Colts Franchise Tag Freeney

[Miguel]

The thing is that the broadcast rights jumped exponentially in 1998. Fox broke the bank in 1993 and paid at the time that $395 million a year for the NFC rights, ABC paid $230 million, NBC paid $217 million, and ESPN and TNT paid a total of $255 million for the Sunday Night games. The total compensation was $1.1 billion a year.

In 1998, Fox paid $550 million a year, ABC paid $550 million a year, CBS paid $500 million a year, and ESPN paid $600 million a year under the new contract for a total of $$2.2 billion a year. So the TV revenues doubled.

In 2006, the new TV deals have CBS paying $622 million a year, Fox paying $712 million a year, ESPN paying $1.1 billion a year to get Monday Night Football, and NBC paying $650 billion year for a total of $3.1 billon. So the increase on this contract was slightly less than the deal in 1998. So no one should have expected more than a one or two year massive increase in the cap.

Your 3.1 billion number does not match with the numbers provided on page 2
http://www.nflpa.org/pdfs/NewsAndEvents/TheAudible/Mar06Audible.pdf

 

[Rob0729]

Your 3.1 billion number does not match with the numbers provided on page 2
http://www.nflpa.org/pdfs/NewsAndEvents/TheAudible/Mar06Audible.pdf

My numbers are well documented and supported as fact in a number of publications. I looked at a number of different sources before I put together my post. I didn't pull those numbers out of the blue. There were several sources that had that same exact information. Here are just some sources that support my facts.

The only thing I can think of is that your article's numbers includes DirecTV and the NFL Network and other revenues. But the free networks only upped their contracts by a small amount this time around. And if ESPN didn't stupidily outbid everyone for a product that was watered down by the league, the overall broadcast package increase probably would have been about 25% from the last contract. It ended up being about 45% based soley on a bloated ESPN contract that represented about 60% of the total increase of the last Network contract.

So again, it was dumb luck for the league that ESPN would overpay to get the spotlight game of the week only to have the league pull the rug out from under them and make the Sunday game the spotlight game.


http://www.answers.com/topic/nfl-on-cbs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_on_CBS
http://www.pressboxonline.com/story.cfm?id=731
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1918761
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34844-2004Nov8.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/04/19/MNGO4CB6UN1.DTL
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7548671/
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0FCL/is_4_33/ai_110312195
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2006-07-13-hiestand-weekend_x.htm
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/04/18/sports/s140430D02.DTL
http://tv.zap2it.com/tveditorial/tve_main/1,1002,271|94776|1|,00.html

 

[coltsfan]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

Best player on defense? Im pretty sure once Bob Sanders got healthy, the defense won the Super Bowl.

OK. But I'd like to see Bob play like that for a full season. He's basically played one full season in '05, and a quarter of a season and playoff run last year. Freeney has played five full seasons and playoff runs.

 

[Yankees/Colts]

Re: Polian agrees that the Colts are screwed: A theory

Best player on defense? Im pretty sure once Bob Sanders got healthy, the defense won the Super Bowl.

They played very well, but that's obviously hyperbole.

Also, perhaps someone has the numbers, but as I recall, the ypc on runs to Freeney's side are by far the lowest for the Colts. Freeney may not get the tackle, yet, with being in the backfield so quickly, is still very disruptive to the play. Freeney is also very good at containing the run. The Colts ran line stunts to Freeney's side in the playoffs where he contained and consistently pushed the runner to the stunting players. The "running past Freeney" deal is a myth. The Colts have always been excellent against runs to the perimeter. It was power backs, right up the gut, who killed them. But fortunately, this was remedied as well.

The thing with Pats fans is that they cannnot seem to fathom or grasp anything outside of their team's structure or philosophy. The Colts are simply structured differently than your team. The Colt defense obviously operates differently than your own. It's as if they want to take the round Colts peg and continue beating it into the square Patriot hole in order to analyze the Colts. Both methods work. Well, at least your method used to work.

And, when they say that they don't know if we should sign Freeney because he's 27(which is laughable) or this or that, it really means they hope we don't sign him because they know he's a dominant force. Because he is. Freeney can take over and change a game in the blink of an eye.

 

[Peytonsbetter]

Did you have to re-sign him because it's in the best interest of the Colts success, or did you have to re-sign him because he's a fan favorite? If you believe it's the former, than we disagree. Which is fine. I still have a hard time believing that a Colts fan who can emotionally detatch himself would believe that the amount of money going towards Freeney wouldn't be better served upgrading the linebacker and cornerback situations. Pass rushers are nice, but downgrading from a (numbers theoretical) 12 sack a year guy to an 8 sack a year guy is worth it if you can strengthen the middle of the defense. The middle of the D is much more important than the edges, especially in the Tampa-2.

I might be the biggest Troy Brown fan in the world, but the Patriots certainly don't have to re-sign him. Or anybody, really, other than Brady and Seymour.

Good point, I can definitely see where you're coming from. IMO, it's kind of a catch-22. Freeney's pass rush improves our secondary b/c they don't have to cover as long. W/o him coming around the corner, teams would have much more success passing the ball.

 

[everlong]

Schefter is reporting on NFL Network that Freeney wants a $30M Signing Bonus and an average of over 9M/year.

