Transition Tag on Mack - Now What?

[Dr. T]

The Colts should offer Mack a one year deal for $11 million and force the Browns to match it. If they don't, we immediately restructure it to make it more cap friendly.

[Gavin]

But its easier to win with a serviceable center than a serviceable QB

Usually yes, The 49ers being the exception and Chiefs. I get what your saying and I would agree if the Browns were way off from being able to compete and had much less cap space but they really aren't that far and the talent they have is young, Its not like they have an All Pro rb who will be 29 at the end of the month (Adrain Peterson, Vikings....He really needs out of there.), Browns have alot of young talent, Now if Mack was an aging vet then I'd hope they would want him to go to a team thats an immediate SB contender but he isn't,

[Gavin]

I supported bringing in De La Puente for a while but I think his market value could be inflated as yes, he is next to very good guard play. He'd still be a nice upgrade over Satele. 

 

Martin could play for us, but I'd also be heavily considering Weston Richburg if we went the draft route. 

 

Evan Dietrich-Smith apparently cleaned out his locker at the end of the season and didn't really say he wanted to stay in Green Bay, instead opted to say business is business. It could be just his way of playing hardball and getting a pay day from the Packers, but it sounds like a guy we'd have a shot at bringing in. Since we have good cap room this year and lots of impending free agents to re-sign in the next couple years, I would favor offering Dietrich-Smith a good front loaded 3 - 4 year deal.

Im all for bringing in Smith, Not so much Puente...even though yes he would be a clear upgrade over Satele, Richburg lacks power to blow DT's off the ball, He is mobile but is inconsistent in hitting his targets up in space, Has trouble gripping his man to sustain blocks from what I read on scouting reports and saw, Better suited for a Zone scheme 

[AgentOrange]

An important thing to keep in mind is that the signing period for transition players doesn't start until March 22nd. That's 11 days after the signing period for FAs. Add that to the 5 days the Browns have to match, and you have at least 16 days of free agency that you are missing out on the opportunity to sign more likely options at Center if you should choose to make a run at Mack. The Colts would basically have their hands tied over a player they probably wouldn't get.

[Coffeedrinker]

What front office is going to spend any time offering him a contract?

Thus the word "may" in my sentence.

[Coffeedrinker]

The Colts should offer Mack a one year deal for $11 million and force the Browns to match it. If they don't, we immediately restructure it to make it more cap friendly.

One, I don't believe that is allowed in the NFL.  Two, could Cleveland not match it and then immeidately restructure to make it more cap friendly?

[BpG]

let him walk this year and save 10 million dollars you could use to pick someone up long term

 

We can do both, so how about no. 

[Le Neon]

The Colts should offer Mack a one year deal for $11 million and force the Browns to match it. If they don't, we immediately restructure it to make it more cap friendly.

Wow, call Cleveland's bluff... I like it! At worst we get a 1 year rental with an inside track on negotiating an extension next offseason.

[husker61]

You're acting like we didn't try to sign him to a long term deal. It was Mack's decision to not sign, so we did what we had to to retain him. 

 

i never said that. what good is signing him for one year? they aren't any where close to being a super bowl contending contending team. now they have even less leverage to retain him long term than they did before this move. they had to get a long term deal or move on.

[husker61]

Why do you think they will not still sign him to a long term deal?  All the Transition tag does is prevent Mack from becoming a FA.  They still have plenty of time to work out a long term deal and from the article I read, Mack didn't want to sign a long term contract until he had a chance to sit down with the new front office.  The transition tag gives them the time to do that, with the added benefit of both the Browns and Mack may get a chance to see what the market is for him this season.

 

there just isn't much of a incentive for him to do so since he is guaranteed 10 million this year. remember, he's a center, not a left tackle. it's like a signing bonus, and he can come back next year and do the same. he will get two signing bonuses. i said the same things last year about macafee. what did the colts gain by franchising him last year?

[BpG]

i never said that. what good is signing him for one year? they aren't any where close to being a super bowl contending contending team. now they have even less leverage to retain him long term than they did before this move. they had to get a long term deal or move on.

 

What does the Superbowl have to do with keeping your good players. So what you're saying is that because we aren't Superbowl contenders, we should just let our good players walk?

 

How do they have less leverage? Very few players want to sit there playing on a one year deal, even if it is for $10 million. I bet he would be much happier to get a guaranteed 40 million, than sit on a 10m deal and rick blowing out his knee. 

[husker61]

What does the Superbowl have to do with keeping your good players. So what you're saying is that because we aren't Superbowl contenders, we should just let our good players walk?

 

How do they have less leverage? Very few players want to sit there playing on a one year deal, even if it is for $10 million. I bet he would be much happier to get a guaranteed 40 million, than sit on a 10m deal and rick blowing out his knee. 

 

you would be willing to give a center 40 million signing bonus for 4-5 years? you are right, he would jump on that and you would kill your salary cap for years. you keep leaving out the ONE YEAR part of the scenario. how is having him for ONE YEAR going to help the franchise long term?

[AgentOrange]

The Colts should offer Mack a one year deal for $11 million and force the Browns to match it. If they don't, we immediately restructure it to make it more cap friendly.

