True, but there are teams (Seattle, Indy, Miami, maybe Denver, KC and others) that are in desperate need of QBs. Someone will take the risk on Flynn, just as they reach for QBs in the draft. Look at what happened last year, and maybe the year before in the draft. In addition, even if Flynn doesn't leave, but if Rodgers goes down early with a season-ending injury, they could be very, very glad to still have Flynn around.
Maybe every team should sign a 16 million/yr backup qb then. Since every team would be glad to have him if their starting qb goes down
i agree that someone will take a flyer on him and will over pay him - i just dont know if they would be willing to do that AND give the packers a high draft pick for the privilege and if no-one bites then the packers are screwed - if i was flynn and got franchised i would be tempted just to sit my ass for the season, pocket $16m and then move on the following year.
Nice. What's with the attitude? I said it was risky, but is it any less risky to let you backup QB walk away and get nothing for him except a 3rd round compensatory pick the following season? Not every team has the talent GB does. GB could still make the playoffs with Flynn at QB, most of the teams in the NFL couldn't, and that's not a reflection on Flynn's ability or lack thereof. It may not even come to that. GB may have another plan in mind already and be happy to let Flynn walk. I'm not saying that they definitely will use the franchise tag, just that there's a case for doing so.
Maybe I'm wrong, but it's my understanding that if a franchised player is traded, a totally new contact is negotiated and signed. It that's correct, then they wouldn't be paying Flynn $16 million and giving GB a high draft pick.
Usually the teams make a trade contingent on a period of time where they have a change to work out a new long term deal with that player. If no deal is struck then the deal can be voided. A new, long term contract (read guaranteed money) is often in the players best interest any way. So once the trade goes down both the player and new team have veryr good incentive to do a new deal and rip up the franchise tag.
lol didnt mean it to come off like a total dick, but it just seems very unlikely to happen. Keeps them from tagging players of their own (Finley) and carries a bit of risk killing your salary cap. Limits them from being active in free agency till they can get him off their hands, and who knows if you can trade a guy when hes making that much cash. After the Eagles trading Kolb, teams would be wise to heed with caution
Yes, thats why I asked you before in another thread, Sometimes its hard to tell a persons intent just with what they are typing. Despite Kolb's so-so play, teams are going to come after Flynn. Anyone that shows a shread of promise at QB in this league will get chased after and paid, becasue it is the most important position on the feild.
sorry i wasnt very clear - what I meant was unless the new team offered Flynn a hefty long term contract along the lines of what Kolb was offered then there would be little incentive for him to agree to a trade as he could just sit tight, collect his $16m from the Packers, then move on the following season and another team may then be more willing to give him a good deal as they would not (at the same time) have to give the Packers a high draft pick. would a team give (i) a big money contract to flynn based on a very small sample of games and (ii) a high draft pick to the Packers? its questionable. personally I think flynn may well get tagged and traded but i would not be surprised if the packers do not take the risk that they cannot move him.
I don't think Flynn has any say in the matter if he's traded. If he's traded, that's it, he's now on the other team. He can be a prick about renegotiating if he wants, but I'm sure he will get a fair deal and I'm sure he wants the opportunity to start.
true but he will only be traded if he agrees a new deal - no-one is going to trade for him on a 1 year $16m deal so in reality he has total control over where he goes
Thanks for the clarification. As I said, I don't disagree that it's a risky move. Personally, I'd rather get a pick for Flynn than keep Finley. I think Finley is overrated and the Packers have some other decent TEs. It does limit them in FA until he's traded, but the point you missed is that if he is traded to another team it won't be for the $16 million contract for one year. They will negotiate a new long-term contract with him and will get him a lot cheaper. True about Kolb, but there aren't enough good QBs to go around. There are only two topflight QB prospects in the draft and most teams won't get a shot at them. Weeden and Tanneyhill are the next best two and Weeden is already 28, but could probably start this year. Tanneyhill I'm not so sure about. GB could get burned if the tag Flynn, but it would hurt to lose him and get nothing this year in return. I guess it just depends upon what "poison" you'd rather risk.
In a few years we'll be back to that when the cap goes out the window with the influx of new money. Teams will have to spend $200 million or so on their roster but nobody is going to tell them where they have to spend it and smart teams will warehouse QB's when they get the opportunity.
Well I posted in another thread that the cap is only going to increase by 7% a year every year. Got a long long way till that comes. And salaries will significantly increase over that same timespan. More cap room means more $$$ to bid for FA. Esp when teams are forced to spend with the cap floor
