PDA

View Full Version : Ty Law looks hella good to me


Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 05:42 PM
just saw a clip on espn with him working out



running and cutting like a beast


Ty law working out (http://s36.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2Q4W8PAFK7W690489L3LAIIM42) [/edit] fixed

(19 megs ... so beware dialups... fyi - i D/L it at about 500kps)






,

chop
07-04-2005, 05:44 PM
That link doesn't work for me.

Nightfyre
07-04-2005, 05:44 PM
bad link, btw.

Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 05:45 PM
crap ... i'll fix it

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 05:46 PM
:cuss: Laz, I am going to stab you in the eye with a spork for posting another Law thread. :cuss:

Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 05:53 PM
:cuss: Laz, I am going to stab you in the eye with a spork for posting another Law thread. :cuss:
o:-)

BigVE
07-04-2005, 05:53 PM
just saw a clip on espn with him working out



running and cutting like a beast


Ty law working out (http://d36.yousendit.com/E/2Y44B85CIXIJJ1LFX6NKQNNJVS/Video0704-1743.wmv)

(21 megs ... so beware dialups... fyi - i D/L it at about 500kps)





,

I thought the same thing when I saw it. I think money is/was an obvious factor as well has his potential for RE injuring the foot. I would still be happy if we somehow got the guy.

Hydrae
07-04-2005, 05:55 PM
I saw part of his interview. He said he is not looking to break the bank just wants his fair market value. What part of people not wanting to pay what he wants gives him any idea there is a higher market anywhere else???

Oh and he said he would talk to ESPN about a job before he plays for league minimum. The man is dilusional.

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 05:56 PM
o:-)
C'mere Laz ...
http://www.kk.org/cooltools/archives/spork.jpg
Stabby, Stabby ...

Ari Chi3fs
07-04-2005, 05:59 PM
With Stram as our 12th man on the field, we dont need Law.

Logical
07-04-2005, 06:03 PM
I saw him working out on the NFL network, clearly he is going to be ready. Unfortunately I don't believe we have the money it will take to sign him left in our salary cap.

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 06:04 PM
I don't believe we have the money it will take to sign him left in our salary cap.
We dont. We won't.

Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 06:05 PM
C'mere Laz ...
http://www.kk.org/cooltools/archives/spork.jpg
Stabby, Stabby ...


owwww!! :cuss:

http://folk.uio.no/bholme/images/cut1.jpg






.

Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 06:05 PM
We dont. We won't.

we do, we do

Crush
07-04-2005, 06:07 PM
Could this guy be the next Chris Dishman?

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 06:08 PM
we do, we do
4th: We don't. We won't.
Laz: we do, we do
4th: We don't. We won't.
Laz: we do, we do
4th: (decides to use Roger Rabbit logic on Laz) We do. We will.
(waits)

Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 06:10 PM
4th: We don't. We won't.
Laz: we do, we do
4th: We don't. We won't.
Laz: we do, we do
4th: (decides to use Roger Rabbit logic on Laz) We do. We will.
(waits)
we don't. we won't



laz
~playing along~

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 06:11 PM
we don't. we won't

laz
~playing along~
ROFL

Ari Chi3fs
07-04-2005, 06:17 PM
i love you guys.

Hydrae
07-04-2005, 06:19 PM
i love you guys.


You're not getting my beer.

Mr. Laz
07-04-2005, 06:22 PM
You're not getting my beer.

The Beer you desire not....

bringbackmarty
07-04-2005, 06:41 PM
Thought the vid was not that impressive, overall he looks fat, wonder if the scenes were taken over the course of a couple of weeks. He seems thinner at the end.
That last bit he looked pretty good, that was him actually cutting on it there. The lisfranc could be reinjured walking\tripping up stairs though I understand, cutting may not show us anything. Who knows, I think carl has a hard on for him, gun too. It could happen. I kinda hope it does, even if he gets hurt, he could help coach our guys, and we all know giunta sucks. If he doesn't sign w\us, I hope he signs with tampa or an nfc team we don't play.

KCFalcon59
07-04-2005, 06:44 PM
I say do whatever it takes to sign him. The more the better. Our defense hasa sucked so bad these last few years. We need as many superstars as possible.

UTChief
07-04-2005, 08:04 PM
I agree he looked good. I say do what ever it takes, our window will be closed soon.

Mr. Flopnuts
07-04-2005, 08:37 PM
Could this guy be the next Chris Dishman?


Maybe, but he'll probably be the next Edgerton Hartwell. He's gonna sign somewhere in the next 48 hours

Gravedigger
07-04-2005, 08:39 PM
Well John Clayton did say we were next right behind Jacksonville as far as cap space... I would seriously get rid of warfield and woods just to get the cap space we need and why not throw eric hicks in there

Frankie
07-04-2005, 09:25 PM
4th: We don't. We won't.
Laz: we do, we do
4th: We don't. We won't.
Laz: we do, we do
4th: (decides to use Roger Rabbit logic on Laz) We do. We will.
(waits)
I think you mean my hero, Bugs Bunny.

Eieh... What's up Doc?

