Bumped by VanRam: Insightful fanpost focused on a subject very worthy of discussion.
The new news that owners are pushing for a "right of first refusal means the following:
The owners want up to three tags that will allow them the ability to match any offer to a Free agent that is given by another team.
Personally I think this is insane. These players are either free or they are not and with the RFA tags, Franchise tags and Transition tags that is enough already.
Free Agency is one of the things that keeps parity in the NFL which is why it is so interesting. Any team any year has a shot!
My solution? The poison pill! So for instance we want to sign Reggie Bush - We simply insert a clause in the contract when he comes to visit and we sit him down that says "If Reggie plays more then 4 games in LA then he will make an additional 3 million dollars per game played in LA. This will destroy any chance that the saints have to match and make the right of first refusal moot.
So are we about to enter into the year of the poison pill? Do owners win the right of first refusal? What do you all think about the owners pushing this point?