PDA

View Full Version : Will Priest stay??


Rogcop_3121
01-24-2006, 04:27 AM
Now that Herm has made it official that LJ is the starter, is Priest going to accept it? Will he return even? Has anyone heard about the other tests or if he has even had them yet? I don't know that Priest will accept being a backup when he knows he can start somewhere else if deemed healthy enough to play again.

DaWolf
01-24-2006, 05:14 AM
Well if he wants to get paid he will be back. A football team needs two good backs and i think Priest recognizes this, as well as recognizes that it's LJ's time now.

The real question is do the Chiefs want Priest back at whatever his cap number is?

I suspect he will be back with the intent of giving this team one more shot at winning it all...

ChiefsfaninPA
01-24-2006, 07:30 AM
I caught Priest on a interview the other week on Fox Sports Radio, I forget which show, but he said that he isn't going to accept a dimished role, such as a role like Marshall Faulk was relegated to. So it sounds like he feels he should be starting IF he does come back to play. It will be interesting to see how this all works itself out. I love Priest, but LJ has definetely earned his keep.

htismaqe
01-24-2006, 08:07 AM
Priest won't be back.

Mr. Kotter
01-24-2006, 08:39 AM
Priest won't be back.

That's my take, as well. UNLESS he's willing to accept a pay cut, and a back-up/third-down-back role "cheerfully." Hence....he won't be back.

KCTitus
01-24-2006, 08:43 AM
Priest wont be back, but it's not his fault. It's because Carl hired Edwards because Saunders wouldnt guarantee that LJ would be the starter and since 810 had pissed of Larry so much, that Carl had to hire a HC that would guarantee that LJ would be the starter and thus, Priest is thrown to the curb. I bet Carl tries to get some of Priest's signing bonus back, too.

Brock
01-24-2006, 08:52 AM
I think he'll be back as Johnson's backup.

htismaqe
01-24-2006, 08:55 AM
Priest wont be back, but it's not his fault. It's because Carl hired Edwards because Saunders wouldnt guarantee that LJ would be the starter and since 810 had pissed of Larry so much, that Carl had to hire a HC that would guarantee that LJ would be the starter and thus, Priest is thrown to the curb. I bet Carl tries to get some of Priest's signing bonus back, too.

Despite the thick sarcasm, the last sentence of your post is almost assuredly true. :D

Brock
01-24-2006, 08:58 AM
If Priest comes back, he keeps his money. I don't know why anyone thinks he's going to give money back. He'll be here and he'll be quite happy, I'm sure.

Extra Point
01-24-2006, 08:59 AM
Picking up the "easy money" is no problem. He's earned it. He's a great second down RB with hands.

It's "Sideline! Hold the nachos."

KCTitus
01-24-2006, 09:01 AM
Despite the thick sarcasm, the last sentence of your post is almost assuredly true. :D

I was serious. It's the only reason why Edwards was given the head coaching job. Well, that and to piss off gotaint.

htismaqe
01-24-2006, 09:10 AM
If Priest comes back, he keeps his money. I don't know why anyone thinks he's going to give money back. He'll be here and he'll be quite happy, I'm sure.

Because Carl Peterson isn't gonna lock up almost $5M of the cap in a backup RB. I also think that we're fooling ourselves if we think Priest is gonna be happy about being a backup like Marshall Faulk. Considering what he went through in Baltimore, I highly doubt he's gonna be happy.

This is gonna get messy, and Priest won't be playing for the Chiefs next year.

ChiefsfaninPA
01-24-2006, 09:17 AM
This is gonna get messy, and Priest won't be playing for the Chiefs next year.

I totally agree with you on this point. In that interview, he in no way made it seem like being a backup was an option. It is going to be very interesting these next few months with this situation.

RedThat
01-24-2006, 09:21 AM
As much as I hate to say it, and no disrespect to Priest because I love the guy for everything he has done for this organization, I think his time has come. It's LJs chance to shine. I think were better off without Priest. I would not like to pay 3.5, 5 million dollars, whatever the number is for a backup RB.

I mean were better off without him. Plus he's 32 year of age, and gets hurt a lot. Age isn't on his side, especially at the RB position. Don't get me wrong, I think he'd be a great #2 back. But does he want to accept a #2 role? A reserve role like Marshall Faulk is doing in St.Louis? He is gonna have to.

I'd be somewhat upset if he didn't. Id like to see him retire, and let LJ grow, and tear up the league.

Hog Farmer
01-24-2006, 09:21 AM
I would think with his age and injury history he would find this the ideal role. But then again I am not Priest.

Brock
01-24-2006, 09:25 AM
Because Carl Peterson isn't gonna lock up almost $5M of the cap in a backup RB. I also think that we're fooling ourselves if we think Priest is gonna be happy about being a backup like Marshall Faulk. Considering what he went through in Baltimore, I highly doubt he's gonna be happy.

This is gonna get messy, and Priest won't be playing for the Chiefs next year.

What's Peterson going to do, cut him?

htismaqe
01-24-2006, 09:26 AM
What's Peterson going to do, cut him?

It's not gonna come to that.

There's a reason that Priest has gone to at least 4 doctors - he's gonna retire and claim that he's injured.

RedThat
01-24-2006, 09:28 AM
What's Peterson going to do, cut him?

