Just curious for some opinions - has anyone speculated whether the increased tag usage the past couple of years (up from 7 in 2007 to 12 last year, and 14 this year) has anything to do with the potential uncapped year, or possibly due to teams limiting their longer term salary exposure because of an economic downturn?
It just seemed like a lot of guys that would normally have been either re-signed or left to go in years past got tagged this year, not sure whether there's some economic tie-in, it's random, or there's some other factor that I've overlooked (like possibly tagging guys for trade in what seems to be a very deep draft).
Thoughts?
with an uncapped year, potentially in 2010.
Wouldn't it also be ironic if we have a strike in 2010, with the opening of the new Giants Stadium...that would be a bummer.
there were only 3 franchise tagged players (Abraham, Clements, Backus).
Any capologists out there with a theory? Could this also just be the result of teams getting more comfortable with cap management, to the point where a higher, one year salary that offsets the risk of a longer term contract to a player is palatable?
how much this has to do with those rules of an uncapped year such as 6 years before FA eligibility.
But he is busy with combine stuff.
I think.. if there IS a reason, then as others have mentioned the uncapped year is looming. Specifically the six years. Teams are hording guys now, because FA would dry up. Nobody would be available that was drafted from 2005 on, unless they were released.
Part of me thinks it's a bit of a random occurence too.
-A Kicker and a Punter this year, none in '08, one in '07.
-A QB in Cassell, which is very rare and was most likely done for a dual purpose of insurance for Brady and blocking him to Jets.
-Giants using it on Jacobs, first time the club has used it since Jumbo, and with both parties almost seeing it as nothing more than a formality, as they work out a deal that is sure to be done.
-And lastly, the Bucs have a shitload of cap room and need to hit a minimum. What better way than a one time 9M+ hit in '09 on a #1 WR. (Bryant is pissed, btw)
I'm leaning towards more random (Starks tag is a head-scratcher, they don't have a lot of room, so I assume it's like the Jacobs situation)
Well, that's my take, no big strategic, forward-looking financial initative, just dumb luck.
makes a lot of sense for the Giants. He wants a lot of money and a longer contract than we may be willing to give, protected by guaranteed money. We have him for two years now and know the cost up front. We may draft a RB and we can watch how Bradshaw and Ware develop. Who knows maybe we only want BJ for two more years, especially with the injury history and the lack of receiving skills he has shown so far. IMO.
