OT: Sources: Eagles expected to franchise, trade Nick Foles

Status
Not open for further replies.

remydat

Well-known member
I like the idea of Foles suing the NFL to gain leverage and avoid being franchise tagged, and you interpret this as "Foles has leverage because he is franchise tagged".
Another strawman. I was referring to the first point in the paragraph which I already quoted for you. I said nothing about the author's point about suing the NFL.
 

Rory Sparrow

Well-known member
Another strawman. I was referring to the first point in the paragraph which I already quoted for you. I said nothing about the author's point about suing the NFL.
Great article. "First, Foles should take the position that if the Eagles apply the franchise tag, he'll immediately accept it."

I thought we had progressed past this initial level of "iueyedoc idiocy". I guess not. You still have no idea how the franchise tag works.

I imagine Foles being on Lets Make a Deal, and Monty Hall shows him Door #1...it's $25 million franchise tag! Door #2...it's $20 million option year! Door #3...it's $0!

So many "choices"! So much "leverage"!

On a side note, I still like the idea of Foles suing the NFL to gain leverage and avoid being franchise tagged, and you interpret this as "Foles has leverage because he is franchise tagged".
 

remydat

Well-known member
Great article. "First, Foles should take the position that if the Eagles apply the franchise tag, he'll immediately accept it."

I thought we had progressed past this initial level of "iueyedoc idiocy". I guess not. You still have no idea how the franchise tag works.

I imagine Foles being on Lets Make a Deal, and Monty Hall shows him Door #1...it's $25 million franchise tag! Door #2...it's $20 million option year! Door #3...it's $0!

So many "choices"! So much "leverage"!

On a side note, I still like the idea of Foles suing the NFL to gain leverage and avoid being franchise tagged, and you interpret this as "Foles has leverage because he is franchise tagged".
It is amazing you think your mental gymnastics does anything other than make you look stupid. Carry on.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Staff member
If Foles "leverage" is a lawsuit that the NFL would win rather easily..then he has no leverage.
 

remydat

Well-known member
It is amazing that you think the Nick Foles situation requires "mental gymnastics" in the first place. It's not that complicated.
I agree it is not complicated to note that a player can refuse to negotiate a long term deal with certain teams and in doing so possibly influence where he ends up. The fact you are struggling with this concept is truly amazing.
 

FirstTimer

v. 2.0: Fully Modded
Staff member
The Eagles could always non-exclusive tag Foles and really fuck him. Even the transition tag would trip Foles up. He has very little leverage here if the Eagles play this right.
 

WindyCity

Well-known member
I wonder if the trading team would want him off the tag? Are we sure the Jaguars are not cool with 25 million guaranteed for 1 year.

What if the alternative is to guarantee him 50-60-70 million dollars. Teams might prefer Foles on the tag for one season.
 

WindyCity

Well-known member
How many teams are even going to be interested in Foles?

Jags
Maybe Miami

I am not sure why those teams would not just sign Tannehill, Bridgewater or Flacco.
 

Sculpt

Well-known member
I wonder if the trading team would want him off the tag? Are we sure the Jaguars are not cool with 25 million guaranteed for 1 year.

What if the alternative is to guarantee him 50-60-70 million dollars. Teams might prefer Foles on the tag for one season.
a team may prefer to pay him $25m for a 1yr tryout. If he fails, not a big loss. that's smart.

I read Jax, doesn't even have the cap space ($4m over cap) to trade and sign him with the tag ($25m). However, I read a trading team without the cap space can trade for him, then sign him to a 'long term' contract amount that is within their cap at that moment that same day.
 

Sculpt

Well-known member
How many teams are even going to be interested in Foles?

Jags
Maybe Miami

I am not sure why those teams would not just sign Tannehill, Bridgewater or Flacco.
Jags, Denver, Miami and Wash are mentioned.
- I read Jags think they have a SB window now, but they have to cutoff arms & legs cap-wise to afford Foles.
- If Miami owners are really impatient for a winning team (& with Tannehill), they might.
- Wash is stuck paying Smith $70m, and I think they like McCoy/Johnson.
- Denver seems a strong possibility cause they seem to be on the move and can work it out.

Here's a link to a post that lays out team suiters in more detail. http://www.chicitysports.com/forum/showthread.php/101481-OT-Trouble-in-Philly?p=3292432&viewfull=1#post3292432
 

remydat

Well-known member
The Eagles could always non-exclusive tag Foles and really fuck him. Even the transition tag would trip Foles up. He has very little leverage here if the Eagles play this right.
Non exclusive doesn't really fuck him at all. It would still be over 20 million to do so and they would still likely need to trade him before the start of the league year.

