Welcome to PatsFans.com

A nice FA summary, including AV's choices.

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by Box_O_Rocks, Mar 20, 2006.

  1. Box_O_Rocks

    Box_O_Rocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    Messages:
    20,550
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0

  2. bosfan

    bosfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It's a no brainer Adam and time to sh!t or get off the pot............
  3. bresna

    bresna PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    According to this article, not using the franchise tag is the same thing as "releasing him"?? That's wrong.

    You can only use the tag once and if the Pats had used it on AV, it would have cost them a cool $3 million. They chose not to do that. They didn't release him, they simply did what they were asked to do and that is, not franchise him. This is all AV's doing.
  4. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,060
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +207 / 16 / -38

    #50 Jersey

    I am not 100% sure, but being as this would have been the 3rd time that the Pats had used the Tag on Adam, under the new CBA, I believe it would have required them to pay him the franchise amount for QBs.
  5. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    Unfortunately unless the Pat's add the normal signing bonus to their offer it is a no brainer.
  6. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    The better terminolgy would be they let him walk. And you can use the tag more than once. Adam was tagged in 2001 before signing a 3 year deal that made him the third highest paid at the time by AAV ($1.79M). You can use it as many times as you like except at some point when 120% of the prior years salary exceeds the annual top 5 tag number it gets prohibitively expensive.

    BTW Adam has indicated he didn't ask them not to franchise him again and he would have been OK with playing under the tag again had they chosen that route.
  7. MoLewisrocks

    MoLewisrocks PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2005
    Messages:
    19,949
    Likes Received:
    29
    Ratings:
    +29 / 0 / -0

    They made the dicision not to franchise him weeks before the new CBA was hammered out so it likely wasn't the basis for their decision. And I think that rule may deal with consecutive use of the tag.
  8. DaBruinz

    DaBruinz Pats, B's, Sox PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    24,060
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +207 / 16 / -38

    #50 Jersey

    Mo -
    Yes, they did make that decision preior to the CBA being hammered out officially. However, the CBA discussions had been ongoing for how long? Weeks, months. You don't think that they had an any prior knowledge to the idea that the Franchise clause would be changing?

    If the rule does say 3 consecutive times, so be it. However, what I saw was that it said 3 times. And, just for the record, Adam is the only player that the Pats have franchised recently. And, to my knowledge, it would have been the 3rd time in a row that Adam would have been franchised.

    Not to mention that they supposedly had a "gentlemen's agreement" with AV to not use the franchise tag a 3rd time.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>