You are wrong on this point. I know what the difference is between a cap hit and base salary. The 120% base increase is from the base salary number, not the cap hit. So it is INDEED not $15.8 mil.
(e) For the purposes of this Article, "Salary" means the total of the Para- graph 5 Salary (reduced proportionately if the contract is entered into after the first regular season game), roster and reporting bonuses, pro-rata portion of signing bonus, and other payments to players in compensation for the playing of professional football for the applicable year of the player's most recendy negotiated Player Contract, except for performance bonuses other than roster and reporting bonuses. Salary shall also in clude any umepaid loans made, guaranteed or collateralized by a Team or its Team Affiliate to a player or Player Affiliate. "Prior Year Salary" means the Salary (as defined 45 in this Subsection) for the last League Year of the player's most recently negotiated Play er Contract.
Including bonuses pro rated for McCoy his salary for 2014 will be $13 mil plus...essentially his cap number which makes his tag number $15.8mil or so.
Nope
Great argument, filled with plenty of thought provoking retort. Look it up man. This is all moot...franchise tags are in place to benefit the organization. McCoy's agent would be a fool to hold out for "Revis money" as you put it and risk him getting injured while playing on a franchise tag. This isnt baseball...long term deals with guaranteed money > year to year deals.
I did more than look it up, I asked an agent. His response:"Cap number excluding workout bonus and likely to be earned incentives."The articles on google about the franchise tag that say "salary" are lazily written. Here's one from PFT that specifically says cap number http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/28/10-things-to-know-about-the-franchise-tag/
Nope
Great argument, filled with plenty of thought provoking retort. Look it up man. This is all moot...franchise tags are in place to benefit the organization. McCoy's agent would be a fool to hold out for "Revis money" as you put it and risk him getting injured while playing on a franchise tag. This isnt baseball...long term deals with guaranteed money > year to year deals.
I did more than look it up, I asked an agent. His response:"Cap number excluding workout bonus and likely to be earned incentives."The articles on google about the franchise tag that say "salary" are lazily written. Here's one from PFT that specifically says cap number http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/28/10-things-to-know-about-the-franchise-tag/
Forgive me if I dont believe you at your "I asked an agent" comment. Not saying you didnt, but there's no way for me to believe that at all.This would be a quote from the link you posted, sounds a lot like what I said:"This dynamic often applies to players who were taken high in the draft before the implementation of the rookie wage scale. As rookie contracts expire under the new labor deal, franchise tenders for many of them will be lower."
Nope
Great argument, filled with plenty of thought provoking retort. Look it up man. This is all moot...franchise tags are in place to benefit the organization. McCoy's agent would be a fool to hold out for "Revis money" as you put it and risk him getting injured while playing on a franchise tag. This isnt baseball...long term deals with guaranteed money > year to year deals.
I did more than look it up, I asked an agent. His response:"Cap number excluding workout bonus and likely to be earned incentives."The articles on google about the franchise tag that say "salary" are lazily written. Here's one from PFT that specifically says cap number http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/28/10-things-to-know-about-the-franchise-tag/
CBA defines it....posted above.
Nope
Great argument, filled with plenty of thought provoking retort. Look it up man. This is all moot...franchise tags are in place to benefit the organization. McCoy's agent would be a fool to hold out for "Revis money" as you put it and risk him getting injured while playing on a franchise tag. This isnt baseball...long term deals with guaranteed money > year to year deals.
I did more than look it up, I asked an agent. His response:"Cap number excluding workout bonus and likely to be earned incentives."The articles on google about the franchise tag that say "salary" are lazily written. Here's one from PFT that specifically says cap number http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/28/10-things-to-know-about-the-franchise-tag/
Forgive me if I dont believe you at your "I asked an agent" comment. Not saying you didnt, but there's no way for me to believe that at all.This would be a quote from the link you posted, sounds a lot like what I said:"This dynamic often applies to players who were taken high in the draft before the implementation of the rookie wage scale. As rookie contracts expire under the new labor deal, franchise tenders for many of them will be lower."
McCoy is not amongst the many.
Nope
Great argument, filled with plenty of thought provoking retort. Look it up man. This is all moot...franchise tags are in place to benefit the organization. McCoy's agent would be a fool to hold out for "Revis money" as you put it and risk him getting injured while playing on a franchise tag. This isnt baseball...long term deals with guaranteed money > year to year deals.
I did more than look it up, I asked an agent. His response:"Cap number excluding workout bonus and likely to be earned incentives."The articles on google about the franchise tag that say "salary" are lazily written. Here's one from PFT that specifically says cap number http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/28/10-things-to-know-about-the-franchise-tag/
CBA defines it....posted above.
Ryan, you are correct indeed. JC, you were right. I was reading lazy journalism at many locations and took it for word instead of going through the CBA. I am man enough to admit being wrong on this front.I still maintain, McCoy's agent would be dumb to not want his client to sign a long term contract very similar (with perhaps more guaranteed) to what Atkins got.
Ryan, you are correct indeed. JC, you were right. I was reading lazy journalism at many locations and took it for word instead of going through the CBA. I am man enough to admit being wrong on this front.I still maintain, McCoy's agent would be dumb to not want his client to sign a long term contract very similar (with perhaps more guaranteed) to what Atkins got.
Well...there's a first for everything on my behalf I guess. I don't think the franchise number will come into play. I don't think there's a lot of room to save money off the cap with a new deal for McCoy. I think we'll see similar numbers plus or minus a bit.
