NFL: Kirk Cousins, The Franchise Tag, and NFL contracts

[Mr Janny]

Here's a good article on why we might see more star players doing what Kirk (Kurt) Cousins did and refuse to sign long term contracts with teams.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...approach-may-become-a-trend-for-star-players/

The Cousins situation is fascinating, because the roles are reversed from where they usually are, and it's opening some eyes on alternate ways to approach negotiating.

Savvy agents may start using the franchise tag to their advantage, where in the past it had been seen as something that only really benefited ownership. Basically, if offered contracts only have a couple years worth of guaranteed salary, it's potentially more beneficial for players to make the team franchise them. Very interesting stuff. I doubt many owners are pleased with the way the Cousins situation has played out.

 

[flynnhicks03]

Here's a good article on why we might see more star players doing what Kirk (Kurt) Cousins did and refuse to sign long term contracts with teams.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...approach-may-become-a-trend-for-star-players/

The Cousins situation is fascinating, because the roles are reversed from where they usually are, and it's opening some eyes on alternate ways to approach negotiating.

Savvy agents may start using the franchise tag to their advantage, where in the past it had been seen as something that only really benefited ownership. Basically, if offered contracts only have a couple years worth of guaranteed salary, it's potentially more beneficial for players to make the team franchise them. Very interesting stuff. I doubt many owners are pleased with the way the Cousins situation has played out.

I won't pretend to understand this completely, but I wonder if this will push the owners towards fully-guaranteed contracts, like most other sports, instead of what are essentially a series of 1-year contracts.

 

[jbindm]

Yeah, as long as the player doesn't mind assuming the risk of injury then it makes good sense financially. But it's a huge risk. For a QB I can definitely understand it because the guys at that position are more protected by league rules. But guys in the trenches are one play away from getting their knee rolled up on. If they're doing the year to year thing then just like that they're damaged goods about to hit free agency.

But NFL contract structures could be about to change in the not too distant future anyway. The current CBA expires in four years. I think there's going to be a big fight coming over fully guaranteed contracts similar to what MLB and the NBA have. The union is already advising their members to start saving.

 

[Mr Janny]

I won't pretend to understand this completely, but I wonder if this will push the owners towards fully-guaranteed contracts, like most other sports, instead of what are essentially a series of 1-year contracts.

I don't know about fully guaranteed contracts, but if more players start to follow Cousins' example, it's sure to have an effect on contracts.

The whole way that NFL contracts are reported on is kind of disingenuous. The media will report that a guy signed a 6 year $85 million dollar contract. That $85 million number is gaudy, and eye catching, but it's basically meaningless. The contract is only really worth the guaranteed amount. So, if there was $25 million in guaranteed money, then it's only really a $25 million contract. The rest of the salary/years rarely will actually be paid, can be terminated at any time by the team, and are basically meaningless.

 

[flynnhicks03]

I don't know about fully guaranteed contracts, but if more players start to follow Cousins' example, it's sure to have an effect on contracts.

The whole way that NFL contracts are reported on is kind of disingenuous. The media will report that a guy signed a 6 year $85 million dollar contract. That $85 million number is gaudy, and eye catching, but it's basically meaningless. The contract is only really worth the guaranteed amount. So, if there was $25 million in guaranteed money, then it's only really a $25 million contract. The rest of the salary/years rarely will actually be paid, can be terminated at any time by the team, and are basically meaningless.

I think it's interesting that with all the collective bargaining, and potential strikes/lockouts over the last 10-15 years, the guaranteed contract issue isn't something the players made a bigger push for.

 

[Mr Janny]

I think it's interesting that with all the collective bargaining, and potential strikes/lockouts over the last 10-15 years, the guaranteed contract issue isn't something the players made a bigger push for.

There are a lot of things that the NFLPA should have pushed harder for. They got absolutely fleeced in this last CBA. And, they don't have anyone to blame but themselves.

When it comes to owners vs players, I generally will side with the players, but I can't blame ownership for asking for as much as they can. The recourse of the players is not to agree to it. If they don't like the arrangement, they shouldn't have signed off on it.

 

[jbindm]

I don't know about fully guaranteed contracts, but if more players start to follow Cousins' example, it's sure to have an effect on contracts.

The whole way that NFL contracts are reported on is kind of disingenuous. The media will report that a guy signed a 6 year $85 million dollar contract. That $85 million number is gaudy, and eye catching, but it's basically meaningless. The contract is only really worth the guaranteed amount. So, if there was $25 million in guaranteed money, then it's only really a $25 million contract. The rest of the salary/years rarely will actually be paid, can be terminated at any time by the team, and are basically meaningless.

