Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

GB Packers beat reporter tweets that he expects Matt Flynn to be Franchise Tagged (EDIT: NOW NOT SO MUCH)

Oldskool

By Oldskool
in Around the NFL

Recommended Posts

Oldskool

Oldskool

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Matt Flynn - QB - Packers

With Jermichael Finley locked up through 2013, Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel expects the Packers to use their franchise tag on free agent Matt Flynn.

It would be a highly aggressive and fairly risky maneuver, but the Packers can pull it off by staying $14.5 million under the salary cap. That's the franchise tag number for quarterbacks, and Green Bay must be there by March 13. The idea would be to get compensation for Flynn rather than letting him hit the unrestricted free agent market with nothing in return. GM Ted Thompson would have to feel comfortable that Flynn can generate enough interest to command a draft choice, and attract a team willing to sign him long term.

Source: Tom Silverstein on Twitter Feb 22 - 9:06 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Unforgiven

Unforgiven

Posted
Posted
Or not a lick of difference if he's as highly prized as he's being made out to be, save we don't waste a pick on him.

Hail.

Yeah, it's hard to tell.

Though it's a 100% lock he was going somewhere as a FA, but I'm not sure you're going to get a team giving up multiple 1st round picks for him.

I'd much rather he be a free agent and just go somewhere and fill a hole than possibly sit in GB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sjinhan

sjinhan

Posted
Posted
Yeah, it's hard to tell.

Though it's a 100% lock he was going somewhere as a FA, but I'm not sure you're going to get a team giving up multiple 1st round picks for him.

I'd much rather he be a free agent and just go somewhere and fill a hole than possibly sit in GB.

i dont think he will demand the same type of compensation that Kolb did. Maybe a high 2nd rounder will get job done for Flynn. I am not saying that Redskins trade for him but I think he is the worst case scenario for the Redskins but if I were GB and only offer on the table was a 2nd rounder from either Browns, Seattle, or Miami... i take it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Darth Tater

Darth Tater

Posted
Posted
Bad, one fewer FA QBs for another team to grab....meaning more competition for us for available FAs and rookie QBs in draft.

If they are tendering him it would mean that one of the other big players in the QB game IS interested in him since GB would only tag him if someone is going to give them something. Unless we've been getting a failed smoke screen from our FO, it is not us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thecardiacrll

thecardiacrll

Posted
Posted
Him getting franchised does no good for the Skins.
I disagree completely If Holmgren wants him he has two first rd. picks he will only have to give up one for him and wont have to go into a free agent money bidding war. Then the Browns will have there QB and not have another first rd. pick for a trade up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
S.T.real,lights,out

S.T.real,lights,out

Posted
Posted

I really dont see how they can do that. He will be making somthing like 6 mil more than Rodgers. Plus the intent of the tag is to be used to assist in signing a guy. Not to tag and trade. A guy i listen to a lot and really respect as a writer (Andrew Brandt) and who worked for the Packers organization said the packer would not do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
grego

grego

Posted
Posted
I thought I read somewhere u can't use a tag With the hopes of Trading the player. Kind of like cheating the system. Not that I care or anything, just thought that you couldn't.

i believe youre not supposed to tag with the intent of trading. that's apparently the rule.

Technically correct I believe but tagging with intent to trade is a major reason teams tag.

i dont think teams actually tag with the intent of trading. i think they tag players because it generally benefits them money-wise while allowing another year to get a long term deal done. its like a rental.

it was brought up before, but, supposedly new england was allowed to franchise cassel cuz brady was injured, so there was a supposed legit reason for them to do it.

i'd be a little surprised if GB is allowed to do this, as its a clear violation of the rule, especially considering flynn would be making more than rodgers.

one thing i'm puzzled about is, when he gets traded, isnt the other team on the hook for his contract? if so, who on earth is going to pay flynn top 5 qb money? how does that work?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...