NFL Nation: CBAWatch

San Diego's release of running back LaDainian Tomlinson came two days after we engaged in this bit of funny-talk speculation in the weekend mailbag.

The short of it: Chester Taylor signs with his hometown team in Detroit and Tomlinson replaces him in Minnesota as the Vikings' third-down back/insurance for Adrian Peterson. I'll stress I have no inside information to suggest it's a possibility. But from an outsider's perspective, I think it makes some sense.

The move also gives us an opportunity to make one addendum to the Final Eight discussion we had last week. As you know, the Vikings can't sign an unrestricted free agent unless one of their own unrestricted free agents signs elsewhere first. Moreover, the contracts must be comparable.

But in a very technical sense, Tomlinson won't be an unrestricted free agent. In the NFL, a player who is released from his contract is classified differently than one whose contract expires. So assuming there is an uncapped offseason in 2010, the Vikings -- or any of the other 2009 "Final Eight" teams -- could sign Tomlinson even if they don't lose an unrestricted free agent first.

Hope that makes sense.

CBAWatch: Final Eight Plan

February, 16, 2010
2/16/10
6:15
PM ET
Last week, we began a semi-regular feature designed to feed you a digestible amount of the pending changes to the way the NFL's offseason will work when the salary cap is eliminated next month. We started off by addressing the way franchise and transition tags will work, and Tuesday our SportsNation chat gave us an opportunity to review the "Final Eight" plan.

This plan is one of several ways the NFL will restrict player movement in the uncapped scenario. The eight teams that played in the divisional round of the playoffs won't be able to sign an unrestricted free agent unless one or more of their own unrestricted free agents sign elsewhere. In addition, the four teams that played in the championship round will be further limited in that the free agent they sign must be a player with a "comparable" salary to the one they lose.

(The four teams that lost in the divisional round will have some additional flexibility, but those rules aren't relevant in the NFC North.)

All of which compelled Zack to ask this question during Tuesday's chat:
How big a role do you think that letting Chester Taylor leave would allow the Vikings to sign an outside free agent could factor in a decision to resign him or not?

I thought that was a compelling question and one that emphasized the new layers of strategies teams will be faced with this year. In this particular case, Taylor is an unrestricted free agent who is a valuable backup but might attract starter-caliber money on the open market. He is also an asset who would allow the Vikings to add a key component at another position if they want.

In essence, then, the Vikings would be faced with a trade situation. Would the free-agent player be important enough to mitigate Taylor's departure? And would the contracts match up to satisfy the "comparable" requirement?

(I've yet to see or hear a firm definition of what "comparable" means, but the best guess is that the deals must have similar first-year compensation.)

With all that said, I don't know if there is a player the Vikings might target who would compel them to let Taylor leave. It's possible they'll need his free agent "slot" to replace quarterback Brett Favre, but that's a discussion for another day.

SPONSORED HEADLINES

Insider