Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Should the Bucs tag Bennett ? « previous next »
Page: 1

michael89156

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12106
Offline
: February 14, 2013, 12:02:16 AM





2013 NFL Free Agency: Buccaneers could use franchise tag on Michael Bennett



By Sander Philipse on Feb 13, 12:00p 





Grant Halverson



The Tampa Bay Buccaneers last used the franchise tag in 2009, when they applied it to Antonio Bryant -- apparently the worst signing in Buccaneer history. That move looked smart at the time, grabbing a relatively young, productive player with an injury issue and some "character" problems (euphemism for "he doesn't agree with coach all the time"). It was a one-year, try-out contract. Turned out that his knee injury was so bad he didn't do much that season, and then never played in the NFL again. But this year, they realistically have the option of using the franchise tag. On Michael Bennett.
 

I keep saying this, but only because it's important: Michael Bennett is a crucial player to re-sign this offseason, and the Buccaneers easily have the cash to do it. They have the fifth-most cap space in the NFL with $30 million, and can easily add another $12.5 million by releasing Quincy Black and Eric Wright -- something that's exceedingly likely to happen. The Buccaneers should do whatever they can to get him signed for the long term. If there's one thing these past few years have taught Bucs fans it is that you can never have enough good defensive linemen, and Bennett is certainly one of the better ones.
 
But if the Bucs cannot reach an agreement with Bennett before free agency opens, the franchise tag should be in play. It would be expensive, but it wouldn't be outlandish. With a full franchise tag, Bennett would likely receive around $11 million, while a transition tag would give him around $9 million, per these numbers from NFL.com. The transition tags would allow other teams to negotiate with Bennett, but would give the Bucs the right to match any resulting contract. That would effectively guarantee Bennett's presence in Tampa, because it's highly unlikely a team would be able to give Bennett a contract the Bucs couldn't match -- although there may be contracts they won't be willing to match.
 
The franchise tag would give the Bucs a little more security, giving them two first-round draft picks if Bennett does sign elsewhere, but it's pretty expensive at around $11 million. That's a lot of money, and a long-term deal is likely to pay Bennett somewhere between $6 and 9 million per year as one of the top defensive ends on the market. Ultimately, Mark Dominik will want to sign Bennett to a long-term deal. But if that turns out to be unrealistic, the franchise tag may give them another option.



http://www.bucsnation.com/2013/2/13/3980860/franchise-tag-buccaneers-michael-bennett-free-agency-nfl-2013

UMiamiBucFan

****
Starter

Posts : 685
Offline
#1 : February 14, 2013, 12:27:41 AM

Stopped reading after the first sentence. Bucs used their franchise tag on Connor Barth last season.

TheAman

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2515
Offline
#2 : February 14, 2013, 12:38:03 AM

I assume they mean last used a franchise tag that stuck, as opposed to one where they then negotiated a contract.

buccaneerNW

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1022
Offline
#3 : February 14, 2013, 12:57:24 AM

No.

- Dont bee kritisyzun gramer end punktushun on dis baored becuz its for talkn uhbowtt the Bukx.


nybuccguy

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1951
Offline
#4 : February 14, 2013, 01:56:30 AM

Agree with miami buc fan.....although they nded up extending Barth, the tag was utlized to keep him on the roster and allow the contract to happen. The frqanchise tag was clearly used last year.

BucNY

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 7901
Online
#5 : February 14, 2013, 07:47:18 AM

It's not a bad idea really, although I prefer him to  be signed. Even if Bowers and Clayborn have healthy years and are the studs we want them to be, we will need the depth on the defensive line.

\\\\\\\"This forum needs a poster like BucNY now more than ever\\\\\\\"
      - Everyone

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 17741
Online
#6 : February 14, 2013, 07:49:23 AM

Never tag a defensive end who is not an elite pass rusher......see how that worked out with Chidi Ahanotu...

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           

UMiamiBucFan

****
Starter

Posts : 685
Offline
#7 : February 14, 2013, 08:15:28 AM

Never tag a defensive end who is not an elite pass rusher......see how that worked out with Chidi Ahanotu...

That was one of Rich McKay's more hilarious mistakes. There's a window associated with the franchise tag that if you negotiate a long term deal with a franchise tagged player, you can't use the franchise tag for the duration of that deal. All they had to do was sign the deal AFTER this period expired. Nope, lets go ahead and sign it and sacrifice the franchise tag for SIX years.

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 13449
Offline
#8 : February 14, 2013, 01:48:27 PM

Absolutely not.


dbucfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 46231
Offline
#9 : February 14, 2013, 01:54:48 PM

NO

\"A Great Coach has to have a Patient Wife, A Loyal Dog, and a Great Quarterback. . . . but not necessarily in that order\" ~ Coach Bud Grant

DEBUCSOWN

****
Starter

Posts : 991
Offline
#10 : February 14, 2013, 03:23:14 PM

If push comes to shove yes. Otherwise no.

Go Bucs

The Anti-Java

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 23487
Offline
#11 : February 14, 2013, 09:12:51 PM

If push comes to shove yes. Otherwise no.



This ^^^^


Page: 1
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Should the Bucs tag Bennett ? « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools