Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: new interesting fatlock reading

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Jun 2006
    Location
    betwwen lost and nowhere,southcentral ks.
    Posts
    1,258
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default new interesting fatlock reading


    0 Not allowed!
    Whitlock | Price goes up for Johnson


    function PopupPic(sPicURL, sHeight, sWidth) { window.open( "http://media.kansascity.com/static/popup.html?"+sPicURL, "", "resizable=1,HEIGHT=" +sHeight+ ",WIDTH=" +sWidth); }


    The record contract the Colts handed defensive end Dwight Freeney late last week is yet another new wrinkle in the Larry Johnson-Chiefs contract saga.
    Freeney’s $72 million deal, which includes $30 million in bonuses and $37.5 million over the first three years, raised the roof on all future contract demands across the league.
    The Colts treated Freeney, the game’s second-best defensive end after Julius Peppers, like a quarterback. And by doing so, the Colts hammered the point that you can’t compare 2007 contracts by the standards established under the old collective-bargaining agreement.
    The franchise-tag value for defensive ends had been around $8.6 million. Once Peppers inks a new deal, an agreement that should surpass Freeney’s, the franchise number for pass rushers will begin to approach $10 million.
    My point in bringing this up is it is being made abundantly clear that the deal that LaDainian Tomlinson, the league’s best running back, signed in 2004 is obsolete when talking about Larry Johnson’s value in today’s market.
    If the Chargers signed LT today, he would garner a $30 million signing bonus and $36 million over the first three years of the contract.
    Under that scenario, what does the game’s second-best running back deserve? Larry and his agent have virtually no choice but to demand $25 million in guarantees.
    I still see a trade as a legitimate possibility. The Hunt family has never shown the stomach for reaching into their piggy bank and handing out huge signing bonuses.
    The Chiefs still operate like a $10 million bonus is a big deal. Yes, Tony Gonzalez got $18 million in guaranteed money, but only $10 million was in signing bonus. The rest was in guaranteed salary over the first four years of his new deal.
    But look at the cash Colts owner Jim Irsay has been tossing around: Peyton Manning received $35 million in guarantees, Marvin Harrison got $23 million, Reggie Wayne took home $13.5 million and now Freeney just cracked $30 million.
    There’s a huge difference between paying a guy in salary and paying a guy in guaranteed bonuses. The latter is far more risky and causes an owner to initially dip into his own finances to do it. It’s the difference between cash dollars and salary-cap dollars.
    The Hunts will spend their salary-cap dollars, but they’ve been reluctant to stretch the cap by spending large sums of cash in bonuses.
    I’m not going to beat up the Hunts or team president/general manager WildCarl Peterson about their frugal spending habits. You could argue the Colts are in a unique situation; they have arguably the league’s best quarterback, pass rusher and wide receiver.
    The Chiefs have arguably the league’s best tight end, and they paid him like it. In my opinion, the Chiefs have the league’s best offensive guard, Brian Waters, and WildCarl took complete advantage of Waters in 2006 contract negotiations.
    Is it WildCarl’s fault that Waters chose to do his deal without the assistance of an agent? Waters is every bit as good as Minnesota’s Steve Hutchinson, who inked a $49 million deal that included $16 million in bonuses.
    Waters received a $4 million roster bonus, relatively modest salaries over the first three years ($585,000, $720,000 and $2.08 million), and roster bonuses in 2007 and 2008 of $3 million and $2.5 million. When you toss in workout bonuses and per-game roster bonuses, Waters received $14.6 million over three years. Hutchinson got $23 million.
    Waters signed an extremely Chiefs-friendly agreement. It’s simply not the kind of reward teams generally give proven performers and rock-solid citizens such as Waters — at least not when they retain proper representation.
    Again, I’m not trying to beat up Peterson or the Hunts. The Patriots and the Eagles, to name two franchises, have experienced success while gaining a reputation as cheap.
    And does declining to give Johnson $20 million-plus in guarantees mean the Chiefs are cheap or does it signify that the organization believes Johnson isn’t worth it? According to my sources, so far, the Chiefs have offered Johnson less guaranteed money than Gonzalez. The Chiefs are allegedly in the $14 million to $15 million range, or about half of what LT would get today.
    Is Johnson only half the running back that Tomlinson is? No one would argue that. A trade just might make sense for all parties. Brett Favre would love to have Larry Johnson, and the Packers would properly pay Johnson. The Chiefs could pick up a few draft picks
    i can remember what a chief super bowl team looks like! ......

