Can someone who KNOWS clarify the legality of tag-and-trade?

[RayClay]

Those rules are actually a simplification of the CBA, which is posted in its entirety on NFLPlayers.com. [You can browse it section-by-section here; near the upper left is a link to download a 3MB PDF file.]

In any case, this provision in Article XIV, on contracts in general, is the closest I can find in the CBA to such a rule:

(b) A Club extending a Required Tender must, for so long as that Tender is extended, have a good faith intention to employ the player receiving the Tender at the Tender compensation level during the upcoming season. It shall be deemed to be a violation of this provision if, while the tender is outstanding, a Club insists that such a player agree to a Player Contract at a compensation level during the upcoming season below that of the Required Tender amount.

That settles that. As long as they don't try to weasel out of paying him 14.6 mil, they are in compliance. Of course they can trade him to avoid that possibility.

 

[BradyManny]

Is there a rule that you cannot tag a player and trade them, or tag them in order to trade them?
There is RAMPANT speculation, even people talking about teams filing grievances against with the league, and speculation that BB (aka scummy rule breaker) will just lie to pretend that wasn't his intention.

Can someone PLEASE once and for all clarify and show where this RULE exists?

I'm guessing Miguel would be the authority.

Please do not respond with opinion, guess or uncertainty.
Cousin's girlfriends uncle's neighbors bosses barber does not count as authority.

Cassel signing the tender makes the point a moot one. He's under contract for 2009 with the New England Patriots, we can do whatever we want with him now.

 

[Rob0729]

What cards does Cassel no longer hold?

He can still block a trade with any team by refusing to sign a long-term contract to consumate the deal.

That's a pretty powerful card AND as a fall back he gave himself the assurance of at least $14.65 million for this season ALONE - creating a worst case scenario where he collects more in 2009 and 2010 when he'd go back into free agency (or tagged again at a 10-20% hike) and get another upfront guaranteed signing bonus... likely much more than he'd be getting guranteed for the first two years if he signs a long-term contract with the Pats or another team this year.

As I said all along, it made sense for Cassel to sign the tender from a money perspective. I still think he wants to start and that means accepting a trade to another team - but he's made it clear he's not about to accept a discount for doing so. I can't really blame him for that.

Well, he does lose the power to block a trade for a team that is willing to roll the dice and have Cassel on the roster for one year and $14.65 million. Highly unlikely that it would happen, but team desperate enough to win now might do it and roll the dice that they can either tag Cassel next year or convince him to sign a long term deal at some point after he is traded and before he becomes a free agent.

 

[Rob0729]

BTW, the only one who can initiate a grievance in this case would be Cassel and I don't see it happening even if he does have the ability to after he signed the tender.

 

[mgteich]

1) The risk would be very short term. There is no trade worth anything if Cassel doesn't cooperate. I am only suggesting that Cassel should have waited until the week after the beginning of free agency to sign.

2) This option should have been listed by me.

3) Why should Cassel settle for less? To sign, he must believe that no one would pay two firsts (that was subject to check) or that he believes the market is so good that he will getter a better contract deal with an expanded list of teams, even if the patriots get to veto any contract. This position trusts the patriots to make a deal that is best for Cassel. What if the patriots wait a couple of months to get more information on Brady, and then deal with the diminished list of bidders? Is Cassel really better off? What part of "this is a business" does he not understand?

There are several other possibilities that you ingore....

1.) Concern that the team would rescind

2.) The possibility that a deal has already been made in principle

3.) The likely reality that the team has been forthright about their intentions to trade/keep Cassel, so that the signing was nothing more than a formality.

 

[Fencer]

The way I interpet the wording, the 'good faith' refers strictly to the next line, in attempting to coerce the player to sign a contract for less than the franchise tender. The fact that it expilicitly goes on to specify that a team can still trade the player - and in fact, can even franchise the player with the intention of trading him.

The 'Pats are breaking the rules' because they are 'franchising Cassel with the intent of trading him' is another one of those untrue comments that gets repeated so many times that people assume it must be true.


Edit: Excellent job Joker and ctpatsfan77 digging up that info - thank you.

Agreed. The "good faith intention to employ" is just a "good faith intention to give the full amount of the money to", not a "good faith intention to keep on one's own roster."

 

[Deus Irae]

1) The risk would be very short term. There is no trade worth anything if Cassel doesn't cooperate. I am only suggesting that Cassel should have waited until the week after the beginning of free agency to sign.

He'd have been a complete idiot to have done that. I get the impression that Cassel is not a complete idiot.

3) Why should Cassel settle for less? To sign, he must believe that no one would pay two firsts (that was subject to check) or that he believes the market is so good that he will getter a better contract deal with an expanded list of teams, even if the patriots get to veto any contract. This position trusts the patriots to make a deal that is best for Cassel. What if the patriots wait a couple of months to get more information on Brady, and then deal with the diminished list of bidders? Is Cassel really better off? What part of "this is a business" does he not understand?

This is either a red herring being tossed out by you, or you completely misunderstand the mechanics of the situation.

 

[Pat_the_Patriot]

It's not a question of his perceived value, it's a question of whether he felt that a team would offer two firsts for him.

... OR, it's that someone placed an offer at more than $14M GUAR. in front of him.... and he took the opportunity to be set for life... why wouldn't he sign it?

 

[Pat_the_Patriot]

Cassel signing the tender makes the point a moot one. He's under contract for 2009 with the New England Patriots, we can do whatever we want with him now.

Well... technically, yes... but he still controls where he goes... assuming that folks wouldn't trade for a one year deal, he would have to agree to the long term contract as part of the deal... so he still has say on where he ends up, no?

 

[maverick4]

BTW, the only one who can initiate a grievance in this case would be Cassel and I don't see it happening even if he does have the ability to after he signed the tender.

Previous posts indicate that the 'good faith' aspect is already satisfied, and with the comment above, it appears we can trade him as soon as is allowed without worrying about any league hang-ups.

 

[Synovia]

It seems that Cassel had little faith that he is worth a solid contract in the market place and two firsts. He could have waited and had all the cards in his hand.

He has to sign the tender to be traded anyways. Absolutely nothing has changed.

 

[mgteich]

A team like Minny or the jets could have sent two firsts to the patriots for Cassel, without a trade.

He has to sign the tender to be traded anyways. Absolutely nothing has changed.

 

[Synovia]

1

3) Why should Cassel settle for less? To sign, he must believe that no one would pay two firsts

Or that he believes teams will be willing to pay more $$ when not giving up 2 firsts.

 

[Synovia]

A team like Minny or the jets could have sent two firsts to the patriots for Cassel, without a trade.

Right, but 2 firsts is a lot. Has anyone actually ever been signed out of a Franchise tag, for the 2 firsts? I can't think of any.

 

[Funktopus]

Right, but 2 firsts is a lot. Has anyone actually ever been signed out of a Franchise tag, for the 2 firsts? I can't think of any.

I think that Galloway was from SEA to DAL, but i'm not positive.

Funny how after being set straight about the Tagging rules that BB's statement about looking forward to working with Matt in 2009 looks directed at Cassel to maybe be resonable in negotiating a contract with a new team else he'll be competing with Brady for a starting role in 2009.

btw, someone set me straight on this because there seems to be a lot of moving parts. A potential Cassel suitor negotiates at the same time with the Pats for compensation AND Cassel for compensation (assuming they want a long term deal in place).

-F

 

[Synovia]

btw, someone set me straight on this because there seems to be a lot of moving parts. A potential Cassel suitor negotiates at the same time with the Pats for compensation AND Cassel for compensation (assuming they want a long term deal in place).

-F

essentially. A trade would be contingent on cassel signing long term.

 

[Funktopus]

essentially. A trade would be contingent on cassel signing long term.

Then, the message from BB to MC about working with you in 09 was that we'd be happy to see you on the Pats backing up Brady if you want to engage in Scott Boras-like contract negotiations. At least that's me reading between the lines...

-F

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Then, the message from BB to MC about working with you in 09 was that we'd be happy to see you on the Pats backing up Brady if you want to engage in Scott Boras-like contract negotiations. At least that's me reading between the lines...

-F

Well, they don't exactly want to be on the hook for $14.6M, either. . . .

 

[maverick4]

Basically Cassel is going to work out a deal and then come to the Pats to approve and execute. This is going to be a very smooth process. Cassel is working with us amicably, and he has lots of suitors. This should go down in a neat, win-win process.

 

[BPF]

Great stuff here. I think Cassel signing the tender will make the process move quicker and tells me that he is very eager to do that. He wants to get with a team, attend all the camps to make sure he is successful this upcoming season.

I think he and his agent played it safe, which in this case is also the wisest tactical move. Dunn wanted to make sure his client got the $14.5 mil while also ensuring the process would move to a resolution quicker rather than later because the compensation is not exorbitant in the form of two 1st Rd picks.