PFT: Redskins Plan to Franchise Fred Davis

[Lanky Livingston]

Makes sense, he was our best offensive player last year. If he can lay off the reefer, he seems to be a good fit in the offense.
-----------------------------------

When Redskins tight end Fred Davis was suspended four games for violating the NFL’s substance-abuse policy, coach Mike Shanahan said he was disappointed, big time. But apparently not so disappointed that Shanahan doesn’t want Davis on the team.

The Redskins plan to put the franchise tag on Davis prior to the start of free agency March 13, according to Jason La Canfora of NFL Network, via CSNWashington.com.

The suspension aside, Davis had his best season in the NFL last year, catching 59 passes for 796 yards and three touchdowns. He’s set to become an unrestricted free agent, and the Redskins can be sure to keep him in the fold with the franchise tag.

If Davis signs the one-year franchise tender, he’d get a guaranteed salary of about $5.5 million in 2012.


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/08/report-redskins-plan-to-franchise-fred-davis/

 

[Jimbo]

Could that signal the end for Cooley or do we try to emulate the Pats? I could see Cooley included in any trade with the Rams for that #2 pick. He could be a valuable target for Bradford.

Just hoping Sleepy can ride the "straight-and-narrow".

 

[Burgundy Burner]

Ah, the offseason! The first bit of news. Take a fresh breath of it inward and exhale slowly. It's our time of the year!

Sounds like the team is confident in Fletcher returning. It will be interesting to see the LaRon situation now and to a lesser extent, Carriker.

 

[Boone]

I view it as somewhat pathetic that Fred ****ing Davis is the guy we reportedly have decided we're so afraid of losing we use the franchise tag on him. The guy has really had one decent season, and even then has shown the propensity to make incredibly stupid decisions at times (both on and off the field).

Sad testament to where we are if true.

 

[Ax]

I would think we could get him for less than 5.5 mil.
Also, doesn't it preclude the team from adding language to cover their ass if Shortbus continues to light up?

Only in America could ignorant and stupid command such a large salary.

 

[Neophyte]

This does have the advantage of not giving Sleepy any guaranteed money, at least as I understand it. This way we can keep him for a year to get some idea if he has straightened himself out while also getting to see if Cooley has recovered. Then make a decision on a longer contract with guaranteed money next season.

 

[Boone]

I think that's got to be the reasoning - you pay him probably more than you want to (or he deserves) this year, see if he's got enough brain cells left to figure out he'd better stop screwing around and get serious, and if he doesn't, you aren't on the hook after this year.

It may be smart from an operational level, but still seems sad that he'd be the guy we use a franchise tag on.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

This does have the advantage of not giving Sleepy any guaranteed money, at least as I understand it. This way we can keep him for a year to get some idea if he has straightened himself out while also getting to see if Cooley has recovered. Then make a decision on a longer contract with guaranteed money next season.

Do you mean past one year? Because the $5.5M tender is fully guaranteed (I believe).

 

[ntotoro]

Do you mean past one year? Because the $5.5M tender is fully guaranteed (I believe).

Franchise dollars aren't guaranteed. That's one reason players don't like being franchised. you franchise a guy at (say) $5.5m and he tears an ACL in training camp during the first game of the season, you can cut him for nothing.

Unless I remember incorrectly.

Nick

 

[Boone]

I'm not sure that's right ntoro - I think it IS guaranteed, even if he's suspended. I think the sole purpose of this has to be ensuring we don't lose him to another team while we determine if he's going to get his act together. I can't really see any other angle?

5.5 million dollars to do it. Seems like a lot for a guy with as many question marks around him as old sleepy. But maybe there were some other machiavellian reasons to go this route? Speculation on the other site that Jeff Fischer wants Davis as part of a trade-up scenario

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Not the best reference, but I found this:

There are two types of franchise tags: exclusive and non-exclusive. The exclusive tag prevents a player from negotiating with any other team; in return, the team must offer him a guaranteed salary equivalent to the average of the five best-paid players at his position for the upcoming season, or 120 percent of his salary the previous year, whichever is more.

A player who receives the non-exclusive tag is allowed to negotiate with other teams, but his current team has the right to match any offer. If the current team chooses not to match that offer and the player signs with the other team, that club must give up two first-round draft picks. When a team applies the non-exclusive franchise tag to a player, it must offer him a guaranteed salary equivalent to the average of the five best-paid players at his position the previous year, or 120 percent of his previous salary, whichever is more. In neither case is the player required to sign his own team's offer, known as a "tender." He can choose to sit out the year instead, or he and the team can work out a long-term contract.

I think the reason players don't like the Franchise tag is because its only a 1-year deal. If they play the 1-year deal and get injured, they don't get the long-term deal they're hoping for.

 

[ntotoro]

That makes sense. The other hand, they could forget to set their alarm clocks, run late out the door, trip on the front porch and tear an ACL, too...

Nick

 

[Jimbo]

It wouldn't surprise me to see Mike and Bruce grab a guy like Ladarius Green with one of those 4th round picks just to hedge the bet on Davis. That, in itself, could help ol' Sleepy avoid the Ganja Train.

 

[servumtuum]

I view it as somewhat pathetic that Fred ****ing Davis is the guy we reportedly have decided we're so afraid of losing we use the franchise tag on him. The guy has really had one decent season, and even then has shown the propensity to make incredibly stupid decisions at times (both on and off the field).

Sad testament to where we are if true.

Boone, just out of curiosity, do you have an alternate selection in mind as a player the Redskins could/should tag? Just wonderin'.

 

[Skinsfan76]

I actually agree with the decision to franchise Davis. Landry would really be the only other option and since he can't stay healthy he is not worth franchising.

 

[Elephant]

Do we need to franchise anybody?

 

[burgold]

I didn't like this move on first blush, but on second thought I do.

I'm not sold that Davis is a top five tight end, but I do like his potential. I think giving him a one year looksee to see if he can build on last year and equally importantly be smarter off the field may wind up being a wise choice.

Between the two, I do prefer franchising Davis to Landry.

 

[fansince62]

Do we need to franchise anybody?

good question!!!

 

[Neophyte]

Do we need to franchise anybody?

Nothing in the rules says we have to, no.

 

[Elephant]

I should have been a little more clear. I do not think there is a single player this year who we need to franchise. I was just wondering why we were considering franchising any player on our roster.