  There has been a consistent criticism over the past decade of the NFL
franchise tag's monetary limitations due to its biased institutions in favor of
the team rather than the player. But the question whether the NFL's franchise
tag is fair or unfair to players has never been systematically studied. In this
paper, I investigate the effects of NFL players' contract extensions when on a
franchise tag compared to when they are not and analyze them through
statistical and economic lens. Through my research, I find that indeed the
current franchise tag designation is unfair to players when it comes to
contract extension. I then propose a solution to remedy this unfairness, that
is, removing the opportunity to franchise tag players for multiple years, and
adding an option for the player to either test free agency but receive zero pay
until they settle on a contract (the team can also match the offer) or sign the
franchise tag, to provide more flexibility for the player and the team.
