Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Because they get nothing for him if they don't franchise tag him. He'll simply be an UFA if they don't franchise him.If they do Franchise him, which would be a gamble and I doubt they do that, they are obviously expecting some high picks for him. Otherwise, the risk of tagging him would be far too high if all you think you'll get is a 2nd. They would run the risk of being stuck with a back up QB making 18 million a year if they do that though, which is why they wont. 1. If they have the cap space, what does it matter? It's just for one year. It's not like Green Bay is ever in the hunt for high priced free agents. 2. There is a salary floor now so teams MUST spend money. 3. They will eventually get a bite. There are 20 good QBs and 32 teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 TK? LL56? Hellooooooo?! I would expect there is very little that they know at this point. It's January 3...there are probably 18 different directions we might go, so even if TK was Bruce Allen, he probably couldn't provide anything of substance at this point in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destructis Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Here's the thing with Flynn & GB: Jermichael Finley will also be a FA this year. They can only tag 1 player. They can sign Finley if they want to before FA starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goskinz0721 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Here's the thing with Flynn & GB: Jermichael Finley will also be a FA this year. They can only tag 1 player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 1. If they have the cap space' date=' what does it matter? It's just for one year. It's not like Green Bay is ever in the hunt for high priced free agents.2. There is a salary floor now so teams MUST spend money. 3. They will eventually get a bite. There are 20 good QBs and 32 teams.[/quote'] They could eventually trade him for a 4th round pick and they'd make out better by having franchised him than letting him walk via FA and getting nothing. Trust me, with the QB starved teams out there, someone will eventually give GB something for Flynn. It's cool to think about the other 31 teams trying to stick it to the Packers and making them pay 2 QBs a boatload of money, but eventually someone will just take the bargain and trade for Flynn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pick6 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Here's the thing with Flynn & GB: Jermichael Finley will also be a FA this year. They can only tag 1 player. I think if your the Packers you offer Finley a good deal, but other teams are not in a big need for TEs. However, a lot of teams are in need of a QB and Flynn has made himself very valuable. You slap that franchise tag on him and now you could get draft picks for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Russell on 980 just said, his source with the team told him that the Packers and Skins offense is very similar and Flynn would be a fit. He's coming back on 980 in a minute to elaborate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Pretty sure if they franchise him they will need to get atleast 1 maybe 2 1st's. And yes that is ridiculous. Pretty sure Flynn would be making more than Rodgers if that were to happen. There is no way he's staying there and there is no way they are going to franchise him. And for the record i do not want him. Not only that, but Jermichael Finley is a FA this year (if memory serves) and he would be tagged rather than Flynn if need be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Not only that, but Jermichael Finley is a FA this year (if memory serves) and he would be tagged rather than Flynn if need be. Teams can get around that by simply getting ahead of the curve and signing the player before free agency begins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/photos/uncategorized/2008/01/27/spy_hunter_smoke_screen.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Russell on 980 just said, his source with the team told him that the Packers and Skins offense is very similar and Flynn would be a fit. He's coming back on 980 in a minute to elaborate Please update if you can...thanks! If our offenses are similar, boy do we have a ways to go to optimize ours! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milellie111 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Not getting too excited about Flynn. Remeber, Ryan Fitzpatrick looked all pro in Buffalo and as soon as he signed that big money contract...Well, let's just say the fans are trying to run him out of town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Here's the thing with Flynn & GB: Jermichael Finley will also be a FA this year. They can only tag 1 player. Scott Wells their pro bowl center is also a FA. If GB tag Flynn he'll take up around 16mil of cap room, making it impossible to sign both Wells and Finley. Seriously I think I would be more excited if the Redskins got Wells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Russell on 980 just said, his source with the team told him that the Packers and Skins offense is very similar and Flynn would be a fit. He's coming back on 980 in a minute to elaborate i dont want to butcher the exact quote but he said something about there being a buzz with the people that make the decisions within the redskins organization with regards to flynn, but the way he said it was 'i know for a fact there was buzz'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T.real,lights,out Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Good thing your not Dan Snyder then. Flynn would be an immediate upgrade and the kid has pure talent. If we sign Flynn, do what we can to get Blackmon, then we have a ton of weapons on offense to make sure Flynn in successful. (Pending everyone is and stays healthy) Then you work on shoring up the o-line. That will give us 10 wins and I bet on that one if that scenario were to take place. I am not basing this on one game either. Flynn is smart, accurate, makes good decisions, still fresh and mobile. Everything we did not have this year or the past 15 years. Just about any backup QB would be an upgrade over what we have right now. And sorry that i dont want to trade for a guy that has 3 legit #1 WR's and maybe one of if not the best TE in football. I would rather take our chances with a young QB in the draft. And by adding Blackmon we dont have a "ton" of weapons. And what are you basing this off of? 2 games? