Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rams Consider Transition Tag For Trumaine Johnson

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rams Consider Transition Tag For Trumaine Johnson

    ProFootballTalk
    Posted by Michael David Smith on February 20, 2016, 2:24 PM EST



    The Los Angeles Rams may use the transition tag to retain cornerback Trumaine Johnson. Johnson, who had seven interceptions last season, is set to become an unrestricted free agent at the start of the league year. There’s been talk that Johnson could be franchised, but Jim Thomas of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that the Rams might place the transition tag, not the franchise tag, on Johnson if the two sides don’t reach a long-term deal.

    Like the franchise tag, the transition tag gives a team the right to match an offer one of its free agents signs. So if the Rams put the transition tag on Johnson and he signs with another team, they could choose to keep him by matching the offer. That’s what the Browns did two years ago with center Alex Mack, who signed an offer sheet with the Jaguars that the Browns matched.

    For the Rams, the advantage to using the transition tag instead of the franchise tag is that it wouldn’t cost them as much if Johnson ends up signing the tender offer and playing this season on the tag. The franchise tag salary for cornerbacks this season is expected to be $13.7 million, while the transition tag salary for cornerbacks is expected to be $11.7 million.

    Last year, one player got the transition tag: Dolphins tight end Charles Clay, who ended up signing an offer sheet with the Bills that the Dolphins declined to match. When a transition tagged player switches teams, the original team does not get draft pick compensation.

  • #2
    Smart move and I think there will be lots more (I hope)

    __________________________________________________________
    Keeping the Rams Nation Talking

    Comment


    • #3
      If they are saving the Franchise tag for someone else, this is a good idea. If they are not planning on using the Franchise tag on someone else, this a dumb move to save just 2 mil. Spend some of that money you just gained in franchise value. Isn't that the reason for moving to LA? All another team has to do is include a poison pill in the contract that prevents the RAMS from matching, and then we lose TJ. Dumb move, just plain dumb move.


      gap

      Comment


      • #4
        Well we all pretty much wanted Tru to remain a Ram at near to all costs... so this would be a very smart move by the Rams org. imho! Leaving the franchise tag available if needed for say perhaps JJ as I think the Rams really like him. But also perhaps they are making the choice not to use the FT on any player to keep the cap available to go after a prime target free agent they have in mind should he hit the open market. Just a thought there, as there could be some top talent out there if teams chose to let them see what the market can bear. I like that they at least want to make the effort to keep TJ. I really like him as I think most of us do even more than JJ. This is very interesting to follow...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by gap View Post
          If they are saving the Franchise tag for someone else, this is a good idea. If they are not planning on using the Franchise tag on someone else, this a dumb move to save just 2 mil. Spend some of that money you just gained in franchise value. Isn't that the reason for moving to LA? All another team has to do is include a poison pill in the contract that prevents the RAMS from matching, and then we lose TJ. Dumb move, just plain dumb move.


          gap
          to quote the internet:
          In 2011, the NFL and NFLPA ratified a new collective bargaining agreement. In this agreement, poison pill clauses were eliminated from offer sheets issued to players under the transition tag. The specific language in the CBA states:
          "No Offer Sheet may contain a Principal Term that would create rights or obligations for the Old Club that differ in any way (including but not limited to the amount of compensation that would be paid, the circumstances in which compensation would be guaranteed, or the circumstances in which other contractual rights would or would not vest) from the rights or obligations that such Principal Term would create for the Club extending the Offer Sheet (i.e., no 'poison pills')."

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Randart View Post
            I like that they at least want to make the effort to keep TJ. I really like him as I think most of us do even more than JJ. This is very interesting to follow...
            TJ has GOT to remain a Ram! I think he will be improving / should be improving over his already above-average talent rating.
            Last edited by RealRam; -02-20-2016, 07:38 PM. Reason: Tyop

            Comment


            • #7
              Tagging Johnson would sure put a snag in the Migos "package deal" plan.