Sure. NFL contracts are funny money. Even the "guaranteed" money comes with all sorts of strings attached. Some of it is partially guaranteed, some of it is guaranteed if the player is still on the roster at a certain date, and some of it is guaranteed for injury. It's ridiculous. Running backs are getting worked over worse than anyone because of their relatively short shelf life. Let's say a team drafts an RB late in the first round. They've got control of that player now for five years, and then they can franchise him for a year or maybe two. If the player was 21 coming out of school, that makes him 27 with a ton of wear and tear and at a spot where 30 is the age where decline sets in before he can finally force his way to the open market.

 

[jbindm]

There are a lot of things that the NFLPA should have pushed harder for. They got absolutely fleeced in this last CBA. And, they don't have anyone to blame but themselves.

When it comes to owners vs players, I generally will side with the players, but I can't blame ownership for asking for as much as they can. The recourse of the players is not to agree to it. If they don't like the arrangement, they shouldn't have signed off on it.

And I think that's why Atallah and Smith are telling players to start saving now. They weren't financially prepared the last time around, and a lot of guys who didn't squirrel enough away got vocal about a deal getting done. The owners had all the leverage. For the players to get a better deal they're going to have to be prepared to miss games, if not an entire season.

 

[Mr Janny]

Sure. NFL contracts are funny money. Even the "guaranteed" money comes with all sorts of strings attached. Some of it is partially guaranteed, some of it is guaranteed if the player is still on the roster at a certain date, and some of it is guaranteed for injury. It's ridiculous. Running backs are getting worked over worse than anyone because of their relatively short shelf life. Let's say a team drafts an RB late in the first round. They've got control of that player now for five years, and then they can franchise him for a year or maybe two. If the player was 21 coming out of school, that makes him 27 with a ton of wear and tear and at a spot where 30 is the age where decline sets in before he can finally force his way to the open market.

absolutely. Running backs can play their entire careers on rookie contracts nowadays. Unless they are consistently elite, there's not a ton of incentive for teams to give them 2nd contracts.

 

[jbindm]

absolutely. Running backs can play their entire careers on rookie contracts nowadays. Unless they are consistently elite, there's not a ton of incentive for teams to give them 2nd contracts.

Holdout. That's pretty much the only recourse for guys like David Johnson and Zeke Elliott. Get paid while you can.

 

[Mr Janny]

Holdout. That's pretty much the only recourse for guys like David Johnson and Zeke Elliott. Get paid while you can.

agreed. And get trashed by ownership and fans in process.

And I'm not saying that's bad or good. I'm just stating the reality. It's a tough spot for them to be in.

 

[jbindm]

agreed. And get trashed by ownership and fans in process.

And I'm not saying that's bad or good. I'm just stating the reality. It's a tough spot for them to be in.

Yeah. Savvy fans and most teammates would understand, but generally speaking a player is never going to win the PR battle in a holdout.

 

[pulse]

The Cousins situation is pretty unique in that it is a result of the teams/owner screwing themselves and Cousins gambling on it. He had nothing to lose and became the only option when RGIII failed. He went from making a few hundred K to 20 million in one season because the team had to tag him or go with the 3rd string QB. Its a kind of a perfect storm. A team really has to mess up to get themselves in this situation. If a wide receiver does this, the team will just let them go, but a QB is a different story.

 

[jbindm]

The Cousins situation is pretty unique in that it is a result of the teams/owner screwing themselves and Cousins gambling on it. He had nothing to lose and became the only option when RGIII failed. He went from making a few hundred K to 20 million in one season because the team had to tag him or go with the 3rd string QB. Its a kind of a perfect storm. A team really has to mess up to get themselves in this situation. If a wide receiver does this, the team will just let them go, but a QB is a different story.

Yeah, I agree that the Redskins botched this pretty badly. But a consequence of the situation could be more star players looking at the year to year option and deciding to do that if they don't get a long term deal they think is fair. I doubt it would ever become the norm; the game is too violent and too many guys will opt for the up front signing bonus and the illusion of security with a long term deal. But some players might choose to roll the dice on staying healthy and productive. It's an interesting option.

 

[pulse]

Yeah, I agree that the Redskins botched this pretty badly. But a consequence of the situation could be more star players looking at the year to year option and deciding to do that if they don't get a long term deal they think is fair. I doubt it would ever become the norm; the game is too violent and too many guys will opt for the up front signing bonus and the illusion of security with a long term deal. But some players might choose to roll the dice on staying healthy and productive. It's an interesting option.

Yeah I think it's great option. Cousins played it perfectly. In order for it to work though you have to be invaluable enough to the team where they have to put the tag on you or you'll leave. And there's only one tag.