Fantasy Football News and Rumors

[TREFF]

Does anybody know if Barkley and Jacobs had it worked into their deals that they wouldn't be tagged this year? I know that they both ended up signing one year deals instead of the franchise tender, but I thought I remembered seeing something about not being able to be tagged again this year but maybe I'm crazy.

Josh Jacobs makes franchise-tag history — and sets himself up for nearly $26 million over two years

Yes. there's value in withholding services.

www.nbcsports.com

The Raiders still have the ability to tag Jacobs again in 2024. But the one-year price tag will be at least $14.16 million, a 20-percent raise of his salary in 2023. Barkley is on track for a salary of $12.12 million next year, if tagged again.


Considering neither technically signed the franchise tender, both were 1 year, non-franchise contracts, I don't know that he typical rules of back to back franchise tags and the corresponding salary increases due to being franchised multiple times, back to back, would apply-such as it did with Kirk Cousins in Washington. This article makes it sound like it would for Jacobs, but not for Barkley?

 

[femurov]

Josh Jacobs makes franchise-tag history — and sets himself up for nearly $26 million over two years

Yes. there's value in withholding services.

www.nbcsports.com

The Raiders still have the ability to tag Jacobs again in 2024. But the one-year price tag will be at least $14.16 million, a 20-percent raise of his salary in 2023. Barkley is on track for a salary of $12.12 million next year, if tagged again.


Considering neither technically signed the franchise tender, both were 1 year, non-franchise contracts, I don't know that he typical rules of back to back franchise tags and the corresponding salary increases due to being franchised multiple times, back to back, would apply-such as it did with Kirk Cousins in Washington. This article makes it sound like it would for Jacobs, but not for Barkley?

Looks like it is the same. When you franchise a player, the cost is the average of the top 5 salaries at that position. But if the player's salary x 20% is more than the tag, they use that number. Jacobs just signed a bigger contract last year.

 

[redskinsfan1963]

panthers have signed bucs dc as head coach.

 

[Bandit]

Looks like it is the same. When you franchise a player, the cost is the average of the top 5 salaries at that position. But if the player's salary x 20% is more than the tag, they use that number. Jacobs just signed a bigger contract last year.

Neither Barkley or Jacobs signed their franchise tenders last year. They both signed one year deals with the franchise amount guaranteed and then some extra incentives on top of that. So I don't think it's clear if that counts as being franchised with the extra 20% rule applying. I thought they both had it written into their contracts that they couldn't be franchised again this year, but I can't find that anywhere. I'm sure there will be a lot more talk about it once the new league year comes in March.

 

[TREFF]

Neither Barkley or Jacobs signed their franchise tenders last year. They both signed one year deals with the franchise amount guaranteed and then some extra incentives on top of that. So I don't think it's clear if that counts as being franchised with the extra 20% rule applying. I thought they both had it written into their contracts that they couldn't be franchised again this year, but I can't find that anywhere. I'm sure there will be a lot more talk about it once the new league year comes in March.

I guess the overall point would be yes, they can be franchised, neither secured a deal that says they couldn't be. What's up for debate is what that franchise $ value would be, an aggregate of the top 5, or %20 higher than the previous year, whichever is greater..if I understand the rules correctly

 

[Bandit]

I guess the overall point would be yes, they can be franchised, neither secured a deal that says they couldn't be. What's up for debate is what that franchise $ value would be, an aggregate of the top 5, or %20 higher than the previous year, whichever is greater..if I understand the rules correctly

See that's what I thought. It wouldn't make sense for them to do what they did unless there was some kind of deterrent to being franchised again this year. Maybe if you're hit with the tag it counts whether you sign the tender or not? Hell if I know.

 

[femurov]

See that's what I thought. It wouldn't make sense for them to do what they did unless there was some kind of deterrent to being franchised again this year. Maybe if you're hit with the tag it counts whether you sign the tender or not? Hell if I know.

Yeah, I don't think it matters if you were tagged for the 20%. Actually, I think the % goes up if you are tagged the year before.

 

[Barilko]

Nobody circles the wagons like the Buffalo Bills.