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwitt Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Russell said the Packers simply are unlikely to be able to franchise Flynn. It makes sense. 1. They would have to have the cap room, all be it temporarily, to make it possible. 2. They take a huge risk of paying crazy money to their back up QB. 3. Teams interested are not going to want to give up a good draft pick AND pay him the tender money. Green Bay has no leverage. Flynn is going to be a free agent and go to highest bidder. Let's hope it's Cleveland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlobberKnockinFootball Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Russell said the Packers simply are unlikely to be able to franchise Flynn. It makes sense. 1. They would have to have the cap room, all be it temporarily, to make it possible. 2. They take a huge risk of paying crazy money to their back up QB. 3. Teams interested are not going to want to give up a good draft pick AND pay him the tender money. Green Bay has no leverage. Flynn is going to be a free agent and go to highest bidder. Let's hope it's Cleveland. Matt Flynn and Blackmon.. I like that combo. As much as I like RG3, I just think come around April the asking price is going to be through the roof to move up if Cleveland doesn't take Flynn in FA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I could live with this scenario. But, we would probably need to trade up into the late first to grab Tannehill. QB's tend to be over-valued in the draft. thats true. And if the case, then i wouldn't mind letting Tannehill go. By no means do i want to trade up. we need all our picks and more (too many holes to fill). Which is why i wouldn't mind signing Flynn, if the staff really thinks he can get it done. But again, outside of Luck or RG3, i REALLY like Blackmon!! When was the last time we had a WR like that? ---------- Post added January-3rd-2012 at 01:42 PM ---------- Matt Flynn and Blackmon.. I like that combo. As much as I like RG3, I just think come around April the asking price is going to be through the roof to move up if Cleveland doesn't take Flynn in FA. , just posted the samething with out seeing your post... great minds think alike i guess? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Not if they strongly believe they can get at least a 2nd round pick for him. If we trade any picks for him we are fools. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Russell said the Packers simply are unlikely to be able to franchise Flynn. It makes sense. 1. They would have to have the cap room, all be it temporarily, to make it possible. 2. They take a huge risk of paying crazy money to their back up QB. 3. Teams interested are not going to want to give up a good draft pick AND pay him the tender money. Green Bay has no leverage. Flynn is going to be a free agent and go to highest bidder. Let's hope it's Cleveland. The cap space was an aspect I didn't think about. If they tie up almost $20M, they'd potentially lose their TE and/or C. ---------- Post added January-3rd-2012 at 01:44 PM ---------- If we trade any picks for him we are fools. Well... McNabb, Grossman, Beck...maybe we ARE fools when it comes to QB decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper 21 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Blackmon is not making it past the rams. So just eliminate that possibility. He is incredible yes but everyone knows that already and is thinking the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missouri_Skins_Fan Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Hey Bruce....Don't fall for the trap, bud. Forget Matt Flynn!! You need to just print out my sig Bruce & stick it to your refrigerator, buddy. For those that want to me to explain why? http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?361233-Poll-You-are-Shanahan.-Do-you-draft-a-QB-or-look-for-a-FA-QB-%28explain%29/page2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Flynn would be a good match for CLE. Now all they need is a RB, 2 WRs, a TE, and a LT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 "According to ESPN 980 Washington's Chris Russell, impending free agent Matt Flynn's six-touchdown Week 17 game "generated a lot of buzz and positive chatter" in the Redskins' organization.The Redskins might be the Packers' ideal target for a sign-and-trade scenario if Flynn is indeed franchise tagged, because Washington has a documented history of making blockbuster-type moves. They've been much more well-run since GM Bruce Allen came into the picture two years ago, however. Flynn does make sense in D.C. because of his familiarity with a West Coast-style system. Jan 3 - 10:36 AM Source: Chris Russell on Twitter" the packers franchise tagging their backup QB may be the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard Chris Russell also said the Skins would wear black jerseys after Sean Taylor's passing. Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Well... McNabb, Grossman, Beck...maybe we ARE fools when it comes to QB decisions. That's what I'm afraid of. I've seen this movie before. I didn't like it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.