Detroit Lions won't use transition or franchise tag this year

Tom Kowalski By Tom Kowalski
on February 09, 2011 at 12:50 PM, updated February 09, 2011 at 1:44 PM

ALLEN PARK - The NFL has created some controversy by saying that teams can use the franchise and/or transition tag on players beginning on Thursday - more on that in a moment - but it's not an issue with the Detroit Lions because they won't be using either tag on any of their players.

Under terms of the old collective bargaining agreement, teams are allowed to put transition or franchise tags on potential free agents. Because those tags also come with guaranteed salaries of the top five or the top 10 players at that position, the Lions will pass. Under last year's system, only players with six years of service or more were considered unrestricted free agents. That term could potentially change in the legal wrangling that is sure to come.


Here's a list of the Lions' potential free agents and their years of service:

Four-year players -- CB Chris Houston, QB Drew Stanton, DE Turk McBride, K Dave Rayner, S John Wendling, CB Brandon McDonald, WR Brian Clark and CB Tye Hill.

Five-year players -- LB Bobby Carpenter and G Dylan Gandy.

Six years or more -- Safety C.C. Brown, CB Eric King, CB Nathan Vasher, LB Vinny Ciurciu and LB Landon Johnson.

The following players are restricted or exclusive rights free agents which means they'll likely be tethered to the Lions regardless of what new deal is done: RB Kevin Smith, DT Andre Fluellen, DE Cliff Avril, FB Jerome Felton and T Corey Hilliard.

The more interesting aspect of this franchise tag debate is why the owners and union are having it at all. If there's going to be a lockout on March 4 and nobody can be signed until a new CBA is signed - and new free agent rules are made - what difference does it make?

Here's why: There might not be a lockout and both sides are trying to position themselves or, there might be a lockout and the two sides are trying to position themselves. Allow me to explain.

If the owners try to declare a negotiating impasse and attempt to continue operations as usual under the old deal, they'll want to continue normal business right up to that point. If the owners are successful in achieving that strategy, the union will want the "old rules'' to revert back to the first years of the CBA, not simply the last year.

Also, if the union decides to decertify - which means there can be no lockout because there's no union to lock out - the same strategies for both sides are the same as above. They want to put themselves in the best possible position moving forward.

And then there's this: The owners may fully intend to lock out the players on March 4 but they want to conduct business as usual because they want it to "appear'' like they're hoping to get a deal done before the deadline. That's also why you're hearing all this talk about optimism that a deal might get done earlier than expected. The owners are talking that nonsense because they want it out there publicly that they really want a deal, they're bargaining in good faith and hope a deal will get done.

The union, of course, has to say the same thing because, if they don't, it might be evidence that they're not bargaining in good faith and trying to force a lockout.

So, in the end, the lesson of the day is this: When it comes to franchise tags or optimistic talk - or anything that comes out of the mouth of anybody on either side - until a new CBA is signed, sealed and delivered, don't believe a word of it.