Collective Bargaining Agreement

Friday afternoon’s unveiling of the 2024 salary cap brings clarity to the franchise tag scene. Already in this year’s window to apply tags, teams now know officially what it will cost to do so.

This marks the 32nd offseason in which NFL teams could use franchise or transition tags, a player-retention tool brought on along with the emergence of full-fledged free agency in 1993. Teams can use either the franchise or transition tag during an offseason, but not both. While Xavier McKinney has already come up as a transition tag candidate, only four players have been slapped with that designation over the past 10 years. Handfuls of players are franchise-tagged each year, however.

A number of candidates are on the radar to be tagged, though no team has designated a franchise player yet this year. Here are the 2024 non-exclusive tag numbers by position, according to NFL.com’s Tom Pelissero:

• Quarterback: $38.3MM
• Running back: $11.95MM
• Wide receiver: $21.82MM
• Tight end: $12.69MM
• Offensive line: $20.99MM
• Defensive end: $21.32MM
• Defensive tackle: $22.1MM
• Linebacker: $24MM
• Cornerback: $19.8MM
• Safety: $17.12MM
• Kicker/punter: $5.98MM

This does not apply to all franchise tag candidates. Players who were tagged in 2023 would be tied to a number that comes in 120% north of their 2023 salary. This previously established the tag prices of Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs and Tony Pollard. None of those running backs are a lock to be tagged this year, and due to the cap growth, Barkley’s tag figure of barely $12MM is roughly the same as what it will cost a team to tag a running back for the first time this year.

Chris Jones‘ situation also differs, due to the star Chiefs defensive tackle being tagged in 2020. A Jones tag would cost the Chiefs 120% of his pre-restructure 2023 salary. That number coming in beyond $32MM makes the eight-year veteran prohibitive to tag. Jones’ camp received some good news via the $255.4MM cap reveal, which gives teams more money to spend this offseason.

Only one other player — Lamar Jackson — has been tagged for beyond $30MM. That move cost the Ravens $32.4MM last year; it will now cost teams $38.3MM to tag a quarterback. No QBs are on the radar to be tagged this year, with Friday’s cap reveal all but slamming the door shut on the Buccaneers tagging Baker Mayfield. While teams can enjoy more flexibility in making final preparations for their free agency budgets, tagging players will be a bit costlier than clubs expected.

The exclusive tag, which prevents players from speaking with other teams, is rarely used due to the increased costs and the non-exclusive tag being an effective deterrent at keeping players off the market. The non-exclusive tag mandates a team that signs a player to an unmatched offer sheet send two first-round picks to the player’s previous club. The transition tag, however, entitles a team to no compensation if it fails to match an offer sheet for a player.

Here are the 2024 transition tag numbers:

• Quarterback: $34.37MM
• Running back: $9.77MM
• Wide receiver: $19.77MM
• Tight end: $10.88MM
• Offensive line: $19MM
• Defensive end: $19.1MM
• Defensive tackle: $18.49MM
• Linebacker: $19.97MM
• Cornerback: $17.22MM
• Safety: $13.82MM
• Kicker/punter: $5.43MM

Last year brought an earlier resolution on the salary cap front. The $224.8MM figure emerged in late January, but it is not out of the ordinary for the process to take longer to produce a number. A slower run-up is transpiring this year.

In December, we heard teams were expecting the cap to check in around $240MM. Teams’ internal projections at that point were going on a salary ceiling between $235-$240MM. It looks like clubs are now expecting that number to be a bit higher; a year-to-year increase of more than $20MM may now be in play.

After indicating an expectation the 2024 cap would be north of $243MM, Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio added the number will likely veer closer to $250MM. This would be approaching a historic one-year increase.

The previous record came between the 2021 and ’22 offseasons, and extraordinary circumstances drove that. After the COVID-19 pandemic led to the second-ever cap decrease, the 2022 number ($208.2MM) came in $26MM higher than the 2021 ceiling. Flirting with that type of increase under more normal circumstances would be an interesting development for the league.

The NFL and NFLPA negotiate the salary cap, and Florio adds the league may be attempting to enact a more gradual increase from the 2023 number. The March 2021 TV agreements, along with money coming in from gambling partnerships, will factor into this year’s salary cap. The YouTube TV seven-year “NFL Sunday Ticket” agreement, worth more than $2 billion, will impact future caps as well.

Once the 2024 salary ceiling emerges, matters like franchise tag numbers and RFA tenders — along with fifth-year option prices for the 2021 first-rounders — will crystallize. The cap has only climbed by $20MM-plus in a year once, and it has only jumped more than $15MM twice (last year and in 2006, when a new CBA was ratified).

Illustrating the league’s growth, the 2024 cap is expected to reside more than $110MM above where it stood in 2014. Here is how the salary cap has climbed over the past two CBAs:

• 2011: $120.4MM
• 2012: $120.6MM
• 2013: $123.6MM
• 2014: $133MM
• 2015: $143.3MM
• 2016: $155.3MM
• 2017: $167MM
• 2018: $177.2MM
• 2019: $188.2MM
• 2020: $198.2MM
• 2021: $182.5MM
• 2022: $208.2MM
• 2023: $224.8MM

In 2012, the NFL moved its trade deadline back two weeks, slotting it on the Tuesday following Week 8. This has led to increased in-season trading. While the league has not caught up to Major League Baseball or the NBA on this front, the increased activity has brought more interest in the country’s most popular sports league.

The NFL has since extended its season, pushing the schedule to 18 weeks in 2021. It had stood at 17 for 31 years, with bye weeks debuting in 1990, and had been at 16 from 1978-89. Setting the trade deadline shortly after Week 8 represents a different timeline from the MLB, NBA and NHL calendars. Baseball’s deadline checks in two thirds of the way through the season. The NBA trade endpoint arrives in early February, which is beyond the halfway point in that season. Hockey’s is even closer to the playoffs, with 2024’s deadline placed on March 8.

It appears the NFL will preserve its status quo. After discussions last year about pushing the deadline back, The Athletic’s Dianna Russini notes the league is unlikely to change its current trade setup. A league official informed Russini competitive balance resides behind the resistance to change the deadline date (subscription required).

From the NFL’s side, more time for teams to trade players could indeed affect competitive balance. More sellers would emerge under this format, with struggling teams having a clearer path to high draft picks the following year. Less money in base salary would remain on trade chips’ contracts.

Pushing the deadline back one or two weeks would open the door to higher-profile players being moved and teams that miss out on these pieces being at a disadvantage. Teams that fail to make upgrades could find themselves outgunned in a way they have not been under the present format. With fewer games in NFL regular seasons compared to the other top American sports, trades have the potential to provide bigger swings.

Then again, this is what has made the other sports’ deadlines more interesting. The fear of being outgunned annually drives MLB and NBA contenders to make moves, seeing those deadlines become important roster-building windows. The NFL has seen trading increase since the 2012 switch, but a number of contenders annually sit out the deadline.

Last year brought more in-season moves, with a record-setting 18 coming between Week 1 and the deadline. The first year of the post-Week 8 deadline brought only two. Teams have gradually become more flexible to in-season additions. From 2012-16, no more than five in-season trades occurred. Eight and nine transpired in 2017 and ’18, respectively, per The Athletic. Over the past five years, no fewer than 12 in-season trades have commenced. This year brought 15, and 22 teams were involved in trades in each of the past two seasons.

A half-measure of a one-week bump, to correspond with the increase to a 17-game/18-week campaign, would make sense for the NFL. After last year featured a record 10 trades on deadline day, multiple teams reached out to the league office about the prospect of moving the deadline back. Nothing came of it, and as of now, it looks like 2024 will bring the same format. Buyers and sellers will again need to assess their rosters and contention viability by Week 8.

Nick Chubb being carted to the locker room against the Steelers on Monday night highlights the importance of running backs securing guaranteed money, but this offseason brought an effective crash of the position’s market, leaving it in an unstable place. The fallout from the franchise tag deadline led to running backs meeting about the state of their position. That has come up in an NFL grievance.

The league filed a grievance accusing the NFLPA of encouraging backs and other players to fake or embellish injuries to increase their leverage, Mark Maske of the Washington Post reports. No arbitrator has been assigned to the grievance, one the NFLPA calls “ridiculous and without merit,” per NFL.com’s Tom Pelissero. This comes after an NFLPA grievance accused owners of colluding to impede efforts for fully guaranteed contracts.

While the NFL’s grievance accuses the NFLPA of violating CBA provisions, Maske adds it does not levy accusations of improper conduct against running backs.

“Beginning this past summer and continuing throughout Training Camp, NFL Players Association leadership, including President J.C. Tretter, have become increasingly vocal in advising NFL Players dissatisfied with their current contracts to consider feigning or exaggerating injuries to withhold service as a way to increase their leverage in contract negotiations,” the NFL said in its grievance.

This offseason’s RB market crash included a number of developments. Aaron Jones and Joe Mixon accepting pay cuts sandwiched cap-casualty releases Ezekiel Elliott and Dalvin Cook. Austin Ekeler, who remains attached to a contract he has outplayed, did not generate trade interest and returned to the Chargers after receiving a small incentive package. The franchise tag deadline — when Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs and Tony Pollard did not sign long-term extensions — and the Jonathan Taylor drama headlined one of the most eventful offseasons for a position group in NFL history.