              Comment


              • #8
                So who might the Rams franchise tag then? Its no secret the Rams want to keep J. Jenkins but with one tag coming at $11 Million and the other $13 Million--that will not sit well with T. Johnson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by gap View Post
                  If they are saving the Franchise tag for someone else, this is a good idea. If they are not planning on using the Franchise tag on someone else, this a dumb move to save just 2 mil. Spend some of that money you just gained in franchise value. Isn't that the reason for moving to LA? All another team has to do is include a poison pill in the contract that prevents the RAMS from matching, and then we lose TJ. Dumb move, just plain dumb move.


                  gap
                  The Franchise and Transition tags are mutually exclusive. Meaning, if a team uses a transition tag, they LOSE their franchise tag... and vice versa.

                  Just thought I'd clarify that before people derail this thread into who to transition and who to franchise this year.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by KoaKoi View Post

                    The Franchise and Transition tags are mutually exclusive. Meaning, if a team uses a transition tag, they LOSE their franchise tag... and vice versa.

                    Just thought I'd clarify that before people derail this thread into who to transition and who to franchise this year.
                    I thought that was changed a few years ago, and a team could use both. If it is a 'one-or-the-other', then Stan needs to let loose some of that $2 B he earned changing the name of his team from St. Louis to Los Angeles. $2 M is chump change to him, and it is worth making sure you don't lose one of the best CBs in the league. Wasn't the added value of the team moving supposed to make it better for keeping and signing the 'best players'?


                    gap

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by gap View Post

                      I thought that was changed a few years ago, and a team could use both. If it is a 'one-or-the-other', then Stan needs to let loose some of that $2 B he earned changing the name of his team from St. Louis to Los Angeles. $2 M is chump change to him, and it is worth making sure you don't lose one of the best CBs in the league. Wasn't the added value of the team moving supposed to make it better for keeping and signing the 'best players'?


                      gap


                      JT

                      Heard earlier this offseason that team might place transition tag on CB Trumaine Johnson if unable to get long-term deal.

                      JT made this statement before they cleared that cap space, so I agree having the cap space in place sign him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Transition tag continues to make little sense
                        Posted by Mike Florio on February 21, 2016, 9:40 AM EST

                        In the years before the transition tag did not become fully guaranteed upon signing, it made some sense to use it. And multiple teams did. Since the transition tag became fully guaranteed as part of the 2006 CBA extension, it has been used more sparingly.

                        The reason is simple. To use the transition tag, a significant investment on a one-year guaranteed deal is required, and if the player signs an offer sheet elsewhere that isn’t matched, there’s no compensation. By kicking in a little more on a one-year deal, the current team gets two first-round picks if the player leaves — which means for most players that he won’t be leaving.

                        But teams still use it, even though the end result in recent years hasn’t been great. When the Browns applied it to center Alex Mack, Mack finagled an offer sheet from the Jaguars with a provision allowing him to void the deal after two years. Now, two years later, the Browns have to worry about whether Mack will leave, along with what it may take to keep him to stay.

                        Last year, the Dolphins used the transition tag on tight end Charles Clay, who was gobbled up by a division rival with an offer sheet Miami wouldn’t match.

                        In both cases, another million or two on a one-year franchise tender would have kept that from happening.

                        So why do teams keep using the transition tag? Some may be doing it just to see what the player’s value is, knowing that if it’s too high they’ll let him walk. Others possibly don’t want the franchise tender to lay the foundation for a long-term deal.

                        Regardless, if anyone gets the transition tag this year (the Rams have leaked that they’re considering it with cornerback Trumaine Johnson), there’s no reason to think the outcome will be any different than what has happened the last two years. Either Johnson will get an offer sheet the Rams can’t or won’t match, or he’ll get an offer sheet with a legitimate poison pill embedded in it.