  2. #31
    Member Since
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    1,852
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Canada's #1 Chiefs Fan View Post
    lol :liar:
    Clarification please.

  3. #32
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,141
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 30
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkHillbilly View Post
    Clarification please.
    He was reffering to the fact that you called me an optimist. Most of my "polite exchanges" with people, on here, have been my negativity, against their optimism. I am known as "the bringer of rain".Lol.

  4. #33
    Member Since
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    14,295
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 86
    Given: 30

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    I already said "good morning", in another forum...... I would rather be 4-12, in a rebuilding year, than 4-12 while thinking that we were supposed to contend.

    Right now, with L.J., I see alot of similarities, between the Chiefs and the Raiders. How can you not see it? Good runningback,( Though I don't see, in L.J., what you do.) Basically, a rookie quarterback, good defense, (Giving the Raiders the edge, there.) and our offensive line has dropped, in ability,massively, these past two offseasons, where the Raiders, already have a bad O-line.

    If you look closely, who else, in our division, do we compare to?
    Please don't compare the Chiefs to the faders. I might have to slit my wrists.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkHillbilly View Post
    Tell me the last time a top 2 or 3 running back was traded.

    Then tell me what they got for him.
    I don't think this is a fair comparison. LJ is going to hold out. If we were to trade him, it would almost certainly have to be a sign and trade deal. With LJ's current contract, his market value isn't what you might think because he isn't coming to play.

    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    The two factors that most convince me that we should seek a trade, for L.J. are these.

    1) Larrys value is peaked. He has been looking good, behind a strong O-line, and , previously, a great all-around offense. With all of that gone, now, this year would show another decrease in productivity. His value has been "balooned" by productivity in an offense that we no longer have.
    I think Chief31 hit this issue squarely on the head with this post. I don't think the offense is gone as you mention, but I think LJ's value has peaked.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canada's #1 Chiefs Fan View Post
    It is because of you that we are drowning in tears.:439:
    Chiefs31 needs a disclaimer in his sig. Something like "Consistent reading of my posts may cause you to immediately jump in front of a moving bus."

    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    He was reffering to the fact that you called me an optimist. Most of my "polite exchanges" with people, on here, have been my negativity, against their optimism. I am known as "the bringer of rain".Lol.
    You bring a different perspective than I to the boards. This is what I love about these forums. People have different ideas on how the Chiefs should proceed. But we all want the Chiefs to do well.


  5. #34
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    28,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 253
    Given: 447

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by admin View Post
    Please don't compare the Chiefs to the faders. I might have to slit my wrists.

    Yeah, bleeding all over your key board is a real bummer.


  6. #35
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Posts
    5,091
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 23
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by admin View Post
    I agree that half of LT's salary isn't fair. And you also correct that many teams will probably offer him LT money. That is what complicates this whole mess. I hope they can come to an agreement to keep him here for something near LT money. I just don't want to see the Chiefs stuck with a high-priced RB that all of the sudden hobbles to the sidelines over little injuries because he is suddenly making guaranteed money. And his personality/character issues make that scenario seem likely.
    But hey, we still have Priest.
    THAT quarterback is NOT a Pro Bowl quarterback. Never was and never will be.

  7. #36
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    28,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 253
    Given: 447

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Guru View Post
    But hey, we still have Priest.
    Heh! He has gotten fat on nachos.


  8. #37
    Member Since
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Scottsdale, Arizona
    Posts
    1,852
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Have they finally cleared up all of his money against the cap issues?

  9. #38
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    28,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 253
    Given: 447

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by DrunkHillbilly View Post
    Have they finally cleared up all of his money against the cap issues?

    Good question; deserves a good answer.


  10. #39
    Member Since
    Jun 2006
    Location
    betwwen lost and nowhere,southcentral ks.
    Posts
    1,258
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    i see the queen or rufus has lashed out at fatlock for this writting. i dont know who`s funner fatlock or the queen,i mean rufus.
    i can remember what a chief super bowl team looks like! ......

  11. #40
    Member Since
    Sep 2005
    Location
    SE Kansas
    Posts
    28,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 253
    Given: 447

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfpack View Post
    i see the queen or rufus has lashed out at fatlock for this writting. i dont know who`s funner fatlock or the queen,i mean rufus.

    Hey; football on the business side is all about entertainment.


Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •