From Mike Florio
profootballtalk.com
POSTED 9:12 a.m. EDT, July 4, 2005
ALEXANDER WON'T TOIL FOR TENDER
With the moratorium on negotiations toward a long-term deal for franchise players set to expire in less than two weeks, Seattle running back Shaun Alexander has a message for the team.
Bring your checkbook.
Alexander says he won't play for the one-year, $6.32 million franchise tender, which he has yet to sign.
And he says that the 'Haks blew their chance long ago to get him on the cheap.
"I told them three years ago that I love playing here and let's do something now. Let's meet," Alexander said. "It was just me and Mike [Holmgren]. There were no agents involved. I said, 'You know what? My wife's here. My family's here. I want to be here until I retire. It's really funny because back then I would have worked for peanuts.
"Two Pro Bowls and 3,000 yards and 36 touchdowns later, now it's time to talk? And I'm like, 'Why would you do this?' So now it's just one of those things where I say, 'Let's do what's right.' I'm not trying to be evil or greedy or anything, let's just do what's right."
The problem, though, is "what's right" and "what's allowed under the CBA" are two different things. After more than a decade of full-blown free agency, teams have figured out that it's smarter and safer to pay the franchise salary on a year-to-year basis to a workhorse running back whose rookie deal has expired than to give the guy an eight-figure bonus and a long-term deal.
Tailbacks who thrive on 25-plus touches get banged and battered, game after game. The elite runners like Shaun Alexander and Edgerrin James and Clinton Portis are only one big hit away from being knocked out for a year, and possibly from returning as "just a guy."
By paying such players under a string of franchise tenders, the player assumes the risk of a catastrophic injury, and the team doesn't pay much more over the first three years of the arrangement than would have been paid under a long-term deal.
In Alexander's case, he likely wants a three-year total payout in the neighborhood of $25 million. Factoring the 20 percent annual increase for a player who wears the franchise tag, Alexander's tenders for three years are $6.32 million, $7.584 million, and $9.1008 million, which adds up to just over $23 million.
For the 'Hawks, then, it's a no-brainer to use the tag year in, year out. If he blows out a knee or has some other serious injury in year one or year two, the team saves millions. Ditto if, for whatever reason, Alexander simply becomes ineffective.
Seattle already has played this game with left tackle Walter Jones, dropping the "F" bomb on him for three straight seasons before signing Jones to a long-term deal. Although, in Jones' case, his ability to remain healthy and highly effective for three seasons resulted in three years of franchise money followed by a lucrative contract, there's a big difference between tackles and running backs when the clock strikes thirty.
In Alexander's case, he'll be far less marketable -- even if fully healthy -- in 2008, when he'll turn 31 just before the regular season begins.
Still, Alexander insists that signing the tender is "out of the question."
"I honestly believe that they're going to make a great deal for me," Alexander said. "I'm going to end up signing and it's going to be no big deal. [But] I'm not naive to think that you can make a deal like that overnight."
But it's not as if Alexander has many other options. No one wanted to swing a trade with the 'Hawks for his services, because no one else wants to give him the long-term deal that he desires.
So there's a good chance that a deal between the 'Hawks and Alexander will not be made overnight.
And not at all.
profootballtalk.com
POSTED 9:12 a.m. EDT, July 4, 2005
ALEXANDER WON'T TOIL FOR TENDER
With the moratorium on negotiations toward a long-term deal for franchise players set to expire in less than two weeks, Seattle running back Shaun Alexander has a message for the team.
Bring your checkbook.
Alexander says he won't play for the one-year, $6.32 million franchise tender, which he has yet to sign.
And he says that the 'Haks blew their chance long ago to get him on the cheap.
"I told them three years ago that I love playing here and let's do something now. Let's meet," Alexander said. "It was just me and Mike [Holmgren]. There were no agents involved. I said, 'You know what? My wife's here. My family's here. I want to be here until I retire. It's really funny because back then I would have worked for peanuts.
"Two Pro Bowls and 3,000 yards and 36 touchdowns later, now it's time to talk? And I'm like, 'Why would you do this?' So now it's just one of those things where I say, 'Let's do what's right.' I'm not trying to be evil or greedy or anything, let's just do what's right."
The problem, though, is "what's right" and "what's allowed under the CBA" are two different things. After more than a decade of full-blown free agency, teams have figured out that it's smarter and safer to pay the franchise salary on a year-to-year basis to a workhorse running back whose rookie deal has expired than to give the guy an eight-figure bonus and a long-term deal.
Tailbacks who thrive on 25-plus touches get banged and battered, game after game. The elite runners like Shaun Alexander and Edgerrin James and Clinton Portis are only one big hit away from being knocked out for a year, and possibly from returning as "just a guy."
By paying such players under a string of franchise tenders, the player assumes the risk of a catastrophic injury, and the team doesn't pay much more over the first three years of the arrangement than would have been paid under a long-term deal.
In Alexander's case, he likely wants a three-year total payout in the neighborhood of $25 million. Factoring the 20 percent annual increase for a player who wears the franchise tag, Alexander's tenders for three years are $6.32 million, $7.584 million, and $9.1008 million, which adds up to just over $23 million.
For the 'Hawks, then, it's a no-brainer to use the tag year in, year out. If he blows out a knee or has some other serious injury in year one or year two, the team saves millions. Ditto if, for whatever reason, Alexander simply becomes ineffective.
Seattle already has played this game with left tackle Walter Jones, dropping the "F" bomb on him for three straight seasons before signing Jones to a long-term deal. Although, in Jones' case, his ability to remain healthy and highly effective for three seasons resulted in three years of franchise money followed by a lucrative contract, there's a big difference between tackles and running backs when the clock strikes thirty.
In Alexander's case, he'll be far less marketable -- even if fully healthy -- in 2008, when he'll turn 31 just before the regular season begins.
Still, Alexander insists that signing the tender is "out of the question."
"I honestly believe that they're going to make a great deal for me," Alexander said. "I'm going to end up signing and it's going to be no big deal. [But] I'm not naive to think that you can make a deal like that overnight."
But it's not as if Alexander has many other options. No one wanted to swing a trade with the 'Hawks for his services, because no one else wants to give him the long-term deal that he desires.
So there's a good chance that a deal between the 'Hawks and Alexander will not be made overnight.
And not at all.