Stick that in your salary cap and smoke it.

 

[RyanTheColtsFan]

Hey Freeney lovers. A friend of mine, MD, posted some very interesting stats. Take a look:

Mathis (2004-2006): 125 tackles, 31.5 sacks, 18 forced fumbles
Freeney (2004-2006): 86 tackles, 32.5 sacks, 14 forced fumbles

Mathis signed a five-year contract last June for a TOTAL of $30 million. And that's what Freeney wants just as a signing bonus.

Let him walk next season.

 

[everlong]

Hey Freeney lovers. A friend of mine, MD, posted some very interesting stats. Take a look:

Mathis (2004-2006): 125 tackles, 31.5 sacks, 18 forced fumbles
Freeney (2004-2006): 86 tackles, 32.5 sacks, 14 forced fumbles

Mathis signed a five-year contract last June for a TOTAL of $30 million. And that's what Freeney wants just as a signing bonus.

Let him walk next season.

I agree for that money the Colts would be much better off using the money elsewhere.

Patrick Kearney is looking for similar money to Freeney, he's not worth it either.

 

[GHOSTOFSAMGASH]

Schefter is reporting on NFL Network that Freeney wants a $30M Signing Bonus and an average of over 9M/year.

Stick that in your salary cap and smoke it.

haha hes worth it too

 

[solman]

Schefter is reporting on NFL Network that Freeney wants a $30M Signing Bonus and an average of over 9M/year.

Stick that in your salary cap and smoke it.

If you believe that Freeney merits an exclusive Franchise tag (I don't), then this is a gift. If he hit the open market, he'd get more than this.

If thats all he's asking for, the Colts can probably reduce the bonus to $25M and spread it over two seasons.

Year Salary Bonus Cap Hit
2007 1M 15M 3.5M
2008 1M 10M 5.5M
2009 5M 00M 9.5M
2010 6M 00M 10.5M
2011 7M 00M 11.5M
2012 9M 00M 13.5M

If Freeney returns to his 2005 form and stays there, this sort of deal might even let the Colts remain competitive in 2008.

If not, he'll be yet another albatross around Polian's neck.

 

[everlong]

If you believe that Freeney merits an exclusive Franchise tag (I don't), then this is a gift. If he hit the open market, he'd get more than this.

If thats all he's asking for, the Colts can probably reduce the bonus to $25M and spread it over two seasons.

Year Salary Bonus Cap Hit
2007 1M 15M 3.5M
2008 1M 10M 5.5M
2009 5M 00M 9.5M
2010 6M 00M 10.5M
2011 7M 00M 11.5M
2012 9M 00M 13.5M

If Freeney returns to his 2005 form and stays there, this sort of deal might even let the Colts remain competitive in 2008.

If not, he'll be yet another albatross around Polian's neck.

He's not worth an exclusive tag, the bonus, or that salary. He may have gotten more on the open market because this is going to be an MLB-esque year but is he worth almost 2X Colvin per year?

 

[solman]

He's not worth an exclusive tag, the bonus, or that salary. He may have gotten more on the open market because this is going to be an MLB-esque year but is he worth almost 2X Colvin per year?

I agree 100%, he's not worth it.

 

[patsfanofNC12]

No surprise they franchise Freeny. He is a solid if not elite player. Even though he is a little small.

 

[Yankees/Colts]

Hey Freeney lovers. A friend of mine, MD, posted some very interesting stats. Take a look:

Mathis (2004-2006): 125 tackles, 31.5 sacks, 18 forced fumbles
Freeney (2004-2006): 86 tackles, 32.5 sacks, 14 forced fumbles

Mathis signed a five-year contract last June for a TOTAL of $30 million. And that's what Freeney wants just as a signing bonus.

Let him walk next season.

Did your friend post any interesting stats on the number of games missed by Bob Sanders?

Robert Mathis cannot carry Freeney's jock. He would get nowhere near those numbers without Freeney drawing all the attention. It's the same deal as it was with Edgerrin James. Edgerrin James looked pretty damn good behind Peyton when the defenses were scared crapless of Peyton and the holes were 3 miles wide as a result. He then goes to Arizona and looks like one of the worst RBs in the league. Take Freeney away and Mathis' party ends.

 

[coltsfan]

Hey Freeney lovers. A friend of mine, MD, posted some very interesting stats. Take a look:

Mathis (2004-2006): 125 tackles, 31.5 sacks, 18 forced fumbles
Freeney (2004-2006): 86 tackles, 32.5 sacks, 14 forced fumbles

Mathis signed a five-year contract last June for a TOTAL of $30 million. And that's what Freeney wants just as a signing bonus.

Let him walk next season.

Why are you comparing him to another Colts player? If Polian would have let Mathis become an unrestricted free agent right now, he would be commanding much more than what we got him for last year. Rather than using Mathis' contract to degrade Freeney, you should be happy that Polian had the foresight to extend Mathis last summer.

They are both hosses, I'm glad we have them both. As Polian said a couple of weeks ago, "we will be OK as long as we have #18, #93, and #98." And Y/C does make a good point in that Freeney gets the double teams and all the attention from opposing offenses. You can bet that when every team gameplans the Colts' defense it starts and ends with Freeney.