3 ways we would change the NFL's franchise tag

NFL free agency is never short on action, as teams fight mercilessly for the top players on the open market.

But one of the main reasons why the important part of the free-agent period - when most of the elite players are snapped up - can end so quickly and dramatically is because of a severe drop-off in talent after the first tier of free agents.

This is due, in part, to the NFL's short-sighted franchise tag (this year's deadline is at 4 p.m. ET Tuesday).

The tag allows teams to lock in one player of their choosing to a one-year contract (with varying types of tags that we'll get into later), which is designed to give both parties more time to negotiate contract extensions. However, the tag often doesn't serve its intended purpose, and some of its more outdated aspects give teams unfair leverage over players, taking away from what could be a much more interesting free-agent period.

Here are three ways to fix the franchise tag:

Higher penalties for repeated tagging

That loud cheer of agreement you just heard was from Kirk Cousins, who has been the poster boy for this loophole of sorts over the past several seasons.

The Washington Redskins have dithered back and forth about signing the former fourth-round pick to a big-money contract extension, making him a very rich man in the process. However, they also robbed him of two years of his prime by tagging him in back-to-back seasons and then allowing him to hit free agency anyway, deciding that trading for Alex Smith was preferable.

Similarly, the Los Angeles Rams tagged cornerback Trumaine Johnson twice in a row and will also just allow him to walk this offseason.

Of course, sometimes extension talks break down and agreements simply fail to materialize, but teams still have too much power in this regard and the league suffers as a result.

In order to make negotiations more urgent, the NFL should increase the premium for tagging a player in consecutive seasons. Currently, a second tag is 120 percent of the player's previous salary and 140 percent for a third year.

The third-year mark is often untenable for any position outside of quarterback - and even then teams would think twice unless they're sure he's a franchise-level player, as shown by Cousins - so by making it a 140 percent increase for the second year, we should get faster clarity on players' futures and possibly more big names hitting the open market.

Greater positional variance for tags

The NFL has seen a shift in recent years, with hybrid roles blurring the lines between positions and the rise of more specialized positions like slot cornerback meaning players simply can't be viewed under one all-encompassing label.

Unfortunately, no one seems to have told the league that, as the franchise tag remains woefully outdated.

Centers, guards, and offensive tackles - which all have vastly different financial worth - are all considered "offensive lineman," while linebackers and defensive ends and tackles aren't distinguished between 3-4 and 4-3 defenses.

This is an easy fix for the NFL. It will mean more players being worthy of the tag, but it will also make the salaries for the positional tag more appropriate and therefore easier to negotiate from - especially if teams or players have a more well-thought-out system for deciding which positional tag most suits each player.

Simplify tags to make them for premium players only

As previously mentioned, there isn't simply one type of franchise tag. That would just be too easy for the NFL.

The franchise tag has two categories: exclusive and non-exclusive. The main difference is that the exclusive option means the tagged player can't negotiate with other teams, while players hit with the non-exclusive tag can. However, the original club has the right to match the offer and the other suitor must give up two first-rounders to sign the franchise player away - a very rare occurrence.

The exclusive tag's worth is also set from the average salary of the top five players at the position for the upcoming season, while the non-exclusive is the average of the top five from the previous campaign and therefore usually a smaller amount. The non-exclusive tag is much more common, with only the likes of Cousins and Von Miller getting the exclusive tag in recent years.

Confused yet? Well, there's more in the form of the transition tag. Similar to the non-exclusive tag, except the player gets paid an average of the top 10 salaries at his position rather than the top five. Plus, teams get no compensation if the player is signed elsewhere.

Again, a fix is simple, though would likely be met with opposition from teams that don't want to give up leverage.

The transition tag should be abolished, as it's rarely used and doesn't adequately reward players.

Both the exclusive and non-exclusive tags have their merits, but the non-exclusive tag is too team-friendly, and by only having the premium tag, players will get more money. Additionally, teams would be more motivated to either reward them with a long-term deal or let them hit the open market and save the franchise tag for players they truly view as franchise centerpieces.

(Photos courtesy: Getty Images)