The NFL is a business. To think there is no risk is extremely naive. It is shrewd for a team to franchise a player, just to trade him. No question, it can happen, but there's still a lot of risk involved as I have outlined several times, as others have.
Ted Thompson keeps things very hush hush. Let's not forget that, however, lets not forget he did franchise and trade Corey Williams.
I think the ideal situation would be. Matt Flynn tells the Packers which teams he wants to play for. The Packers talk to said teams. If compensation is agreed, then the team talks to Matt Flynn's agent and work out a contract.
I'm not sure of the penalties of doing this with the new CBA, if any at all. But what I outlined goes directly against the CBA's use and intent of the franchise tag.
Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool
I dont see much of a risk i must admit. Agreed as Pack93z says that there must be faith in the other team to make good on the offer and follow through, but dont tell me Ted doesnt have an idea who he can trust and who he cant.
Granted there is a loss of draftpick penalty i assume inline with tampering, both on our side but also on the team that has to discuss money with Flynns agent, but this is common practice in the nfl, and penalties is basicly only handed down if it is done too openly.
Why do players resist the franchise tag... because it eliminates their ability to hit the market and create a "bidding" war which might nab a long term deal with huge up front bonus money upon inking the contract.
So lets say the Packers tag Flynn to assist another team in pinning him in on a contract without the "bidding" war and thus potentially pulling dollars away from Flynn because of said lack of bidding war.
Basically the Packers are possibly harming Flynn's potential earnings in this case.
So if I am Flynn and that deal this new team is presenting is less than what my agent thinks is available via the open market.. my backup option is simply ink the tag and force the Packers to either pay me that number for a year or release me (costly option by the way). The could always trade him during the season, but that would require the team agreeing to a deal with Flynn and again making it worth is while not to hit the open market again in 2013.
Originally Posted by: Pack93z
No players resist the franchise tag to be forced to play on a one year deal, with no long term financial security.
In tag'n trade cases like this Flynns agent allready have feelers out with most of the potential suitors to see where they are contract numbers wise, and Flynns agent more than likely have approached teams with numbers for the opening negotiation.
Reality is, Flynn controls this situation now that he has earned free agency.. and honestly the Packers have very little leverage because of the high tag numbers afforded to the "glory boy" QB's.
You are correct that the Packers will not be left empty handed with Flynn leaving this season, it is called compensatory compensation via a draft pick.
That is unless the market for Flynn never materializes and he decides his best bet is another year of seasoning in Green Bay, then hitting the market again in 2013.
Originally Posted by: Pack93z
I agree, Flynn is basicly in control, he decides where he wants to go, but i think people are to quick to dismiss the tag'n trade on the wrong reasons.
Yes the cap room is an obstacle, but clifton and driver will not be brought back at the current contract anyways.
The threat of another year as a backup is almost hollow with the financial implications for the packers, but i still think its viable. Very few athletes get to this point in their carreer without a drive to succeed, win and first of all to play. I think the threat of a insanly highpriced backup is pretty big to spend another year without getting that shot at starting when you are this close? Granted the injuri risk is low, but still there is more security in a 5 year deal with 25 mill guaranteed.
Overall i agree with these points on why it wont get done, but i think alot of the other reasons about "Ted doesnt do business that way", "its a against the rules", "there is a risk by tagging him without knowing if there is market" etc. those are off target.
I dont know if there is that kind of market for Flynn, will he be payed like a starter, or get a prove it first kind of deal. No idea, but assuming there is a starter money market, i still say its just as likely to be a tag'n trade for a second rounder or late first round, as it is getting a late 3rd rounder comp pick.