                        Whatever happens, don’t expect Johnson to adopt the same approach as former Steelers tackle Max Starks. When Pittsburgh applied the transition tag to Starks in 2008 — and once he realized the salary became fully guaranteed when the tender is accepted — Starks signed it. Johnson, per a league source, won’t be signing the transition tender, if it’s applied. Instead, he’ll be doing exactly what Mack did in 2014 and what Clay did in 2015: Looking aggressively for an offer from another team.
                        I tend to agree with others. While the old school poison pill is no longer an issue, including an option of some sort that the Rams may not want could be a possibility. Spend another couple million, apply the franchise tag if need be, then work to get a long term deal done.

                        Comment

                        Related Topics

                        Collapse

                        • AvengerRam
                          Schefter: Rams will franchise tag Trumaine Johnson
                          by AvengerRam
                          My thoughts:

                          1. Johnson is a guy we can't lose. He's our best DB by far, and has rare size for the CB position, making him a guy who can take on the bigger receivers.

                          2. I'm not thrilled about paying him franchise tag money. My hope is that this move is intended to secure his services with the hope of reaching a long-term deal later.
                          -02-27-2017, 10:42 AM
                        • Nick
                          Rudi doesn't want franchise tag
                          by Nick
                          Rudi doesn't want franchise tag
                          Agent says running back will sit if given one-year deal
                          By Mark Curnutte
                          Enquirer staff writer

                          Rudi Johnson would sit out the 2005 season rather than play under a one-year free agent contract designation available to the Bengals.

                          Peter Schaffer, Johnson's agent, said Friday night that he has told the Bengals that Johnson would not play if the club uses the franchise tag on Johnson.

                          "He feels he has earned the right not to play for insecurity," Schaffer said. "It's notanti-organization. It's not Corey Dillon. I was very clear: Rudi feels his contributions to the team and his stats warrant that, if he is going to play for the Bengals, that it is not for one year."

                          Johnson wants a five- or six-year contract with the Bengals, Schaffer said. Johnson can become an unrestricted free agent March 2. He played for a $1.8 million tender as a restricted free agent in 2004 and responded by starting all 16 games and setting franchise records for rushing yards (1,454) and rushing attempts (361).

                          The franchise tag severely limits a free agent's ability to change teams. The Bengals would have to guarantee Johnson a one-year deal equal to the average of the top five running back salaries in the league - expected to be near $6 million. If another team would sign Johnson as a free agent, the Bengals would receive compensation in the form of two first-round draft picks.

                          Johnson did not return several phone messages left Friday.

                          "They felt strongly about securing cornerstone players Willie Anderson (right tackle), Chad Johnson (wide receiver) and Carson Palmer (quarterback) with multi-year contracts," Schaffer said of the Bengals. "Rudi is not saying he does not want to be a Bengal. He wants to be a Bengal for several years."

                          The Bengals could put the tag on Johnson and then try to trade him.

                          Bengals spokesman Jack Brennan had no comment Friday night about Schaffer's comments.

                          Johnson has been a good team player, unlike Dillon, who consistently complained about playing in Cincinnati and tried to manipulate his exit.

                          The Bengals traded Dillon to New England in April for a second-round pick.
                          -01-22-2005, 11:26 AM
                        • Nick
                          2018 Offseason: You Make the Call - Trumaine Johnson
                          by Nick
                          With the season officially over, it's time to start discussing what we fans think the Rams should do this offseason to continue building on the improvement they showed in 2017. The first decisions for the Rams will involve players already on their roster or scheduled to hit free agency.

                          One of the most talked about Rams players in recent years as it relates to long term contract negotiations is cornerback Trumaine Johnson. The Rams have used their franchise tag on him for two years now, and due to the whopping cost of doing so a third time, it's unlikely the Rams are able to tag him again. Contract talks did not progress last summer, and unless both sides really heat things up in the next two months, Johnson is poised to hit the free agent market, where he will be among the top cornerbacks available.

