Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Cap Question « previous next »
Page: 1 2

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
#15 : November 22, 2006, 06:20:20 PM

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7167454

 
Quote
The John Tait transition tag

The Kansas City Chiefs put a transition tag on offensive tackle John Tait. They could have put a franchise tag on him for $7 million and controlled his rights. They opted for the cheaper transition tag at $6 million, not because they wanted to save the cap space, but because they wanted to bring the negotiations to a head by having his agent go out into the market and bring back a deal that the Chiefs could match or pass on.
.    
Tait brought a deal back to Kansas City with a reported modest $3 million signing bonus, but had another bonus offer for $11 million due about 10 days after that. The contract is designed to make it difficult for the Chiefs to match because Chicago has considerably more cap space than Kansas City.

These techniques are often referred to as a "poison pill." There's nothing wrong with the technique, and in fact, it should be used if a team truly wants a player and the home team has the right to match the offer. Believe me, Kansas City can match this offer, but the size of the contract does force the Chiefs to decide if they think the player is worth it. Tait is a fine player and the Chiefs have an excellent offensive line with him. The question really becomes, "If we let him go to Chicago, can we find a decent replacement on our roster, in free agency or in the draft? And, can we use the $6 million of cap space that comes back to us in more constructive ways to help the football team?"

Also keep in mind the Chiefs will receive a third-round compensatory pick from the league next year in the 2005 draft if they decide not to match the Bears' offer. There's a lot to think about, and it's not as simple as whether or not Kansas City wants Tait on the football team. As I look at the free-agent offensive tackle population, I believe there is a player or two that could give the Chiefs a reasonable replacement, and the cap space could be used to sign at least two quality defensive players. On the other hand, the Chiefs offense can really score points and they may not want to upset the chemistry. The decision is March 12, and no matter which way they go, it will be the right decision.

Well signing Tait would have been possible IF the Bucs cut John Lynch early in free agency.  With that said the Bucs could have signed Tait + Gold but instead went with the Garner, Steussie, Deese + Gold.

The Bucs decision to make cuts when it was necessary to sign players kind of backfired in my very honest opinion. 

Hit55Fan

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2396
Offline
#16 : November 22, 2006, 06:22:58 PM

losing Gold was hard.. he could have been a BIG impact player for us.. and was his short time here.

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
#17 : November 22, 2006, 06:26:09 PM

The Chiefs had a lot more cap space than the Bucs but they could not match Tait's poision pill contract at the time.  If the Bucs cut Lynch earlier in free agency they may have had a shot at Tait but Chicago's cap space > greater than the Bucs cap space at that time.


Hit55Fan

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2396
Offline
#18 : November 22, 2006, 06:28:22 PM

thats almost like how seattle got burlison. they put in the deal a 10 million dollar bonus saying if nate played more then 5 games in Minni he would get 10 mill bonus.. well of course minni couldnt match that lol

Some of these gms are sneeky :) very sneeky sneeky

Itchalot

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 5747
Offline
#19 : November 22, 2006, 06:29:35 PM

The Bucs didn't have the cap room for Tait. You can't just say sign Tait and to hell with everything else. Thats what they would have had to do.

"Chiefs president Carl Peterson said that Tait's compensation package would be prohibitive.

"The cap number of $11,585,000 in that offer sheet for 2004 would cost almost 15 percent of our cap room for the season," Peterson said. "We believe that cap number is too excessive for the services of one player."

And again this wasn't even a pro-bowl player.



alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
#20 : November 22, 2006, 06:29:43 PM

thats almost like how seattle got burlison. they put in the deal a 10 million dollar bonus saying if nate played more then 5 games in Minni he would get 10 mill bonus.. well of course minni couldnt match that lol

Some of these gms are sneeky :) very sneeky sneeky


Same thing happened with Hutch too.

Hit55Fan

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2396
Offline
#21 : November 22, 2006, 06:30:25 PM

yeah but so far the viking have won that battle lol

Hit55Fan

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2396
Offline
#22 : November 22, 2006, 06:31:34 PM

The bears will have cap problems in a few years as well.. they have made some high priced sigings and exstentions.

alldaway

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 37078
Offline
#23 : November 22, 2006, 06:32:32 PM

The bears will have cap problems in a few years as well.. they have made some high priced sigings and exstentions.


They have tough cap decisions to make starting this off season with Briggs.

gone

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 9244
Offline
#24 : November 22, 2006, 06:36:38 PM

Bears right now are the '99 Bucs with a slightly better O.  They are making their run and will pull out all the stops, don't expect anyone leaving their team anytime soon.  They are gonna keep that D intact and hope for magic in the draft this offseason or go for gold on O and work some contract magic...
Page: 1 2
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Cap Question « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools