"Law a perfect fit for Kansas City...."

[Mr. Laz]

Adam Schein from NFL Network seems to think so:


"Ty law can absolutely be a factor for a team this year"

"i think he's a perfect fit for the Kansas city chiefs .... Hey, i love want Carl Peterson and Dick Vermeil have done this offseason... love Derrick Johnson in the draft ... the underrated Carlos Hall ... Pat Surtain, and of course Sammy Knight."

"Ty Law is worth the risk, give him a contract, give him the money. The guy brings character ... brings credibility at the cover corner position ... and he can show this defense how to win and how to perform in big games... he brings the intangible ... he brings super bowls, which is what this season is all about for kansas city"



impact rookies this year


j.j. Arrington for the cardinals

and

"I could not believe that Derrick Johnson fell to #15 in the draft. luv gunther cunningham as a defensive coordinator. It's a position of need for the Chiefs and i think that Derrick johnson is ready to step in AND BE A STAR for the Chiefs in 2005."

[Cochise]

I don't see how they can fit Law in but I'm not a capologist or anything. If we landed him on top of DJ and Surtain the offeason passes from 'great' into 'dream scenario'

[TRR]

It all depends on if Ty Law will be 100% healthy. I have my doubts.

[Zebedee DuBois]

Is there a site that lists all the salaries that make up our cap number?

It would be interesting to see a offense/defense/dead money breakdown.

[KChiefsQT]

http://www.chiefswarpath.com/resources/playersalaries.htm

That is the Salaries of all KC players.

[the Talking Can]

anyone remind me who JJ Arington is?

[Herzig]

anyone remind me who JJ Arington is?

RB who played for Cal last year. Running and receiving threat. Drafted by Zona...projected to be the starter there.

[Deberg_1990]

a Healthy Ty Law on one side and Surtain on the other?? Are you freakin kidding me??? Id give my right nut up for that to happen!

[shaneo69]

Does Adam Schein also go by the name of Jason Whitlock?

[the Talking Can]

RB who played for Cal last year. Running and receiving threat. Drafted by Zona...projected to be the starter there.

thanks....I think Johnson is for sure the freaking steal of the draft....total package LB slides to worst D in league at #15.... ROFL

[CrazyPhuD]

McCleon, Dexter

CB

2005

1,500,000

Warfield, Eric

CB

2005

3,300,000

That's 4.8mil right there...... How much do you think his cap figure would be this year. Could get screwed next year(Warfield and McCleon's acceleration) but might be worth the gamble.....

[Mr. Laz]

That's 4.8mil right there...... How much do you think his cap figure would be this year. Could get screwed next year(Warfield and McCleon's acceleration) but might be worth the gamble.....
the cap room is there ... its' almost ALWAYS there


this is about whether the Chiefs really want to or not. it's a financial risk for Hunt and a injury risk because of Law's foot.


will Law be healthy?

can any of our young guys step up instead?

will warfield get suspended? for how long?



Law can also play free safety so he has a spot regardless. Just depends on what the chiefs want to do.

[CoMoChief]

It doesn't matter how good of a fit Ty Law is in Kansas City, he simply WILL NOT SIGN WITH US. He is strictly waiting to see who will come up with the most $$$, which is not us by any means. I hate to burst some people's dream bubble but god damn, it isn't going to happen.

[Mr. Laz]

It doesn't matter how good of a fit Ty Law is in Kansas City, he simply WILL NOT SIGN WITH US. He is strictly waiting to see who will come up with the most $$$, which is not us by any means. I hate to burst some people's dream bubble but god damn, it isn't going to happen.
why you gotta be so negative all the time, man. :shake:

[Ultra Peanut]

anyone remind me who JJ Arington is?He's no Adimchinobe Echimandu, that's for sure.

[CoMoChief]

why you gotta be so negative all the time, man. :shake:


Well I mean it's just flat out silly to think that we have the money to sign him. We only have about 900K of cap room left I thought and I don't see him biting at that, especially with Douchebag Poston as his agent. It would be great if we could get him. If we did I would probably get a boner of the fact. Having Surtain and Law at our corners is just nasty. Teams arent going to want to throw at us anymore, or at least will not take advantage of our pass defense.

I still think that we need to have the d-line to step up if this defense is going to do anything this season.

[milkman]

the cap room is there ... its' almost ALWAYS there


this is about whether the Chiefs really want to or not. it's a financial risk for Hunt and a injury risk because of Law's foot.


will Law be healthy?

can any of our young guys step up instead?

will warfield get suspended? for how long?



Law can also play free safety so he has a spot regardless. Just depends on what the chiefs want to do.

If the Chiefs sign Law, he better damn well be healthy and ready to play corner, cause he ain't going to sign for a mere pittence.

Screw the idea of him playing safety.
We have about a thousand safeties to sift through already.

The only reason you sign Law is to upgrade at CB.

But I think Pimp is right.
It's a pipe dream.

[Thig Lyfe]

a Healthy Ty Law on one side and Surtain on the other?? Are you freakin kidding me??? Id give my right nut up for that to happen!

Actually, you can donate your nut to science for like 100 grand.

It's a sweet deal.

[Kerberos]

Adam Schein from NFL Network seems to think so:


"i think he's a perfect fit for the Kansas city chiefs .... Hey, i love want Carl Peterson and Dick Vermeil have done this offseason... love Derrick Johnson in the draft ... the underrated Carlos Hall ... Pat Surtain, and of course Sammy Knight."


What NO love for pulling in Kendrell Bell ?????

How could you leave him out of this statement? :shake:



IMO



.

[Mr. Laz]

If the Chiefs sign Law, he better damn well be healthy and ready to play corner, cause he ain't going to sign for a mere pittence.

Screw the idea of him playing safety.
We have about a thousand safeties to sift through already.

The only reason you sign Law is to upgrade at CB.

But I think Pimp is right.
It's a pipe dream.

actually i only brought up the safety part for flexibility in 3/4 cornerback sets.


Surtain
Law
Warfield


imo Law would probably be the inside guy who can flex and even cover the tightend. he's really physical and smart.... corner/safety.


he Could allow us to only carry 1 free safety and just cut the rest of these scrubs to make cap room.


safeties- Knight,Wesley

corners- surtain,law,warfield,mccleon,sapp,Hodge (battle on IR)


cut- woods,bartee,harts,connot,Pile,Canonico


knight and wesley can play both safety spots and Law can play free safety in a pince.

[milkman]

actually i only brought up the safety part for flexibility in 3/4 cornerback sets.


Surtain
Law
Warfield


imo Law would probably be the inside guy who can flex and even cover the tightend. he's really physical and smart.... corner/safety.


he Could allow us to only carry 1 free safety and just cut the rest of these scrubs to make cap room.


safeties- Knight,Wesley

corners- surtain,law,warfield,mccleon,sapp,Hodge (battle on IR)


cut- woods,bartee,harts,connot,Pile,Canonico


knight and wesley can play both safety spots and Law can play free safety in a pince.

OK, I can get behind that.
But if we did sign Law, can we please, I'm begging, cut McPassOn? :grovel:

[Mr. Laz]

OK, I can get behind that.
But if we did sign Law, can we please, I'm begging, cut McPassOn? :grovel:

when Warfield gets back from suspension he might be.


we could actually keep woods instead of mccleon depending on which guy frees up the most cap room.

[Rausch]

If we want Law we can sign him.

Us wanting Law doesn't mean Law wants us though...

[keg in kc]

Us wanting Law doesn't mean Law wants us though...Yeah, that's unfortunately a part of it. I'd like to think he'd play here for an amount that would be responsible on our part, but I doubt it. Because that's really the issue, not whether we can manipulate the cap in a way to afford it, but whether that would be the right thing to do, and I don't think it is, not after the rest of the offseason. And I don't mean that just from a future cap standpoint, but also from a risk management standpoint, because there's no guarantee that the Law who eventually steps on the field will be anything close to the Law of a couple seasons ago. He may be; he may not. If I were an NFL team, he's not going to get a huge contract, he's going to get an incentive-laden deal that protects me, and it doesn't sound like that's what he wants.

In the overall picture, if it can be done, it certainly doesn't hurt to add another potential leader to the unit, and he could potentially be one more piece to an enormous defensive transformation. If it can't, well, I think we've still done a hell of a job.

[Dave Lane]

It doesn't matter how good of a fit Ty Law is in Kansas City, he simply WILL NOT SIGN WITH US. He is strictly waiting to see who will come up with the most $$$, which is not us by any means. I hate to burst some people's dream bubble but god damn, it isn't going to happen.

Why not us? I don't get this attitude. Barber is costing $2.2 mm this year and Maz is $1 mm. Cut those or get a injury settlement and restructure, cut here and there and you have $4-5 MM avalable this year.

Dave

[Chiefs Pantalones]

Like I mentioned before, I'd sign him if he would do a 1 year deal. Prove that he will be back to his old form. Then, if he's a success, attempt to re-sign him at the end of the year. But he won't go for that. At least not right now.

[Chiefs Pantalones]

Why not us? I don't get this attitude. Barber is costing $2.2 mm this year and Maz is $1 mm. Cut those or get a injury settlement and restructure, cut here and there and you have $4-5 MM avalable this year.

Dave

That's interesting. I bet the Chiefs would look at that, if not already, if they really wanted to sign him.

Also, the fact that we are still interested in him, and not to mention, all the moves we've made, makes me think we are as serious as we've been in a long time about going to the Bowl. I think the Chiefs know that our offense is in its final stages of being what it is possibly.

[keg in kc]

I think the Chiefs know that our offense is in its final stages of being what it is possibly.I don't think they believe that at all. There's only one player where retirement looks imminent, Shields. Even if, for the sake of argument, Priest and Roaf join him, the offense was built primarily through free agency, so if the number of young players we have (and there are a few, Black, Johnson, Parker, Sampson, Thorpe, Williams, Wilson - those are just some drafted guys off the top of my head) don't work, they can always reload the same way they did in '01 and '02. There'll be a step down, losing a couple hall of famers on your isn't something to laugh at, but we shouldn't suddenly turn back into the pre-2001 offense.

[Wallcrawler]

The Chiefs can clear the kind of space needed to sign Ty Law, but sinking it all into just one player after cutting several players is bad business.

They would have to cut several players, in order to sign one, who still has the injury questions lingering over his head. Its not a smart move at all. If Law cant go, or has a relapse, or if we lose another player to injury, we have nothing left to sign a replacement.

He wants the kind of deal that we already gave to Surtain.

Look at his last statements about Miami wanting him to come in. He said that if they couldnt afford Surtain, how could they afford him.

That right there tells you that Ty Law is looking for major cash to sign with anyone. The guy thinks he's God's gift to the corner position.


He would be a great fit for the Chiefs if he is healthy, but he is driven by greed more than anything right now, not his want for a championship.

[stevieray]

why you gotta be so negative all the time, man. :shake:


take a picture and give me the date... :clap:

[Chiefaholic]

Well I mean it's just flat out silly to think that we have the money to sign him. We only have about 900K of cap room left I thought and I don't see him biting at that, especially with Douchebag Poston as his agent. It would be great if we could get him. If we did I would probably get a boner of the fact. Having Surtain and Law at our corners is just nasty. Teams arent going to want to throw at us anymore, or at least will not take advantage of our pass defense.

I still think that we need to have the d-line to step up if this defense is going to do anything this season.

Damn I hate to repost the same 'ol shit over and over, but it IS possible to get Law under contract. Despite what YOU think, Lynn Stiles said it IS possible to get him under contract this year. It's just a matter of how much money they want to defer to the future. A cut here, a restructure there, we have the money to pay him this year. Then it's just a matter of how much actual cash Lamar is willing to shell out to get his butt under contract.

Will it happen? Who knows, but the Chiefs have just as good of a chance as any other team out there. Plus we have a top offense and what looks to be a revamped defense to make him take a serious look at the Chiefs to be a contender.

[KChiefs1]

a Healthy Ty Law on one side and Surtain on the other?? Are you freakin kidding me??? Id give my right nut up for that to happen!

A couple of years ago they were the starting AFC CB's in the Pro Bowl! :drool:

[CosmicPal]

Had Battle not been gone for the season- I'd say "no way" we'd get Law. But, now that Battle is indeed gone, and we could use some help at the corner position- I don't see why not.

