Text size +

No tag on Moss

Posted by Mike Reiss, Globe Staff February 21, 2008 04:26 PM

The deadline for placing franchise tags on players has passed, and the Patriots have not tagged WR Randy Moss.

That could mean that the sides have agreed to a multi-year contract. Yet a multi-year contract can not be announced until the 2008 league year begins Feb. 29, because players can not extend/restructure more than once in a league year. Moss had restructured his deal in April to consummate his trade to New England.

The Patriots did not place the franchise tag on any player.

33 comments so far...
  1. If not Randy Moss...then to whom (if anybody) did they assign the franchise tag?

    Posted by Larry in San Diego February 21, 08 04:38 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. so they didn't tag anyone? I don't understand

    Posted by King B February 21, 08 05:29 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. they don't have to tag anyone, so they didn't

    Posted by Fish February 21, 08 05:43 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Patriots drop the ball, like Reche Caldwell and Asante Samuel. If either of those two catch those balls, the Pats would have been champs. BTW, where's the apology from NFL for the extra 60 seconds the Giants got in last 2.40 of SB XLII? Check it out. No one talking about it, but Aikman and Buck mentioned it twice. The clock keeper acted on own, did not ashere to Mike Carrey's arm motions. Hmmmm. Game was over with Eli Manning being sacked...No Tyree catch. No Burress TD. No questions. No inquiry. No apologies. Hmmm. As for the franchise tag, very peculiar but not shocking given who would be candidates for it. Must be sign that Moss signing long term deal.

    Posted by Michael February 21, 08 05:46 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. why would that tag anyone other then moss? only asante was good enough for it, but we had a handshake deal that we wouldn't do it.

    Posted by a February 21, 08 05:48 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. they didn't tag anyone. there's no rule saying they HAVE to.

    Posted by FJU February 21, 08 05:50 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Who did you want the to tag?

    Posted by Sean, Montreal February 21, 08 05:52 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Interesting, Guess we'll find out next week. Go Pats!

    Posted by Jody February 21, 08 05:59 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. they tagged noone. they don't have to tag anyone

    Posted by chris February 21, 08 06:11 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. you don't have to use the franchise tag

    Posted by cavman February 21, 08 06:11 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Guys, read the last sentence.

    "The Patriots did not place the franchise tag on any player."

    They didn't "franchise tag" any player. It doesn't mean Moss is not returning to the Patriots; just that he won't be back as the "franchise" player.

    Posted by Rob February 21, 08 06:19 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Moss will catch 20 TDs next year, get ring, go to Hall, etc.
    Moss wants to stay with Patriots. Patriots want to stay with Moss.
    Moss stretches field, creates horror show problems for defense,
    makes Brady smile, makes Belechick smile, etc. Patriots will
    give him something like 8M a year for 3 years.
    Ring mattters more than money to RM, TB and BB.

    Posted by Mark Ospeck February 21, 08 06:22 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Lets Hope Randy returns. This guy cannot get out into the open market because someone will get silly and offer him one of those cannot match deals (like $25 million bonus).

    i am officially feeling like the sky is falling on Patriots fans ever since Matt Light threw the Super Bowl.

    Posted by Bigtuna February 21, 08 06:44 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Moss obviously wants to stay (he's said that) so you wouldn't tag a guys that's not going anywhere.
    As far as Asante Samuel is concerned, he may be too expensive for us to afford.

    Posted by Brandon February 21, 08 06:46 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. There were no other players worth tagging. Asante Samuel's deal with the Pats last fall freed him from getting tagged this year to explore free agency. The other players that are UFAs are not worth a franchise tag.

    Posted by Pats Fan on Cape Cod February 21, 08 06:46 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. they don't need to franchise someone, it is merely an option you have to retain a free agent for a year or two.

    Posted by dan February 21, 08 06:51 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. They did place the franchise tag on Matty Walsh. To keep him away from Specter.

    Posted by mwg February 21, 08 07:02 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. A team does not have to use the franchise tag. This year the Pats determined it wasn't worth using on any potential free agents.

    Posted by Tom February 21, 08 07:15 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Your not required to tag anyone. It is used as a way to avoid a hold-out in the final year where teams used to be held hostage while they worked to get a long term deal in place.

    It can backfire - see Asante Samuel - so teams may not want to do it in a given year. If they didn't franchise Moss, then they must be close to a long-term deal. Also means that they don't think there are any guys like Samuel or Moss that they couldn't afford to lose and don't feel will sign a 1-yr deal otherwise.

