- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 20,536
- Reaction score
- 1
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.bresna said: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.
bosfan said:It's a no brainer Adam and time to sh!t or get off the pot............
bresna said: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.
DaBruinz said: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.
MoLewisrocks said: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.