I don't think Peterson would do that.

I think it'll be a decision from Priest himself. He is either gotta accept his role as a #2 RB, or hang em up.

Brock
01-24-2006, 09:31 AM
I don't think Peterson would do that.

I think it'll be a decision from Priest himself. He is either gotta accept his role as a #2 RB, or hang em up.

It isn't a question of accepting a backup role. It's a question of how much money he gets to keep. You can't simply cut his salary, and if you ask him to do it voluntarily, he's going to laugh.

RedThat
01-24-2006, 09:42 AM
It isn't a question of accepting a backup role. It's a question of how much money he gets to keep. You can't simply cut his salary, and if you ask him to do it voluntarily, he's going to laugh.

Well, thats where I was trying to get at with Peterson and the Chiefs.

I don't think Peterson is intentionally going to come out and say "Priest would you like to retire?"

No I don't think that's gonna happen. I think Priest has to evaluate the whole situation himself. We already know LJ is #1 RB. Priest has to see whats most important to him and go from there. I do think though, it is not BASED on 1 question, there are several questions he has to answer. Money? Age? Backup/reserve role? etc.

chefsos
01-24-2006, 09:59 AM
I totally agree with you on this point. In that interview, he in no way made it seem like being a backup was an option. It is going to be very interesting these next few months with this situation.

I heard a blurb from the same interview, and the exact wording of his answer to the question of his taking a Marshall Faulk-type role was, "Definitely not."

Maybe he changes his mind, but I don't think so. BigRedChief and htismaqe have it figured out, I think. Priest and Carl are headed for a showdown, unfortunately.

Bowser
01-24-2006, 10:13 AM
Let me preface this by saying I'm a big fan of Priest. That being said, how do you sit LJ for Priest? Considering where they both are right now in their respective careers, how does Herm make that move? There is no way he can come in here and demand to be the starter, not with the history of injury Priest has proven he's prone to, and with the way LJ absolutely was tearing up the NFL. No way. In this offense, Priest was All-Pro. LJ is All-World.

I'm thinking the Chiefs, if they wanted, could restructure his contract to where he would get a chunk of what is left to him in a bonus, and play for the minimum. This could possibly give the Chiefs a little more wiggle room with the cap, as well.

I know Priest is a very prideful guy, but he's not getting around this. Be the backup to LJ. No one would think any less of him because of it. And if he bitches and moans and refuses, I bet Cleveland or Arizona could use a running back of his caliber*.



* Of course I don't want that. I'm just sayin'.....

pikesome
01-24-2006, 11:09 AM
I think the most likely result is a lot of maneuvering by both Priest and CP as they try to not give up any money. Priest is going to be too injured too play again (he says) and CP is going to claim that he's retiring. Do I know which is the truth? No. But I see some tough negotiations in the future. If CP gets his way we might see Priest back as the #2 but he won't be happy about it. We aren't going to trade him or cut him I believe. If Priest gets his way CP head might explode (just imagine the press-conferences).

StcChief
01-24-2006, 12:19 PM
I don't see it. This will be ugly before it's over.

All about the $$$$$.

cdcox
01-24-2006, 12:54 PM
Question 1. Can Priest find a doctor to say it would be dangerous for him to continue his career?

Yes -> Priest retires.

No -> Question 2: Does Priest want to retire badly enough to risk giving up part of his signing bonus?

Yes -> Ugly fight between the Chiefs and Priest.

No -> Question 3: Will the Chiefs pay Priest $3.5M to be a back up?

Yes -> Priest will be back.

No -> Question 4: Will Priest rework his contract to take less money to be the back up?

Yes -> Priest will be back (least likely outcome, IMO)

No -> Chiefs cut Priest, Priest retires with his signing bonus in tact.

Iron Chef
01-24-2006, 01:05 PM
All I know is in my Madden 2006 season I traded him to Texas for a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round pick.

FringeNC
01-24-2006, 01:15 PM
What are the salary cap ramifications with respect to bonus money if a player retires?

Cave Johnson
01-24-2006, 01:22 PM
All I know is in my Madden 2006 season I traded him to Texas for a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round pick.

Sounds about right for the Texans. Probably turned out to be top 5 picks, too.

I'm always amazed at the asinine trades you can pull off in Madden.

Brock
01-24-2006, 01:34 PM
Question 1. Can Priest find a doctor to say it would be dangerous for him to continue his career?

Yes -> Priest retires.

No -> Question 2: Does Priest want to retire badly enough to risk giving up part of his signing bonus?

Yes -> Ugly fight between the Chiefs and Priest.

No -> Question 3: Will the Chiefs pay Priest $3.5M to be a back up?

Yes -> Priest will be back.

No -> Question 4: Will Priest rework his contract to take less money to be the back up?

Yes -> Priest will be back (least likely outcome, IMO)

No -> Chiefs cut Priest, Priest retires with his signing bonus in tact.

Sums it up perfectly. Priest has the upper hand here.

pikesome
01-24-2006, 01:45 PM
Sums it up perfectly. Priest has the upper hand here.

I think it hinges on what the requirements are for the doctor's recommendation. If all it takes is a doc saying "he shouldn't play, he's hurt" then Priest retires. CP has already been laying the ground work for his side of the argument (see his comments vs Priest's) so maybe he has a plan. Its gonna be ugly though.