[carlos3652]

Well I mean it's just flat out silly to think that we have the money to sign him. We only have about 900K of cap room left I thought and I don't see him biting at that, especially with Douchebag Poston as his agent. It would be great if we could get him. If we did I would probably get a boner of the fact. Having Surtain and Law at our corners is just nasty. Teams arent going to want to throw at us anymore, or at least will not take advantage of our pass defense.

I still think that we need to have the d-line to step up if this defense is going to do anything this season.


Uh.... thats before J. Morton was cut... and if we cut anyone else it would free up some more...

[jspchief]

Uh.... thats before J. Morton was cut... and if we cut anyone else it would free up some more...Like who? Who are you going to cut to free up enough room for Law? Morton was one of the few guys that saved us money by cutting. Most players will actually hurt the cap, due to pro-rated bonuses.

And remember, you need to free up more than this year. You need to make sure we can afford him in subsequent years as well. Years where Gonzo, Holmes, Green, Surtain, and a lot of other guys are getting into the high dollar years of their contracts.

I keep reading about how there's a way, but no one has actually posted a legit map of how it can be done.

[The Bad Guy]

Well I mean it's just flat out silly to think that we have the money to sign him. We only have about 900K of cap room left I thought and I don't see him biting at that, especially with Douchebag Poston as his agent. It would be great if we could get him. If we did I would probably get a boner of the fact. Having Surtain and Law at our corners is just nasty. Teams arent going to want to throw at us anymore, or at least will not take advantage of our pass defense.

I still think that we need to have the d-line to step up if this defense is going to do anything this season.

The D-line wasn't the problem last year. It was the weak assed linebackers and horrible cover corners we had.

This team has constantly drafted DE's and DTs and it's time for the Wilkerson's, Sims', Siavii's on this team to earn their money.

The Chiefs could also say goodbye to Shawn Barber, who doesn't have a place on this team and restructure a contract or 2 (like Jerome Woods and John Browning) to afford Law.

If the Chiefs really want to do it, they have the means to get it done. With Vermeil still monitoring the situation and expressing interest, I would imagine they are looking at trying to do it.

The Chiefs know this guy isn't going to come cheap. They know his attitude about wanting some money. They know who his agents are and they know what they can or can't do.

If they couldn't afford Ty Law, they wouldn't be calling his agent every week.

[ENDelt260]

why you gotta be so negative all the time, man. :shake:
Haha... you know you're in a bad way when you get this from Laz.

[The Bad Guy]

Like who? Who are you going to cut to free up enough room for Law? Morton was one of the few guys that saved us money by cutting. Most players will actually hurt the cap, due to pro-rated bonuses.

And remember, you need to free up more than this year. You need to make sure we can afford him in subsequent years as well. Years where Gonzo, Holmes, Green, Surtain, and a lot of other guys are getting into the high dollar years of their contracts.

I keep reading about how there's a way, but no one has actually posted a legit map of how it can be done.

Forget what I put in my previous post about Barber because it would cost more to cut him. I just don't know how the guy would accept a backup role.

Anyway..to answer your question.

Restructure the following 3 contracts..

John Browning at 1.2 million. Have him drop his base salary down to 700,000..which would free up about 500,000, work that number into a signing bonus and that can be spread out 5 years, which would result in a 400,000 savings.

Trent Green at 4.7 million. Trent being a team guy would surely restructure. Have him take his base salary down to about 2.5 million and tie that 2.5 million into a signing bonus prorated over the next 5 years of his deal, which would result in a net cap savings of 2 mill.

Do the same thing to Warfield. He has a base salary of 3.3 million, have him drop it down to about 2 million and give him a signing bonus of 1.3 million for doing so, which would spread out over the next 4 years of his contract, resulting in a net savings of about 1 million.

Right there, that's a cap savings of about 3.4 million this year, tacked on to our 900,000 cap figure, resulting in about 4.3 million dollars of space to work with.

It can be done. It just depends on whether the Chiefs want to restructure deals.

[jspchief]

Forget what I put in my previous post about Barber because it would cost more to cut him. I just don't know how the guy would accept a backup role.

Anyway..to answer your question.

Restructure the following 3 contracts..

John Browning at 1.2 million. Have him drop his base salary down to 700,000..which would free up about 500,000, work that number into a signing bonus and that can be spread out 5 years, which would result in a 400,000 savings.

Trent Green at 4.7 million. Trent being a team guy would surely restructure. Have him take his base salary down to about 2.5 million and tie that 2.5 million into a signing bonus prorated over the next 5 years of his deal, which would result in a net cap savings of 2 mill.

Do the same thing to Warfield. He has a base salary of 3.3 million, have him drop it down to about 2 million and give him a signing bonus of 1.3 million for doing so, which would spread out over the next 4 years of his contract, resulting in a net savings of about 1 million.

Right there, that's a cap savings of about 3.4 million this year, tacked on to our 900,000 cap figure, resulting in about 4.3 million dollars of space to work with.

It can be done. It just depends on whether the Chiefs want to restructure deals.I doubt Green would be willing. More importantly, I don't think we should ask Green to. He's been playing at a Pro Bowl level for the last three years, putting up numbers only rivaled by a few QBs in the league, all the while averaging about 1 million per year. He deserves to get paid, just like Holmes.

Browning, who knows? I'll give you that one.

Warfield? Yea, I'm sure he's chomping at the bit to restructure his contract so that we can afford his replacement. Sounds like a brilliant career move.

Besides that, there's the issue of cash. Signing bonuses require a lot of up front money. KC has already spent in the neighborhood of 20 million in bonuses this year, now you want to tack on another 3.4 plus whatever we give Law.

While it may not be impossible, I'd say it's highly unlikely that we can afford Law. Moreover, I'm not sure the team is willing to cast themselves head first into cap hell to do it.

[Mr. Laz]

I doubt Green would be willing. More importantly, I don't think we should ask Green to. He's been playing at a Pro Bowl level for the last three years, putting up numbers only rivaled by a few QBs in the league, all the while averaging about 1 million per year. He deserves to get paid, just like Holmes.
i don't think you understand what it means to restructure a contract


the player doesn't take a pay cut ... in fact they actually benefit from the deal because they get most their yearly salary up front.


example:

lets say Player A is set to make 4.75 million this year.

they take his base salary all the way down to the league minimum of 750k(or whatever, close enough). the missing 4 million is changed over to the bonus catagory and given to Green up front at the beginning of the year like a signing bonus.

because the 4 million is a bonus now it can be prorated over the life of the contract.

4 million divided by 4 years = 1 million per year cap hit

Player A now counts 1.75 million against the cap this year BUT still actually gets paid his original 4.75 million.

it's all paper shuffling


this gratitude towards the players for restructuring is just PR bullchit


they get their money up front and get put it in the bank to collect interest. The players make money from a restructure generally.


it's only a pay CUT the usually hurts the player

[yoswif]

The Chiefs gave Priest big $ at a pretty ripe age for a RB and coming off an injury. If he's fully recovered from his injury, as Priest was, I think CP and DV will consider a contract for Law structured to provide good cap value for 3 or 4 years worth the risk.

For cap money, restructure Green ($4.7 mil salary) and Warfield ($3.3 mil salary) for about $1.5 mil cap saving. Release McCleon ($1.5 mil salary), Bartee ($800k salary), and Stills ($800k salary) for about $1.5 mil in cap saving. Teams still have to have a body on the roster so I can't use all the release money in cap saving.

As for motivation, Law surely knows Surtain and Knight from pro bowl weeks and AFC east battles. Probably knows Bell as well. He knows there is some quality in the Chiefs D to go with their outstanding offense and return game. His ego could get a great massage from being the final piece to a really nice puzzle.

[BigChiefFan]

I'd love to have Law become a Chief(who wouldn't?), but his pricetag seems a little inflated, IMO. The guy has been a damn good corner, but he wants his cake and eat it, too. It's all about Law and his needs and he's soured me on him. You gotta give a little, to get a little, Ty.

[Mr. Kotter]

...As for motivation, Law surely knows Surtain and Knight from pro bowl weeks and AFC east battles. Probably knows Bell as well. He knows there is some quality in the Chiefs D to go with their outstanding offense and return game. His ego could get a great massage from being the final piece to a really nice puzzle.

If Law ends up in Red and Gold, this will be why. :thumb:

[Hoover]

We have 900K in cap space, but what can we save if we dump Woods?

I would rather dump Woods and McCleon to bring in Law. I don't see McCleon and Woods really helping anyway.

[Hoover]

Like who? Who are you going to cut to free up enough room for Law? Morton was one of the few guys that saved us money by cutting. Most players will actually hurt the cap, due to pro-rated bonuses.

And remember, you need to free up more than this year. You need to make sure we can afford him in subsequent years as well. Years where Gonzo, Holmes, Green, Surtain, and a lot of other guys are getting into the high dollar years of their contracts.

I keep reading about how there's a way, but no one has actually posted a legit map of how it can be done.
But we all think Shields, and Holmes could be playing their last season in the NFL. Thats why you make a move to bring in Law. Now is the time to go for it.

[htismaqe]

Yes, the Chiefs COULD find the cap space if they really want to. To me money is not the question.

1) I don't understand the "motivation" ideas. The guy is NOT going to be motivated by winning, HE HIMSELF said as much. He's got his SB rings, he said he wants to be paid, period.

2) I'm most worried about the injury. We absolutely HAVE to get someone who can start for Warfield in GAME ONE of the season. If we spend a bunch of money on Law and he's not ready? Well, that's just dumb beyond words.

[jspchief]

We have 900K in cap space, but what can we save if we dump Woods?

I would rather dump Woods and McCleon to bring in Law. I don't see McCleon and Woods really helping anyway.We would only save about 300k from dumping McCleon.

It's hard to say what cutting Woods would do because the structure of his signing bonus isn't known (I just know that it was two-tiered). But it's likely that cutting Woods would actually affect the cap negatively, since we would have to absorb the pro-rated portion of his signing bonus. Speculating that the the front side of his bonus was only 3 million, cutting him would consume another 1 million worth of cap space.

[KCTitus]

... I don't understand the "motivation" ideas. The guy is NOT going to be motivated by winning, HE HIMSELF said as much. He's got his SB rings, he said he wants to be paid, period...

I agree. He doesnt care about helping a team win...been there, done that.

[BigChiefFan]

Yes, the Chiefs COULD find the cap space if they really want to. To me money is not the question.

1) I don't understand the "motivation" ideas. The guy is NOT going to be motivated by winning, HE HIMSELF said as much. He's got his SB rings, he said he wants to be paid, period.

2) I'm most worried about the injury. We absolutely HAVE to get someone who can start for Warfield in GAME ONE of the season. If we spend a bunch of money on Law and he's not ready? Well, that's just dumb beyond words.

I don't agree with your first statement. I've had heard Law say that yes he wants to be paid, but he wants to leave a legacy and become a HOFer. He said he IS motivated to getting back to the Super Bowl with whatever team he goes to. He said some may call him arrogant, but he was confident in his play and knew he could improve any secondary. Of course he wants to be paid, but he IS motivated to leaving the game as one of the best ever and showing it on the field.

[htismaqe]

I don't agree with your first statement. I've had heard Law say that yes he wants to be paid, but he wants to leave a legacy and become a HOFer. He said he IS motivated to getting back to the Super Bowl with whatever team he goes to. He said some may call him arrogant, but he was confident in his play and knew he could improve any secondary. Of course he wants to be paid, but he IS motivated to leaving the game as one of the best ever and showing it on the field.

I heard an interview with Law around Super Bowl time, and he DID say he wanted to be a HoFer. He also said that he didn't really care about going back to the Super Bowl. He said, specifically, at this point in his career it's all about Ty Law.

[BigChiefFan]

I heard an interview with Law around Super Bowl time, and he DID say he wanted to be a HoFer. He also said that he didn't really care about going back to the Super Bowl. He said, specifically, at this point in his career it's all about Ty Law.
The interview I heard was back in the early stages of FA. He said he deserved some money, but he sounded like he wanted to make a big contribution to a team to get back to the big dance. Most of the big names, hype themselves and I suspect Law is doing that, but there is no question the guy still had something to prove and knew he wasn't a lock HOFer at this point in his career.

[Hoover]

While we all know the dude wants PAID. I think he also wants to be on a winning team, him going to another team and making them better only adds to his greatness as a player. I still think he will be a Steeler.

