The Tag and Trade
The young QB suffers a season ending injury and is replaced by the backup. The backup, a 27 year old, former USC QB, who had done nothing in his previous seasons. Now with a very good surround, he takes the team to an 11-win season.
After the season, with the young starter returning to health, the team places the franchise tag on the backup QB. Couple weeks later he’s traded for a high 2nd round pick. Of course I’m talking about the Patriots, Tom Brady, Matt Cassel and the Chiefs. Someone explain to me how our situation is SO DIFFERENT that we shouldn’t expect to get something for Sam Darnold.
You might argue that Cassel was better than Darnold. Not even close. Cassel's season: 11 wins, 3600 yards, 21 TDs and 11 INTs. Darnold's season: 14 wins, 4300 yards, 35 TDs and 12 INTs. You might argue the upcoming QB class was worse, forcing the Chiefs to make the trade. It wasn't. The Chiefs had the #3 overall pick and Matthew Stafford was in that class. You might argue that Cassel was cheaper than Darnold will be. But that's not true either. By definition, the tag salaries are exactly the same. And later in the offseason, before he even took a snap with the Chiefs, Cassel received an extension that made him the 5th highest paid QB in the NFL.
I think this is about supply and demand then vs today...
All it takes is two teams interested and this is subterfuge season.
Not sure if Darnold/Agent are part of the problem if tag/trade isnt possible?
Hurry-up Vikings, we ain't getting any younger!
Maybe it's because Cassell didn't poop his pants with the whole world watching... twice. The market is what it is. The Vikings aren't prepared to have him on the roster at 41 mil, so they can't put the tag on without working a deal behind the scenes.
And it looks like attempts at that haven't panned out although there are still 24 hours or so left. But people who are pretty dialed in have been saying it's unlikely for several days now. Comp pick here we come.
comet52 wrote:
Maybe it's because Cassell didn't poop his pants with the whole world watching... twice. The market is what it is. The Vikings aren't prepared to have him on the roster at 41 mil, so they can't put the tag on without working a deal behind the scenes.And it looks like attempts at that haven't panned out although there are still 24 hours or so left. But people who are pretty dialed in have been saying it's unlikely for several days now. Comp pick here we come.
Patriots would not have been prepared to keep Cassel either. If no team traded for him, they would've been stuck paying Cassel AND Brady, whom they were already paying big money on his 2nd contract. So two QBs with top 5 salaries. The risk was MUCH bigger for them. The Vikings have McCarthy on a rookie salary.
Another thing is that with Cassel there was no "unleashed raw talent" factor. Darnold was the 3rd overall pick for a reason. Cassel was a 7th rounder for reason.
I've said all along that I would be surprised if the Vikings were able to tag and trade him. But I don't know why I think that. Probably just inherent purple pessimism. But I think if it doesn't happen, PF is maybe closer to the reason why: lack of cooperation by Darnold and his agent.
purplefaithful wrote:
I think this is about supply and demand then vs today...All it takes is two teams interested and this is subterfuge season.
Not sure if Darnold/Agent are part of the problem if tag/trade isnt possible?
While I tend to agree with you on the Darnold/Agent thing, I don't on the supply and demand thing. I'd say the demand for a top QB now is far greater than it was then.
We have to be willing to do something a player does not like and willing to call others' bluffs. The Vikings can easily add cap space by extending or converting current contracts. If I were the Vikings' owner, I would order KAM to tag Darnold and have Brez create more cap space. Teams will want Darnold. It would take at least a 2d - at least - for me to trade Darnold. Otherwise, he will compete with JJ to be the starter. And as soon as a QB goes down in the preseason or if one is clearly not ready (Sanders or Ward) or has lost it (Rodgers), they will call about Sam. Then it will take at least a 1st to acquire Darnold. What are the Raiders going to do with a new HC in Pete, a new OC, and a new face of ownership in Brady. Are they going to go back to their trash QBs? Maxx will want out as badly as Garrett now does.
Gotta be willing and able to play the game.
dadevike wrote:
We have to be willing to do something a player does not like and willing to call others' bluffs. The Vikings can easily add cap space by extending or converting current contracts. If I were the Vikings' owner, I would order KAM to tag Darnold and have Brez create more cap space. Teams will want Darnold. It would take at least a 2d - at least - for me to trade Darnold. Otherwise, he will compete with JJ to be the starter. And as soon as a QB goes down in the preseason or if one is clearly not ready (Sanders or Ward) or has lost it (Rodgers), they will call about Sam. Then it will take at least a 1st to acquire Darnold. What are the Raiders going to do with a new HC in Pete, a new OC, and a new face of ownership in Brady. Are they going to go back to their trash QBs? Maxx will want out as badly as Garrett now does.Gotta be willing and able to play the game.
