Franchise tag on Haushka?

The last few days there's been a lot of talk about placing our franchise tag on Haushka. That would be around $3.1m FOR A KICKER...

I understand the sentiment that you never want to be without a good kicker because it could mean a game at some point and he certainly is a top 5 kicker in the game right now.

Haushka made 620k last year and this would be a huge bump. It's also not unheard of for us to use it on a kicker as we did in 2010 on Olindo Mare.

Just seems odd to me to use it on a kicker when the money could viably be used elsewhere to resign core players we need on a consistent basis.

I went through some misery years with Holmgren with piss poor kickers. We lost ours to NY when they gave him an unheard (for that time) of million bucks over 3 years.

Fast forward to now. We have a kicker that trained in the off season with many different types of athletics learning to gain leg strength.

Please guys, don't let this one get away. No more of this stupidity we've heard for years from all the teams,,"oh we can get a kicker anywhere" bullshit.

:roll:

I think it's just speculation and there are so few that they'd think would get the tag so they are throwing out Hauschka's name. Personally I don't see us using the tag at all this off season

The thing is, though, you CAN get a kicker anywhere.

That's not to say that I don't like Hauschka. I do. I'd love to keep him on a reasonable deal (no more than $1.5m per year).

But the fact of the matter is that most decent kickers tend to fall between about 82% and 90% on their FG attempts. Occasionally, there is an outlier season where a kicker only misses one attempt or misses several. But for the most part, it's a very predictable range. And if you look at the active kickers for each team in the league, almost every team has a guy whose career shows that range.

In the end, if you're going to give a big contract out to a player, do it for a guy who sees the field for more than a handful of snaps and whose skillset isn't relatively fungible.

I agree with Kidhawk. I dont think we need to use it this year and probably wont. The talking heads are just getting as bored as we are with the offseason.....has it only been 2 weeks??? LOL

Yes but his kickoff stats of getting the ball out of/deep in the end zone are way up this season.

:les:

the franchise tag is the average salary of the top 5 paid kickers the previous season right?

Which kickers in the league were making over 3 mil per season????

I don't think it will be used, but the only person I could see it possibly being used on his him.

bigcc":1rw0kn9t said:

the franchise tag is the average salary of the top 5 paid kickers the previous season right?

Which kickers in the league were making over 3 mil per season????

Click to expand...

There are 8 kickers making over $3m a year average now. Janikowski is at the top @ $3.8m.

I would guess that if they did use it, it would only be as part of negotiating a longer term deal.

Don't get me wrong, Haushka is awesome and consistent, but I don't know if any kicker is worth the amount for the tag. Kickers now a days are overall really consistent, and I think we could get someone for much cheaper that could make all the kicks Haushka made.
Also, Haushka hasn't really shown a big leg, and IMO it would be nice to get someone in here that can kick the long ball. Seeing how every time we lose, its pretty much by a field goal

IMO, Seattle missed a great chance to sign him long term at a reasonable price last year. I am not a fan of 1 year contracts for very good kickers.

I'm fine with letting him test the market. I trust JS to find a good replacement if need be. This isn't the NFL of the Holmgren years, the league is adding a few very good kickers out of the college ranks every year- there is more supply than demand. Let's not forget how it was that we acquired Haushka in the first place. We got him because a couple years ago he wasn't even the best kicker on Denver's preseason roster.

Would love to keep him, but won't panic if we lose him. Haushka is unquestionably a stud, but then again a lot of kickers will look good with Seattle's coverage unit and Pete's phobia of 50 yard attempts.

According to this, http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/kicker/, the top 5 salaries for 2014 kickers are:

1) Josh Scobee, $3,225,000
2) Matt Prater, $3,000,000
3) Stephen Gostkowski, $2,900,000
4) Rob Bironas, $2,875,000
5) Matt Bryant, $2,750,000

This averages out to be $2,950,000. I don't know how the franchise tag works, if it's all counted against the cap or not. I would guess that it is, as I don't imagine any signing bonuses are anything are involved with the franchise tag.

That's a lot of money for a kicker, but Hauschka couldn't have been any better than he's been the past 3 years for us. And, he's still very young, with room to improve. The franchise tag is just a last resort, and buys us more time to put together a long-term contract if needed.

dracolich81":2lw79lae said:

Don't get me wrong, Haushka is awesome and consistent, but I don't know if any kicker is worth the amount for the tag. Kickers now a days are overall really consistent, and I think we could get someone for much cheaper that could make all the kicks Haushka made.
Also, Haushka hasn't really shown a big leg, and IMO it would be nice to get someone in here that can kick the long ball. Seeing how every time we lose, its pretty much by a field goal

Click to expand...

We win quite a few with those field goals as well. Personally I don't think you can ask more from a kicker than we get from Hauschka. That being said I think we need to get him for the right price, but I also think we'll sign him to a 3-4 year deal that will get him a signing bonus which will get him paid this year like a franchise kicker, but when you look at the deal overall it should be fairly cap friendly.

nategreat":1ajflh9o said:

This averages out to be $2,950,000. I don't know how the franchise tag works, if it's all counted against the cap or not. I would guess that it is, as I don't imagine any signing bonuses are anything are involved with the franchise tag.