[Random & Clever]

2) I'm most worried about the injury. We absolutely HAVE to get someone who can start for Warfield in GAME ONE of the season. If we spend a bunch of money on Law and he's not ready? Well, that's just dumb beyond words.


I wouldn't say that it's dumb beyond words. Even if it takes the first 4 weeks for Law to become his probowl self, that leaves 12 weeks of football plus hopefully playoffs. We'd have Surtain, Law, and Warfield as our CB's. I know the first few weeks would not be ideal, but having McCleon start for 4 weeks then going to what I said before wouldn't be that dumb (IMO). OR If they sign a vet for min. $, he starts for 4 weeks then goes to nickle. So in the playoffs we'd have Surtain, Warfield, and a vet. What would you rather have? Do you think that one of those Vets would play THAT much better than McCleon in the first 4 weeks. And that's IF Law isn't healthy.

[htismaqe]

I wouldn't say that it's dumb beyond words. Even if it takes the first 4 weeks for Law to become his probowl self, that leaves 12 weeks of football plus hopefully playoffs. We'd have Surtain, Law, and Warfield as our CB's. I know the first few weeks would not be ideal, but having McCleon start for 4 weeks then going to what I said before wouldn't be that dumb (IMO). OR If they sign a vet for min. $, he starts for 4 weeks then goes to nickle. So in the playoffs we'd have Surtain, Warfield, and a vet. What would you rather have? Do you think that one of those Vets would play THAT much better than McCleon in the first 4 weeks. And that's IF Law isn't healthy.

You know how many teams have started 1-3 and made the playoffs? You can count them on one hand, AFTER an industrial accident.

If Law can't play day 1, I don't want him.

[ROYC75]

Oh Good Lord, htismaqe ,Titus and I are back to agreeing on something ! :hmmm:

[Mr. Laz]

If Law can't play day 1, I don't want him.

you don't want him period ... so no big change

[htismaqe]

you don't want him period ... so no big change

That's not true.

If he'll sign for a reasonable amount (vet minimum with incentives) and can participate in TC/PS games, I'd definitely take him.

However, considering that both of those (especially the first) are VERY remote possibilities...

[Wallcrawler]

McLeon starting the first four games isnt that big of a deal, for several reasons.


1. NO season is determined a success or failure in the first 4 weeks of the season. Ive seen 4-0 football teams fail to make the playoffs. Its about focus, and consistency whether or not your team makes the playoffs, not your record in September. If youre a team that goes into the tank after a rough start in the first four games, then quite honestly you have no business playing for the Lombardi trophy in the first place. Championship caliber teams overcome adversity, not submit to it.


2. This team is capable of winning DESPITE a bad defense. Theyve been doing it for four seasons now. The Chiefs have previously defeated the Jets, Raiders, and Broncos all with a horrendous defense in a prior year. This year, we have drasticly upgraded talent, and the same explosive offense. If Dexter McLeon is the one weak spot on the defense, I like our chances. The Chiefs have overcome much worse than that in previous years.


3. Making the playoffs is all about winning the division. The Chiefs have only two divisional games in the first four weeks. Im highly confident that they will defeat the Raiders despite having to go to Oakland. Their defense is so bad that this offense should be able to dominate the game and keep the Raider offense off the field. Against the Broncos in Denver, thats probably a loss if they dont play extremely well, because KC sucks as bad in Denver as Denver sucks at Arrowhead. The rest of the important AFC west games come later in the season, 3 out of 4 of them coming at Arrowhead stadium. Honestly, I like the Chiefs' chances of winning the division this year.



While Dexter McLeon isnt the greatest answer in the world to replacing Warfield for the first four games, it is hardly a death sentence for the team if that is what the situation is when the season starts. The Chiefs are used to having to compensate for the defense anyway, but this year they shouldnt have to compensate as much, even if McLeon has to start the first month of the season. Dexter has been burnt during his time with the Chiefs, but he has also come up with some big plays for the Chiefs as well. Its not like we're starting William Bartee out there.


The Chiefs will be competetive during the first month of the season based on offense alone. You could give the Chiefs last year's defense in the first four games, and Im willing to bet that they would be competetive in those games, but this year we have probably 4 new starters, all of whom should be playing in the opener. Despite the loss of Warfield for a few games, the Chiefs are still fielding a much better defense than last year.

[ROYC75]

Who in there right mind would not want a healthy Ty Law at Vet. Min. ?

But a healthy Ty law is not at this time.

As Parker has said, the 1st 4 games are critical with Warfield possibly out.

Yes a healthy Ty Law would benefit us later and in a possible post season.....

I'm just not convinced he will be 100 % this year.......

[ROYC75]

Our offense sucked the 1st 4 games last year........

[Mr. Laz]

That's not true.

If he'll sign for a reasonable amount (vet minimum with incentives) and can participate in TC/PS games, I'd definitely take him.

However, considering that both of those (especially the first) are VERY remote possibilities...
the money part is remote ... the health part looks like he has a good chance to be ready by preseason.


imo it depends on how rationale his money demands are



if he truly expects to be paid like the top corner in the league ... i doubt it's gonna happen. His age alone will probably prevent that.

but if he just wants legit starter money then we should consider it ... especially if he's will to structure it in a cap friendly way at take his injury into some kind of consideration.(ie health/performance bonuses)

[Lzen]

Who in there right mind would not want a healthy Ty Law at Vet. Min. ?

But a healthy Ty law is not at this time.

As Parker has said, the 1st 4 games are critical with Warfield possibly out.

Yes a healthy Ty Law would benefit us later and in a possible post season.....

I'm just not convinced he will be 100 % this year.......

Then that begs to question "is Ty Law at 85% better than Dexter McCleon/Alphonso Hodge/Ashley Ambrose/etc. ? That is a huge question and honestly, I don't know the answer.

[KCTitus]

I just dont see it happening. It's obvious Law wants big money and there's no way that's going to come out of KC at this point. According to Law he passed up an offer already from KC while he wasnt even able to run, what makes anyone think he's going to take less now that he can play?

If KC lands him, consider me suprised.

[htismaqe]

1. NO season is determined a success or failure in the first 4 weeks of the season. Ive seen 4-0 football teams fail to make the playoffs. Its about focus, and consistency whether or not your team makes the playoffs, not your record in September. If youre a team that goes into the tank after a rough start in the first four games, then quite honestly you have no business playing for the Lombardi trophy in the first place. Championship caliber teams overcome adversity, not submit to it.