                          According to Pro Football Focus, Johnson finished the year with a solid grade of 75.8, ranking as their 67th best corner in the league. There were questions during the offseason about how well Johnson fit into Wade Phillips's defensive scheme, and one could say that question has not been definitively answered one way or another. Regardless, it's time for the Rams to make a decision about what to do with their top cornerback.

                          The questions I have for you are as follows...

                          -Do you feel resigning Trumaine Johnson is an offseason priority, or do you think the Rams are better served by letting him go elsewhere and restocking at the CB position?
                          -If the Rams lose Johnson in free agency, what do you think is the best plan to replace him? Another free agent? The draft? Players already on the roster?

                          You make the call - What would your decision be regarding Trumaine Johnson?
                          -01-07-2018, 12:11 PM
                        • Nick
                          CB Trumaine Johnson likely playing 2016 under franchise tag
                          by Nick
                          Today is the deadline for franchise players to sign long-term extensions. If they don't, they will play the season under the tag and be eligible for free agency in 2017. There seems to be no indication as of the time of this posting that Johnson is poised to sign any extension with the Rams.

                          What are your thoughts on this, going forward? Should the Rams have given Johnson a Jenkins-like contract extension, or are they wise to not overspend on a long term deal while risking losing Johnson after the season?...
                          -07-15-2016, 10:41 AM
                        • r8rh8rmike
                          Rams Decide Against Using Franchise Tag
                          by r8rh8rmike
                          Rams decide against using franchise tag

                          17 hours ago • By Jim Thomas [email protected]

                          The Rams made it clear weeks ago that they weren’t interested in placing the franchise tag on offensive lineman Rodger Saffold. So it was no surprise when that turned out to be the case Monday, the deadline for using the franchise tag in the National Football League.

                          The franchise tag number for offensive linemen in 2014 is $11.65 million, a figure too high in the Rams’ estimation to use on Saffold.

                          The Rams haven’t used a franchise tag designation since they put it on safety Oshiomogho Atogwe in 2009, and they have used the tag only six times in 19 seasons since the team moved to St. Louis in 1995:

                          • 1998: CB Ryan McNeil

                          • 2000: DE Kevin Carter

                          • 2003, ’04 and ’05: LT Orlando Pace

                          • 2009: Atogwe.

                          As a result of not using the tag on Saffold, he is free to sign with other teams as of March 11. He can negotiate with other teams as early as Saturday because of the three-day contact period, which came into effect last season. The Rams have exclusive negotiating rights until Saturday.

                          The Rams met with Saffold’s representatives at the NFL scouting combine, but no contract offer was made at that time and a deal does not appear imminent. However, that can change with one phone call. Saffold is expected to make a decision quickly — perhaps as early as March 11, the first day of free agency .

                          Other notable Rams scheduled for unrestricted free agency are quarterback Kellen Clemens, linebacker Jo-Lonn Dunbar, safety Darian Stewart and offensive guard Chris Williams.

                          League-wide, only four teams used the franchise tag this year, down from eight a year ago and far off the record 21 franchise tag designations in 2012. There were also two players designated as transition players this year. Here’s the list:

                          Franchise players • PK Nick Folk, New York Jets; TE Jimmy Graham, New Orleans; DE Greg Hardy, Carolina; LB Brian Orakpo, Washington.

                          Transition players • C Alex Mack, Cleveland; LB Jason Worilds, Pittsburgh.

                          Franchise players earn the average of the of the top five players at their position. Transition players get the average of the top 10 players at their position.

                          The transition tag is rarely used, in part because teams get no draft-pick compensation, only get matching rights. In the case of the franchise tag, teams get two first-round draft picks if a player signs elsewhere under the non-exclusive franchise tag.

                          The exclusive franchise tag, which is more expensive, prevents a player from going anywhere. All four players tagged this year were given the non-exclusive franchise tag.

                          At positions of need for the Rams, players who were not franchised included cornerbacks Vontae Davis (Indianapolis),...
                          -03-04-2014, 05:48 PM
                        Working...
                        X