Brandon Jacobs franchised

[Randall]

Jacobs franchised

 

The Giants have placed the non-exclusive franchise tag on running back Brandon Jacobs, the team has announced. That means the free-agent-to-be will not be a free agent, though the "non-exclusive" classification means he's free to negotiate with other teams. Of course, if he signs with another team and the Giants don't match, Jacobs' new team would owe the Giants two first-round draft picks.

 

The Giants had until next Thursday to use the tag.

 

"With the deadline approaching it was the right business thing to do at this point, although we are hopeful to get a longer term deal hammered out in the near future," general manager Jerry Reese said in the team's press release. "I did speak to Brandon and we had a very good conversation today."

 

Here's what the tag also means: Jacobs, who turns 27 in July, is scheduled to earn $6.621 million this season if he signs the 1-year deal. That number is the average of the top five running back salaries from this past season. If the Giants had given Jacobs the "exclusive" tag, they would have owed him the average of the top five salaries at his position as of an as-yet unspecified date in April.

 

It also means Jacobs could potentially be bumped down to a restricted free agent next year if the NFL Players' Association and the league cannot reach an agreement on a new collective bargaining agreement. That would make 2010 an uncapped year and nudge the requirement for unrestricted free agency from four accrued seasons to six. Jacobs is entering his fifth season.

 

But before anyone worries about that, the Giants' designating Jacobs their franchise player (only the second time in their history they've done that) doesn't preclude them from still working out a long-term deal in the coming months. In fact, they have until July 15 to do so. If they don't reach an agreement, Jacobs will then be forced to play under the 1-year deal, which would be 100 percent guaranteed against injury or a release.

 

"They don't want to let me go and it just buys more time to get a deal done," Jacobs said. "A deal is going to be done and I am confident in that fact that a deal is going to be done. They just didn't want to let me hit the market to see what else is out there. They want me in and it is fine with me, because I would rather be here. It is another reason why I don't really have a problem with it. Now if I didn't want to be here I would be going off the deep end now, but that is not the fact because I want to be here. My family likes it here. This is where I started and this is kind of where I want to finish. It is really just to franchise me to try to get a deal done.

 

"I think both parties will probably come to an agreement here soon on a long-term deal. A lot of guys would be going off the deep end now, which I understand why guys do it and why nobody wants to be franchised. That only happens when guys don't want to play the rest of their career with that team and they want to see what else is out there. I am in a situation where I want to be here. I want to play here. That doesn't really bother me."

 

Tom Coughlin wants Jacobs here as well.

 

"I never felt Brandon would be anything but a New York Giant," the coach said. "There isn't any question that when you talk about being a physical football team, he gives you that physical edge as a runner, a pass protector or catching the ball coming out of the backfield. He's a valuable, valuable part of our team and of the philosophy and the concept by which we play. It's important for our team going forward that he's a Giant."

 

The previous time the Giants have used the franchise tag was in 1993 when they used it on OL Jumbo Elliot. They've used the transition tag on LB Carl Banks (1993), TE Howard Cross (1994) and RB Rodney Hampton (1996).

 

4:12 p.m. UPDATE I had written it was the third time they used the tag because that's what the Giants' release said. I double-checked and saw it was only once before. As you can see, I've made the changes.

[Robash]

I like it, they will get a new deal for him.

[tazinib1]

Wind will wind up somewhere else. Fire is the better of the 3 IMO anyway.

[Robash]

was just gonna post, Ward and the Giants are talking new deal and ware could suplant fire as the number 3. does that make him water?

[Timmypg]

I am really happy with news.

[Kid Cid]

This is a good thing. All parties want to see a deal get done, the Giants did this to let him know that they want him to remain a Giant. The tag they used allows him to talk to other teams if he wants to find out his market value, but honestly, his agent has probably already done that for him. It's just a matter of making the numbers work for both sides now.

[Square]

was just gonna post, Ward and the Giants are talking new deal and ware could suplant fire as the number 3. does that make him water?

Alright...now I'm confused. I always thought Bradshaw was pretty good. Is he going to end up somewhere else or will it be Ward?

[Robash]

Alright...now I'm confused. I always thought Bradshaw was pretty good. Is he going to end up somewhere else or will it be Ward?

 

Bradshaw isnt going anywhere, ware is good and there is talk he could pass bradshaw. I can't remember or find where i saw that at, but he had a very promising pre-season...just no carries leftover to give him once the games started counting. Ware and Ward are the same build, so it would make sense to me to put him at number 2 if ward does leave leaving Bradshaw exactly where he is at. Situational type stuff late in the game, if at all.

[tazinib1]

Bradshaw isnt going anywhere, ware is good and there is talk he could pass bradshaw. I can't remember or find where i saw that at, but he had a very promising pre-season...just no carries leftover to give him once the games started counting. Ware and Ward are the same build, so it would make sense to me to put him at number 2 if ward does leave leaving Bradshaw exactly where he is at. Situational type stuff late in the game, if at all.