A transition tag is even dumber because a team would just offer him a multi-year contract and the Eagles would not be in position to match.
 

remydat

Well-known member
Foles would have some control over a trade. He couldn't be moved until he signed his tender. Foles would effectively have a de facto no-trade clause or veto power since his cooperation would be necessary in order to be dealt to another team.

I faced the unsigned tender trade situation during my agent days. One of the players I helped represent was cornerback Jimmy Hitchcock. The Patriots informed us during the 1998 NFL draft after selecting Tebucky Jones, a safety who would be moved to cornerback, in the first round that a trade with the Ravens had been worked out for Hitchcock. Since Hitchcock didn't want to be dealt to a team that drafted a cornerback in the first round, we advised him to refuse to sign his restricted free agent tender. His refusal killed the trade. Hitchcock subsequently signed his tender for a trade to the Vikings, who hadn't used a high draft choice on a cornerback. The prospect of a team giving up potentially significant draft choice compensation or players should be unappealing to Foles because his new club would be weakened.

Foles quickly signing his tender, which would be in the $25 million range, instead could create a different set of headaches for the Eagles. He and/or his agent could discourage potential trade partners by telling teams there isn't any circumstance that he will sign long-term if acquired because he is going to test free agency in 2020.

Foles' tender would become fully guaranteed when signed. To make matters worse, the Eagles would still be on the hook for the entire amount if Foles was released regardless of how big of a deal he signed with another team. Franchise and transition tenders, once fully guaranteed, don't contain an offset.

Either approach could hinder Foles' trade market. Finding a team willing to take Foles for approximately $25 million next season without assurances that he would sign a long-term contract to prevent him from being an expensive short-term rental could prove to be a difficult task. Cutting in Philadelphia's favor is the relatively weak free-agent quarterback class in which Foles would clearly be the best one available if on the open market. Foles could be franchised again in 2020 for right around $30 million, a CBA mandated 20 percent raise over his 2019 franchise tag.


https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-if-eagles-use-the-franchise-tag-on-nick-foles-heres-a-look-at-possible-risks-rewards/

For the bozos like Rory that think Foles has no leverage. Former player and agent explaining pretty much what I already said. Thanks to the poster who provided to me because they didn't want to get caught up in Rory's stupidity.
 
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-if-eagles-use-the-franchise-tag-on-nick-foles-heres-a-look-at-possible-risks-rewards/

For the bozos like Rory that think Foles has no leverage. Former player and agent explaining pretty much what I already said. Thanks to the poster who provided to me because they didn't want to get caught up in Rory's stupidity.
Rory is neither stupid nor a bozo. And your mysterious benefactor is just a coward too afraid to discuss rationally because Rory might cut his feelings with "sharp remarks" over the Internet.

However, I honestly read the article thinking you may have a point but the article confirms the Eagles have all the decision-making power here and Foles is entirely dependent on what the Eagles will do from here.

Now it does say that "[Foles] ... couldn't be moved until he signed his tender. Foles would effectively have a de facto no-trade clause or veto power since his cooperation would be necessary in order to be dealt to another team."

But this doesn't translate into picking the team of his choice or if there is the right team out there at all. Say he likes none of them. Now, it is just he would either have to sign and get paid to be a backup QB or get paid 0.

Even IF he drags his feet and hopes that his personal "no-go" teams that surface with interest will give up and find something else, he would still have to sign when or IF his "dream" team destination pops up ... BUT the Eagles still have the power of getting what THEY want for him or not. If the Eagles are looking at not wanting to sign a backup to franchise tag then the only factor that heightens the chance of the Eagles making the sweetheart deal to the "right" team that FOLES wants is time (over which he has no leverage either).

Also, the longer it goes, the longer Foles would also be risking injury to Wentz which could inspire PHI to say fuck off to any other team no matter what - which is yet another factor Foles does not have leverage over.

98 Hitchcock is not 2019 Foles so that paragraph lost me as a complete non sequiter.

Then came: "He and/or his agent could discourage potential trade partners by telling teams there isn't any circumstance that he will sign long-term if acquired because he is going to test free agency in 2020."