Following the July 17 tag deadline, running backs voiced their disapproval on social media and then met to discuss the fallout in a Zoom meeting. The league alleges Tretter and new NFLPA executive director Lloyd Howell participated in the meeting that included the conveying of the injury strategy, Maske adds. During a podcast appearance in July, Tretter advocated for players to gain as much leverage as they could. Although he stopped short of advocating for backs to fake injuries, the NFLPA president advised players to do what was necessary to maximize leverage.

“[The NFLPA’s] conduct is a clear violation of the union’s agreement to use ‘best efforts to faithfully carry out the terms and conditions of the [CBA]’ and ‘to see that the terms and conditions of all NFL Player Contracts are carried out in full by players,” the league’s memo reads. “The union’s conduct is also reckless as any player that chooses to follow this advice and improperly withhold services under his player contract will be subject to discipline and financial liability under the CBA, Club rules, and/or the player’s contract.”

While running backs have understandably come up, the practice of holding in has been ongoing since the 2020 CBA included language that made holdouts more difficult to wage. A number of players have staged hold-ins and been rewarded. T.J. Hockenson complained of ear and back discomfort during this year’s Vikings training camp; the tight end returned to action after finalizing a lucrative extension. T.J. Watt staged a hold-in during the Steelers’ 2021 training camp, leading to a record-setting extension. Brian Burns took the unusual route of practicing and then stepping away in a hold-in effort late this summer; the Panthers edge rusher returned to practice soon after.

The Taylor matter remains a key talking point. Jim Irsay fired a CBA-driven salvo at running backs who were discussing the position’s future. That drew the ire of Taylor’s camp, and the relationship has deteriorated in the weeks since. Taylor landed on the Colts’ active/PUP list, despite Irsay indicating in July the All-Pro RB was ready to return from the minimally invasive ankle surgery he underwent in January, and his trade request became public soon after.

The Colts engaged in trade talks with teams and are expected to revisit them, but Taylor is out for the season’s first four games while residing on Indianapolis’ reserve/PUP list. Jalen Ramsey used a similar tactic during the 2019 season, asking out of Jacksonville and using an injury excuse to miss time. Once he was dealt to Los Angeles, the All-Pro cornerback returned to action.

Chubb participated in that Zoom call, as did Barkley. Both players suffered injuries in Week 2. Chubb’s $12.2MM-per-year contract — the most recent eight-figure-per-year deal given to a back, which he and the Browns agreed to in July 2021 — runs through 2024. Barkley joins Jacobs, Ekeler and Pollard in being 2024 UFAs.

After Brock Purdy‘s injury effectively removed any drama regarding the NFC championship game’s outcome, the NFL will allow teams a notable protection measure against the kind of situation the 49ers ran into in January.

The league will now allow teams to dress an emergency third quarterback, approving a proposal to bring this rule back Monday, Tom Pelissero of NFL.com tweets. Teams usually dress only two quarterbacks, allowing an extra roster spot for another player — one more likely to be needed — as part of their 48-man gameday contingent. A wrinkle to this arrangement will be reintroduced this coming season.

For a team to be able to use its emergency quarterback, the first two must be physically unable to play. Teams will not be able to stash a third quarterback on their roster and turn to him in a benching scenario involving either of its top QBs, Field Yates of ESPN.com adds (via Twitter).

Additionally, all emergency QBs must be on teams’ active rosters. None can be summoned from practice squads during a game. Teams will, however, be able to designate their emergency passer 90 minutes before kickoff. Should one of the team’s top two QBs be deemed healthy enough to return to a game, the emergency QB must be yanked.

Teams, of course, could have still dressed a third quarterback under the previous format. But clubs generally steered against doing so in order to better protect themselves against injuries at other positions depleting depth charts. Active rosters can include up to 55 players on gamedays, with teams being able to bump two up from the practice squad each week. Third-string quarterbacks are often part of the 55-man contingent but are regularly among the seven who do not dress for games. Some teams only carry two QBs on their active roster. That will need to change if a franchise wants to take advantage of this emergency protection measure.

This became a problem for the 49ers, who saw Purdy suffer a torn UCL during the first quarter of the NFC title game. That injury summoned journeyman Josh Johnson, whom the 49ers signed off the Broncos’ practice squad in the wake of Jimmy Garoppolo‘s December foot fracture. Johnson, who served as Purdy’s backup down the stretch, suffered a third-quarter concussion that brought a compromised Purdy back into the game. The 49ers not dressing a third QB led to them essentially playing out the string, with Purdy repeatedly handing off or throwing short passes in the Eagles’ blowout win.

The 49ers lost four QBs to injury last season. Trey Lance‘s fractured ankle in Week 2 began the team down this path, one that turned out to affect the entire NFL for the 2023 season. The league allowed teams this flexibility from 1991-2010, but the past two CBAs did not include the rule. One team’s historic injury run at the sport’s marquee position will lead to a mid-CBA amendment.