ExtremeChief
07-04-2005, 10:00 PM
I think it would be great if he decided to play here. That's what it will ultimately come down to, where he wants to play, IMO. I think Law at 75% is better than Ambrose or McCleon at 100%. But I think he is going to the highest bidder, and I don't think that will be KC. But Carl has surprised me this offseason, so who knows.

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 10:04 PM
Carl has surprised me this offseason, so who knows.
Carl has also spent the vast majority of our allotted salary cap. Keep that in mind before you go chasing this pipe dream.

ExtremeChief
07-04-2005, 10:07 PM
and that's why I said this:

But I think he is going to the highest bidder, and I don't think that will be KC

CoMoChief
07-04-2005, 10:12 PM
I say do whatever it takes to sign him. The more the better. Our defense hasa sucked so bad these last few years. We need as many superstars as possible.


We dont need all superstars to play defesne, look at the Pats. Law would be a great addition though. Teams would be scared as shit to pass against us. Who was the last team to feature such a dominant secondary than that?

4th and Long
07-04-2005, 10:18 PM
and that's why I said this:
You're right. It wont be us becasue WE HAVE NO MEASURE AMOUNT OF MONEY LEFT!

arrowhead20
07-04-2005, 10:32 PM
who the hell knows how much money we have left?
the cap is shrouded in secrecy, only the chiefs have the difinitive number. the chiefs organization will lie about our money situation to throw the media off, then make a big deal overnight like the surtain deal. if carl has such a hard on for Law, he'll do what he can.
im just gonna let the cards play out

Chiefs Pantalones
07-04-2005, 10:41 PM
just saw a clip on espn with him working out



running and cutting like a beast


Ty law working out (http://s36.yousendit.com/d.aspx?id=2Q4W8PAFK7W690489L3LAIIM42) [/edit] fixed

(19 megs ... so beware dialups... fyi - i D/L it at about 500kps)






,

fag

TRR
07-04-2005, 10:43 PM
I wasn't impressed in the least bit. When he had to plant and change directions, he basically came to a complete stop to do so.

He has a ton to prove. Anyone can look decent in shorts and a T-Shirt. I want to see him put the pads on, and take on a pulling guard. Then we'll see how the foot holds up. Running around cones means nothing to me when the player is expecting a Patrick Surtain like contract.

whoman69
07-05-2005, 10:04 AM
Unofficial count:
Ty Law threads- 1,492
Hugh Douglas threads- 1,474

Mr. Laz
07-05-2005, 11:30 AM
Thought the vid was not that impressive, overall he looks fat, wonder if the scenes were taken over the course of a couple of weeks. He seems thinner at the end.
That last bit he looked pretty good, that was him actually cutting on it there. The lisfranc could be reinjured walking\tripping up stairs though I understand, cutting may not show us anything. Who knows, I think carl has a hard on for him, gun too. It could happen. I kinda hope it does, even if he gets hurt, he could help coach our guys, and we all know giunta sucks. If he doesn't sign w\us, I hope he signs with tampa or an nfc team we don't play.
you guys crack me up

people were complaining about how he was in a wheelchair a month ago and now he is running/cutting and working out.

yet you bitch that he "looks fat"


"holy crapazoid, batman" :eek:

Mr. Laz
07-05-2005, 11:32 AM
I wasn't impressed in the least bit.

I want to see him put the pads on, and take on a pulling guard
unbelievable ... :shake:


our healthy linebackers couldn't even take on a pulling guard last year.

TRR
07-05-2005, 11:34 AM
unbelievable ... :shake:


our healthy linebackers couldn't even take on a pulling guard last year.

As I said in my reply. Let him work out in pads before you say he looks "hella good."

BTW, I wasn't saying he needs to win the battle. I just want to see how his foot responds after a collision like that.

StcChief
07-05-2005, 12:22 PM
It won't happen in KC.

The guy will be on a team really needing a DB. willing to cough up what his market value is.

RedThat
07-05-2005, 12:42 PM
He looks fine...he doing sprints like that, he's fine and will be ready by the time season starts....I hope we sign him, and i think we can do it!

C'mon people let's be optimistic here. Hello? If we get Ty Law, we would have a great pass defense, and possibly a top 10 defense. He's like the final piece to our teams puzzle for a championship.

Coogs
07-05-2005, 02:25 PM
As I said in my reply. Let him work out in pads before you say he looks "hella good."

BTW, I wasn't saying he needs to win the battle. I just want to see how his foot responds after a collision like that.

It probably going to cost some team a few million before they see that workout in pads.

And I agree with RedBull. I can't believe some people object to the prospect of adding another top defender to the team. And before you say we can't afford him, in the Clayton thread it states the Chiefs told AA we were still going to go persue Law.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-05-2005, 02:37 PM
I'm all for going after Law, if he's healthy.

To tell the truth, I have a hard time convincing myself (I've been on record saying I don't want him) that he WON'T be the same player because of his Priest Holmes type of determination and work ethic. Law says he's only 80%, but by the time training camp comes and the regular season, I wouldn't bet on him not being the same player he was before the injury. The Chiefs think so too, or else they still wouldn't be persuing him and checking up on him. Every player gets injured, it's apart of the NFL. Some come back, some don't. I think he will be back to where he was, and hopefully we have the cheese to sign him.

