Flacco, though, is the kind of player for whom the franchise tag was designed.

"To me, the franchise tag should be used on a player that your team is not just going to be worse without, but is going to be fall-off-a-cliff worse without," the agent David Canter said.

The problem, in the eyes of Canter and many players, is that the franchise tag — which teams can use on one player a year — has more recently evolved into a mechanism to reduce the movement even of players without whom teams would certainly not plummet.

That was never more apparent than last year, when 21 of the 32 teams used the tag, often on players who fell well short of the franchise quarterback standard. The reason: in the final hurried days of negotiations toward a new collective bargaining agreement nearly two years ago, the convoluted formula for determining the amount of money paid to players given the tag was changed. Not surprisingly, in a deal that has so far tilted to the advantage of teams in almost every financial way, the adjustment made the tag less onerous for teams and even less appealing for players.

Photo

The tag numbers used to be calculated by taking the average of the top five salaries at a given position in the previous season. The tagged player would play for that amount for one year.

Now, the tag number is determined by a mind-numbing formula that takes into account salaries over five years and their percentage of the overall cap in those years. As a result, the franchise numbers have dipped.

While the figures for next season have not been set, the salary for a franchised quarterback is expected to be around $14.6 million. It was $16.1 million in 2011, a number that was elevated because the previous season had been an uncapped year.

Newsletter Sign Up Continue reading the main story Please verify you're not a robot by clicking the box. Invalid email address. Please re-enter. You must select a newsletter to subscribe to. Sign Up You will receive emails containing news content , updates and promotions from The New York Times. You may opt-out at any time. You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. Thank you for subscribing. An error has occurred. Please try again later. View all New York Times newsletters.

Most players and agents dread the franchise tag because, while the money is good and guaranteed, the contract offers no long-term security. A significant injury during the franchise year would send a player into free agency with a likelihood of diminished earnings, rather than a chance at the lucrative contract he might have received if he had been allowed to test the market the previous year.

"I'm very, very disappointed that the numbers have gone down," Canter said. "I'm disappointed it's become a much easier device for teams to wield against players. It's a scare tactic and a power tactic by the team. 'If you don't agree to our lousy deal, we'll slap the tag on you, and you know you're risking injury.' You've earned your right to test the market. It's creating an animosity and a wall that happens so often with the franchise tag."

Advertisement Continue reading the main story

Complicating decisions about the tag this year is that the salary cap is again expected to rise only slightly, to about $123 million, forcing many teams to cut still-viable veterans whose salary figures have risen. There will most likely be some hesitation to use the tag on any but the most indispensable players.

Some agents said during the combine that they feared a class system would result from the flat cap: that the elite 15 percent of N.F.L. players would receive top dollar and the rest of the league, forming the backbone of rosters, would be disappointed by the deals offered in free agency, with a market flush with talented players looking for jobs.

Flacco does not need to worry about that, of course. If Linta and the Ravens are unable to strike a deal, the Ravens will put the tag on Flacco. If it is not the exclusive tag — which pays more but would mean he could not negotiate with other teams — Baltimore will run the risk of another team's trying to construct a deal that it cannot match.

Linta, who represents his share of nonmarquee players in addition to a star like Flacco, has a unique view of the franchise tag. The lower franchise numbers under the new formula leave more salary-cap space for the rest of the roster.

"The rank and file, they don't care," Linta said. "I'm perfectly fine with the way it is. It only affects in a normal year three to six guys a year. What benefited the middle and lower class negatively affected the upper class."