Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

What is the rule on the Franchise Tag for New England this year? Let's say that the Raiders put the tag on their Cornerback asomungha (sp?) this year. What if BB decides to top the offer and give up his two first round picks to the raiders, this years and next years.

Problem is, we don't have a first round pick this year, our #7 is actually from SF and wouldn't count. Wouldn't it be hilarious if all we gave up was next years first rounder for a standout cornerback like that guy! Al Davis would be pissed. :D

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

Why would the SF pick not count???

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

If that's the case, then, the Pats would be shut out of signing franchise players altogether (if you can't pay the price, you can't sign the player). My understanding of the rule is that you can use a higher pick, but you can't use a lower one. To use the reverse example: SF holds Indy's first rounder this year. They can not use that to sign a franchise player, because it's robbing the team that used the tag.

Similarly, the Pats can sign at most one second-round tender RFA, unless they'd be willing to give up the #7 pick to do so.

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

I guess my understanding was that the two first round picks would be based on the picks awarded to the team based on their performance on the field and not from trades. Is there wording to the contrary? That's what I'm asking.

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

While in the section dealing with RFAs, I am pretty sure that this CBA portion also applies to franchise players- "Any Club that does not have available, in the upcoming Draft, the selection choice or choices (its own or better choices in the applicable rounds) needed to provide Draft Choice Compensation in the event of a timely First Refusal Exercise Notice may not sign an Offer Sheet in such circumstances." Since the Pats have a 1st round pick better than theirs, they can use the 7th pick and their 2009 1st round pick to compensate the Raiders.

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

The Colts can not sign a franchise player to an offer because they do not have a 1st round pick.

The 49ers can not sign a franchise player to an offer because they do not have a 1st round pick that is better than the pick that originally belonged to them.

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

If they were going to spend that much money, why wouldn't they just keep Asante?

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

Asomugha was drafted with the 31st pick in the 2005 draft. Could

the Pats make a trade drafting down to this pick and then sign him

to an offer sheet? Of course, it might be all for nothing if Oakland

matched the offer.

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

I would rather pay the Raiders CB, this defense needs change. The Raiders cornerback is bigger, more physical and can take on any reciever. Asante is too small and can't out jump bigger recievers.

Re: Franchising Players vs. Loss of draft pick question
 

I would think that the trade down would have to occur at least a week before the draft to involve a 2008 first rounder. If the trade down is done during the draft and the Pats made an offer to Asomugha, then the picks in play would be the 2009 and 2010 first rounders.