Interesting take. Similar thing happened with the Vikings and Sam Bradford. What's more, Darnold isn't near the injury risk as Bradford was at the time.
dadevike wrote:
We have to be willing to do something a player does not like and willing to call others' bluffs. The Vikings can easily add cap space by extending or converting current contracts. If I were the Vikings' owner, I would order KAM to tag Darnold and have Brez create more cap space. Teams will want Darnold. It would take at least a 2d - at least - for me to trade Darnold. Otherwise, he will compete with JJ to be the starter. And as soon as a QB goes down in the preseason or if one is clearly not ready (Sanders or Ward) or has lost it (Rodgers), they will call about Sam. Then it will take at least a 1st to acquire Darnold. What are the Raiders going to do with a new HC in Pete, a new OC, and a new face of ownership in Brady. Are they going to go back to their trash QBs? Maxx will want out as badly as Garrett now does.Gotta be willing and able to play the game.
That's $41mm worth of stakes...It could have a really negative impact on FA if things dont play out right.
Hurry-up Vikings, we ain't getting any younger!
purplefaithful wrote:
That's $41mm worth of stakes...It would no doubt impact FA.
Yes it would. Not nearly as much as some think though. Look, you know I love playing devil's advocate, sometimes offering a position I don't necessarily support just to play around with scenarios.
Think about it this way. The Vikings have $63M in cap space. Take $41M out and you have $22M left. And that's before releasing or restructuring anyone. For the sake of comparison, the Vikings added their best free agent class in history last year and started with $16.9M in cap space.
Releasing Asamoah, Bradbury, and Ingram adds $10M. So $32M total now. Restructure candidates include Brian O'Neill, TJ Hockenson and Jonathan Greenard. It's been said that there is up to $28M in potential savings there. It's doubtful we restructure all of it, so let's just say $20M. So, the Vikings, if they wanted to, could pay Darnold his tag hit AND have nearly three times the cap space they had entering free agency last year.
MaroonBells wrote:
Yes it would. Not nearly as much as some think though. Look, you know I love playing devil's advocate, sometimes offering a position I don't necessarily support just to play around with scenarios.
Think about it this way. The Vikings have $63M in cap space. Take $41M out and you have $22M left. And that's before releasing or restructuring anyone. For the sake of comparison, the Vikings added their best free agent class in history last year and started with $16.9M in cap space.
Releasing Asamoah, Bradbury, and Ingram adds $10M. So $32M total now. Restructure candidates include Brian O'Neill, TJ Hockenson and Jonathan Greenard. It's been said that there is up to $28M in potential savings there. It's doubtful we restructure all of it, so let's just say $20M. So, the Vikings, if they wanted to, could pay Darnold his tag hit AND have nearly three times the cap space they had entering free agency last year.
Let's just say, devils advocate aside, I'm glad you aren't the GM.
Your plan would likely relegate the Vikings to perpetual mediocracy. Would you really be content to kick the can down the road further for Darnold? Vikings fans have lived the world of roster deficits because of over spending on a flawed QB for quite awhile.
Their plan is to repair the roster deficits by having a QB on a rookie contract. They would be fools not to. It may or may not work, but is clearly the path to building a team capable of hoisting a Lombardi.
But then I know you are just playing devils advocate!
The #Vikings are not expected to franchise tag QB Sam Darnold by Tuesday’s deadline, per me and @TomPelissero. But all parties are working through options to potentially keep him in Minnesota.
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 4, 2025
Darnold, who is set to hit free agency, has a situation best described as fluid. pic.twitter.com/q3A8iGkYEQ
“Hell is empty and all the devils are here”
Shakespeare
Be a brass balls move to tag Darnold today...
I dont know how I'd feels about it...I would hypothesize they are unsure still as to what they have in the rookie
Hurry-up Vikings, we ain't getting any younger!
purplefaithful wrote:
Be a brass balls move to tag Darnold today...I dont know how I'd feels about it...I would hypothesize they are unsure still as to what they have in the rookie
The tagging would not be about keeping Darnold and would say nothing about their opinion of McCarthy. It would be about getting something for Darnold.
JustInTime wrote:
https://x.com/rapsheet/status/1896756341068444135?s=46&t=TjjB9Q4BmOwmN74RrrMjoQ
Let's say the Vikings do work out a deal with Darnold...the Vikings are still in a position to trade him if there's a "No trade clause".
ArizonaViking wrote:
Let's say the Vikings do work out a deal with Darnold...the Vikings are still in a position to trade him if there's a "No trade clause".
I think the no trade clause just means the QB has to agree to the trade.
At this point my guess is he's gonna sign somewhere else about one minute into free agency. Let's hope it's for lots of money at least. The last two games cost the Vikings dearly. We'll see how much $$$ they cost Sam.
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.