Kawann Short won’t be signing the franchise tag quickly, if at all

Getty Images

Panthers defensive tackle Kawann Short wants to remain with the team. He wants to not be discarded the way that cornerback Josh Norman was a year ago. As a result, Short will be inclined to say all the right things about his contractual situation.

On Monday, the thing he said about his contractual situation doesn’t mesh with his current plan of action.

Short, per a league source with knowledge of the situation, won’t be quickly signing the franchise tag, if the team applies it. Short may not sign the tag at all, which means that absent a long-term deal before July 15, Short may not play in 2017.

While few players end up sitting out an entire season in response to being tagged, Short’s mindset is to secure a fair long-term deal. To get one, he realizes that he’ll have to let things play out, possibly with the tag applied to him.

A year ago, Norman refused to sign the tag. After more than a month, the team surprisingly rescinded it, allowing Norman to land a major deal on the open market.

Whether Short gets a major deal from the Panthers or anyone else remains to be seen. However, quick acceptance of the one-year franchise tag isn’t an option, and the Panthers would be wise to not assume he’ll sign it quickly.

19 responses to “Kawann Short won’t be signing the franchise tag quickly, if at all

  1. I understand players are kind of salty by the whole Tag thing, but has ANY team had more drama around it than the Panthers?

    Greg Hardy, and Norman, now a day after the season there is all ready talk about the next hot mess, in Carolina

  2. The Panthers won’t have any problems signing Short. Short is a good player and a good guy. He’s a winner. He’s the kind of player winning teams want to have around, both on and off the field. He’s a guy you build around. He’s a great leader. He’s someone you want your younger players to copy. He’s the kind of guy you give the big money to. In other words, he has nothing in common with Norman.

  3. onebuffalove716 says:
    Jan 2, 2017 1:55 PM

    That was quick

    ——————————————
    that’s what she said

  4. Sounds like this article was a press release from his agent. Im sure he told Kawaan…..”look you may want to be a Panther forever, but we don’t need to show all our cards just yet.”

    Nothing to see here…..this deal gets done

  5. I think he had a medicore year and was part of the Panthers downfall. We needed him and he was missing for 3/4 of th season. In addition, that is why DG drafted Butler so don’t get too attached to KK cause I think he is gone.

  6. Short has every right to manage his negotiations how he sees fit. Players bc of the deal the union don’t have a lot of leverage, but Norman proven last year that this is a winnable approach.

    In a way, if this goes south, the Panthers only have themselves to blame. They set the precedent.

  7. in a utopian world all players should organize, and sit out seasons, thus effectively eliminating the franchise tag altogether.

    do not strenuously excercise while sitting out so the onus is on the team to pay the returning player while they take an additional full year to get back into shape.

    the franchise tag is a ripoff to all players future, and present.

    but of course convincing players to turn down millions is not feasible, as injury can happen away from the field or practice facility too.

    looks like players will have to settle for millions of dollars for playing a game.

  8. The players ARE organized, and they voluntarily/collectively bargained the franchise tag – right, wrong, or indifferent. It’s a contractual agreement, and buyer’s remorse is not really a good reason to not live up to their end of an agreement in which you willingly entered into.

    As an aside, the players will never have the leverage in the NFL that they need to use mass sitouts as a tool to get what they want, and the reason is simple: far too many of them are millionaires that nonetheless live paycheck-to-paycheck. This is why owners have no problem with lockouts every 10 years or so and the majority of the players come running back to the negotiating table within a few months of doing so. Only a handfull of the players have enough fiscal means and wherewithal to plan for (relatively) lean times sufficient to desperation, despite Tom Brady’s urging them to do so.

  9. This situation is nothing like last year. Yes, Short wants Fletcher Cox money just like Norman wanted Darelle Revis money. But that’s where the similarity ends.

    Last year, giving Norman $15M a year would have left us nothing to sign our draft picks. This year we’re about $60M under the cap. Norman thinks he’s one of the 5 best CBs in history, and is very loud about it. Short just thinks he’s a great player and does very little self-promotion. Norman is a defensive back. Short plays on the interior line – and whether or not you agree, Gettleman believes you cannot win a title without superior interior line play. Thus, interior linemen are worth more money than DBs. (The play of the Cowboys seems to back him up.) Norman had an idiot for an agent. Short does not.

    The deal will get done. He probably will get franchised, and he probably won’t sign the tender, but by July 15 he will be signed long-term.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!