HoosierCat Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 I wasn't even thinking that the Bengals should use the tag this year until I saw this Prisco piece which had all the 2012 tag numbers. Except for QB, all the numbers have fallen, some dramatically, since 2011. DE has gone from $13 million to $10 million, and the cost of franchising a TE is a paltry $5.4 million.Safety? That's tumbled from nearly $9 million in 2011 to a bit more than $6 million this year.Looking back at last year, the safety who got away, Donte Whitner, signed with the 49ers for a skosh under $4 million a year. For that, SF got 62 tackles, 2 INTs, a FF and 10 passes defensed. Last season, Nelson had 85 tackles, 4 INTs (one which went for 7 vs. 0 for Whitner), 2 FF and 12 PDs. Advantage Nelson.So Nelson can make a strong argument he deserves at least $4 million/year. So really, we're talking about using an extra $2 million (in a year when we have $60 million in cap space) to eliminate some uncertainty, shore up a position and give them time to negotiate a long-term deal down the road.I say do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spor_tees Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I wasn't even thinking that the Bengals should use the tag this year until I saw this Prisco piece which had all the 2012 tag numbers. Except for QB, all the numbers have fallen, some dramatically, since 2011. DE has gone from $13 million to $10 million, and the cost of franchising a TE is a paltry $5.4 million.Safety? That's tumbled from nearly $9 million in 2011 to a bit more than $6 million this year.Looking back at last year, the safety who got away, Donte Whitner, signed with the 49ers for a skosh under $4 million a year. For that, SF got 62 tackles, 2 INTs, a FF and 10 passes defensed. Last season, Nelson had 85 tackles, 4 INTs (one which went for 7 vs. 0 for Whitner), 2 FF and 12 PDs. Advantage Nelson.So Nelson can make a strong argument he deserves at least $4 million/year. So really, we're talking about using an extra $2 million (in a year when we have $60 million in cap space) to eliminate some uncertainty, shore up a position and give them time to negotiate a long-term deal down the road.I say do it.I didn't know they had internet for the residents at an insane asylum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I didn't know they had internet for the residents at an insane asylum.Why yes, Indiana does have internet service.Well, if you don't tag Nelson, what then?Sign a FA? Not a wide selection this year. Nelson looks to be one of the better options, actually.Draft Mark Barron? I'm hip but the idea makes some others projectile vomit.Wishin' hopin' prayin', i.e. the Taylor Mays Experience? Im kind of tired of traveling that road myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spor_tees Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I didn't know they had internet for the residents at an insane asylum.Why yes, Indiana does have internet service.Well, if you don't tag Nelson, what then?Sign a FA? Not a wide selection this year. Nelson looks to be one of the better options, actually.Draft Mark Barron? I'm hip but the idea makes some others projectile vomit.Wishin' hopin' prayin', i.e. the Taylor Mays Experience? Im kind of tired of traveling that road myself.If the Bengals use the tag, I expect them to use it on Nugent like they did with Graham. It insures they get to keep him, and not at a high price that they wouldn't already pay him. As for the safety problems, I think they should make a strong move to resign Nelson, but I don't think they should threaten to handcuff him with the Franchise tag. Some players feel threatened by it. The Bengals should approach Nelson with the premise that they believe in him and that they were the ones that went after him in the first place with the trade from the Jags. Michael Griffin would be nice. DeCoud from Atlanta played well last year. Tom Zbikowski, Bob Sanders?, Jim Leonhard, and LaRon Landry would even be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcom69 Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I wouldnt mind if they did franchise him, but also try to sign him to a long term deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I wouldnt mind if they did franchise him, but also try to sign him to a long term deal.Stick, meet carrot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpeldios Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I am against franchising him, and I have been a Nelson fan for a long time. I actually wanted him in the first round when he came out in the draft. He just isnt a 6mil per year player. I would offer him a solid contract, close to what whitner got. And Even with him back I still want them to draft Mark Barron who will make this defense better now. Anyone who thinks going from Crocker to Barron wont be an upgrade is crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Speaking of safeties, there's been a Marquand Manuel sighting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Bengal Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Tbh the tag is most likely gonna be used on the nuge we have the cap space to sign nelson but will it be done who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I was kicking around the idea of the tag yesterday while in my business class (yeah I know, sue me)...Nugent immediately came to mind as did Nelson. Nugent in the same manner they handled Graham in that they felt they would come out ahead in terms of overall money spent to tag him as opposed to giving him money up front when they were starting to question what they actually had in him. It was a really good example of applying the tag to a player they really didn't view as a "franchise" type of guy.There could be worse ways to go than tag Nelson, but I just don't think