History would disagree. Since 1990, there have been 90 playoff teams. 18 of them went 1-3 to start a season. Only 1 has made it to the Super Bowl.

2. This team is capable of winning DESPITE a bad defense. Theyve been doing it for four seasons now. The Chiefs have previously defeated the Jets, Raiders, and Broncos all with a horrendous defense in a prior year. This year, we have drasticly upgraded talent, and the same explosive offense. If Dexter McLeon is the one weak spot on the defense, I like our chances. The Chiefs have overcome much worse than that in previous years.

That I agree with.

3. Making the playoffs is all about winning the division. The Chiefs have only two divisional games in the first four weeks. Im highly confident that they will defeat the Raiders despite having to go to Oakland. Their defense is so bad that this offense should be able to dominate the game and keep the Raider offense off the field. Against the Broncos in Denver, thats probably a loss if they dont play extremely well, because KC sucks as bad in Denver as Denver sucks at Arrowhead. The rest of the important AFC west games come later in the season, 3 out of 4 of them coming at Arrowhead stadium. Honestly, I like the Chiefs' chances of winning the division this year.

Because of the 4-team divisions, winning the division is less important than it's ever been in the history of the NFL. Conference wins are more important than ever.



While Dexter McLeon isnt the greatest answer in the world to replacing Warfield for the first four games, it is hardly a death sentence for the team if that is what the situation is when the season starts. The Chiefs are used to having to compensate for the defense anyway, but this year they shouldnt have to compensate as much, even if McLeon has to start the first month of the season. Dexter has been burnt during his time with the Chiefs, but he has also come up with some big plays for the Chiefs as well. Its not like we're starting William Bartee out there.


The Chiefs will be competetive during the first month of the season based on offense alone. You could give the Chiefs last year's defense in the first four games, and Im willing to bet that they would be competetive in those games, but this year we have probably 4 new starters, all of whom should be playing in the opener. Despite the loss of Warfield for a few games, the Chiefs are still fielding a much better defense than last year.

I don't disagree. However, why start Dexter when you could just as easily get someone like Aaron Beasley, who would be a pretty decent upgrade?

[htismaqe]

the money part is remote ... the health part looks like he has a good chance to be ready by preseason.


imo it depends on how rationale his money demands are



if he truly expects to be paid like the top corner in the league ... i doubt it's gonna happen. His age alone will probably prevent that.

but if he just wants legit starter money then we should consider it ... especially if he's will to structure it in a cap friendly way at take his injury into some kind of consideration.(ie health/performance bonuses)

$42M, $10M guaranteed is legit starter money IMO. It's also an outrageous sum of money to offer a guy who may or may not be healthy.

If he turned that down, fuggedaboutit...

[Random & Clever]

You know how many teams have started 1-3 and made the playoffs? You can count them on one hand, AFTER an industrial accident.

If Law can't play day 1, I don't want him.

True. But look at it this way. One of the 4 Vet CB are probably better than McCleon. So what are you thinking our record would be if we sign one and he starts? 3-1? 2-2? That big a difference over an upgrade at our #2 corner?

So lets say Law isn't 100% 'til week 5 (12 games left). He would be an upgrade Warfield right? (after his susp.) Then Warfield goes to the nickleback. (another upgrade at NB) So how many wins could we equate to those two upgrades for the rest of the season that we wouldn't have won. How much better would our chances be in the playoffs/SB? This way equals better talent in two spots for 12 weeks vs better talent for 4 weeks. Plus the upgrades are much more significant for the 12 weeks.

[htismaqe]

True. But look at it this way. One of the 4 Vet CB are probably better than McCleon. So what are you thinking our record would be if we sign one and he starts? 3-1? 2-2? That big a difference over an upgrade at our #2 corner?

So lets say Law isn't 100% 'til week 5 (12 games left). He would be an upgrade Warfield right? (after his susp.) Then Warfield goes to the nickleback. (another upgrade at NB) So how many wins could we equate to those two upgrades for the rest of the season that we wouldn't have won. How much better would our chances be in the playoffs/SB? This way equals better talent for in two spots for 12 weeks vs better talent for 4 weeks. Plus the upgrades are much more significant for the 12 weeks.

That all sounds good IF Law can play. IF.

[Mr. Laz]

$42M, $10M guaranteed is legit starter money IMO. It's also an outrageous sum of money to offer a guy who may or may not be healthy.

If he turned that down, fuggedaboutit...
1st off, we don't know how it was structure

secondly, i don't recall him saying that 10 million was guaranteed. He just said that with the way it was structured, the chiefs would prolly cut him after only paying him 10 million.

theres a gap the size of the grand canyon to negotiate a compromise in there.

the chiefs tried to get him on the cheap because of his injury, which was a smart thing. If he gets healthy, they can structure the contract much differently and MAYBE have a chance.


i still think new england is the odds on favorite.


The steelers are generally pretty cheap ... the dolphins are a mess ... the chiefs seem to lack the aggressiveness/commitment or something :shrug:

add Law really would boost our defense from a leadership point

i said before ... if we improve our secondary enough to get Warfield out of the starting lineup then we have really accomplished something.


with Law on the roster our chance for a super bowl would all hinge on Health imo ... and that's saying alot.

[Ari Chi3fs]

how about signing Derrick Johnson first? :shrug:

[Random & Clever]

That all sounds good IF Law can play. IF.

True.

[Mr. Laz]

how about signing Derrick Johnson first? :shrug:
if we want a super bowl we need to multi task

signing our draft picks by camp is a must ... not a luxury... especially johnson.

[RedThat]

This is how I see it, nobody is gonna offer Ty Law the money he wants. We can offer him the money, it just wont be to his liking. If we really want him, I think we can at least TRY to get him. We simply have to clear some cap space, and imo, some dead weight to clear for this year and next year. We could do that by cutting Maz, Barber, Woods, and restructing contracts from Green, Browning, Warfield, and so forth. However, the question is, the money that we free up, is it competitive enough against competitive offers from other teams? I doubt it. Now, if Ty Law says Miami can't afford Surtain what makes them think they can afford me? Seems to me after hearing those comments, he's looking for a contract similar to Surtain's.