If we do end up signing him, I won't be mad at all. He's worth the risk, I guess. Why not?

RedThat
07-05-2005, 03:17 PM
Every player gets injured, it's apart of the NFL. Some come back, some don't. I think he will be back to where he was, and hopefully we have the cheese to sign him.

If we do end up signing him, I won't be mad at all. He's worth the risk, I guess. Why not?

Your right. absolutely right. Injuries are apart of the game. He is either going to come back or not, that's the chance you take though.

Honestly, a 3x SB champ, and 5, 6 time pro-bowler whatever amount times he made it, is hard to pass on, and, I think, outweighs all this talk about about him being hurt, and not perform at the same level again.

He's worth the risk...even if he goes down, I feel comfortable knowing Warfield or Ambrose will come in to play.

Ty Law is the man, all he does is make BIG plays in big games...The guy is a gamer. Like Coogs said, and I agree with him, I can't believe some people object to the prospect of adding another top flight defender to the team.

Law has always been a good player ever since he entered the league from day 1. He knows what he is worth, and the league minimum is a joke, and a slap in the face to a quality player like that. I hope we sign him. all he is going to do is make our defense a championship caliber defense. He brings swagger, heart, leadership to a defense and a team that could use those things. How can people object to not having that? Is waaaay beyond me.

TRR
07-05-2005, 03:25 PM
It probably going to cost some team a few million before they see that workout in pads.

And I agree with RedBull. I can't believe some people object to the prospect of adding another top defender to the team. And before you say we can't afford him, in the Clayton thread it states the Chiefs told AA we were still going to go persue Law.

I would love to add Ty Law. You will never find a post where I said I didn't want him on KC. However, I don't want KC to throw Patrick Surtain money at Ty Law because of the injury. As I said previously, his injured foot isn't going to buckle running around some cones. How will it hold up in pads is the big question....Too big of question to throw a multi year - multi million dollar contract at.

RedThat
07-05-2005, 03:46 PM
I would love to add Ty Law. You will never find a post where I said I didn't want him on KC. However, I don't want KC to throw Patrick Surtain money at Ty Law because of the injury. As I said previously, his injured foot isn't going to buckle running around some cones. How will it hold up in pads is the big question....Too big of question to throw a multi year - multi million dollar contract at.

It doesn't necessarily have to be a Patrick Surtain type contract. We could try to give him a 1-yr deal in the $6million dollar range. Or give him a contract based on performance.

Dave Lane
07-05-2005, 04:44 PM
:cuss: Laz, I am going to stab you in the eye with a spork for posting another Law thread. :cuss:

Whats a spork?

Dave

Dave Lane
07-05-2005, 04:52 PM
Bring him on. Lets pay him the money Dammit Carl!!

RedThat
07-05-2005, 04:56 PM
Bring him on. Lets pay him the money Dammit Carl!!

agreed

4th and Long
07-05-2005, 05:18 PM
Whats a spork?

Dave
You cant be serious.
http://www.kk.org/cooltools/archives/spork.jpg

I'm going to use it to dig both of Laz's eyeballs out of their sockets for starting another Law thread. :D

royr17
07-05-2005, 05:18 PM
Get on the phone Carl, workout a deal, some how, some way, get TY LAW in here and dont let him leave till he SIGNS THAT DAMN CONTRACT.

Taco John
07-05-2005, 05:27 PM
You guys just got Ambrose. What are you even talking about this for? You might as well be talking about relocating the Eiffel Tower into the AH stadium parking lot.

Rausch
07-05-2005, 05:28 PM
unbelievable ... :shake:


our healthy linebackers couldn't even take on a pulling guard last year.

Neither could Ray Lewis...

mikey23545
07-05-2005, 05:37 PM
I wonder if some of you guys have ever seen an NFL cornerback before.

He looked a little slow in a straight line, and dreadful when making a cut.

He may turn out to be just fine, but that video doesn't mean a thing except he's not in a wheelchair anymore. And it doesn't speak at all to whether that foot is going to explode the first time he makes contact during a real game. If this egomaniac wants to put his money where his mouth is, and sign a contract at league minimum with $30 million worth of incentive clauses built in, fine. Otherwise, I really don't care if he goes and ****s himself.

Husky4506
07-05-2005, 07:53 PM
We would have the best corners. Id love to see it but knowing Carl and the way Vermiel is talking about it seems unlikly

Chiefs Pantalones
07-05-2005, 09:01 PM
We were supposed to hear about Warfield's possible suspension last week, but never did.

milkman
07-05-2005, 09:21 PM
We would have the best corners. Id love to see it but knowing Carl and the way Vermiel is talking about it seems unlikly

I would be highly surprised to see Law sign with KC, but if I were you, I wouldn't worry too much about what Vermeil says.

Dick has a propensity of talking out of his ass. :hmmm:

Dayze
07-05-2005, 09:30 PM
not worth it for the Chiefs IMO.
Way too many areas to improve to drop that much coin on 1 player.

he'll sign with someone, and I"m sure he'll be good.

