cfujskins Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 http://raiders.scout.com/ Amazing. the Raiders have REVOKED the franchise tag on Woodson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 I don't see the story... And I don't see how that's possible... He already signed it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsaddict Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 dont tell snyder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skin_finatic Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Really how is that possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manichispanic Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 cfuj help us out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 If he signed the 1 year deal then they can't revoke it, but if he didin't sign it then I think they can. They probably couldn't afford to give him that amount. What the franchised CB salary this year? I think its like 8 million for the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Money Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Hello? This is why you should post the story AND the link!!! Please? Bueler? Bueler? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfujskins Posted March 1, 2005 Author Share Posted March 1, 2005 I don't subscribe to that service, but the link is at the very top of the page Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 they can if Woodson agrees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 He signed the tender, did he not? Which makes it impossible to revoke... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 CFUJ: that link is broken. Did you copy it from somewhere else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfujskins Posted March 1, 2005 Author Share Posted March 1, 2005 This is the best I can do since I'm not an insider: "Oakland Raiders CB Charles Woodson's $10.537 million tender is an expensive outlay for a cornerback in today's NFL, where rules favoring the passing game have conspired to prevent defensive backs from achieving greatness. Their hands have been tied and that has all but made the "shutdown corner" a thing of the past. Take Denver and Champ Bailey. Porter burned him for three touchdowns in a game this past season. And perhaps that is the reason the Raiders removed the exclusive franchise tag from Woodson's name Tuesday. By making him non-exclusive, they can trade him to another club if another club thinks he merits that kind of money. And if no club comes calling, the Raiders have ammunition to fire back at the Poston brothers and negotiate a long-term deal with him later this year. If the outside offer does come through, the Raiders can opt to match it or let him go and accept two first round draft picks instead. Either way, by removing the exclusive tag, the Raiders have all but said if they can finish No. 30 in the league on defense with Woodson, they can certainly do at least that well without him." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfujskins Posted March 1, 2005 Author Share Posted March 1, 2005 Originally posted by iheartskins CFUJ: that link is broken. Did you copy it from somewhere else? I got a better link. Its at the top of the page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TODD Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 I don't see how that's possible. He already signed it on Friday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soljaofjesus Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Originally posted by jrfriedm If he signed the 1 year deal then they can't revoke it, but if he didin't sign it then I think they can. They probably couldn't afford to give him that amount. What the franchised CB salary this year? I think its like 8 million for the year. 10.5 I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 1, 2005 Share Posted March 1, 2005 Originally posted by jrfriedm If he signed the 1 year deal then they can't revoke it, but if he didin't sign it then I think they can. They probably couldn't afford to give him that amount. What the franchised CB salary this year? I think its like 8 million for the year. Don't know what the generic number is for CBs. Aparantly, Woodson's number was higher, because the rules say you not only have to offer him the "franchise" pay, it also has to be 20% larger than last year's pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 The Raiders haven't REVOKED the franchise tag. All they have done is change Woodson's tag from exclusive to non-exclusive, so other teams can negotiate with him. The Raiders don't want to cut him because they are still stuck for his cap hit. So they want to trade him now. Woodson is still guaranteed $10.5 Mil and the Raiders are still stuck for that amount on their books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfujskins Posted March 2, 2005 Author Share Posted March 2, 2005 Originally posted by inmate running the asylum The Raiders haven't REVOKED the franchise tag. All they have done is change Woodson's tag from exclusive to non-exclusive, so other teams can negotiate with him. The Raiders don't want to cut him because they are still stuck for his cap hit. So they want to trade him now. Woodson is still guaranteed $10.5 Mil and the Raiders are still stuck for that amount on their books. Ahh, Ok. MY BAD folks. A little misunderstanding here:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 if I'm not mistaken they have not yet given Randy Moss a new contract, assuming he will get a new one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Originally posted by jimster if I'm not mistaken they have not yet given Randy Moss a new contract, assuming he will get a new one. I read where the Raiders are now asking the Vikings to re-do Randy Moss's $7+ million contract BEFORE the trade becomes official. I assume the Vikings will comply because they want to move Moss. So the trade of Moss may or may not be officially recorded on Wednesday, but later in the week. Being that teams trade contracts and not players, a new Moss contract which reduces their cap hit, is what the Raiders want, being that Woodson fouled them up by signing his franchise tender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
convince Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Originally posted by cfujskins the Raiders have all but said if they can finish No. 30 in the league on defense with Woodson, they can certainly do at least that well without him." Well, you would think they would have thought that before the franchised him, what idiots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I agree, the Raiders are back-peddling now. I have to give Woodson and his agents credit for signing the contract. I don't what the Raiders were thinking. I would have cut him loose and sign someone like Rolle in FA to a long term contract. Woodson doesn't appear to want to be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Al Davis is greedy and can't see beyond the immediate gratification of a trade or signing. If he could he would have worked out the Woodson situation before moving into territory to take on the Moss contract. The Raiders had a disastrous offseason strategy in 2004 of signing aging free agents to try and prop their team up. It blew up in their faces. Warren Sapp is done. Ted Washington is done. Gannon is done. They just released Middleton and Stone, another pair of 30 somethings they paid money to just recently. Ray Buchanan is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins4SB Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Originally posted by bulldog Al Davis is greedy and can't see beyond the immediate gratification of a trade or signing. If he could he would have worked out the Woodson situation before moving into territory to take on the Moss contract. The Raiders had a disastrous offseason strategy in 2004 of signing aging free agents to try and prop their team up. It blew up in their faces. Warren Sapp is done. Ted Washington is done. Gannon is done. They just released Middleton and Stone, another pair of 30 somethings they paid money to just recently. Ray Buchanan is gone. They released Stone too? I guess I missed that. They are hurting at guard now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chet06 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Woodson is overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.