The Patriots, with an 11-5 record, officially miss the playoffs

[Chris]

absolutely not true. If he is franchised by the pats, he must sign the one year deal or not play (that was asnte's problem) he signs the one year deal. Then pats can than trade him, but he's under no obligation to then sign a long term contract with the next team he's on, only his one year contract must be served. You can assume as part of trade negotiations that he agrees to, but he is under no obligation to make the pats lives easier by taking a longer but cheaper per year deal (which is what he will get).

you are correct, but that isnt how it happens.  The teams generally negotiate the contract while also in the trade negotiations.  because ultimately, a franchised player will get a pretty hefty long term deal from the team, and that is going to be cassells goal. if they franchise him, whoever is a trade partner (assuming their is a trade partner) will work out a long term deal with him.
[/quote]

Where are you guys finding this information on the franchise tag?  I have been doing some research online, and all I have read is that if a non-exclusive franchise offer is made, it just means that the team has the right to match any offer from another club.  There is nothing about him needing to sign the one year deal.  

Is there a good site with information about this (like the CBA FAQ site for the NBA)?

[nickagneta]

absolutely not true. If he is franchised by the pats, he must sign the one year deal or not play (that was asnte's problem) he signs the one year deal. Then pats can than trade him, but he's under no obligation to then sign a long term contract with the next team he's on, only his one year contract must be served. You can assume as part of trade negotiations that he agrees to, but he is under no obligation to make the pats lives easier by taking a longer but cheaper per year deal (which is what he will get).

you are correct, but that isnt how it happens.  The teams generally negotiate the contract while also in the trade negotiations.  because ultimately, a franchised player will get a pretty hefty long term deal from the team, and that is going to be cassells goal. if they franchise him, whoever is a trade partner (assuming their is a trade partner) will work out a long term deal with him.

Where are you guys finding this information on the franchise tag?  I have been doing some research online, and all I have read is that if a non-exclusive franchise offer is made, it just means that the team has the right to match any offer from another club.  There is nothing about him needing to sign the one year deal.  

Is there a good site with information about this (like the CBA FAQ site for the NBA)?
[/quote]
I just posted the NFLPA bylaws on the subject

[Chris]

Actually how the Franchise tag works is that the club tenders the player a contract as a Franchised Player with all the ramifications that that entails such as salary paid, guarantees involved and so on. The team then is given time to negotiate in good faith with the player to settle upon a longer term contract or the player can accept the tendered offer and be guaranteed the salary for one year regardless of whether the team cuts him or not.

Players who want to explore the free agent market usually despise this because they feel the club is impinging upon their rights to go out and sign a much longer term contract with major security whereever they might like to play. However, in many cases if a player wants to stay with his club it is perceived as just a fall back guarantee option until the inevitable longer term deal is completed.

It almost never happens that a player is offered the Franchise tender and then immediatelt accepts as the team, the player's agent and other teams can negotiate trades, trade compensation, longer term contracts and other contractual things.

So, it is possible for the Patriots to franchise Cassel and then negotiate with his agent until a deal could be reached that would satisfy both Matt's and the Patriots' needs. A 5 year $55 million contract that gives Matt a $15 million signing bonus, a very lucrative first year salary and then a structure that makes it palatable for them to trade Matt if Tom comes back healthy either next year or the year after is not only a possible scenario it is also the most likely considering the uncertainty of Brady's status.

Matt Cassel does not have to immediately accept the franchise tender. Sorry Crownsy but you are wrong there. Here is the NFLPA bylaws on the matter:

http://www.nflplayers.com/user/template.aspx?fmid=181&lmid=231&pid=540&type=c

As much it is unusual for this scenario to occur it is also a very unusual circumstance we are dealing with. First Cassel loves the Pats and if brady isn't going to be available would love to stay. But he understands that he isn't Tom Brady and if he comes back Matt won't be needed. The Pats also understand that Cassel has grown and deserves his time to start for a team. If Tom's not available then they want Matt. This is not the usual contentious negotiating that usually goes on with these designations. There is a clear understanding between the parties of what's best for all involved.

I say the Pats will franchise him, negotiate in good faith with him for a longer term deal and if Tom is showing great progress by draft day will make the trade for a pick and if Brady isn't then cassel will sign.

Thanks Nick, I missed this post before.  This is how I understood it too (I just couldn't articulate it as well).

[yall hate]

absolutely not true. If he is franchised by the pats, he must sign the one year deal or not play (that was asnte's problem) he signs the one year deal. Then pats can than trade him, but he's under no obligation to then sign a long term contract with the next team he's on, only his one year contract must be served. You can assume as part of trade negotiations that he agrees to, but he is under no obligation to make the pats lives easier by taking a longer but cheaper per year deal (which is what he will get).

you are correct, but that isnt how it happens.  The teams generally negotiate the contract while also in the trade negotiations.  because ultimately, a franchised player will get a pretty hefty long term deal from the team, and that is going to be cassells goal. if they franchise him, whoever is a trade partner (assuming their is a trade partner) will work out a long term deal with him.