MGRS13
07-05-2005, 09:41 PM
Any one that thinks the Chiefs would be worse off with Law is an idiot. Now do we have the money? Will Carl sign him? These are arguments you can make, but to say we don't need him or shouldn't at least try to sign him is well, just plain stupid.

regald
07-05-2005, 11:15 PM
Carl Peterson is buying you a trip to the playoffs, but he can't pay off injuries, so just hope Surtain, Ambrose, and Warfield, Maybe Julian (too late), can be healthy.

Ty Law looked good, but that "workout" can be extremely misleading. We don't know if he has the speed to keep up with a Marvin Harrison if he's lost a step based on him running in shorts by himself with cones.

Anyway, If you add Ty Law, that could be the difference between the #15 defense and the #1 defense in the league. That's if Ty Law is Ty Law. I'd be willing to make the gamble to get him, Ashley Ambrose is Ashley Ambrose, he's not going to come out and be the savior to Eric Warfield.

Ty is an elite corner, when paired with Surtain, that could be the best in the league, possibly better than Samari Rolle and Chris Mccalister. I'd take my chances on that rather than an oft injured MLB who wants Ray Lewis money.

htismaqe
07-06-2005, 05:40 AM
Like I said the other day, we've got our insurance (Ambrose) so signing Ty Law now wouldn't be a bad idea at all.

yoswif
07-06-2005, 07:36 AM
Running around in his shorts doesn't tell us much about Law's ability run faster or turn quicker than some rookie free agent CB. If he wants to prove something, do a combine workout and post the #s.

If Law is just as healthy as Priest was when he signed his extension, signing vet CB Law to serious $ over 3 years coming off a season ending injury represents no greater risk than giving vet RB Holmes serious $ coming off a season ending injury.

If Ambrose is the dime back and vet backup for both starting CBs, Chief's management may choose between committing $16 million in salary for the next 3 seasons to 29 year old starting CB Warfield and 31 year old nickle CB McCleon or committing a lower amount of money over the next 3 seasons to 31 year old starting CB Law and 24 year old nickle CB Sapp (or 23 year old nickle CB Hodge).

htismaqe
07-06-2005, 07:48 AM
Running around in his shorts doesn't tell us much about Law's ability run faster or turn quicker than some rookie free agent CB. If he wants to prove something, do a combine workout and post the #s.

If Law is just as healthy as Priest was when he signed his extension, signing vet CB Law to serious $ over 3 years coming off a season ending injury represents no greater risk than giving vet RB Holmes serious $ coming off a season ending injury.

If Ambrose is the dime back and vet backup for both starting CBs, Chief's management may choose between committing $16 million in salary for the next 3 seasons to 29 year old starting CB Warfield and 31 year old nickle CB McCleon or committing a lower amount of money over the next 3 seasons to 31 year old starting CB Law and 24 year old nickle CB Sapp (or 23 year old nickle CB Hodge).

No way should we get rid of anyone, especially Warfield, to sign Law. We still have a depth problem which is why we need someone like Law in the first place. Cutting anyone to make room for him just perpetuates the depth problem.

Coogs
07-06-2005, 08:13 AM
Way too many areas to improve to drop that much coin on 1 player.

Ok, I'm curious. How many more areas do we need to improve?


From my perspective, one more lockdown CB to go with Surtain frees up the Safties to help with the running game. One more lockdown CB causes the QB to have to do one more checkdown in his passing progression. That little bit more time maybe gets Hicks back to the QB as many times as he did in his best season. Since we have more speed at LB, I am not as concerned about TE's and RB's in the passing game. One more lockdown CB makes this defense IMO.

htismaqe
07-06-2005, 08:24 AM
Ok, I'm curious. How many more areas do we need to improve?


From my perspective, one more lockdown CB to go with Surtain frees up the Safties to help with the running game. One more lockdown CB causes the QB to have to do one more checkdown in his passing progression. That little bit more time maybe gets Hicks back to the QB as many times as he did in his best season. Since we have more speed at LB, I am not as concerned about TE's and RB's in the passing game. One more lockdown CB makes this defense IMO.

Our DT's still suck.

Coogs
07-06-2005, 08:30 AM
Our DT's still suck.

I'm optimistic that our improved LB's will mask some of the DT's weaknesses. And if the Safties can play run first with Law and Surtain taking care of the opponents top two WR's.... well that's just all the better for the DT's IMO.

RedThat
07-06-2005, 09:59 AM
No way should we get rid of anyone, especially Warfield, to sign Law. We still have a depth problem which is why we need someone like Law in the first place. Cutting anyone to make room for him just perpetuates the depth problem.

Exactly. Good point. We would have to restructure several contracts though to pave way and make room for him. Lets suppose Law signs a 1yr deal in the $6-7 million dollar range, as it stands right now the Chiefs have $3.5 million dollars under their cap. We are probably going to use $3 million of that cap space on our rookies. That'll leave us with 1/2 million dollars under the cap.
To get Ty Law we'd have to clear about $6 million dollars worth of cap space. Not by cutting anyone, guys just have to restructure. This means our highest paid players have to take cuts. So they have to decide, do they REALLY want a great chance at a championship, and make room to bring him in here, or, just keep their current salaries and say screw him.