Because of his age, and the whole injury thing, I think, those 2 will play a factor in him NOT getting the money he desires. Which brings me back to my first sentence, "nobody is gonna offer Ty Law the money he wants." He should just take the best offer available, and play with the team that has the best contention for a SB. And, i don't think Ty Law wants that.

*which leads me to believe certain comments people have made in this thread.
2 in particular, from both Rausch and KCTitus.


"If we want Law we can sign him.

Us wanting Law doesn't mean Law wants us though"... -Rausch


"I agree. He doesnt care about helping a team win...been there, done that". -KCTitus

These comments here, sum up the whole Ty Law situation. Imo, he wants to go where the money is, and, he has already won, but, hasn't got his pay. He CARES about his money, and that is what he is trying to get, regardless, if other teams give it to him or not. He's striving to get his money it's obvious.
He may very well screw himself, nobody is going to pay him, and he may very well not be playing for anybody this year.

[Wallcrawler]

History would disagree. Since 1990, there have been 90 playoff teams. 18 of them went 1-3 to start a season. Only 1 has made it to the Super Bowl.

I dont put a lot of stock in historical numbers. Yes, its tougher to make the playoffs if you start slow, but not impossible. I would be inclined to think that if any team had a shot at it, it would be a team with an offense the likes of the KC Chiefs.

Besides that, who is to say that just because Warfield is out, the Chiefs go 1-3? I dont really recall Eric Warfield being that kind of a dominant presence on the field to the extent that if he were not in the game, the defense was destined to be beaten. He's one guy. If the Chiefs cannot replace one guy, adjust to and overcome his absence, then they are not championship material in the first place.




Because of the 4-team divisions, winning the division is less important than it's ever been in the history of the NFL. Conference wins are more important than ever.

I was under the impression that if you won your division, you automatically had a spot in the playoffs. Hence an 8-8 team playing in a weak division beating out a 10-6 team in the same conference that did not win its division, and did not qualify for a wildcard spot.



I don't disagree. However, why start Dexter when you could just as easily get someone like Aaron Beasley, who would be a pretty decent upgrade?

Now that, we will probably never know. It probably could be filed in the same cabinet with the question as to why it took Carl Peterson 15 years to finally get aggressive and bring in some actual top flight talent in the offseason.

[Ari Chi3fs]

another +70 post Law thread. yippee.

[htismaqe]

1st off, we don't know how it was structure

secondly, i don't recall him saying that 10 million was guaranteed. He just said that with the way it was structured, the chiefs would prolly cut him after only paying him 10 million.

theres a gap the size of the grand canyon to negotiate a compromise in there.

the chiefs tried to get him on the cheap because of his injury, which was a smart thing. If he gets healthy, they can structure the contract much differently and MAYBE have a chance.


i still think new england is the odds on favorite.


The steelers are generally pretty cheap ... the dolphins are a mess ... the chiefs seem to lack the aggressiveness/commitment or something :shrug:

add Law really would boost our defense from a leadership point

i said before ... if we improve our secondary enough to get Warfield out of the starting lineup then we have really accomplished something.


with Law on the roster our chance for a super bowl would all hinge on Health imo ... and that's saying alot.

No we don't know how it's structured. But he's reportedly seeking a 1-year deal worth $6M. That's way too much.

I honestly think he's going to have trouble playing this year. Alot of people seem to think that he's gonna come back 100% no problem. I don't. I think we'll see him struggle to stay on the field and he'll be in and out all year.

[htismaqe]

if we want a super bowl we need to multi task

signing our draft picks by camp is a must ... not a luxury... especially johnson.

Multi-task?

Unless we can negotiate with them simultaneously, which is dictated by THEM not the Chiefs, we have to make sure we have enough money to sign DJ before we do anything else.

[htismaqe]

Yes, you are correct. Winning the division is a guaranteed spot. The problem is if you don't win your division...

[KCTitus]

No we don't know how it's structured. But he's reportedly seeking a 1-year deal worth $6M. That's way too much.

6M? He's not going to get that from anyone...

[Mr. Laz]

which is dictated by THEM not the Chiefs,
that's bull ... you've been drinking too much Carl Kool-aid

it's a mutual negotiation, carl just wants them to come to him because he thinks it gives him move leverage. That's why he's only gotten 3 or 4 of his 1st round picks into camp on time during his entire tenure irrc.

and of the 3/4 1st rounder that got in, almost all were low 1st rounders.

going by memory:

larry johnson - 27th
trezelle jenkins - 31st

greg hill - 26th (maybe????)

there's another that got in on time... can't remember who it is though

[ptlyon]

Laz - DJ isn't going to sign anything until picks 1-14 are signed, barring a miracle.

[Wallcrawler]

All you have to do is read some of his press. He thinks he is the end-all be-all of the cornerback position. This guy wants huge money, and actually believes that he is worth the money, even with the injury questions and his age.

Ive seen some players with some thick blinders on, but this guy must have had his custom made.

He turned down 10 million while he was still in a wheelchair and 30 pounds overweight. This guy is one greedy s.o.b.


It almost makes me wish the Chiefs would just drop their pursuit of him, because noone else on the KC team has that me me me me attitude that Law has.

The Chiefs players want to win, Law just wants to get paid. I dont see how that is a good mix. Law has his rings, so if the Chiefs dont make it to the big dance, its no skin off his ass, he's still earning a huge check.

Id rather have someone in that is willing to work with the team and that is motivated by the want for a championship, not just money.

[Mr. Laz]

No we don't know how it's structured. But he's reportedly seeking a 1-year deal worth $6M. That's way too much.

I honestly think he's going to have trouble playing this year. Alot of people seem to think that he's gonna come back 100% no problem. I don't. I think we'll see him struggle to stay on the field and he'll be in and out all year.
health is a concern, but i think i'd do a 1 year deal like that


3 year contract worth 23 million:

5 million dollar signing bonus

1st year- 1 million base salary
2nd year- 8 million base salary
3rd year- 9 million base salary

basically a 1 year deal for 6 million



next year we cut him and take a 3.6 million dollar cap hit ... we can live with that IF HE'S HEALTHY.

[Mr. Laz]

Laz - DJ isn't going to sign anything until picks 1-14 are signed, barring a miracle.

maybe ... i just hope we are pro active and aggressive, make sure that as soon as the market is set we have a contract ready to hash out.