This doesn't increase his options either. It assumes there are trade partners and also assumes none of the trade partners would be teams he would actually want to start for because that kind of finalized stance would drive them away (just to spite PHI) and wanting to take back any little bit of control.

I mean the article is not wrong here; yeah he could say "Fuck off JAX. I'll QB for you on the tag in 2019 only then in 2020 fuck off" then his "choice" was to be forced to play on a one-year deal for JAX instead of PHI. This alos assumes JAX is cool with that. They may NOT agree at all and Foles is back in square one with PHI: Eagles QB for 25 mil or sit for 0.

Again, you may say that if the RIGHT team comes along he would say "for YOU guys I'll sign the long term deal and I don't mind PHI getting by with this move" but PHI would still win by getting the trade and that depends on that "right" TEAM's interest which Foles will have no leverage over either.

"Foles' tender would become fully guaranteed when signed. To make matters worse, the Eagles would still be on the hook for the entire amount if Foles was released regardless of how big of a deal he signed with another team. Franchise and transition tenders, once fully guaranteed, don't contain an offset."

Which simply means the Eagles would never release him. Great stuff there. What a find.

TLDR: Foles has very little choice here and very few options if PHI franchise tags him: play on 1-year 25 mil tag or sit for 0. Now, he can send signals to teams he likes and ones he doesn't I get that, but he has zero control over what a team would offer PHI and what PHI is looking for in return. If Wentz pulls an MCL playing tennis in April, Foles could face less than zero choice fast.
 
Last edited:

Rory Sparrow

Well-known member
Foles would have some control over a trade. He couldn't be moved until he signed his tender.

The prospect of a team giving up potentially significant draft choice compensation or players should be unappealing to Foles because his new club would be weakened.

For the bozos like Rory that think Foles has no leverage. Former player and agent explaining pretty much what I already said. Thanks to the poster who provided to me because they didn't want to get caught up in Rory's stupidity.
Cool. I'm still not understanding how Foles wielding de facto "trade veto power" amounts to any type of financial "leverage". Again, Post #158... Foles can increase his bargaining power by proactively limiting his employer market. In this case, Foles can "leverage" himself into getting a big money long-term deal by making it clear that he won't be signing a long-term deal. Blind stupidity.

As I have said repeatedly...if money is no issue to Foles and it is simply about playing for a particular team then, yes, he has some "leverage"...but even then the Eagles can still retain Foles' services with the "franchise tag"...which, as I have also said repeatedly, is the whole purpose of the franchise tag.

Also, even if a team trades for Foles' services, that team has no obligation to offer Foles a long-term contract. They could simply proceed with Foles' 1yr/$25M franchise tag contract...just like every other player in the history of the NFL who has played under the franchise tag!

Again, its not that complicated. The franchise tag is designed to limit a player's leverage. Not sure where the misunderstanding lies. Its also incredible that the article points out that a franchise tag contract is guaranteed money...a team can't release a franchise tagged player and not have to pay him....OMG! I don't even think remy would even be dumb enough to think that. Sheesh.
 
Cool. I'm still not understanding how Foles wielding de facto "trade veto power" amounts to any type of financial "leverage". Again, Post #158... Foles can increase his bargaining power by proactively limiting his employer market. In this case, Foles can "leverage" himself into getting a big money long-term deal by making it clear that he won't be signing a long-term deal. Blind stupidity.

As I have said repeatedly...if money is no issue to Foles and it is simply about playing for a particular team then, yes, he has some "leverage"...but even then the Eagles can still retain Foles' services with the "franchise tag"...which, as I have also said repeatedly, is the whole purpose of the franchise tag.

Also, even if a team trades for Foles' services, that team has no obligation to offer Foles a long-term contract. They could simply proceed with Foles' 1yr/$25M franchise tag contract...just like every other player in the history of the NFL who has played under the franchise tag!

Again, its not that complicated. The franchise tag is designed to limit a player's leverage. Not sure where the misunderstanding lies. Its also incredible that the article points out that a franchise tag contract is guaranteed money...a team can't release a franchise tagged player and not have to pay him....OMG! I don't even think remy would even be dumb enough to think that. Sheesh.
Eagles have such a lions' share of the leverage it is not really an issue dealing with what Foles can do when or if they tag him. Foles is completely dependent on PHI's next move. To say he could not care about money or he could try to get picky over which team he goes to is not the same as "exerting bargaining power" or "having leverage", but rather seems to make the opposite case and reveals just how limited his situation is as far as I can see.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top