Welcome to PatsFans.com

Now we can fanchise Moss

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by javajunky, Aug 29, 2007.

  1. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    I have the feeling the Pats really didn't give into Samual on next year's fanchise tag. The tag is a more importent tool for future negotiations with Moss. You almost always tag the Hall of Fame Player first.
  2. Michigan Dave

    Michigan Dave Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,382
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    Doubtful. I can see us trying to re-sign him, but can't imagine using the franchise tag.
  3. Mike the Brit

    Mike the Brit Minuteman Target PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    145
    Ratings:
    +301 / 2 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    If this post isn't intended to be ironic, I think there must be something other than java in your system.
  4. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    Oh yeah, cause what we'd want is a disgruntled Moss. There's one player we know will dog it if he feels he has to. No, our best bet with him is to keep him happy, and if that's no longer to our benefit, let him go.
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2007
  5. patsgo

    patsgo Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    you might see belicheck rotate gay into the mix to keep his snaps down he can always say he wasnt ready, especially early on because of the hold out and well again be able to franchise him , he always misses a few games due to injury anyway
  6. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    Foolish children. You don't tag Moss to sign him, but to trade him.
  7. Pat_Nasty

    Pat_Nasty Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    550
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    Seriously, dude... nobody is going to trade for an unhappily-tagged Randy Moss.

    That's like sticking a bunch of wolverines in a cage, shaking it vigorously, and then trying to get someone to give you $20 bucks for it.
  8. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    We did. We traded for Randy Moss, lest you forget.
  9. whoisjbp

    whoisjbp Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2007
    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    We don't pay Moss even close to 8 mil. Why franchise a guy that we
    a) can get rid of if he plays poorly
    b) if he plays well trade for younger talent?
  10. smg93

    smg93 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    1,809
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    I thought Moss had a contract for more than one year? Is it just for this year? If it's for multiple years, how do you franchise him? don't you just franchise players who are free agents?
  11. Flying Fungi

    Flying Fungi Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    except that Randy specifically agreed to renegotiate his contract for the Patriots to get the hell out of Oakland

    that does not equate with 'unhappy-tagged Moss'
  12. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    Moss only has a one year deal, we ripped up the old one. Also, we are talking about next year's fanchise tag.
  13. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    In terms of leverage it is. Your statement is telling me you are missing the point.
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2007
  14. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    You title your thread with a question, I assume to gather people's input. Then you respond to their input by calling them "Foolish children" because they didn't agree with your preconceived notion.

    Brilliant!!

    This isn't ESPN or CBSsportsline. ;)
  15. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    I didn't start the sarcasm. Read between the lines.
  16. Flying Fungi

    Flying Fungi Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    actually, it isn't the same thing

    Randy Moss has already negotiated with the Patriots in good faith.

    There is no supporting argument for this NEP FO using the franchise in this circumstance. It would irritate Moss, and it would be counterproductive.

    But feel free to disagree for the sake of disagreeing.
  17. mgcolby

    mgcolby Woohoo, I'm a VIP!!! PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Messages:
    5,606
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    You are missing the point. The Pats took a flyer on him with their extra 4th round pick in a week draft. Believing that they have a locker room environment that can keep him in check and he tore up his contract to come here. Oakland wanted him gone and a perfect match was born.

    Now, if you tag Moss that means you want him to stay or you are just trying to get a pick for him and/or your preliminary numbers were far off. If you want him to stay then most likely a long term deal will/would get done without the tag. How many teams in the league do you think truly believe that they have a locker room strong enough to support Moss? And how many of those teams do you think would be willing to give up a draft pick and insane money to get him?
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2007
  18. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    23,508
    Likes Received:
    553
    Ratings:
    +1,394 / 15 / -11

    Disable Jersey

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    a contender for the worst 2007 off-season thread
  19. javajunky

    javajunky Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    Do you have any evidence that we can't tag Moss?

    Was not this board talking about the trade value for Samual by using the franchise tag as leverage?

    If the team does not plan to resign Moss, it would be foolish for the team not to look into getting compensation for Moss .
  20. fleabassist1

    fleabassist1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,104
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Re: Now we can fanchise Moss.

    I did not realize that Moss brought all the Junkies with him!?

    HOF Player: T. Brady
    Never will be HOF Player: Randy Moss

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>