Here's a listing I provided for everyone that shows the Chiefs current highest paid players for 2005. I simply placed the 10 highest paid players on the list for this year. Ok here ya go:

1. Green $4,700,000
2. Shields $4,300,000
3. Warfield $3,300,000
4. Gonzalez $3,000,000
5. Roaf $3,000,000
6. Holmes $2,415,000
7. Barber $2,200,000
8. Waters $1,625,000
9. Kennison $1,595,000
10.McCleon $1,500,000

Question is, which of these guys will restructure their salaries for this year?
I don't think Holmes will. Green already restructured in 2003 to help us acquire defensive players. I doubt Gonzo will. Roaf and Shields will probably not restructure, since they're both nearing the end of their careers, and are playing worth their salaries.

That leaves us with Warfield, Waters, Barber, Kennison, McCleon. And let's say all these guys restructure their contracts. Which they all should because they aren't playing worth their salaries, except, Waters. It is possible we could free up cap space to get him.

*Get Warfield to bring his salary down to $1 million---we save 2.3 million

*McCleon should bring his salary down to the veteran min----we save $850,000

*Barber is not even gonna play this year, the Chiefs should at least get him to bring his salary down to $1 million----we save 1.2 million

*Kennison can possibly bring his salary down to a $1 million--we save $595,000

*Ok I doubt Waters will restructure, because he performed better than 1.625 million

so, in total we free up 4.945 million in cap space a bit short on Law.

I'm sure their are other guys that can restructure. Take some dead weights, like, Maslowski, who I think should play for the veteran minimum. Lets say he takes a pay cut and plays for the veteran minimum, we save $350,000

Welbourn shouldn't be making 1.2 million. Bring his salary down to 850,000 at the very least, and we save another $350,000

Browning shouldn't be making 1.2 million. Bring his salary down to $900,000, and we save $300,000

Add all these up and that totals $1 million right there. Plus, I'm sure we could get Todd Collins to bring his $1 million dollar salary down to lets say $850,000, ok, we save $150,000.

Let do the math in total. Warfield, McCleon, Barber, Kennison save us 4.945 million

Browning, Welbourn, Collins, and Maslowski save us 1.15 million.

4.945 + 1.15 = 6.095 million freed up in cap space. A total of 8 guys restructure their contracts. We could afford Law! It's possible, Right there I just proved it. The thing I don't know is the understanding of how bonuses work and just the complexity of structing contracts in general. I'm sure their are some people on the planet that would probably know.

TEX
07-06-2005, 10:02 AM
Our DT's still suck.

So does our MLB.

whoman69
07-06-2005, 11:57 AM
4.945 + 1.15 = 6.095 million freed up in cap space. A total of 8 guys restructure their contracts. We could afford Law! It's possible, Right there I just proved it. The thing I don't know is the understanding of how bonuses work and just the complexity of structing contracts in general. I'm sure their are some people on the planet that would probably know.
Do you know how hard it is to restructure EIGHT players? The method you are taking is just talking pay cut. No player is going to agree to that. You have to give to take.

No way should we get rid of anyone, especially Warfield, to sign Law. We still have a depth problem which is why we need someone like Law in the first place. Cutting anyone to make room for him just perpetuates the depth problem.
I would agree with anyone except McCleon. He proved last year he can't play in this defense. He needs another play off the ball type D like grob had.

Coogs
07-06-2005, 12:02 PM
So does our MLB.

Law is out there for the CB spot. Who do you suggest we go after for the MLB spot?

Nightfyre
07-06-2005, 12:28 PM
Exactly. Good point. We would have to restructure several contracts though to pave way and make room for him. Lets suppose Law signs a 1yr deal in the $6-7 million dollar range, as it stands right now the Chiefs have $3.5 million dollars under their cap. We are probably going to use $3 million of that cap space on our rookies. That'll leave us with 1/2 million dollars under the cap.
To get Ty Law we'd have to clear about $6 million dollars worth of cap space. Not by cutting anyone, guys just have to restructure. This means our highest paid players have to take cuts. So they have to decide, do they REALLY want a great chance at a championship, and make room to bring him in here, or, just keep their current salaries and say screw him.

Here's a listing I provided for everyone that shows the Chiefs current highest paid players for 2005. I simply placed the 10 highest paid players on the list for this year. Ok here ya go:

1. Green $4,700,000
2. Shields $4,300,000
3. Warfield $3,300,000
4. Gonzalez $3,000,000
5. Roaf $3,000,000
6. Holmes $2,415,000
7. Barber $2,200,000
8. Waters $1,625,000
9. Kennison $1,595,000
10.McCleon $1,500,000

Question is, which of these guys will restructure their salaries for this year?
I don't think Holmes will. Green already restructured in 2003 to help us acquire defensive players. I doubt Gonzo will. Roaf and Shields will probably not restructure, since they're both nearing the end of their careers, and are playing worth their salaries.

That leaves us with Warfield, Waters, Barber, Kennison, McCleon. And let's say all these guys restructure their contracts. Which they all should because they aren't playing worth their salaries, except, Waters. It is possible we could free up cap space to get him.

