Tuesday, March 3, 2015

NFL, it's time to change the Franchise Tag

Monday marked the day when players found out whether or not they were heading to free agency. Six total players were placed with some type of tag. Five players were recipients of the franchise tag while just one (tight end Charles Clay) was introduced to the less popular transition tag. 

Two of the players who were tagged were edge rushers. The New York Giants defensive end Jason Pierre-Paul and the Kansas City Chiefs outside linebacker Justin Houston were given one-year deals thanks to the hand-capping nature of the franchise tag. While both players primary job is to disrupt the opposing team's passing game by getting pressure of the quarterback, Pierre-Paul is slated to earn almost $2 million more than Houston by virtue of playing in a 4-3 defense.

The amount for franchising a defensive end is $14.813 million while the amount for a linebacker is $13.195 million. To be clear, there's a strong chance that Justin Houston fights the idea that he's tagged as a linebacker instead of defensive end. At the very least, he'll attempt to use his pass rushing status as leverage to get a long term deal. 

Both players spend a majority of time lined up just outside the offensive tackle. Trying to pay Houston less because he stands up as opposed to lining down in a three-point stance. When the franchise tag was created in 1993, the 4-3 was still the primary defense. More so, linebacker was seen as the more glamorous position and was paid as such. Now passing is all the rage in the NFL. Defensive ends aren't primarily run stoppers. They are drafted and signed to be quarterback assassins. Also, the evolution of passing offensives has created multiple sets and more receivers on the field at a time. This means defenses are searching for versatile players. The 3-4 defense lends itself perfectly to the versatility; especially with players like Justin Houston. His athleticism gives him the ability play in space more than most pass rushers. But that shouldn't cost him money. 

It's becoming increasingly difficult to classify players by positions. The NFL should change the titles to accommodate the changes in the league. Titles such as "interior defensive lineman" should be used for a player who plays inside in base and nickel packages. "Edge defender (or rusher)" should be used to categorize players like Justin Houston, Jason Pierre-Paul and Cliff Avril (who plays the "Leo" position in Seattle's unique defensive scheme). When Julius Peppers, who played in a 4-3 scheme in both Carolina and Chicago, signed with Green Bay, his role didn't change much at all. He was comfortable, even when playing from a two-point stance, because he was still on the edge. However, when teammate Clay Matthews was moved to inside linebacker, it created waves. Matthews had a more severe position change than Peppers although Matthews has been a linebacker his entire career.

Joining rush linebacker, defensive tackle (whether 4-3 or 3-4), and defensive end as one position group for the purpose of the franchise tag would be a possibility as well. More players would likely hit free agency but it's no different from having only an "offensive lineman" tag as opposed to the subgroups of tackle, guard and center. These changes must be made or it will become an almost annual discussion for star pass rushers wanting to be labeled as defensive ends. 

And yes, put tight ends in the same category as receivers to avoid Jimmy Graham-type catastrophes. If a tight end is considered talented enough to tag in this era, trust me, he's spending plenty of time split out in a wide receiver-like manner.

The league is surely aware that the conflict isn't going away anytime soon. Attempting to pull one over on players isn't going to work in this case. They're proactively fighting the league's stance on this. The NFL should operate in the interest of fairness. "Franchise" tags should be for franchise players. Those players should be expensive. The league's franchise tagging process is simply working with an outdated model. 

No comments:

Post a Comment