Marshall Tendered For First Round Pick
by tommite622 on Mar 3, 2010 2:28 PM CST
Email
PrintThere's been a lot of talk on WCG today about the Bears possibly acquiring Brandon Marshall, but according to sporting news.com and Adam Schefter, that may have just become impossible.
According to a report from ESPN’s Adam Schefter via Twitter, Marshall, a restricted free agent, just received the first-round tender.
That means just to acquire him, the Bears will need to send a first-round pick to Denver. Here’s the problem: The Broncos already own Chicago’s first-round pick for 2010, thanks to, you guessed it, last year’s Cutler trade.
Unless we trade Olsen for a first rounder which we subsequently ship off to Denver, there is no way that we can get Marshall. I honestly think that a first-rounder is a fair price for Brandon but what we would have to give up in order to get said first-rounder is just too much. Hopefully, this means we'll be looking at that young core of guys at WR for another year, and the Bears can focus on greater needs.
Update: Here's the link to the story: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Atg_2C8b2t9mNRmjNQqisbM5nYcB?slug=tsn-brandonmarshalltobea&prov=tsn&type=lgns
23 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
And the Bears just
tendered Anderson a 2nd round deal. He’ll make 1.7mil this year unless another team offers him more, at which point they have to give us a second round pick.
I wasn’t too sold on Marshall anyway, I think we have more pressing needs.
Exactly
I would like having Marshall, but its not something that we absolutely need in order to win. Bring on Peppers! Or Kampman, or Rolle, I’ll take any of them.
Tell me why they couldnt get our 2011 First Rounder..............
Im not saying it will happen, Im just saying it could.
"How sad, another victim of the Night Nurses from Jersey."
From What I've Read
That’s not the way that the tender works, it’s for this year’s picks, and its non-negotiable. Plus, I think the Bears want to avoid not having a first round pick for three years in a row.
After all the First Round Picks weve wasted money on, I could care less...........
if we give up every first round pick for the next 5 years as long as the player we got in return were as young and talented as Marshall and Cutler. Id much rather have the proven polished player over the potential player.
"How sad, another victim of the Night Nurses from Jersey."
Maybe
But, lets say Brian Urlacher goes down this year and calls it quits, or we don’t pick up a safety in free agency. Wouldn’t you rather have a first rounder to spend on a need area than a (very good) player with a bad reputation for being a cancer in a position that I wouldn’t qualify as a need?
Right...
i was hoping for BM and Rolle and Peppers and Kampman and Chester Taylor….Mine as well go for broke in my mind..lol
Walter Payton lives on!!!
I think...
the tender is in play only if the Bears sign him to an offer sheet. Then they would be required to send them a 1st round draft pick in 2010 (which they currently don’t have) if the Broncos choose not to match, but the Broncos still could trade him to a team since they still hold his rights, then he would become a RFA for Chicago.
If anyone knows for sure let us know.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Mar 4, 2010 8:36 AM CST reply actions
I don't think a player can be traded without
a deal in place. I don’t think the Bears have any chance of acquiring Marshall unless they receive a 1st rounder via another trade.
I just read on sporting news
that the Broncos can trade him to Chicago if they want.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Mar 4, 2010 11:32 AM CST up reply actions
technically
once they tender him, he’s under contract…
I think…
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Mar 4, 2010 1:49 PM CST up reply actions
No.
I’ve never seen a player traded that wasn’t under contract, save for draft rights on draft day. But the draft is special in that you have to meet a certain criteria to be draft eligible. You have to declare yourself eligible if you meet the criteria for that year. If you don’t get drafted you then become an unrestricted FA able to sign anywhere. But in essence, you have to pass through the draft to attain the right to become a free agent. The draft grants team rights to a player should they choose to exercise that right to sign a player. The rights to sign a draftee can be exchanged. The rights to sign a free agent cannot be exchanged. The player is no longer under contract. Otherwise, technically you would be able to trade unrestricted FAs in the same manner.
A tender is a way to set value. It’s an offer sheet. You can’t tell a player I’m going to sign you for 2.2 million. You’re offering him 2.2 million for one season. He hasn’t agreed to anything. In most cases a deal is being negotiated. But that player can also negotiate with other teams. The current team has set the value via the tender for what a new team would have to provide in exchange for signing a player away from the current team. That’s the definition of restricted free agency in the NFL.