*Get Warfield to bring his salary down to $1 million---we save 2.3 million

*McCleon should bring his salary down to the veteran min----we save $850,000

*Barber is not even gonna play this year, the Chiefs should at least get him to bring his salary down to $1 million----we save 1.2 million

*Kennison can possibly bring his salary down to a $1 million--we save $595,000

*Ok I doubt Waters will restructure, because he performed better than 1.625 million

so, in total we free up 4.945 million in cap space a bit short on Law.

I'm sure their are other guys that can restructure. Take some dead weights, like, Maslowski, who I think should play for the veteran minimum. Lets say he takes a pay cut and plays for the veteran minimum, we save $350,000

Welbourn shouldn't be making 1.2 million. Bring his salary down to 850,000 at the very least, and we save another $350,000

Browning shouldn't be making 1.2 million. Bring his salary down to $900,000, and we save $300,000

Add all these up and that totals $1 million right there. Plus, I'm sure we could get Todd Collins to bring his $1 million dollar salary down to lets say $850,000, ok, we save $150,000.

Let do the math in total. Warfield, McCleon, Barber, Kennison save us 4.945 million

Browning, Welbourn, Collins, and Maslowski save us 1.15 million.

4.945 + 1.15 = 6.095 million freed up in cap space. A total of 8 guys restructure their contracts. We could afford Law! It's possible, Right there I just proved it. The thing I don't know is the understanding of how bonuses work and just the complexity of structing contracts in general. I'm sure their are some people on the planet that would probably know.
Ok, the only way to get Warfield to restructure would be an extension.
McCleon should be cut.
Barber gets placed on IR, his salary doesnt count against the cap.
Restructuring kennison? What would be the incentive for him?
Do you understand that you have to provide incentive in order for them to restructure? A lot of the players on this list do not have that incentive. Like Welbourn and Collins and Kennison particularly.

Just keeping it real.

Coogs
07-06-2005, 12:38 PM
Just give him what he wants. If it violates the salary cap limit, so be it. It will only cost us a 3rd round pick about 5 years from now that will be given back to us in the form of a compensation pick. That wouldn't be a bad trade off for a Super Bowl win would it? ;)

TEX
07-06-2005, 12:44 PM
Just give him what he wants. If it violates the salary cap limit, so be it. It will only cost us a 3rd round pick about 5 years from now that will be given back to us in the form of a compensation pick. That wouldn't be a bad trade off for a Super Bowl win would it? ;)

Or two? ... :hmmm:

TEX
07-06-2005, 12:50 PM
Law is out there for the CB spot. Who do you suggest we go after for the MLB spot?

I believe I made my suggestion of Trotter this time last year. And I believe that you, along with many, promptly shot it down. Correct? If you weren't part of that group, then I'm sorry for including you.

In any case, I don't know who could help us now at MLB cause we did in fact go after Trotter and Hartwell. I do understand your point about someone being out there to help out a position of need. I also understand that nobody is out there at MLB that could help us. . I was just saying that we suck at MLB and we do.

RedThat
07-06-2005, 01:31 PM
Ok, the only way to get Warfield to restructure would be an extension.
McCleon should be cut.
Barber gets placed on IR, his salary doesnt count against the cap.
Restructuring kennison? What would be the incentive for him?
Do you understand that you have to provide incentive in order for them to restructure? A lot of the players on this list do not have that incentive. Like Welbourn and Collins and Kennison particularly.

Just keeping it real.

Ok..So then Warfield should get an extension to free up some room. If McCleon gets cut, are we subject to getting a cap hit? that's the question.

So Barber salary doesn't count against the cap, that's good to hear.

instead of restructing, we can ask them to take pay cuts. Even if it isn't them, out of 53 guys, 4 or 5 of them can take pay cuts, instead of restructuring.

RedThat
07-06-2005, 01:35 PM
Just give him what he wants. If it violates the salary cap limit, so be it. It will only cost us a 3rd round pick about 5 years from now that will be given back to us in the form of a compensation pick. That wouldn't be a bad trade off for a Super Bowl win would it? ;)

That wouldn't be a bad trade at all, it's almost like giving up a 2nd for Surtain.

I guess to avoid this whole complexity of restructuring contracts, or finding ways players can reduce their salaries to clear up room for him. Violating the cap is probably our best bet and an easy way out.

3rd round pick would be damn worth it, if it means Ty Law is the final piece to the puzzle for a championship.

yoswif
07-06-2005, 02:22 PM
No way should we get rid of anyone, especially Warfield, to sign Law. We still have a depth problem which is why we need someone like Law in the first place. Cutting anyone to make room for him just perpetuates the depth problem.

IMO, the primary reason for lack of depth at CB is that the starter Warfield and the nickle CB McCleon aren't very good. On top of that Warfield gets $14 million in salary over the next four years and McCleon gets $6 million over the next 3 years. It's hard to build depth at CB when two players who that aren't very good at the position are pulling down huge salaries.

regald
07-06-2005, 02:33 PM
3.3 Million for Warfield is ridiculous, to me, that's similar to the amount of money Johnny Morton was scheduled to make.

