting paid an average of the Top 5 players at your position is so unfair, and a guaranteed 20% raise the next year if you continue to perform and are franchised again is robbery. The one concession I'll give is if that it can be very frustrating to a player who truly wants out of their organization, but I'm not thinking that's the case here.

[Darth Biscuit]

Now I see why that rookie LB'er wanted in on that suit as well.

"But its for everyone guys!!!"

Why is that? Just because they are the big dogs?

[carpanfan96]

Removed from the CBA all together ? Get fuged both of yas

Yep they made that request back in June, I don't think it gets removed from the CBA completely. Too important for some teams and owners to be removed.

However I do see them all being exempt from the tag for the rest of their careers.

Which means that Jackson, Manning and Mankins will be Free Agents for this upcoming Free Agency period.

[carpanfan96]

I will say that this result is way better then What Brady, Brees and Manning wanted out of the Antitrust to begin with.

They wanted the Franchise tag and tenders removed

The NFL draft removed and the Salary Cap removed completely.

I'll take those greedy ass players getting an exemption for the Franchise Tag over that poo any day of the week.

[Udogg]

Well, isn't that special... because getting paid an average of the Top 5 players at your position is so unfair, and a guaranteed 20% raise the next year if you continue to perform and are franchised again is robbery. The one concession I'll give is if that it can be very frustrating to a player who truly wants out of their organization, but I'm not thinking that's the case here.

I think both Jackson and Mankins want out legitimately. Manning and Brees got added on because of name recognition and I think this is just a bargaining ploy since 1) Indy has said it was going to make Peyton the highest paid anyway. 2) New Orleans would probably put Brees right under that level when his contract is due. There is a 0% chance that franchise tags get completely removed.

[carpanfan96]

I think both Jackson and Mankins want out legitimately. Manning and Brees got added on because of name recognition and I think this is just a bargaining ploy since 1) Indy has said it was going to make Peyton the highest paid anyway. 2) New Orleans would probably put Brees right under that level when his contract is due. There is a 0% chance that franchise tags get completely removed.

They have to give the players in the Anti Trust lawsuit something, the question becomes is Franchise Tag exemption enough for these guys or do they want it completely removed.

If they want it removed, then it gets removed because a deal can't get done with out this lawsuit being settled. Pretty much unless they are talked down by the NFLPA, they get what they want because the league wants to get this CBA done and not loose money.

[Montsta]

I find it funny and pathetic that the players named individually on the suit were in a sense randomly named for whatever reason just to be figureheads essentially and now they're looking for individual goodies. fug you both I say. If they push for their own individual agendas and I'm an owner I say screw you. I'm sorry but I wouldn't want to be the one or two players that caused the other 1800 players to stop getting paid. If I'm a Colts or Saints offensive lineman and I lost a year of checks and got a year older because of your individual asshatery, I may just have to let a pissed off James Harrison get a blindsided shot on your candy ass. Whoopsy, my bad Drew.

[SevenSixes]

I find it funny and pathetic that the players named individually on the suit were in a sense randomly named for whatever reason just to be figureheads essentially and now they're looking for individual goodies...

I believe that Reggie White also earned an exemption from the Franchise Tag for having his name on the suite during the last CBA anti-trust lawsuit.

If you put your name on a lawsuit you are risking tarnishing your reputation, so I don't see it as asking for "goodies" just getting something personal out of a deal that you risked more than others to get.

I would think that a personal exemption to the Franchise tag could easily be considered just compensation. As for the 10Mil, good luck with that..

[Montsta]

It's a very real possibility that I don't know enough about the situation to comment, but I don't understand what bigger risks the individuals named on the Brady Vs. NFL suit took by having their names attached to that suit. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable in corporate anti-trust law can fill me in?