This is quoting me...but the quotes are all screwy.  I wrote the second part, not the first...lol

[Donoghus]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

[crownsy]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

any chance we can get a home game vs. INDY some time in the next decade?

[Donoghus]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

any chance we can get a home game vs. INDY some time in the next decade?

Ahh...its just reverse karma.  For years, they were always playing the Pats in Foxboro.

[crownsy]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

any chance we can get a home game vs. INDY some time in the next decade?

Ahh...its just reverse karma.  For years, they were always playing the Pats in Foxboro.

I saw an article on that which pointed out that really, the Pats and colts have no buisness playing a regular season game once a eyar under the NFL scheduling guidelines, since they just happen to always be on the schedule.

I mean, i personaly could care less, I love those games, and the NFL obvously loves the money and hype, it is funny though how now, every year, they schedule us an out of divsion game against the colts, which is technicaly against the rules.

similar article-

http://www.sunjournal.com/story/289971-3/LocalSports/PatsColts_game_isnt_cold_case_just_yet/

[Donoghus]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

any chance we can get a home game vs. INDY some time in the next decade?

Ahh...its just reverse karma.  For years, they were always playing the Pats in Foxboro.

I saw an article on that which pointed out that really, the Pats and col have no buisness playing a regular season game once a eyar under the NFL scheduling guidelines, since they just happen to always be on the schedule.

I mean, i personaly could care less, I love those games, and the NFL obvously loves the money and hype, it is funny though how now, every year, they schedule us an out of divsion game against the colts, which is technicaly against the rules.

similar article-

http://ww.sunjournal.com/story/289971-3/LocalSports/PatsColts_game_isnt_cold_case_just_yet/

Well, the AFC opponents are rotated every year so the Pats just happen to play the AFC South next season.  So, they were gonna play the Colts regardless.  Also, the Pats also play their contemporaries in their conference so since they finished 2nd this year, they'll face the other AFC teams that finished 2nd in their division.  The NFC opponents are also rotated by division. The last few years, the Pats and Colts have both finished 1st in their divisions so that's why they keep playing each playing each other every year.  Its not a case of the NFL just scheduling it for the sakes of ratings or something.  Its legitimate scheduling according to the NFL's current scheduling procedures.

[Cman]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

any chance we can get a home game vs. INDY some time in the next decade?

Ahh...its just reverse karma.  For years, they were always playing the Pats in Foxboro.

I saw an article on that which pointed out that really, the Pats and col have no buisness playing a regular season game once a eyar under the NFL scheduling guidelines, since they just happen to always be on the schedule.

I mean, i personaly could care less, I love those games, and the NFL obvously loves the money and hype, it is funny though how now, every year, they schedule us an out of divsion game against the colts, which is technicaly against the rules.

similar article-

http://ww.sunjournal.com/story/289971-3/LocalSports/PatsColts_game_isnt_cold_case_just_yet/

Well, the AFC opponents are rotated every year so the Pats just happen to play the AFC South next season.  So, they were gonna play the Colts regardless.  Also, the Pats also play their contemporaries in their conference so since they finished 2nd this year, they'll face the other AFC teams that finished 2nd in their division.  The NFC opponents are also rotated by division. The last few years, the Pats and Colts have both finished 1st in their divisions so that's why they keep playing each playing each other every year.  Its not a case of the NFL just scheduling it for the sakes of ratings or something.  Its legitimate scheduling according to the NFL's current scheduling procedures.

Yeah, but it still sucks that we have to play them in Indy year after year....

[crownsy]

On paper, Pats 2009 schedule is brutal.

Home- BUF, NYJ, MIA, BAL, JAX, TEN, ATL, CAR

Away- BUF, NYJ, MIA, DEN, IND, HOU, NO, TB

any chance we can get a home game vs. INDY some time in the next decade?

Ahh...its just reverse karma.  For years, they were always playing the Pats in Foxboro.

I saw an article on that which pointed out that really, the Pats and col have no buisness playing a regular season game once a eyar under the NFL scheduling guidelines, since they just happen to always be on the schedule.

I mean, i personaly could care less, I love those games, and the NFL obvously loves the money and hype, it is funny though how now, every year, they schedule us an out of divsion game against the colts, which is technicaly against the rules.

similar article-

http://ww.sunjournal.com/story/289971-3/LocalSports/PatsColts_game_isnt_cold_case_just_yet/

Well, the AFC opponents are rotated every year so the Pats just happen to play the AFC South next season.  So, they were gonna play the Colts regardless.  Also, the Pats also play their contemporaries in their conference so since they finished 2nd this year, they'll face the other AFC teams that finished 2nd in their division.  The NFC opponents are also rotated by division. The last few years, the Pats and Colts have both finished 1st in their divisions so that's why they keep playing each playing each other every year.  Its not a case of the NFL just scheduling it for the sakes of ratings or something.  Its legitimate scheduling according to the NFL's current scheduling procedures.

oh come on man, its absolutely a money thing. that games consistanly the highest rated regular season game of the year.

And there's nothing wrong with that, the NFL is a business.