Warfield has alot of potential, his salary should prove that but you don't pay someone that kind of money to not make big plays consistantly. It seems he lacks consistancy, I would rather use the money on Ty if and when he's healthy, then play the waiting game for a currently overpaid 29 year old corner. McCleon could go down the league minimum, but I don't think Vermeil would cut one of old players from the Rams.

whoman69
07-06-2005, 03:03 PM
Ok..So then Warfield should get an extension to free up some room. If McCleon gets cut, are we subject to getting a cap hit? that's the question.

So Barber salary doesn't count against the cap, that's good to hear.

instead of restructing, we can ask them to take pay cuts. Even if it isn't them, out of 53 guys, 4 or 5 of them can take pay cuts, instead of restructuring.
Any portion of McCleon's bonus that hasn't been taken against the cap already will be split between this year and next year's cap. We would save money against the cap if we cut him. I don't believe its correct that someone on IR does not count against the cap. It's figure by the top 51 (I think that's the number) of contracts that we hold.

Anyong Bluth
07-06-2005, 03:08 PM
I think people are too apt to knock Warfield. He has steadily improved each season in spite of the fact the talent around him has gone down. His K probably dictates what he could command on the open market and one of the preseason mags has him rated is the 3rd best press cb in the league.
See how terrible he does when there is any sort of pass rush, help over the top (he wasn't the one getting it last year)

He may have been paid on potential his last contract, but chances are some other team would give him = money.

yoswif
07-06-2005, 03:25 PM
I think people are too apt to knock Warfield. He has steadily improved each season in spite of the fact the talent around him has gone down. His K probably dictates what he could command on the open market and one of the preseason mags has him rated is the 3rd best press cb in the league.
See how terrible he does when there is any sort of pass rush, help over the top (he wasn't the one getting it last year)

He may have been paid on potential his last contract, but chances are some other team would give him = money.


I'd like to see some GM tell the local media that $3.3 million in '05' and $14 million over the next four years for Warfield is a good deal.

Warfield lacks the balance and agility to play press coverage. All it takes is one stumble and you're beat for six. Natural balance and agility are things top press CBs are born with.

TRR
07-06-2005, 03:33 PM
I'd like to see some GM tell the local media that $3.3 million in '05' and $14 million over the next four years for Warfield is a good deal.

Warfield lacks the balance and agility to play press coverage. All it takes is one stumble and you're beat for six. Natural balance and agility are things top press CBs are born with.

I disagree completely. While Warfield isn't Patrick Surtain, he still is a good #2 CB. He has been forced to be the #1 CB over the past couple of seasons. Every CB gets beat. Every CB loses their balance and gets beat deep. Patrick Surtain is going to get toasted a handful of times this season. It's nearly impossible not to.

Warfield has been a Chief since day 1. He's gotten better each season, and played well covering the top WR's in the game.

Nightfyre
07-06-2005, 03:34 PM
Warfield is worth his salary, no doubt in my mind.

Coogs
07-06-2005, 03:43 PM
I believe I made my suggestion of Trotter this time last year. And I believe that you, along with many, promptly shot it down. Correct? If you weren't part of that group, then I'm sorry for including you.


:shrug:

I really don't remember my stance on Trotter last off season. But then again, I didn't post at all last summer. Took some time off.

milkman
07-06-2005, 06:10 PM
I disagree completely. While Warfield isn't Patrick Surtain, he still is a good #2 CB. He has been forced to be the #1 CB over the past couple of seasons. Every CB gets beat. Every CB loses their balance and gets beat deep. Patrick Surtain is going to get toasted a handful of times this season. It's nearly impossible not to.

Warfield has been a Chief since day 1. He's gotten better each season, and played well covering the top WR's in the game.

The primary reason for Warfield's struggles in the past, as I've said many times before, is that he was drafted and converted to corner because of his physicality, then put in Spinner's scheme, which didn't take advantage of that physicality.

He was asked to play off the line, give the receiver space, and react to the play as it developed.

He actually played better the season before Dick and Spinner were hired ('99).

Last season, Gun was brought back, and he utilized Warfield's physical presence, and Warfield responded with a solid season, which I expected.

Now with Surtain to help him along, I fully expect him to improve even more.


I would agree with anyone except McCleon. He proved last year he can't play in this defense. He needs another play off the ball type D like grob had.

Which is exactly why the Chiefs hope to line him up at the nickel.

Covering the slot receiver is a play off the ball type coverage.
McPassOn will be better at this than trying to cover the #2.

If the Chiefs should somehow manage to sign Law (I'm not holding my breath on this), moving Warfield to nickel isn't a good idea.

They will have to put Law, who is more versatile, on the slot, and Warfiled on the #2, or McPassOn on the slot, with Warfield to the bench and dime packages.

Gaz
07-07-2005, 05:43 AM
Not for the money he wants.

xoxo~
Gaz
Slapping Ty in the face.

Coogs
07-07-2005, 07:06 AM
Damaged goods, baby...

That pretty well sums up our secondary play last season too. Bring on Law! I don't care if he isn't 100% for the opener. Healthy in December, January, and Feburary and paired with Surtain... that's when we really need him anyway.

regald
07-07-2005, 06:27 PM
I think what you have to ask yourself is this, How can your #1 corner, who was burned so many times and one of the biggest reasons why the secondary was ranked so low in the league, be retained at a salary base upwards of that of Samari Rolle and almost Patrick Surtain.