 

 

Wow, call Cleveland's bluff... I like it! At worst we get a 1 year rental with an inside track on negotiating an extension next offseason.

 

Can't. Whichever team he ends up with, that is his binding contract for the 2014 season. You'd still be stuck paying the $11mill and the cap hit that goes with it. From the same section that discusses "poison pills":

"The player and the New Club may not renegotiate such Player Contract to reduce the Salary in such contract until after the end of the first regular season covered by the Contract. Neither the player nor the New Club may exercise an option in such Player Contract that reduces Salary in the first League Year of such contract until after the end of the first regular season covered by the Contract."

[Le Neon]

Can't. Whichever team he ends up with, that is his binding contract for the 2014 season. You'd still be stuck paying the $11mill and the cap hit that goes with it.

True, but the team that makes the offer gets the inside track on negotiating long term in 2015. At this point only something very creative or completely unhinged in terms of the size of the offer will pry Mack away from Cleveland now.

What could make this a smart move for Cleveland is it gives them another year to pitch to Mack that the franchise is moving in the right direction (assuming he signs the tender). That more than anything could convince him to sign long term.

[BpG]

you would be willing to give a center 40 million signing bonus for 4-5 years? you are right, he would jump on that and you would kill your salary cap for years. you keep leaving out the ONE YEAR part of the scenario. how is having him for ONE YEAR going to help the franchise long term?

 

When did I say anything about a 40 million dollar signing bonus? Do you even know how contracts work?

 

 

What does long term have to do with anything? We either have an all pro center this year or we don't.....it's really that simple.

[Coffeedrinker]

there just isn't much of a incentive for him to do so since he is guaranteed 10 million this year. remember, he's a center, not a left tackle. it's like a signing bonus, and he can come back next year and do the same. he will get two signing bonuses. i said the same things last year about macafee. what did the colts gain by franchising him last year?

When he signs a long term deal, his signing bonus and guaranteed amount will be much larger than $10million.  Jason Kelce of the eagles signed a 7 year 37.5 million dollar contract with $13 million in guarantees, so I could easily see Mack signing a 5 year 35 million with 15-18 million in guarantees.  In addition, if Mack plays under the transition tag and gets injured, yeah he gets the 10 mil for 2014 but then in 2015 he would not get anywhere near the contract at that point.

[husker61]

 

I bet he would be much happier to get a guaranteed 40 million. 

 

 

When did I say anything about a 40 million dollar signing bonus? Do you even know how contracts work?

 

 

What does long term have to do with anything? We either have an all pro center this year or we don't.....it's really that simple.

 

signing bonus, guaranteed salary, it's all the same thing.

 

you are happy to have him for one year, great job. next year you can do the same for 12 million, and everyone will be laughing at the browns for paying left tackle money to a center like they are now. i disagree, but if you think this helps the browns long term, good for you.

[husker61]

When he signs a long term deal, his signing bonus and guaranteed amount will be much larger than $10million.  Jason Kelce of the eagles signed a 7 year 37.5 million dollar contract with $13 million in guarantees, so I could easily see Mack signing a 5 year 35 million with 15-18 million in guarantees.  In addition, if Mack plays under the transition tag and gets injured, yeah he gets the 10 mil for 2014 but then in 2015 he would not get anywhere near the contract at that point.

 

if he doesn't get hurt, he gets the same or bigger signing bonus next year. 10 million in the bank and another 15-20 million next year by your estimates of his worth. if he has a career ending injury he may lose out on around 7 million, but if not he gains another 15-20 million totaling 25-30 million. he can take out a 7 million insurance policy for the year, and he's way ahead of the game.

[BpG]

signing bonus, guaranteed salary, it's all the same thing.

 

you are happy to have him for one year, great job. next year you can do the same for 12 million, and everyone will be laughing at the browns for paying left tackle money to a center like they are now. i disagree, but if you think this helps the browns long term, good for you.

 

Signing bonus and guaranteed money aren't even close to the same thing. 

 

Also, I very much doubt anyone is going to be "laughing at the Browns" for retaining one of their best players. That's just stupid talk. You say we are paying a center left tackle money.....Are we? He hasn't signed the tender, which means we aren't paying him anything. Stop acting like you have any idea what is going to happen this year or next year because you don't. 

[husker61]

Signing bonus and guaranteed money aren't even close to the same thing. 

 

 

 

don't they both have to be payed regardless of what happens? not a lot of difference to me.

[husker61]

Also, I very much doubt anyone is going to be "laughing at the Browns" for retaining one of their best players. That's just stupid talk. You say we are paying a center left tackle money.....Are we? He hasn't signed the tender, which means we aren't paying him anything. Stop acting like you have any idea what is going to happen this year or next year because you don't. 

 

the clock is ticking, time will tell.

 

you don't know ether, but that doesn't mean we can't both give our opinions. you seem i little touchy on this subject. i guess it's the browns track record that has you worried.

[BpG]

the clock is ticking, time will tell.

 

you don't know ether, but that doesn't mean we can't both give our opinions. you seem i little touchy on this subject. i guess it's the browns track record that has you worried.

 

 

I'm not touchy, you're just painting this in a light where no matter what it's a mistake to retain one of our best players. Which is asinine to me.