Now there is a quote that is used quite often in my family households

 

[TREFF]

Yeah, I don't think it matters if you were tagged for the 20%. Actually, I think the % goes up if you are tagged the year before.

It does, its a trigger that is supposed to keep players from continuously being tagged. It's why Kirk Cousin made SOO much money his final couple year in Washington.

"An "exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater.

For any player to be tagged in two straight years, the team must pay 120 percent of the player's previous salary. If tagged in three straight years, the team must pay the player 144 percent of his previous salary, or an average of the top 5 salaries at the highest-paid position (likely QB), whichever is higher."

The distinction between the first year, and the second consecutive year being, that the option of the 'average of the top 5 paid players at his position' is no longer an option, and it's straight %120 of his previous salary (which by definition was already in the middle of that top 5 or greater, being an average of that number the year before, or 120% of his previous year, under the original franchise number terms )

And since neither actually signed his franchise tag, nor did they play under it given that they signed one year deals, it would be my assumption that IF they were to be franchised, it would still be as a first time..which would be likely significantly lower than it was last year now that Zeke and Henry are no longer skewing the average of the top five.

But I could be totally wrong and since they missed the free agency period while under the franchise tag, not being able to negotiate with other teams, perhaps it would count, and the '24 offseason would be franchise tag #2?? F if I know

 

[jarntt]

Fantasy football site employee fired after shock $150,000 cheating scandal

A high-stakes fantasy football platform that hosts massive contests for some of the biggest payouts in the industry had an employee change a lineup to put in a player who had already scored a touch…

nypost.com

 

[Chef99]

Y'know what's kinda funny?

Some team might get Belichick on the cheap.

I mean REALLY cheap, if at all.

I think the best thing for him to do is wait until next year.

I think that would be a very smart move.

 

[TREFF]

Y'know what's kinda funny?

Some team might get Belichick on the cheap.

I mean REALLY cheap, if at all.

I think the best thing for him to do is wait until next year.

I think that would be a very smart move.

But he's 100 years old, how many 'next' years does he have?

Personally I feel if he doesn't get one this year, he might be out of it

 

[Bandit]

It does, its a trigger that is supposed to keep players from continuously being tagged. It's why Kirk Cousin made SOO much money his final couple year in Washington.

"An "exclusive" franchise player must be offered a one-year contract for an amount no less than the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of a date in April of the current year in which the tag will apply, or 120 percent of the player's previous year's salary, whichever is greater.

For any player to be tagged in two straight years, the team must pay 120 percent of the player's previous salary. If tagged in three straight years, the team must pay the player 144 percent of his previous salary, or an average of the top 5 salaries at the highest-paid position (likely QB), whichever is higher."

The distinction between the first year, and the second consecutive year being, that the option of the 'average of the top 5 paid players at his position' is no longer an option, and it's straight %120 of his previous salary (which by definition was already in the middle of that top 5 or greater, being an average of that number the year before, or 120% of his previous year, under the original franchise number terms )

And since neither actually signed his franchise tag, nor did they play under it given that they signed one year deals, it would be my assumption that IF they were to be franchised, it would still be as a first time..which would be likely significantly lower than it was last year now that Zeke and Henry are no longer skewing the average of the top five.

But I could be totally wrong and since they missed the free agency period while under the franchise tag, not being able to negotiate with other teams, perhaps it would count, and the '24 offseason would be franchise tag #2?? F if I know

That's the part I was wondering, but I'm not sure why it would have made sense for those guys to sign the contracts they did if they could be tagged again as a first timer again. I found this chart from overthecap.com about the estimate of how much the tags will be next year. This is still a guess because it's based on what the actual salary cap number is next year. Franchise, Transition and RFA Tenders | Over the Cap

2024 Projected Franchise and Transition Tenders​

Position	Franchise Tag	Transition Tag
QB	$35,952,000	$31,158,000
DE	$23,348,000	$20,141,000
LB	$21,922,000	$18,599,000
OL	$21,720,000	$19,718,000
WR	$21,665,000	$19,398,000
DT	$19,753,000	$15,798,000
CB	$18,421,000	$15,889,000
S	$17,220,000	$13,957,000
RB	$12,419,000	$10,104,000
TE	$12,371,000	$10,564,000
ST	$5,827,000	$5,286,000

 

[MilkSpiller22]

But he's 100 years old, how many 'next' years does he have?