    Posted by Rich B February 21, 08 07:20 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. I hope the Pats have resigned him I hope they are not the stupid

    Posted by Paula February 21, 08 07:20 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. relax everyone. The Pats are smart enough not to let Moss go into free agency. There must be a deal in place.

    Posted by Sam February 21, 08 07:36 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. A rolling stone collects no Moss.
    Ok, I don't know how that applies, but I always wanted to say it.

    Posted by humptydump3 February 21, 08 08:24 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Chris(comment #9), Who is Noone? Is he a wide receiver or a young linebacker? Tell us more.

    Posted by tim wilson February 21, 08 08:33 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Help me understand. Did the Pats have to franchise anyone? Why didn't they use the franchise tag?

    Posted by Lloyd Christmas February 21, 08 08:40 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. They didn't franchise Moss because franchising a player pisses them off and they'll bolt after one year. I'm guessing they're gambling that Moss wants a ring so bad he'll take less money to be with the Patriots again.

    But I do think it's risky. When Moss was with the Raiders interest was low but now it's high again and no matter how badly he wants to win it's hard to say no to the cash especially if his agent has anything to say about it.

    Posted by JH February 21, 08 08:59 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. I think it would be goood for the pats to keep moss and then get ty law back that would make even better on Deffense if they get him back hes a better cover corner back then samual

    Posted by Jeff February 21, 08 09:09 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Lets not forget what Tom Brady said about Randy Moss !
    We are a pair, We go together !

    Go Patriots !

    It's a shame we didn't win The SuperBowl But what other team has gone 18-0 ?

    We don't need people with big egos .

    We could use Sammy Morris back
    Hey how about Zack Thomas ?

    Posted by Michael February 21, 08 09:35 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. maybe someone can answer this, i've emailed 4 sports writers & no one could/would answer. I go way back with the Pats (all the way to the beginning, now live in Fl. & go to games when they come down here). I watched the Super Bowl (in horror) on a TV down in Central America. I came back, read both Boston paper's archives & found no real critical articles re. the Pat's falling apart, being out coached, etc, etc. It was almost like everyone's afraid to criticize B.B. I felt midway thru the season that the best thing that could happen to the Pats was to lose a game & re-forus their energy. Maybe I'm missing something.

    Posted by Ron February 21, 08 09:42 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. wow michael, bitter much?

    Posted by sully February 21, 08 09:55 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. The likely outcome here is that Moss has signed a new contract. However, because he renegotiated his contract this year to come to NE, he cannot change his contract again or sign a new deal until the new NFL year begins (2.29.08). That's a league rule.

    So the Pats are not allowed to sign him to a new contract until then, and stating that they have re-signed him would go against league rules (and we all know how the league has them under a microscope over rules violations).

    I would expect that when free agency starts and the league calendar starts fresh the team will announce that Moss has agreed to a new deal.

    If that is the case, there is no reason to franchise him as he will not be a free agent and it would be a big waste of time to file paperwork and answer questions about franching him for nothing.

    Posted by DY February 21, 08 10:28 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. all this 'rings matter more than money' is such a con perpetrated against the working class. what if it ends up no rings and less money, then what? how much more will kraft make from each home game based on the ticket price boost? rings matter more than money. what a joke, what a con job.

    Posted by no ring/less money February 21, 08 10:56 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. comment to ring/less money :

    At this point in his career rings do matter more than $ to Moss.

    1. Moss has brains

    2. Say Moss gets 8M from Patriots per year, but some other (lesser) team
    offers him 12M... So what's the difference between the two for Moss? When Moss already makes the 8M, then getting the ring is obviously of larger import.

    3. Only a moron would go to the bad team for the extra 4M, then
    regret never being a champion when he ends up an old man, and
    everybody gets old, even Randy Moss.

    Posted by Mark Ospeck February 22, 08 01:49 PM
    Reply | Report this post
  1. Post #30 by DY, thanks for all the info. Only one problem, it's all in the article!! Duh.

    Posted by tim wilson February 23, 08 11:45 PM
    Reply | Report this post
add your comment
Required
Required (will not be published)

This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.

Mike Reiss and other Globe reporters provide regular updates -- and a behind the scenes look -- on the daily happenings of the Patriots.
If you're looking for the latest on the Super scene in Arizona, check out our Double Coverage blog.

ask reiss

Questions will be considered for Mike's mailbag
Name:
E-mail:
Your question/comment:
archives

browse this blog

by category