Although I don't want Long back at the franchise # or a long term deal like Joe Thomas, we can't just let him walk. There is a line of teams 20 deep that would kill to get him (bears, cards, etc). I think we need to franchise him and then trade him to a team who will sign him to a long term deal.

Are there prohibitve cap implications if we do that (assuming we trade him--I understand if we are stuck with him at the franshise # what that means for our cap). Dolphanmark do you know (or anyone else)?

Bottom line is we can get a high pick for Long, at worst, and letting him go for nothing would be totally dumb. I can't think of a case where a top, young LT was just allowed to walk (where he is still "top" is debatable, but what matters is a bunch of teams really would want him). Although nothing would suprise me with this FO

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

Yes berk it would be a shame to just let him walk.

But I think if we franchise him , noone would give for him whats expected.

Arent they supposed to give a couple of first rounders for franchise players?

EDIT: I think im mistaken on this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2012 10:05AM by samsam3738.

samsam3738 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes berk it would be a shame to just let him
> walk.
>
> But I think if we franchise him , noone would give
> for him whats expected.
>
> Arent they supposed to give a couple of first
> rounders for franchise players?
>
> EDIT: I think im mistaken on this.



I'm not 100% certain with the current CBA but I think it goes more or less like this Sam:


Franchise tags are handed out at the end of the season and before the off-season starts in March.

The team extends a "tender" to the player tagging him for a 1 year salary and securing his rights.

If he signs the tender right away he can't sign with anyone else.

If he signs a long term deal with someone else the team that tendered him can match the deal or let him walk and get two 1st round picks (this year and next) as compensation.




I can't see anyone giving us 2 first round picks for an oft injured, overpaid player in decline.

THE Truth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> samsam3738 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yes berk it would be a shame to just let him
> > walk.
> >
> > But I think if we franchise him , noone would
> give
> > for him whats expected.
> >
> > Arent they supposed to give a couple of first
> > rounders for franchise players?
> >
> > EDIT: I think im mistaken on this.
>
>
>
> I'm not 100% certain with the current CBA but I
> think it goes more or less like this Sam:
>
>
> Franchise tags are handed out at the end of the
> season and before the off-season starts in March.
>
> The team extends a "tender" to the player tagging
> him for a 1 year salary and securing his rights.
>
> If he signs the tender right away he can't sign
> with anyone else.
>
> If he signs a long term deal with someone else the
> team that tendered him can match the deal or let
> him walk and get two 1st round picks (this year
> and next) as compensation.
>

thank Man. Appresiate it.


>
>
> I can't see anyone giving us 2 first round picks
> for an oft injured, overpaid player in decline.


I cant see it either. So why not franchise a player that really deserves it.

there is a lot of precedent for teams trading for franchised players taking less than 2 first rounders for them (the teams can work out the competition) and then signing the player to a long term deal worth less than the franchise #. It happened with matt cassell (NE got a 2d rounder and KC signed him to a long term deal that was less than the franchise #), there was talk about GB doing it with matt Flynn, etc. It certainly can be done. The only risk is getting stuck with Long at the franchise #. But that would not be the end of the world to me---give him 1 year to see if he can stay healthy and regain his form, then sign him to a long term deal or let him go.

The worst option of all is letting him just walk.

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> there is a lot of precedent for teams trading for
> franchised players taking less than 2 first
> rounders for them (the teams can work out the
> competition) and then signing the player to a long
> term deal worth less than the franchise #. It
> happened with matt cassell (NE got a 2d rounder
> and KC signed him to a long term deal that was
> less than the franchise #), there was talk about
> GB doing it with matt Flynn, etc. It certainly can
> be done. The only risk is getting stuck with Long
> at the franchise #. But that would not be the end
> of the world to me---give him 1 year to see if he
> can stay healthy and regain his form, then sign
> him to a long term deal or let him go.


Cassell is the only deal like that I can think of.


There are lots of guys like Flynn who had the rumor floated around their pending free agency. Heck, Soliai is one of those guys. We franchised him before the lock out because we were handcuffed by the old CBA. That tag was $12+mill. We thought about doing it again after last season but we let him test free agency instead. When we resigned him a week later it was at $6mill a year.

There is a reason none of those guys like Flynn and got tagged and traded. Teams just don't want to give up picks AND huge cap space for players.



>
> The worst option of all is letting him just walk.


I agree. I was all for trading him after last season ended and it became apparent were weren't in the same neighborhood salary-wise going forward.

But they wanted him on this team. The assumption was he'd get healthy and return to being a star. so worst case you franchise him after this year.

Nobody expected his play to fall off a cliff AND for him to suffer another season ending injury.

If I were the GM I'd offer him a 5 year deal in the 9-11mill per range and I'd structure the signing bonus as 5 equal annual roster bonuses so that it is essentially 5 consecutive 1 year deals where the team can get out without a cap hit if he can't stay healthy or continues for decline.

He might take that, since he's clearly lost leverage and value on the open market this year.

If he doesn't, I bite the bullet and let him walk.

As bad an option as letting him walk is, the absolute worst option is to pay him $90mill for 6 years with a hefty signing bonus that handcuffs him to our roster for then next 4 or 5 years.

No way we can take the chance that it might backfire on us. Jake would probably love it because thats a huge Payday for him. Most don't make $15 Million in a career let alone 1 year. I think he's done in a Dolphins uniform.