Personally I feel if he doesn't get one this year, he might be out of it

I disagree... I would bet that he won't take a job this next season... but I can absolutely see a team panic and get him.... and any team that does get him will regret it IMO... I think he is done...

 

[Bandit]

I also found this on there. Top five cap hits in 2024. Kamara and Aaron Jones will either be reworking deals or getting cut:

​

 

[broncosmitty]

But he's 100 years old, how many 'next' years does he have?

Personally I feel if he doesn't get one this year, he might be out of it

He should be out of it.

I’d think the only team living off his past success would be the one that let him go.

 

[wilwhite]

I'd only put BB in charge of a team with a solid veteran QB and a D that needs some work.

Like if Cousins stays with the Vikings - but it's too soon to pull the plug on Kevin O'Connell. Possibly New Orleans, but same deal.

He may be stuck having to settle for a three-way-tie for most losses.

 

[TREFF]

I'd only put BB in charge of a team with a solid veteran QB and a D that needs some work.

Like if Cousins stays with the Vikings - but it's too soon to pull the plug on Kevin O'Connell. Possibly New Orleans, but same deal.

He may be stuck having to settle for a three-way-tie for most losses.

Well Atlanta would have fit the bill, working under the assumption that they go get a veteran QB- it ain't like there isn't plenty available, some of whom he's worked with before with success.. Brissett, JimmyG, along with Teddy Brdigewater, Minshew, Tannehill, Thai Stick, Darnold, Mayfield, Flacco, probably Russel WIlson.
And defense was already solid, with the talent to possibly be elite.

But they wanna go with a different brand of retread with much less of a successful track record, so I dunno wtf they're thinking with Raheem Morris. cheaper for sure, but still a defensive head coach, and not a proven winner.
Given Pitts, B. Robinson, and London around, if it wasn't gonna be a proven, elite coach like a BB, I was sure they'd go with an offensive dude, some Shannahan/Kubiak/McVay disciple, or maybe a Kellen WInslow, Eric Bienemy type successful OC rookie HC type deal.

I just don't see Raheem Morris as the guy who will bring in an offensive system that'll unlock those three potential elite offensive weapons, and the D was fine the way it was.

Back on topic-
With only Washington and Seattle left..I do believe the Hoody is done. I sure don't see anyone willing to let him have his type of control being mid seventies AND out of the league for a year, this time in 2025. It's already very arguable that the league has passed him by today.

And on a side bar, but related note..I hope Mac Jones either re-takes the Patriots job, or is traded and has success, just to stick it to BB. Belechick did him DIRTY his entire career.

 

[averagejoe]

I hope Mac Jones either re-takes the Patriots job, or is traded and has success,

What was Jones' scouting report coming into the NFL?

 

[TREFF]

What was Jones' scouting report coming into the NFL?

obviously there were conflicting opinions, but the prevailing opinion at the time was that he could be a "plus" NFL QB, perhaps not right away, but given a year or two. not a big arm, but smart, made good decisions, usually went through progressions but could lock onto a primary at times, could succeed in an NFL offense, the typical 'can make all the throws", yada yada. Most had him projected round 1, some early round 1, a few outliers had him falling into the second.

And at the time, before CJ Stroud was a thing, he had one of the best Rookie campaigns ever from a production POV under Josh MCD's. top 3 if I recall correctly. then he ges a defensive coordinator to implement a new system which predictably crashed and burnt spectacularly, and then '23 season, we thought there was an actual OC in place, but turns out that guy only confirmed the suspicion that he's completely lost any handle he used to have on the game. BB never wanted Mac to start with, replaced him with Zappe, who may have looked better at times, but overall Zappe had a lower comp %, lower TD rate, higher INT rate, lower QBR.

Local Denver dudes have been chattering pretty hard that Mac Jones would be the perfect guy for Sean Peyton to bring in to replace Russ. Mac stays on schedule, stays within the system, doesn't have to improvise in order to make a throw, exactly what Peyton and Brees had success doing. And hopefully, draft a kid in the early/mid rounds to develop behind him.