Click to expand...

The full franchise tagged salary is counted against the cap for that year. So the benefit of franchising is no pro-rated bonus to include in base cap hit, but the downside is the inflated full salary hit.

Haushka made like 700k last year, so my guess is we'd keep him if he's willing to take a modest bump to 1,000,000 or so on a 2-3 year deal. But if he's going to want to be paid like the other top kickers at 3 million? See ya.

Haushka is worth every bit of $1.75M/year.

The Hawks should wrap him up for the next three years imo.

Sgt. Largent":3bj4bnlv said:

nategreat":3bj4bnlv said:

This averages out to be $2,950,000. I don't know how the franchise tag works, if it's all counted against the cap or not. I would guess that it is, as I don't imagine any signing bonuses are anything are involved with the franchise tag.

Click to expand...

The full franchise tagged salary is counted against the cap for that year. So the benefit of franchising is no pro-rated bonus to include in base cap hit, but the downside is the inflated full salary hit.

Haushka made like 700k last year, so my guess is we'd keep him if he's willing to take a modest bump to 1,000,000 or so on a 2-3 year deal. But if he's going to want to be paid like the other top kickers at 3 million? See ya.

Click to expand...

I was thinking he'd get more like a 4 year deal with a $3-4 million signing bonus and a salary of something close to where he was at this year, giving him franchise dollars for this season without the franchise cap. His salary can then escalate some over the next few years. Of course that's only if both the front office wants him long term and if he doesn't want to go off into free agency.

kidhawk":397hxava said:

Sgt. Largent":397hxava said:

nategreat":397hxava said:

This averages out to be $2,950,000. I don't know how the franchise tag works, if it's all counted against the cap or not. I would guess that it is, as I don't imagine any signing bonuses are anything are involved with the franchise tag.

Click to expand...

The full franchise tagged salary is counted against the cap for that year. So the benefit of franchising is no pro-rated bonus to include in base cap hit, but the downside is the inflated full salary hit.

Haushka made like 700k last year, so my guess is we'd keep him if he's willing to take a modest bump to 1,000,000 or so on a 2-3 year deal. But if he's going to want to be paid like the other top kickers at 3 million? See ya.

Click to expand...

I was thinking he'd get more like a 4 year deal with a $3-4 million signing bonus and a salary of something close to where he was at this year, giving him franchise dollars for this season without the franchise cap. His salary can then escalate some over the next few years. Of course that's only if both the front office wants him long term and if he doesn't want to go off into free agency.

Click to expand...

That works.

Remember that most teams are up against the cap as well, so it's not like Haushka is going to have his pick of 3 million per year offers. Teams with cap space have bigger holes to fill on their roster besides kickers.

I do like Haushka a lot. His calm demeanor is perfect for a kicker, which is why I think he does so well in the clutch.

Haushka is money.

kidhawk":1kh2pbh2 said:

Sgt. Largent":1kh2pbh2 said:

nategreat":1kh2pbh2 said:

This averages out to be $2,950,000. I don't know how the franchise tag works, if it's all counted against the cap or not. I would guess that it is, as I don't imagine any signing bonuses are anything are involved with the franchise tag.

Click to expand...

The full franchise tagged salary is counted against the cap for that year. So the benefit of franchising is no pro-rated bonus to include in base cap hit, but the downside is the inflated full salary hit.

Haushka made like 700k last year, so my guess is we'd keep him if he's willing to take a modest bump to 1,000,000 or so on a 2-3 year deal. But if he's going to want to be paid like the other top kickers at 3 million? See ya.

Click to expand...

I was thinking he'd get more like a 4 year deal with a $3-4 million signing bonus and a salary of something close to where he was at this year, giving him franchise dollars for this season without the franchise cap. His salary can then escalate some over the next few years. Of course that's only if both the front office wants him long term and if he doesn't want to go off into free agency.

Click to expand...

I agree,,,we wouldn't want to pay a top 5 kicker a top 5 kickers salary would we?

Afterall we could get someone that is "almost" as good for a few hundred thousand less.


As I've heard and said so many times through the years,,,"If you want top class oats we can do business at this price. But if you want oats that have already been through the horse we can do that a bit cheaper".


We'll yell and hollar at how much we should give other players but not a kicker? I know we are trying to keep as much of the team together as we can but a top flyte team needs a top flyte kicker. It has seemed since the early 2000s so many of our members want a really good kicker for a really poor kickers price.

I know, lets bring back that shoe salesman we kept rather than Kris Kluwe years ago. Then after he loses a couple of games for us in the first 4 we can desperately try and find another kicker during the season. Gee wasn't that fun?

Isn't there some middles ground here that would make even "some" of you happy?

:141847_bnono:

p.s. we won some games this year by a field goal or less. Where would be have been home field advantage wise without them?

I think Lgt Largent has maybe the right idea.