Why an arbitrary line won't fix the Jimmy Graham problem

Jimmy Graham is a tight end. We don’t need any overarching data to prove that. We know. He just is.

But technically, Graham is a wide receiver. He spent 67 percent of his snaps in 2013 either lined up split out wide, or in the slot. Though he is indeed a tight end for the purposes of our football watching and assessing, by the literal reading of the league’s collective bargaining agreement that frequent snap alignment makes him a wide receiver in any franchise tag discussion.

According to arbitrator Stephen Burbank who ruled on Graham’s grievance yesterday, the CBA language means little, and he’s still a tight end. Four yards, it seems, is the dividing line. An arbitrary line.

The CBA states that, when applied, the value of a tag is determined by the position a player lined up at most during the previous year. The baseline tag value for a WR is set at $12.132 million this year, not the $7.053 million Graham is scheduled to get as a tight end.

The franchise tag grievance rulings create a rigid, binding precedent. Whichever way the arbiter ruled was set to redefine what being a tight end means financially in today’s NFL.

The most important distinction Burbank made was tied to distance. He ruled that since Graham lined up within four yards of the line of scrimmage for the majority of his snaps, he’s still a tight end, because that’s within the job description of the modern tight end. He can still run his routes from there, and run block too.

A four-yard distance away from the line of scrimmage doesn’t, by definition, make the pass catcher lining up there a wide receiver. But he’s not a traditional tight end either, and instead he’s much closer to being a slot receiver, as far as formation geography is concerned.

It’s a haphazardly drawn line, and nonsensically it’s a decision reached in part because Graham attends tight end meetings, and calls himself a tight end in his Twitter bio - normally a place reserved for descriptors like “DOG LOVER”, “COUNTRY MUSIC FAN”, or “KCCO”.

The ultimate paycheck for Graham is now the secondary discussion behind Burbank’s distinction, and the confusion that lingers (his leverage took a pummeling, but he’ll still get his money mountain after an inevitable long-term extension with the Saints, either now or next offseason).

On payday, franchised slot receivers are wide receivers. But pass catchers who spend the majority of their time lined up at a position that doesn’t meet the traditional definition of what a tight end is remain… tight ends. The problem truly lies in the need to categorize players for franchise tag use, and doing that in a sport where categories are either blurred, or completely ignored.

Since they’re all called “wide receivers”, in a hypothetical franchise tag discussion Calvin Johnson, Victor Cruz, and Randall Cobb would be in the same pay bracket. That’s true even though Cruz and Cobb are almost exclusively slot receivers, and Johnson is a hulking, fast-moving human rock on the outside. The confusion deepens when we think about Darren Sproles, a pass-catching running back who lined up in the slot 33 percent of the time during his final season in New Orleans. In Chip Kelly’s Eagles offense, he could easily spend the majority of his time out there.

There’s little difference between slot receiver and tight end under the four yards “rule”. We enter another layer that has less clarity with Anquan Boldin, whose 40 percent slot rate in 2013 made this a frequent sight…

Boldin is within the Graham zone, the four-yard buffer.

The eventual solution to this murky problem is one that’s been bounced around for some time, and was recently suggested by Eric Ebron: an entirely new franchise tag classification, called a hybrid or joker.

It would be an umbrella term that could re-designate those like Graham who are currently tight ends in name only, and often function as larger, but still field-stretching wideouts. Graham isn’t alone in his creative usage. Tony Gonzalez, for example, lined up somewhere that isn’t in-line as a tight end on 45 percent of his snaps last year. Jordan Cameron finished second among tight ends in receiving yardage (917), and he spent 60.3 percent of his snaps in the slot.

They’re all highly versatile options who create mismatches. Graham is the leader and pioneer, but the position as a whole is evolving to the point where a top tight end who can perform the same functions as his wide receiver peers should be paid accordingly. Consider: Graham’s 1,215 receiving yards in 2013 were a mere 18 yards behind Dez Bryant’s total.

Front offices will repeatedly claim the tight end position has changed drastically, making the previous definition obsolete, and the four-yard buffer precedent is appropriate. On principle they’re not wrong, but neither are those who play the position, and have led the evolution.

A new, more firmly-defined franchise tag tier that can accurately wrap its hands around Graham and his disciples is needed. Not more confusion.