Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;888094]Are you sure? W/out looking it up, it seems to me many a player has been franchised with the intent of getting a trade. How would you prove that the "intent to trade" (barring something idiotic like the GM saying "Oh, we don't want him, we just tagged him to trade him")?[/quote]

[url=http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/flynn-departure-may-not-aid-packers-k43ld06-136557403.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter]Flynn departure may not aid Packers - JSOnline[/url]



[quote]So once the Packers tag Flynn, that $14 million counts against their salary cap. Flynn would automatically become the highest-paid player on the team in terms of annual salary.

NFL teams are prohibited from trading franchise players. [U]In fact, the rules say you may not franchise a player with the intent to sign him to a contract and then trade him.[/U] However, this rule has been broken before and the NFL tends to look the other way.[/quote]

This is where I got this from. Like you said, how could you really prove that?

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

^^ Okay. Thanks for the clarification.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=NC_Skins;888175][url=http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/flynn-departure-may-not-aid-packers-k43ld06-136557403.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter]Flynn departure may not aid Packers - JSOnline[/url]





This is where I got this from. Like you said, how could you really prove that?[/quote]

They sure looked the other way when the Pats traded Cassel...if my memory is correct.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[URL="http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/article_external/green_bay_packers_risk_in_franchise_tagging_qb_matt_flynn/10074415"]Green Bay Packers: Risk in Franchise Tagging QB Matt Flynn?[/URL]

[QUOTE]If the Packers did tag Flynn, he would almost certainly sign the offer sheet—putting the Packers on the hook for the $14.4 million and forcing them to find a trade partner. If no team bit on Flynn, the Packers would be stuck with a backup quarterback making considerably more than their NFL MVP starter, Aaron Rodgers. Re-signing center Scott Wells and special teamer Jarrett Bush would also become tricky under the cap.

But here’s the kicker in the whole deal: The Packers won’t even ponder franchise tagging Flynn unless they have a handshake deal in place with another team on both the parameters of a trade and a re-structrured deal for Flynn—the two necessary components for a tag-and-trade scenario to successfully play out.

Yes, NFL rules are supposed to avoid tampering, which seemingly would become a problem considering the Packers have to tag Flynn by March 5 and that a trade cannot happen between teams until the new league year starts on March 13. Talks about moving players such as Flynn would be considered tampering until that date.
[/QUOTE]

I forgot this part:
[QUOTE]
But let’s be honest here. The next week at the NFL Scouting Combine is a tampering fest, and there are plenty of ways to get a handshake deal in place without actually tampering. Depending on the language used in the dialogue, the Packers and team X can skirt the boundaries of tampering without actually breaking any NFL rules.
[/QUOTE]

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Son Of Man;888203]They sure looked the other way when the Pats traded Cassel...if my memory is correct.[/quote]

I think he fell under the old CBA which I thought team were getting away with doing that and under the new CBA they added a claus that says they can't tag a player with the intention of trading him for value later.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Son Of Man;888203]They sure looked the other way when the Pats traded Cassel...if my memory is correct.[/quote]


The main reason they could get away with it is because of the fear of Brady's health(ACL tear). They could make the claim that we had to sign him since we didn't know if Brady was going to be able to come back or not. Not sure Green Bay could say the same....lol

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[url=http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7607750/teams-talk-st-louis-rams-no-2-pick-sources-say]Teams talk to St. Louis Rams about No. 2 pick, sources say - ESPN[/url]

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=SBXVII;888230]I think he fell under the old CBA which I thought team were getting away with doing that and under the new CBA they added a claus that says they can't tag a player with the intention of trading him for value later.[/quote]

No, the rule is exactly the same now as it was then.

Plenty of players have been tagged with the intent of trading them. It's a nonsense rule and everyone knows it.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

I think Chad Henne is a better QB then his perception.
I think he's one of the journeyman/second chance QBs that has the potential of becoming a good starting QB in the NFL.

I would be happy with an offseason QB overhall that would result with:

Manning + Henne + 4th round or later developmental QB

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Mattyk;888049]Why is that not a good sign?

Luck isn't throwing either.

They have nothing to gain.[/quote]

True they have nothing to gain by throwing. Newton surprised everybody last year when he threw. If your a top 2 qb going in, there is no way you should throw at the meat market, only at your pro day when you have some control over the situation. By the way Tannehill is not the qb that the skins should try to get especially at the 6 spot. He was mediocre at best this year, and was probably better due to his supporting cast then his own ability. If they don't get either Luck or Griffin wait for the second round, Weeden is probably the safest pick among the "clipboard holders". They'll be back in the mix for a qb next year if they don't trade up, probably with a new coach picking the next qb. Hopefuly not a USC qb-they never work.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[url=http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7607498/rams-fielding-offers-no-2-pick-essentially-rg3]NFL Combine: Rams fielding offers for No. 2 pick and essentially RG3 - ESPN[/url]

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=Mattyk;888311][url=http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7607498/rams-fielding-offers-no-2-pick-essentially-rg3]NFL Combine: Rams fielding offers for No. 2 pick and essentially RG3 - ESPN[/url][/quote]

If STL and MIN are trading their picks, neither one is interested in RG3. No?

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=30gut;888305]I think Chad Henne is a better QB then his perception.
I think he's one of the journeyman/second chance QBs that has the potential of becoming a good starting QB in the NFL.

I would be happy with an offseason QB overhall that would result with:

Manning + Henne + 4th round or later developmental QB[/quote]

I'm sorry, I hear people mention Orton and I think Grossman, people are now mentioning Henne and I think Beck.

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

[quote=SBXVII;888324]I'm sorry, I hear people mention Orton and I think Grossman, people are now mentioning Henne and I think Beck.[/quote]

Funny. Might as well bring both of them in and let them compete...

Re: The "Inside Word" on the QB Search
 

ProFootballTalk (@ProFootballTalk)
2/23/12 11:06 PM
Report: Browns expected to make a play for Matt Flynn bit.ly/zkTgTk