I think it impossible that Mia would franchise Long and have to pay the $15M. I don't think they just allow him to walk, either.

Hopefully, he is smart enough to realize that he isn't the player he once was and that no team is going to pay him the big bucks, anymore.

He is still a decent player and has often been said, LTs are hard to find. I think he will sign a cap-friendly deal and remain with Miami.

What could throw a monkey wrench into this whole thing is if Martin plays well. Then it's possible Long could walk, Martin would be the starter, and Mia has to find another RT.

RTs are easier to find than LTs.

berk, I think you're confusing franchising someone with tendering them an offer. Like Truth said, Cassell is the only guy that comes to mind as someone who was franchised then traded (I could be completely wrong on this also?).
I think the only way Jake stays is if we franchise him, we have the cap space to kick the tires for one more season to make sure he either has it or doesn't, yeah it would suck for one season, but we wouldn't be wrecked long term cap-wise. If Ireland doesn't think he has a viable replacement and it would be a good PR move (remember, Ross is a big Michigan booster) he might just do it.

Throw Long a bone. Offer $5mil/year. He's not worth more than that.

It all depends on how Long values himself. Even if we could trade him for a 2nd on a franchise tag , that team is still on the hook to either resign him or pay the 15 mil.

Teams know he is not playing like a pro bowler. He is struggling just as half the LT's in the league are. It's not like they are going to give up a high pick for uncertainty.

Much will depend on what kind of contract Jake wants. I'm not sure that I would want to go through another season with sub par LT play and also with the injury concerns and the drop in physical ability.

The only way I keep him is if he can be an asset as we move him to RT on a lower contract.

It would be much cheaper and probably just as safe to draft a tackle who can play either side.

I guess the jury is in on the Jake Long/Matt Ryan debate. Thanks Bill.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti wrote:I guess the jury is in on the Jake Long/Matt Ryan debate. Thanks Bill.


I won't lie ...i was ok with drafting Jake long because he was definetely a stud coming out of college. But in the back of my mind i knew we needed a QB badly.....And i remember people been pissed for not drafting Matt Ryan..

Aqua And Orange was one of them that i remember.

I remember the debate here was you build a team starting with a QB. And we did not do that.

Hopefully it all changed starting this year.

Oh well... I'd go back and read my posts about Herman Munster and realize Long is done as a Miami Dolphin. His game literally fell apart without the necessary "pharmaceutical augmentation" to keep him glued together.

Funny how someone so big and strong (i.e., dominant) suddenly gets sloppy and shabby. I wonder why? LOL.

The "cornerstone" placed by Parcells is now a certified crumbling sandstone.

But wait. There's More! We could have drafted Matt Ryan and made an aggressive move to get back into R1 and grab Ryan Clady.

Wow man. Like 2 Ryan's in a row!

But at least we landed Patty White in '09 with the R2 we got for JT. That there was some damn fine drafting as well.

We will also be landing a pretty high compensatory pick in 2014 if he signs elsewhere.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We will also be landing a pretty high compensatory
> pick in 2014 if he signs elsewhere.


I always wondered how that worked. I mean other than the fact that NE automatically gets a half dozen selections every year.

I'm sure if we sign an elite WR or cb it will impact what we get for long leaving but who knows?

There is no team that would take Long at $15M for next year.

no kidding, but they could redo the contract in a Long term deal

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> no kidding, but they could redo the contract in a
> Long term deal

Once he accepts the tender, he's on the books for $15.4M in 2013. The franchise and trade works when a guy doesn't want to sign his franchise tender. In this case, Long will jump to sign his franchise tender, because there is no way he could come close to that salary in any other way. That will make it impossible to trade him.

so you are saying if we franchise and trade him and he signs a new deal elsewhere he is on our books for 15mm? that's what i wanted to know.

so best thing would be is he doesnt sign the tnder, but of course he will....

________________________________________________________
The beatings will continue until morale improves.

dolfanmark Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is no team that would take Long at $15M for
> next year.


True but stepping back it is sad. But such is pro football. Jake was great in his day but injuries and age.....

But, on the other hand, making millions a year is more than adequate balancing for the sadness.

Just hope that the money has been saved and/or invested wisely.

I just want to know what EXACLTY the issue is with Long. Injury? Permanent or long term? Loss of strength? desire?

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

Regardless, eesti, him being injured so frequently and at his age, even if the injury is temporary, I doubt any team interested would not exercise extreme wariness in approaching signing him.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just want to know what EXACLTY the issue is with
> Long. Injury? Permanent or long term? Loss of
> strength? desire?


Maybe bignasty's theory about the decline of Long is spot on..................hmmmmmmmmm

Yup, BNF was right about the decline but, as I recall, he never liked
Long in the first place.

IMO, this year Long's off play at times had to do with the complete change in blocking schemes... Longs entire career he played against a position, one guy and his job was to stop him. Now he has to protect an area and make a read of who to block. Teams were able to exploit the gaps in the zone and reads while puttin Long out of position as well as off balance at times... Jake had some issues with adjusting to the zone blocking schemes in his first year in the system...Martin didn't do any better at LT in the zone blocking scheme which he is familiar with from Stanford.. Martin got posterized on Sunday a few times..

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

Chyren year in year out, Jake Long goes up against the best pass rushers in the NFL... Martin got a taste of what that responsibility is really all about..

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche