Saquon Barkley has signed a one-year deal with the Giants, avoiding playing under the franchise tag despite while being eligible, with incentives, to make less than $1 million more on his new deal than if he played under the tag.
Boomer says Barkley’s struggle to get a better payday, and seemingly being handcuffed in negotiations given the tag and the running back market, shows that the concept of the franchise tag is “un-American.”
“The franchise tag was introduced back in 1993, and it really is un-American,” Boomer said. “If you told Jerry Jones, you couldn’t sell your team for more than $1 billion, what would he say to you? He’d say ‘You’re out of your mind, I’m gonna sell it for $10 billion because it’s the Cowboys and one of the most valuable franchises in the world. I’m gonna sell it for as much money as I can.’
“The franchise tag limits the movement of a very small number of players…usually, those players either come up with a new deal, or a guy like Kirk Cousins will play on the tag twice because the numbers are more significant for a quarterback, and will bet on himself. I don’t know if Saquon Barkley would have made more than $11 million, because of the way the NFL views the running back position, but it stagnates his opportunity to go out and get a payday for himself.”
Big Blue will be eligible to place the tag on Barkley again after this season, a reality that Boomer says the Players Association should be fighting to undo that card that teams can play with too much freedom.
“I think the NFLPA has done a really bad job in representing their players,” Boomer said. “There should be no franchise tag at all for any player, and quite frankly…they’re arguing against the wrong numbers and negotiating against the wrong numbers.”
Follow WFAN's morning team on Twitter: @7BOOMERESIASON, @GioWFAN, @Alsboringtweets, @JerryRecco, and @WFANMornings
Follow WFAN on Social Media
Twitter | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube | Twitch
Listen live to WFAN:
Audacy App | Online Stream | Smart Speaker (just say ‘Play W-F-A-N’)
