Franchise Tag Player Vote

[Florida Panthers]

With the new ruling of Free Agency, we have decided to create a new aspect to the league as well which will be the use of Franchise Player Tags.

Franchise Player Tags will help prevent people from having to re-sign the same player who may be signed to a bridge contract in real life multiple times in a short span. All players who are given the Franchise Player Tag will NOT count towards 1 of your re-signs. Once a team uses their Franchise Player Tag, they CANNOT move it onto a new player for 3 seasons.

However, teams are permitted to leave that tag on its existing player for as long as they wish without having to declare a new three-year period. For example, Wayne Gretzky is given a franchise player tag 3 seasons ago, when the 4th season comes the GM may leave that franchise player tag on Wayne Gretzky for as long as they want and are free to move it whenever they desire.

Trading or releasing a franchise player does NOT "unlock" the FP tag move that was assigned to him, nor does it give the acquiring team an additional Franchise Player tag. If a tagged player is moved, the Franchise Player Tag will not become available until the end of the mandatory three-year period.


However we want to get the opinions of the league whether to do 1 or 2 Franchise Player Tags.

Franchise Player Tags will NOT be introduced until NEXT SEASON. Since this is a brand new idea, we will not be allowing this to be done until the following years free agent pool as people have made trades based on the current setup. This will also give everyone ample time to determine when they want to use their Franchise Player Tag and on who as this is a 3 year commitment.

Once again any questions or concerns please ask below!

[Deleted]

odd lol, thought you guys were trying to get more players into FA but keep doing things so less will haha

[Florida Panthers]

Dec 13, 2015 17:13:21 GMT -5 @kalost said:

odd lol, thought you guys were trying to get more players into FA but keep doing things so less will haha

This is more of a matter in regards of players signing bridge contracts before their RFAs expire in real life for example If our current setup was in place last season a player such as Ryan OReilly would have needed to be signed last year and next year. Being that this Tag lasts for 3 seasons it doesn't damage the FA pool other than the fact that means each team exposes 1 less player every 3 seasons

[Winnipeg Jets]

Im def interested in the tags. Id be cool with 2 of them

[Tampa Bay Lightning]

what exactly is the definition of a bridge contract?

[Dallas Stars]

A bridge contract is basically the small 1-2-3 year contracts between a players' ELC and their longer deal that's usually made on their last year of RFA.

[Tampa Bay Lightning]

Ok thanks. voted.

[Deleted]

Wow only 11 people voted. Where's the other 19?? Poll closes tomorrow!!

[Dallas Stars]

Some would have voted for no franchise tag

[Deleted]

Ah. Maybe

[Los Angeles Kings]

Yeah, but if that's not an option for them then why abstain their votes. They won't get what they really want but at least vote on what you think would be the second best option.

[Deleted]

Yes true.

[Florida Panthers]

What I am going to do is remove this poll on Friday, and then I will add a new poll to this thread with the option of No Franchise Tag vs 1 Franchise Tag most likely as that seems to be the victor of the two right now

[Los Angeles Kings]

Well 3 people have voted for 2 franchise tags... Are those people now going to abstain since their option won't be there anymore? Why don't you just re create this poll but ten just add the option of 0 franchise tags

[Deleted]

Yeah, I can't help but feel we are over complicating this. I don't think the franchise tag is necessary which is why I have abstained from voting. We took away some free re-signs under the new free agency rules, but this addition of franchise tags would only undo that step towards a more exciting free agency period, no?

[Florida Panthers]

Dec 30, 2015 14:28:53 GMT -5 Los Angeles Kings said:

Well 3 people have voted for 2 franchise tags... Are those people now going to abstain since their option won't be there anymore? Why don't you just re create this poll but ten just add the option of 0 franchise tags

Because 2 has clearly lost it wouldn't be a feasible option, it will be between 1 or 0, unless something dramatically changes within the next 34 hours lol

[Florida Panthers]

Dec 30, 2015 14:33:22 GMT -5 @nashvillepredators said:

Yeah, I can't help but feel we are over complicating this. I don't think the franchise tag is necessary which is why I have abstained from voting. We took away some free re-signs under the new free agency rules, but this addition of franchise tags would only undo that step towards a more exciting free agency period, no?

No because you only get to use it ONCE over 3 years. Think of it as once every 3 years you can get an extra re-sign, but only on that one player. The reason for the Franchise Player Tag is If a player such as Mike Hoffman who just signed a 1 year deal, signs another 1 year deal, and then signs a long term contract, you are Re-Signing that player as 1 of your re-signs for 3 seasons in a row, whereas the Franchise Player Tag covers Hoffman so you don't have to keep re-signing him as he plays out his bridge contracts under his RFA. Once you place the tag on any player it can't be moved for 3 seasons off that player.

[Deleted]

Dec 30, 2015 14:37:51 GMT -5 Florida Panthers said:

Dec 30, 2015 14:33:22 GMT -5 @nashvillepredators said:

Yeah, I can't help but feel we are over complicating this. I don't think the franchise tag is necessary which is why I have abstained from voting. We took away some free re-signs under the new free agency rules, but this addition of franchise tags would only undo that step towards a more exciting free agency period, no?

No because you only get to use it ONCE over 3 years. Think of it as once every 3 years you can get an extra re-sign, but only on that one player. The reason for the Franchise Player Tag is If a player such as Mike Hoffman who just signed a 1 year deal, signs another 1 year deal, and then signs a long term contract, you are Re-Signing that player as 1 of your re-signs for 3 seasons in a row, whereas the Franchise Player Tag covers Hoffman so you don't have to keep re-signing him as he plays out his bridge contracts under his RFA. Once you place the tag on any player it can't be moved for 3 seasons off that player.

Personally, in this example, I think you should have to use a resign on Hoffman each year. Being a GM in this league is supposed to be a challenge. That's all. Cap leagues are tough. They're supposed to be that way. This eliminates some tough decisions that make the league a fun challenge. GMs should have to be savvy to stay competitive and I think this just makes things too easy.

[Florida Panthers]

Dec 30, 2015 14:50:59 GMT -5 @nashvillepredators said:

Dec 30, 2015 14:37:51 GMT -5 Florida Panthers said:

No because you only get to use it ONCE over 3 years. Think of it as once every 3 years you can get an extra re-sign, but only on that one player. The reason for the Franchise Player Tag is If a player such as Mike Hoffman who just signed a 1 year deal, signs another 1 year deal, and then signs a long term contract, you are Re-Signing that player as 1 of your re-signs for 3 seasons in a row, whereas the Franchise Player Tag covers Hoffman so you don't have to keep re-signing him as he plays out his bridge contracts under his RFA. Once you place the tag on any player it can't be moved for 3 seasons off that player.

Personally, in this example, I think you should have to use a resign on Hoffman each year. Being a GM in this league is supposed to be a challenge. That's all. Cap leagues are tough. They're supposed to be that way. This eliminates some tough decisions that make the league a fun challenge. GMs should have to be savvy to stay competitive and I think this just makes things too easy.

In real life he would be an RFA which is why the Tag is here as an option to vote on as we lowered the age to 24 and under being considered RFAs, whereas real life is 27 and under or 7 years in the show. So to be fair it's actually harder being a GM in this league already. Sure you can look at it as it being a challenge of having to constantly re-sign a player to his bridge contracts, but it's also unrealistic when compared to the NHL where that team would still own his rights or receive comp for said player. Here in this league you have no control over the length of term a player signs for or the cap hit that the player has because we are going based off the real NHL contracts. Cap leauges are tough not because of the amount of re-signs, but because of the fact that there is a Cap. Sure the amount of re-signs make cap leagues even harder, but this is what has already occurred as we lowered the RFA age by 3 years and reduced the amount of re-signs to boot, but we are also using the real NHL contracts to go along with it so there isn't the flexibility of offering a player a contract with your own length of term and salary like there is in almost every other cap sim league.

I see both sides to the argument and the Franchise Tag is something that is used in 2 cap leagues that I am in that work well, which is why I brought it here to see what people wanted to do. This isn't a definitive thing that will happen even if the votes say yes versus no. This also wouldn't be put in place until the following season if we do go ahead and put it into place.

[Philadelphia Flyers]

Anything that makes the league more closely mirror NHL would be welcome in my bookitchen so I have no problem with a franchise tag for RFA's. An RFA or UFA compensation scheme (think baseball rather than NhL for uFa) might also work