PDA

View Full Version : Briggs, Samuel Franchised


NEROtheZERO
02-16-2007, 06:52 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/cs-070216briggs,1,7103398.story?coll=chi-sportstop-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true
The Bears, who have in recent years done one of the best jobs in the NFL of holding onto the players they view as team foundations, took another major step in that direction Friday when they placed their franchise tag on linebacker Lance Briggs.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/
The Patriots informed cornerback Asante Samuel today that they are placing the franchise tag on him. Adam Schefter first reported the news on the NFL Network.

Well, I guess that means it is in our best interest to go after Hood or Bly, Clements just priced himself through the roof.

run-david-run
02-16-2007, 06:53 PM
Dreams just died.

GuerillaBlack
02-16-2007, 07:19 PM
Damn, those were my two players I wanted to see in a Texans uni.

Trap_Star
02-16-2007, 07:24 PM
Well, at least Nate Clements will be a free agent. His price just went up more because of NE....Damn you Belichik!!!!..

thetexanator
02-16-2007, 08:03 PM
i hope samuel raises hell in NE.

kiwitexansfan
02-16-2007, 08:16 PM
Briggs being franchised doesn't bother me but Samuels one is a blow because of the impact on the rest of the CB market.

Its going to cost us much more to sign one now, maybe this pushes us towards drafting one early rounds in the draft, maybe with our 2.

infantrycak
02-16-2007, 08:30 PM
The sky isn't falling. Clements is a one time (2004) pro-bowler. He isn't Champ Bailey and adjusted for NFL inflation won't or shouldn't command money like Champ. He will get paid as a top end guy but this isn't a throw the bank at the guy situation.

Insideop
02-16-2007, 09:00 PM
Neither one being franchised should bother/surprise any of us. We didn't have the money to get them anyway. But it does raise the stakes on Clements and the ones after him. JMHO!

dirty steve
02-16-2007, 11:03 PM
Briggs being franchised doesn't bother me but Samuels one is a blow because of the impact on the rest of the CB market.

Its going to cost us much more to sign one now, maybe this pushes us towards drafting one early rounds in the draft, maybe with our 2.
true. this really drives up nate clements price if you want to be a player for his services. keith at HPF had a great article about the possibilty of signing clements and making economical improvements along the o-line and d-line.

V Man
02-17-2007, 07:55 AM
i hope samuel raises hell in NE.

I was wondering that, I think I read somewhere that he and his agent didn't want to be franchised.

infantrycak
02-17-2007, 08:17 AM
We didn't have the money to get them anyway.

Where does this oft repeated opinion come from? The issue on signing someone isn't really cap as much as willingness to shell out signing bonus. At least one report has Clements wanting an $18 mil signing bonus. Fine, that and $2.5 (no that isn't unrealistically low--the year Peyton got his signing bonus he took a league minimum $535 k base as did Champ Bailey at $540 k followed by $1 mil in year 2) in base gets you a cap hit of $5.5 mil on a 6 year deal.

kastofsna
02-17-2007, 10:14 AM
nate clements just got richer than Angola.

NEROtheZERO
02-17-2007, 02:39 PM
I was wondering that, I think I read somewhere that he and his agent didn't want to be franchised.

The agent for Asante Samuel said his client is not upset about the Patriots placing the franchise tag on him.

"We don't look at it as a bad thing," Alonzo Shavers said on Friday night. "This is a step in the process in working toward a long-term deal."

Asked if Samuel would hold out, Shavers said: "That is not our intention at all."

dbspi
02-18-2007, 01:20 PM
I had really wanted to see Briggs, Samuel or Clements in Texans uniform next year.