it's necessary. They have the money to sign him to a longer 3-4 year deal and the tag could actually keep him and his agent from doing a long term deal, knowing they would be getting paid more this season than a contract would allow and being able to hit the market again the following season. That thought carries risk, but at the same time it's not like Nelson is a poor guy trying to make ends meet at this point either. I really want to see what Carrier can do with Nelson moving forward with OTA's and a full camp.Barron in the first ?? While I can't say as I would be bothered by that pick, I just don't see them going in that direction. The only reason I can give for that is listening or reading to what the coaches have already said about the current crop of SS we already have on the team. I suppose you could argue the "smokescreen effect", but I simply don't think that's the case.Taylor Mays experience ?? Yeah, buckle up because that ride isn't closing up anytime soon regardless of my thoughts.I still think he has upside and he's a good teams player. It's not like we took him in the first either and teams is all we got our of him. Wasn't it like a 5th in next years draft ?? Yeah, I think he stays. Him becoming a starter in this league is still VERY debateable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sea Ray Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 I was kicking around the idea of the tag yesterday while in my business class (yeah I know, sue me)...Nugent immediately came to mind as did Nelson. Nugent in the same manner they handled Graham in that they felt they would come out ahead in terms of overall money spent to tag him as opposed to giving him money up front when they were starting to question what they actually had in him. It was a really good example of applying the tag to a player they really didn't view as a "franchise" type of guy.There could be worse ways to go than tag Nelson, but I just don't think it's necessary. They have the money to sign him to a longer 3-4 year deal and the tag could actually keep him and his agent from doing a long term deal, knowing they would be getting paid more this season than a contract would allow and being able to hit the market again the following season. That thought carries risk, but at the same time it's not like Nelson is a poor guy trying to make ends meet at this point either. I really want to see what Carrier can do with Nelson moving forward with OTA's and a full camp.Barron in the first ?? While I can't say as I would be bothered by that pick, I just don't see them going in that direction. The only reason I can give for that is listening or reading to what the coaches have already said about the current crop of SS we already have on the team. I suppose you could argue the "smokescreen effect", but I simply don't think that's the case.Taylor Mays experience ?? Yeah, buckle up because that ride isn't closing up anytime soon regardless of my thoughts.I still think he has upside and he's a good teams player. It's not like we took him in the first either and teams is all we got our of him. Wasn't it like a 5th in next years draft ?? Yeah, I think he stays. Him becoming a starter in this league is still VERY debateable.Actually it's only a 7th in next yr's draft.I don't see any reason to franchise Nugent. He's a local kid. Just make him a fair offer and he'll grab it. I doubt there's another team looking to overpay for him.As for Nelson just offer him a nice deal in the $6mill range if you have to but if you franchise someone and later extend it to a multi yr deal then you tie up your franchise tag for all of those yrs. We have to be mindful of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UK Bengal Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 No one is gonna overpay nuge not after those misses late in the season and playoff game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 If you tag a player and then sign him to a long term contract, the tag becomes available to place on any other player you wish. It's not tied up for all those years. Teams do that every year so they don't lose a player immediately and attempt to work out a long term deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 Actually, Sea Ray is partially correct, at least under the old CBA. I have not researched the new CBA to see if they changed the rules. But before, if a team tagged a guy, they had until mid-March to reach a long-term deal. If they did they got the tag back. If the player did NOT sign his tender but did sign a long-term deal after that deadline but before July something or other, then the tag wasn't useable again for the life of that deal. After that July deadline the player had no choice but to play under the tag tender or sit out.However, teams quickly figured a way around the deadline issue: the guy just signed his tender (so the team couldn't use the tag until next year, and they couldn't use it again that year anyhow) then they came to agreement on a long-term deal afterward.I'll see if I can find any rules updates to the tag. I guess I'll actually have to read that 500 page copy of the CBA Kirk sent me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I stand partially corrected... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Fortunately, the franchise/transition tag section of the CBA is relatively short, though it's written in language only a lawyer could love. For what I can tell, it's pretty much the same as before. I can't find anything in the section about losing the tag for the life of a long-term contract under any circumstances, so that whole concept appears to have been dropped. The highlights:Teams can designate 1 franchise player a season.The window to apply the tag starts 22 days prior to day 1 of the new league year and ends at 4 p.m. eastern on the "eighth day preceding the first day" of the new league year. So that's February 20 and March 5 this year (the 2012 league year starts March 13).Teams have until July 15 (or if the 15th is a Saturday or Sunday, the following Monday) to sign franchised players to a long-term deal. If they don't, the player either plays under the tag or sits out. Negations can resume after the team plays its last game.Now, there is one line in the transition tag section that suggests teams could somehow not have the franchise tag available. Each year, a team can designate a transition player instead of a franchise player (teams can't use both tags in the same year) "if such franchise player designation is available to such club." Maybe there's something in the other 300 pages of the CBA about losing the franchise tag... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmyBengal Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 I sit mostly correct ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sea Ray Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 If you can't have a franchise and a transition player then how did the Eagles do just that in this article a year or so ago:The Philadelphia Eagles applied their franchise tag to quarterback Michael Vick on Tuesday.The move ensures that Vick will remain in Philadelphia for the 2011 season, giving the team another year to assess his talent before attempting to ink him to a long-term deal...Philadelphia also placed the transition tag on kicker David Akers./>http://www.footballnewsnow.com/2011/eagles-franchise-vick-place-transition-tag-on-akers/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
membengal Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 Different CBA, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted February 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 The tags the Eagles put on Vick and Akers were essentially meaningless, because there was no CBA and no one knew what the rules for tags would be under the new CBA, or even if there would still be tags. Teams tagged guys last year just in case there were eventually rules for tags. When the final rules came out and you could only use one of the tags, the first thing the Eagles did was to rescind the tag on Akers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kazkal Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Even if we keep reggie doesnt mean they wont be looking at a young guy may be Mays or a rookie..we need someone to replace crocker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueridge Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 I am against franchising him, and I have been a Nelson fan for a long time. I actually wanted him in the first round when he came out in the draft. He just isnt a 6mil per year player. I would offer him a solid contract, close to what whitner got. And Even with him back I still want them to draft Mark Barron who will make this defense better now. Anyone who thinks going from Crocker to Barron wont be an upgrade is crazy.Barron is overrated. He's an in-the-box type who would not be a a clear upgrade over Mays/Sands/Miles. Crocker is nearly done and to play up the Barron>Crocker line is not really relevant. Nelson has been more than solid and has earned a payday. The Bengals should do all they can to keep him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wpeldios Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 I am against franchising him, and I have been a Nelson fan for a long time. I actually wanted him in the first round when he came out in the draft. He just isnt a 6mil per year player. I would offer him a solid contract, close to what whitner got. And Even with him back I still want them to draft Mark Barron who will make this defense better now. Anyone who thinks going from Crocker to Barron wont be an upgrade is crazy.Barron is overrated. He's an in-the-box type who would not be a a clear upgrade over Mays/Sands/Miles. Crocker is nearly done and to play up the Barron>Crocker line is not really relevant. Nelson has been more than solid and has earned a payday. The Bengals should do all they can to keep him.I am a big Barron fan. And I do think he would be an upgrade over any of those guys. I am not saying he should be the draft pick no matter who is there, but where we pick I see it as a good possibility that he will be my highest rated player. Before I draft him I would go after Griffin in FA. And I agree, like I said I have been a fan of his for a long time. 6 million per year is a lot of money though. And I don't see him getting close to that anywhere else, so why commit to that much money in the form of a tag when you shouldnt need to. I do say shouldnt because there is always an outside chance someone gets stupid with an offer. He is a quality starter who occasionally makes bad mistakes and occasionally makes things happen for the defense. Not a franchise player. I like the guy, but I dont 6 mil per year like the guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volcom69 Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 Why are the bengals not going to tag Nelson its like a steal to tag him? If they lose him I'll be pissed he was only getting better! Stop losing guys when they start getting better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierCat Posted March 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 Why are the bengals not going to tag Nelson its like a steal to tag him? If they lose him I'll be pissed he was only getting better! Stop losing guys when they start getting betterI guarantee you they are just planning to put Mays in. Remember they supposedly loved him in the draft and even tried to trade up for him. Reggie is as good as gone. Gotta save money for that big contract we have to give AJ in 2014! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.