(And I’m not being defensive or trying to rock the boat. If I am wrong, I can accept that. But my understanding of free agency is what I have expressed above.)
what I read was
His rights along with the tender he received would go to the team that traded for him. Then it would be up to the new team to negotiate with him on a longer term conrtact or just keep the tender in place. Because if no one signs him to an offer sheet he then plays under that tendered contract? Now I’m confused.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Mar 4, 2010 3:21 PM CST up reply actions
Here's something I found...
The definition that we cited above by the CBA for a Free Agent is really the definition of an “Unrestricted Free Agent” (UFA). More specifically, an UFA is : “[a] player [that] shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any Club, and any Club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with such player, without penalty or restriction, including, but not limited to, Draft Choice Compensation between Clubs or First Refusal Rights of any kind.” Basically, what that means is that an UFA is free to sign with the highest bidder (or the team of their choice) without that team having to give the original team any kind of compensation. When a player with five or more accrued seasons (or with four or more accrued seasons in any Capped Year) reaches the end of his player contract, he becomes an UFA.
Obviously, if the CBA is going to define a term for an “Unrestricted Free Agent”, you would expect that they must also have something called a “Restricted Free Agent” (RFA). And, of course, you would be right. A RFA is “any Veteran player with three or more accrued seasons, but less than five accrued seasons (or less than four accrued seasons in any capped year)… At the expiration of his last Player Contract during such period… [the player] shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any club, and any club shall be completely free to negotiate and sign a Player Contract with any such player, subject to… certain restrictions.” The restrictions are the fun part.
….. details in here…..
In the event a Prior Club withdraws its Qualifying Offer, the RFA immediately becomes an UFA.
Again, it doesn’t have anything about trading rights to a FA, but it does specify the right to negotiate a deal. There is some mumbo jumbo in the details there, but I didn’t want this post to take up too much space.
But....
from the same article…
Teams can officially designate Franchise and Transition Players between Feb 5, 2009 and Feb 19, 2009.
February 26 is the deadline for clubs to submit qualifying offers to their RFAs whose contracts have expired and to whom they desire to retain a Right of First Refusal/Draft Compensation.
Free Agency officially begins on February 27. For RFAs, the period officially ends on April 17. The deadline for old clubs to exercise the Right of First Refusal to RFAs is April 24…..
A prior team has until June 1 to tender an UFA or a RFA a qualifying offer (worth at least 110% of the salary of the final year of the contract with the prior team)………….In the case of RFAs, if such a June 1 tender is made, the player can ONLY sign with the the prior club. If no June 1 tender is made for a RFA (or the tender is rescinded by the prior club before July 22), then the player becomes an UFA. In the case of both UFAs and RFAs, if the player does not sign with the Prior team by the first Tuesday following Week 10 of the regular NFL season, then the player shall be prohibited from playing in the NFL for the remainder of that season.
So, whether the player has signed the tender or not is irrelevant, in the case of an RFA. He has no choice but to sign a tendered offer, unless he wishes to miss the whole season, as he cannot sign with another team, and if he doesn’t sign by week 10, then he isn’t playing in the NFL in 2010. A player who doesn’t sign the tender is slitting his own throat.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 4, 2010 7:28 PM CST up reply actions
The question was whether an unsigned player
could be traded. It cannot happen.
With regards to trades, here is another blurb.
Elliott from Chattanooga, TN writes: The Jets put Leon Washington on a second-round tender. Does that mean since the Titans don’t have a second round pick this year they can’t make bid for him? If they could do you think they would be interested in him sense he was a Pro Bowl kick returner and that was a position they were looking to address this year, plus he would be someone to alternate with Chris Johnson.
Paul Kuharsky: Good question for the AFC South since neither the Titans nor the Jaguars have a second round pick.
If either of them wanted to sign a guy tendered at a second-round level to an offer sheet, they’d have to a) acquire a second rounder equal to what they would have had in the draft or one higher; or b) give up their first rounder instead. Basically, if you don’t have a pick in the right round and can’t get one commensurate to what you would have had, it gets rounded up a round. Nobody’s going to be doing the rounded up thing.
While Washington is intriguing as a return guy, the Titans have sufficient alternatives to Johnson as running back. A second rounder they’d have to trade for plus the kind of contract Washington would want are too high a price for the Titans, I’d say.
exactly.....
The team is trading his rights, technically, not his contract. It’s a minute difference, but an important one.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 4, 2010 11:44 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