This is a guy who may've improved, but when you play poor defensively, you either fire the coordinator or get new impact players. You got a new impact players, but if anyone is resposible for lousy play it has to be the #1 corner on the depth chart. If he was making 1 million in salary, that's one thing. To be paid 14 million over 3 years is ludicrous.

This is similar to Johnny Morton's old contract. If I had to choose between acquiring Ty Law for 3 years and waiting for Julian Battle to recover, or possibly using Mccleon to learn and bring up his game, I'd take that over Warfield, whose been a distraction off the field. That factor alone should be considered.

RedThat
07-07-2005, 06:31 PM
I think what you have to ask yourself is this, How can your #1 corner, who was burned so many times and one of the biggest reasons why the secondary was ranked so low in the league, be retained at a salary base upwards of that of Samari Rolle and almost Patrick Surtain.

This is a guy who may've improved, but when you play poor defensively, you either fire the coordinator or get new impact players. You got a new impact players, but if anyone is resposible for lousy play it has to be the #1 corner on the depth chart. If he was making 1 million in salary, that's one thing. To be paid 14 million over 3 years is ludicrous.

This is similar to Johnny Morton's old contract. If I had to choose between acquiring Ty Law for 3 years and waiting for Julian Battle to recover, or possibly using Mccleon to learn and bring up his game, I'd take that over Warfield, whose been a distraction off the field. That factor alone should be considered.

Exactly! Warfield is not worth 3.3 million dollars a season.

regald
07-07-2005, 07:17 PM
Alright, so majority vote says Warfield is kicked to the curb.

Anyway, seriously, he's not that bad. Warfield is a good player, he may've given up some big plays last year but I think the contract is a little ridiculous.

I'm all for paying your players big time dollars, but that's just too much. My Colt's pay our defensive players diddly, lol, but that's generally because they were low draft picks.

I wouldn't be surprised if our new pick, Marlin Jackson, doesn't get as much money as Warfield on his last contract year (When he signs) than what Warfield has now, and he's being toted as a great player. I would've rather taken a first round pick corner for less money, someone who can develop into an all star player behind Surtain that hadn't lost confidence due to last season and didn't have off the field issues..

That's obviously not possible now, but you have an all star corner sitting on the sidelines looking for a deal. The Chiefs gambled on Kendrell Bell, what's it to gamble on Ty Law, who you could get for less than 5 or 4 million a year (similar to what Warfield is getting). Warfield could be retained and possibly restructure, or he could just be cut to make money.

You'd have the two best corners in the league. Try to throw for 30 points on that shit.

milkman
07-07-2005, 07:54 PM
Alright, so majority vote says Warfield is kicked to the curb.

Anyway, seriously, he's not that bad. Warfield is a good player, he may've given up some big plays last year but I think the contract is a little ridiculous.

I'm all for paying your players big time dollars, but that's just too much. My Colt's pay our defensive players diddly, lol, but that's generally because they were low draft picks.

I wouldn't be surprised if our new pick, Marlin Jackson, doesn't get as much money as Warfield on his last contract year (When he signs) than what Warfield has now, and he's being toted as a great player. I would've rather taken a first round pick corner for less money, someone who can develop into an all star player behind Surtain that hadn't lost confidence due to last season and didn't have off the field issues..

That's obviously not possible now, but you have an all star corner sitting on the sidelines looking for a deal. The Chiefs gambled on Kendrell Bell, what's it to gamble on Ty Law, who you could get for less than 5 or 4 million a year (similar to what Warfield is getting). Warfield could be retained and possibly restructure, or he could just be cut to make money.

You'd have the two best corners in the league. Try to throw for 30 points on that shit.

Warfield was a piss poor player in Spinner's (Greg Robinson) system, but in Gun's system, he became a solid corner, that wasn't beat as often as Chump Bailey in Denver.

Of course, part of that is the fact that Bartee and McPassOn sucked on the other side of the field.
But the opposition threw to that side because they found out that Warfield wasn't easy pickin's.

Warfield wasn't the problem on D for the Chiefs, it was every other aspect of D, from the front 7 the everyone else in the secondary.

regald
07-07-2005, 08:12 PM
You're right, but is he worth that type of $ (3-4 million a year)?

We'd all take Warfield, I'd take him, but if he's being paid more than Sheldon Brown, Daunte Robinson, Lito Shepphard, Dengalo Hall, and Rhode Barber, is he worth it?

milkman
07-07-2005, 08:19 PM
You're right, but is he worth that type of $ (3-4 million a year)?

We'd all take Warfield, I'd take him, but if he's being paid more than Sheldon Brown, Daunte Robinson, Lito Shepphard, Dengalo Hall, and Rhode Barber, is he worth it?

I just addressed your earlier post stating that Warfield was the reason that the defense sucked.
I just happened to quote the later one.

Given the fact that he has had only one good season, I would have to say no, he's not worth that kind of jack.
However, if his game continues to improve over the course of the season, as I expect it will, my answer then might change.

But, at this point in time, no.