[KCTitus]

First rounders 1989-2004: (# is pick # in first round)

1989-4: DT
1990-13: Snow
1991-21: Harvey Williams
1992-20: Dale Carter
1994-25: Greg Hill
1995-31: Trezelle Jenkins
1996-28: Jerome Woods
1997-13: Gonzalez
1998-27: Victor Reily
1999-14: Tait
2000-21: Morris
2002-6: Sims
2003-27: Larry Johnson

I dont recall a lot of protracted hold outs priot to Tait, of course, Im old too.

[htismaqe]

that's bull ... you've been drinking too much Carl Kool-aid

it's a mutual negotiation, carl just wants them to come to him because he thinks it gives him move leverage. That's why he's only gotten 3 or 4 of his 1st round picks into camp on time during his entire tenure irrc.

and of the 3/4 1st rounder that got in, almost all were low 1st rounders.

going by memory:

larry johnson - 27th
trezelle jenkins - 31st

greg hill - 26th (maybe????)

there's another that got in on time... can't remember who it is though

You're wrong.

According to 610, 810, and Gretz, the Chiefs offered DJ a contract that was roughly 15% over what last year's 15th pick got. DJ's agent rejected the offer and said that they would wait to see how this year's slotting sets up.

[Mr. Laz]

You're wrong.

According to 610, 810, and Gretz, the Chiefs offered DJ a contract that was roughly 15% over what last year's 15th pick got. DJ's agent rejected the offer and said that they would wait to see how this year's slotting sets up.
so now the media is a reliable source for information?


and 1 offer is hardly the whole of a negotiation

[yoswif]

That all sounds good IF Law can play. IF.

Over the course of the upcoming season, I think Law would come a lot closer to earning a $3.3 million salary as starting CB for the Chiefs than Warfield. Warfield is due to make $14 million in salary in the next 4 years. Releasing Warfield, McCleon, and Bartee would clear close to $20 million in '05', '06', and '07' salary. IIRC, Warfield's signing bonus was $5 million while McCleon and Bartee's were insignificant.

To me, it's a question of whether a physically fit 31 year old perennial pro bowler Law offers better value for $10 million over the next 3 years than sober 29 year old perennial burn victim Warfield. I just can't see Warfield being on the roster as a $3.3 million backup CB if the Chiefs sign Law.

[htismaqe]

so now the media is a reliable source for information?


and 1 offer is hardly the whole of a negotiation

when multiple sources report something, it has a better chance of being true...corroboration.

And your contention was that Carl sits back and waits to be approached, which is wrong. I never said it was the whole of the negotiation, I'm saying that DJ getting signed is in DJ's hands, not the teams. And it's true.

[Chiefnj]

I don't see Law as an option.

If he isn't healthy there is no reason to sign him. If he is healthy he's going to expect a lot more money than KC can afford. Either case, he isn't playing in red and gold next year.

[milkman]

so now the media is a reliable source for information?


and 1 offer is hardly the whole of a negotiation

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that the report is accurate, then that offer should have started the negotiating process.

If the agent decided he doesn't want to negotiate until the market is set by other picks, what are Carl's options?

[Chiefnj]

Even if the report is accurate a 15% increase means nothing in and of itself. A 15% increase on the total value of contract is meaningless if all of it comes at the end during voidable years. If it was a 15% increase on the signing bonus, it would be very good.

The Chiefs organization is typically very tight lipped about offers and contract negotiations so I would be somewhat surprised if that media report were true.

[htismaqe]

Even if the report is accurate a 15% increase means nothing in and of itself. A 15% increase on the total value of contract is meaningless if all of it comes at the end during voidable years. If it was a 15% increase on the signing bonus, it would be very good.

The Chiefs organization is typically very tight lipped about offers and contract negotiations so I would be somewhat surprised if that media report were true.

Regardless of the whether the 15% number is 100% accurate, it remains that in all likelihood the Chiefs have already approached DJ's people and been rebuffed. What else should they be doing if they've been told "We're gonna wait and see what the people around us get"?

[Ari Chi3fs]

the NFL needs to adopt an NBA-ish rookie salary structure, so the Eli's of the world dont break the bank.

[Chiefnj]

Regardless of the whether the 15% number is 100% accurate, it remains that in all likelihood the Chiefs have already approached DJ's people and been rebuffed. What else should they be doing if they've been told "We're gonna wait and see what the people around us get"?

Why do you say that "it remains in all likelihood the Chiefs have already approached DJ's people"??

[htismaqe]

Why do you say that "it remains in all likelihood the Chiefs have already approached DJ's people"??

Because it's been reported by multiple, independent sources. The numbers involved were reported much more ambiguously than the fact that the Chiefs made the first move.

[Chiefnj]

Because it's been reported by multiple, independent sources. The numbers involved were reported much more ambiguously than the fact that the Chiefs made the first move.

Was it reported in writing? Not being from the KC area, I miss these things. Anyway, multiple sources said Trotter was a Chief, etc.

[htismaqe]

Was it reported in writing? Not being from the KC area, I miss these things. Anyway, multiple sources said Trotter was a Chief, etc.

I'll have to check.

And yes, you're right. However, it's the only thing we have to go on right now. Unless all one is interested in is complaining about Carl Peterson.

[Mr. Laz]

I'll have to check.

And yes, you're right. However, it's the only thing we have to go on right now. Unless all one is interested in is complaining about Carl Peterson.

or one is only looking to bemoan about people who abuse poor carl


:rolleyes:

[htismaqe]

or one is only looking to bemoan about people who abuse poor carl


:rolleyes:

I don't give one shit about Carl. He can take care of himself.

What I care about is finding a reasonable explanation that is based as much in fact or thought as possible.

It's not my fault that the constant bashing of Carl is rarely based on reason or fact.

[Coogs]

"Ty Law is worth the risk, give him a contract, give him the money. The guy brings character ... brings credibility at the cover corner position ... and he can show this defense how to win and how to perform in big games... he brings the intangible ... he brings super bowls, which is what this season is all about for kansas city"

Exactly!

Plus the strength of this team should switch from offense to defense over the next few years. Perfect fit IMO.

[LiL stumppy]

I saw this also.I don't think we will get Ty Law.But I do belive there is a
possibilty that Derick J will be defensive player of the year.