So Will We Have The Money For Betts????

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by The Zimmermans

I dunno man, portis now has injury problems, and bett's seems to be on the rise......bett's might have high value

Uhhh... Betts has been injured every season he's been in the league, including this one. Plus, he's never even started half a season and has still managed to get injured repeatedly. I don't doubt that some team will sign him to be a starter, but I also think that team will be a bit disappointed when Betts goes down in the preseason from another ankle issue.

[The Zimmermans]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Uhhh... Betts has been injured every season he's been in the league, including this one. Plus, he's never even started half a season and has still managed to get injured repeatedly. I don't doubt that some team will sign him to be a starter, but I also think that team will be a bit disappointed when Betts goes down in the preseason from another ankle issue.

Exactly why I wanna deal bett's instead of portis. He's having a good season, so his market value is increasing.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by The Zimmermans

Exactly why I wanna deal bett's instead of portis. He's having a good season, so his market value is increasing.

We can't deal him because he wont be under contract come March, and we are past the trading deadline.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

We can't deal him because he wont be under contract come March, and we are past the trading deadline.

So, does anyone know if any of the tags (franchise, transition, etc.) give us a draft pick if we don't match an offer?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

So, does anyone know if any of the tags (franchise, transition, etc.) give us a draft pick if we don't match an offer?

The franchise tag would require us to devote the average salary of the five most highly paid backs in the NFL to our salary cap. If a team signed Betts, we'd be entitled to two first round picks (or otherwise negotiated compensation). We would never franchise Betts because no team is going to deem him worthy of a deal commanded by the top 5 RBs in the league.

The transition tag means we have to tender the average salary of the top 10 backs in the league. We get the right to match any contract, but if we let him go, we get no compensation.

I originally posed the idea, but after thinking about it, tagging him is not a realistic option. Probably going to have to let him walk.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

The franchise tag would require us to devote the average salary of the five most highly paid backs in the NFL to our salary cap. If a team signed Betts, we'd be entitled to two first round picks (or otherwise negotiated compensation). We would never franchise Betts because no team is going to deem him worthy of a deal commanded by the top 5 RBs in the league.

The transition tag means we have to tender the average salary of the top 10 backs in the league. We get the right to match any contract, but if we let him go, we get no compensation.

I originally posed the idea, but after thinking about it, tagging him is not a realistic option. Probably going to have to let him walk.

I don't see any teams wanting to give up picks for him when we clearly won't be keeping him.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

The franchise tag would require us to devote the average salary of the five most highly paid backs in the NFL to our salary cap. If a team signed Betts, we'd be entitled to two first round picks (or otherwise negotiated compensation). We would never franchise Betts because no team is going to deem him worthy of a deal commanded by the top 5 RBs in the league.

The transition tag means we have to tender the average salary of the top 10 backs in the league. We get the right to match any contract, but if we let him go, we get no compensation.

I originally posed the idea, but after thinking about it, tagging him is not a realistic option. Probably going to have to let him walk.

I agree, tagging him probably doesn't make much sense. I think he'll be gone.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

The franchise tag would require us to devote the average salary of the five most highly paid backs in the NFL to our salary cap. If a team signed Betts, we'd be entitled to two first round picks (or otherwise negotiated compensation). We would never franchise Betts because no team is going to deem him worthy of a deal commanded by the top 5 RBs in the league.

The transition tag means we have to tender the average salary of the top 10 backs in the league. We get the right to match any contract, but if we let him go, we get no compensation.

I originally posed the idea, but after thinking about it, tagging him is not a realistic option. Probably going to have to let him walk.

Until the owners work out the whole use of poison pills issue, using the transition tag at all is just asking for trouble.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

The franchise tag would require us to devote the average salary of the five most highly paid backs in the NFL to our salary cap. If a team signed Betts, we'd be entitled to two first round picks (or otherwise negotiated compensation). We would never franchise Betts because no team is going to deem him worthy of a deal commanded by the top 5 RBs in the league.

The transition tag means we have to tender the average salary of the top 10 backs in the league. We get the right to match any contract, but if we let him go, we get no compensation.

I originally posed the idea, but after thinking about it, tagging him is not a realistic option. Probably going to have to let him walk.

Thanks for clearing this up. Very disturbing if he walks and we get nothing in return.

[SmootSmack]

I've heard from my top notch, inside sources that the ink is nearly dry on a new contract for Betts. I have no details but should I find any out I will let you know

[brent]

Betts has been very very impressive these last couple weeks. I'd wager we're all pretty shocked, as he's been merely productive in the past. He might be like Stephen Davis and just explode for a couple of years.

My guess, though, is it will never benefit the Redskins. Good luck, Mr. Betts!

[freddyg12]

I'd like to see Betts stay, but if it requires anything more than a 5mil bonus, I don't think it would be smart cap mgmt.
Our first priority on O should be resigning Dockery, he played a great game yesterday & is coming into his own. Keep the O-line together & resign him!
Today' Washpost mentioned that Betts' agent has been working on an extension all season. It might be a moral victory just to see us resign one of our guys by season's end, but I don't see it, he'll test the mkt. I agree the Jets are a possibility, also Philly.

[Beemnseven]

Sometimes I wonder just how durable Clinton Portis is going to be. Yeah, he's young -- but playing running back can many times take the youth right out a guy.

Not saying he's on the verge of calling it a career, but the wear and tear can pile up quicker on some guys. Remember, it was just a few seasons for Stephen Davis as the primary runner...