Have the bengals ever franchised a player b4?

[jditty47]

just wondering...

[OICanDoThat]

Weren't Pickens and Dillon franchised?

[turningpoint]

Dillon was for a fact, i didn't really pay that much attention to em when pickens was around.

[HoosierCat]

IIRC, Dillon got the transition tag, not the franchise designation. That was back in 2001, and the Bengals had lost use of the franchise tag for a year because of the way they used it on Carl Pickens the year before. There was a dispute between them and the player's association, who claimed they reached a multi-year deal with Pickens before he signed the one-year franchise tender, and so by rule the Bengals lose the franchise tag for the duration of Pick's deal. In the end they "settled" on losing it for a year, so all they had to use on CD was the transition tag.

[jditty47]

lets hope rudi does as well as pickens after he got franchised (sarcasm folks )

and thx for the info joisey!

[turningpoint]

IIRC, Dillon got the transition tag, not the franchise designation. That was back in 2001, and the Bengals had lost use of the franchise tag for a year because of the way they used it on Carl Pickens the year before. There was a dispute between them and the player's association, who claimed they reached a multi-year deal with Pickens before he signed the one-year franchise tender, and so by rule the Bengals lose the franchise tag for the duration of Pick's deal. In the end they "settled" on losing it for a year, so all they had to use on CD was the transition tag.

So you're saying you lose your franchise tag if the player franchised signs a long term deal?

Also if no1 bit on Corey as a transition tagged player, why don't we just transition tag Rudi Johnson.

[schweinhart]

Teams don't lose their franchise tag over the length of a contract signed for a player after he's franchised if they reach the long-term deal before the middle of March or renegotiate an extension after the middle of July. If a long-term deal is struck between the March and July deadlines, they do lose the franchise tag. It seems an inane rule IMO.

As for Rudi, if he's transitioned at the Top 10 avg. and the Bengals don't match a higher offer, there's no direct compensation but could end up being some for the compensatory picks given to teams who lose more or higher quality free agents than they sign in a given year.

If Rudi's franchised, he's either kept or offered for trade.

[JPW]

So you're saying you lose your franchise tag if the player franchised signs a long term deal?

"A team has until March 15 to work out a long term deal with its Franchise Player. If the team signs the Franchise Player between March 15 and July 15, the tag stays with that player for the length of his contract, which means that the team cannot name another Franchise Payer until that player's contract is terminated."

Also if no1 bit on Corey as a transition tagged player, why don't we just transition tag Rudi Johnson.

"A team may elect to tag two players with the Transition tag rather than one Transition Player and one Franchise Player."

So they could in fact Transition Tag Rudi...

But all that the Transition Tag gives you is the Rights of First Refusal.

The Franchise Tag awards you with two 1st round draft picks, from the team that signs your player.

Nobody is going to give up two 1st round picks so they would have to try to work a trade with you if they really want your guy.

Here is a pretty good link on the subject.

Free Agency 101

[HoosierCat]

Here's a short note from the Jags site referring to their tagging Donovin Darius last time around ( http://www.jaguars.com/Story/3458.asp ):

The Jaguars may sign Darius to a long-term contract between Feb. 25 and March 17 and not lose use of the tag. After March 17, signing Darius to a new contract would result in the Jaguars losing use of the “franchise” tag for the duration of Darius' new contract. Some teams have executed a procedural way around that rule, in which the team signs the player to a one-year contract, then signs him to a long-term contract on July 15 or after, which would allow the team to reclaim the “franchise” tag.

That "procedural way around the rule" was pretty much invented by Mike Brown, and it's what the Carl Picken tag dispute was all about. The Bengals signed Pick to a five-year deal in September 2000, then produced a 1-year deal it said Pickens signed first (so they'd get the tag back the next year) and claimed he then signed the new, long-term five-year deal. The player's association cried foul, claiming the Bengals had negotiated the long-term deal first, and only after that was done had him sign the one-year deal first purely to circumvent the tag rules.

The whole thing never actually got resolved one way or another because it ended up becoming part of the Great Pickens Fiasco. In the end, the Bengals agreed to let Carl walk and the association agreed to a mere 1-year moratorium on the Bengals' use of the franchise tag.

[HoosierCat]

My bad, it was Sept. 98 not 2000. Bad memories are fading...

[semiotter]

Im sure CARL PICKENS was tagged with that .. :player: