PDA

View Full Version : Adam T: Cap not good fit for Chiefs


Wile_E_Coyote
02-14-2006, 08:00 AM
Posted on Tue, Feb. 14, 2006
Cap not good fit for Chiefs

KC needs to clear some space in budget

By ADAM TEICHER

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/football/nfl/kansas_city_chiefs/13865214.htm

The Kansas City Star

If the Chiefs want to sign Terrell Owens or another high-priced free agent when the signing period begins next month, it won’t be as simple as writing a fat check.

They will also have to clear some space under the NFL’s salary cap, a task that figures to be anything but easy. Salary documents provided to The Kansas City Star show the Chiefs with cap obligations for next season of more than $116 million.

The salary limit hasn’t been set, but the Chiefs expect it to be between $92 million and $95 million when the league year begins March 3.

The last time the Chiefs faced a similar overage was in 2001, when they had to sacrifice veterans such as Elvis Grbac, James Hasty and Chester McGlockton to squeeze under the limit.

The Chiefs were able that year to re-sign Will Shields, trade for quarterback Trent Green and sign at modest prices free agents Priest Holmes and Casey Wiegmann. Still, they finished 6-10, their worst record in 17 seasons under president/general manager Carl Peterson.

Asked whether the necessary moves to comply with the cap would be similar this year, Peterson said: “Not to the same degree. We’re going to be fine. We’re a little heavy right now. We’ve been through this the last couple of months on what moves we’d have to make regarding the cap.”

Yet with as much as $24 million to trim, the Chiefs won’t be able to avoid some pain.

“The cap situation … can always be better,” coach Herm Edwards said. “Obviously, every team always wants more room under the cap.

Obviously, (the Chiefs) have to do some things, and that’s up to the powers that be.”

A player’s cap number is determined by his base salary along with various bonuses. Those with the highest cap numbers are generally those who were given large signing bonuses or have sizable roster bonuses.

One way for the Chiefs to create cap space is to release players from their contracts, as the Chiefs did with Grbac, Hasty and McGlockton five years ago. The problem this year is that many of the most obvious candidates are too expensive to cut.

Jerome Woods lost his starting safety job last season and, with a base salary of $1.6 million in 2006, would appear to be a prime candidate. But because he is only two seasons into what was originally a six-year contract, Woods’ cost against the cap is actually more if they released him (about $3.5 million, the unaccounted-for portion of his signing bonus, which all would count against this year’s cap) than if they keep him (about $2.9 million).

The same holds for Holmes, who lost his starting job to Larry Johnson. Holmes’ release would cost the Chiefs more than $6 million against the cap. His cost if he plays for them: about $5.3 million.

Documents show the Chiefs would save about $4 million in cap space by releasing linebacker Kendrell Bell. Others who could be in danger include cornerbacks Eric Warfield (savings of about $2.7 million) and Dexter McCleon (about $1.2 million).

“There will be veteran guys and you’ll want to keep them, but you can’t keep them at the money they’re making,” Edwards said without being specific.

The Chiefs also will approach several players about restructuring their contracts to create cap space. Pro Bowl tight end Tony Gonzalez is likely atop the list. He not only has one of the highest cap numbers on the team (about $6.5 million) but also is heading into the final year of his contract.

By merely reaching the salary limit, the Chiefs leave themselves no room to sign free agents, including their own.

The Chiefs have no irreplaceable players who don’t have a 2006 contract, but several have been key contributors, including fullback Tony Richardson, defensive lineman Lional Dalton, nickel back Benny Sapp and kicker Lawrence Tynes.

Big hits against the cap

Five Chiefs, based on their current contracts, are scheduled to count more than $6 million against the salary cap next season.


P
PlayerBase salaryCap No.
*CBPatrick Surtain$1,335,000 $8,335,000

QBTrent Green $5,700,000 $8,298,808

LBKendrell Bell$2,710,000 $7,247,500

GWill Shields$5,100,000 $6,666,666

TETony Gonzalez$3,600,000 $6,531,370

*includes bonuses


<HR class=tagline color=#cccccc SIZE=1>

ChiefsfaninPA
02-14-2006, 08:04 AM
McKlingon should be one of the first to go without hesitation.

Dunit35
02-14-2006, 08:05 AM
Resign Tony
Cut Bell or restructure
Sheilds needs to restructure
McCleon=cut
Restructure Holmes
Restructure Green (if possible)

Maybe Woods can restructure or something since it's going to cost more to cut him still.

morphius
02-14-2006, 08:11 AM
Now is he using the numbers that almost everyone uses that is just an estimate of your cap if you were to pay everyone that is a FA the same you were paying them the year before? I have to say that it seems very much like it.

ChiefsfaninPA
02-14-2006, 08:15 AM
This cap stuff is confusing. There are too many what ifs, and if you do this then..... They need to make it easier so idiots like me can understand it, or at least act like I understand it.

Mecca
02-14-2006, 08:23 AM
Oh great........another year of the suck Jerome Woods.

John_Wayne
02-14-2006, 08:24 AM
The salary cap always gives me a headache. I wish they would simplifiy it so that the fans could understand it. But, I'm sure they don't want the fans to understand it.

wolfpack0735
02-14-2006, 08:28 AM
i bet woods will try to stick it queen carl for screwing him around. McPasson should be out the door,i wish hicks would,bell. the list is to long to write. i just hope the rest will redo their contracts.

Wile_E_Coyote
02-14-2006, 08:30 AM
looks like they did some of their best work last time the cap squeezed. Out Grbac, Hasty & McClockton, in Green, Holmes & Wiegmann with a re-signed Shields. Teicher tends to be a glass half empty kinda guy

shaneo69
02-14-2006, 08:35 AM
Oh great........another year of the suck Jerome Woods.

I think he'll be gone after June 1st. Then they can move half the cap hit to next year. Only problem is...we'll have to wait until 6/2 to start signing FA's because we won't have much cap room available before then.

Mecca
02-14-2006, 08:37 AM
I think he'll be gone after June 1st. Then they can move half the cap hit to next year. Only problem is...we'll have to wait until 6/2 to start signing FA's because we won't have much cap room available before then.

If there is no CBA in place there is no June 1st rule..........

shaneo69
02-14-2006, 08:38 AM
Funny how the Broncos make all kinds of moves each offseason yet never have any cap problems. After an AFC championship game appearance, they still have the money to go after TO, Ricky, and/or Edge.

jspchief
02-14-2006, 08:39 AM
Could Warfield be a cap casualty? With his off-field problems, I wonder if the Chiefs think he's not worth it.

jspchief
02-14-2006, 08:40 AM
Funny how the Broncos make all kinds of moves each offseason yet never have any cap problems. After an AFC championship game appearance, they still have the money to go after TO, Ricky, and/or Edge.That's because the Broncos don't have a salary cap.

beer bacon
02-14-2006, 08:40 AM
looks like they did some of their best work last time the cap squeezed. Out Grbac, Hasty & McClockton, in Green, Holmes & Wiegmann with a re-signed Shields. Teicher tends to be a glass half empty kinda guy

That is what it seemed like to me. If we could cut three guys like Grbac, Hasty, and McGlockton, and then sign four guys like Green, Holmes, Weigmann, and Shields I think I may die from joy. Of course, we really didn't know what we were getting with Green, Holmes, and Wiegmann when we signed them, but they turned out to be great moves.

Wile_E_Coyote
02-14-2006, 08:40 AM
T-Rich may be gone

Brock
02-14-2006, 08:41 AM
That's because the Broncos don't have a salary cap.

Either that, or the salary cap is a convenient manufactured excuse for teams to not spend money every year.

beer bacon
02-14-2006, 08:42 AM
T-Rich may be gone

That would be pretty dumb of us. Fullbacks never have big cap numbers, and he is still one of the best in the league. It isn't like he has really slowed down or anything.

Wile_E_Coyote
02-14-2006, 08:42 AM
That is what it seemed like to me. If we could cut three guys like Grbac, Hasty, and McGlockton, and then sign four guys like Green, Holmes, Weigmann, and Shields I think I may die from joy. Of course, we really didn't know what we were getting with Green, Holmes, and Wiegmann when we signed them, but they turned out to be great moves.

It was also a changing of the HC, chances of that happening again-not good

Wile_E_Coyote
02-14-2006, 08:44 AM
That would be pretty dumb of us. Fullbacks never have big cap numbers, and he is still one of the best in the league. It isn't like he has really slowed down or anything.

this is were Wilson not living up to the hype is good

shaneo69
02-14-2006, 08:47 AM
If there is no CBA in place there is no June 1st rule..........

Then I would just restructure Gonzo, Shields, Green, Surtain, and Warfield, and push their cap hit to next year. Of course, Lamar may have salary obligations of close to $200 mil for 2007, but hey, it ain't my money.

And you're right. You would have to keep slackass Woods around for another year.

The Chiefs talk about how they'll be at such a disadvantage without a cap, because they're a small market team. But I would argue that they'd be better off without the cap, at least in the short-term, because Carl's weak-ass cap management skills would no longer be an obstacle.

KCTitus
02-14-2006, 08:47 AM
I just cant stand this...Every year it's the same story.

Mile High Mania
02-14-2006, 08:50 AM
Funny how the Broncos make all kinds of moves each offseason yet never have any cap problems. After an AFC championship game appearance, they still have the money to go after TO, Ricky, and/or Edge.

The Broncos are quite a bit over the cap as well - I can't remember the number, but I think they were in the $110M area... so, they have their share of trimming and reworking of contracts ahead of them.

shaneo69
02-14-2006, 08:51 AM
I just cant stand this...Every year it's the same story.

From Teicher, or Carl?

KCTitus
02-14-2006, 08:52 AM
From Teicher, or Carl?

My mistake...every other year.

ChiefsOne
02-14-2006, 08:53 AM
The Chiefs also will approach several players about restructuring their contracts to create cap space. Pro Bowl tight end Tony Gonzalez is likely atop the list. He not only has one of the highest cap numbers on the team (about $6.5 million) but also is heading into the final year of his contract.


I thought Gonzalez signed a long term contract when his last one was up?

Chiefnj
02-14-2006, 08:54 AM
How can Surtain have such a high cap hit after signing with the team just last year? That doesn't make any sense.

Deberg_1990
02-14-2006, 08:58 AM
****ing Jerome Woods........thanks for nothing...

jspchief
02-14-2006, 09:04 AM
How can Surtain have such a high cap hit after signing with the team just last year? That doesn't make any sense.He must be a due a huge roster bonus. I thought that number seemed outrageous as well.

Pretty sure that will put an end to the Ty Law talk. We have 13 million tied up in our starting CBs as it is. Pretty sure the team doesn't want to increase that number.

JBucc
02-14-2006, 09:05 AM
How can Surtain have such a high cap hit after signing with the team just last year? That doesn't make any sense.
That's probably why Miami gave him up so easily

Chiefnj
02-14-2006, 09:17 AM
He must be a due a huge roster bonus. I thought that number seemed outrageous as well.

Pretty sure that will put an end to the Ty Law talk. We have 13 million tied up in our starting CBs as it is. Pretty sure the team doesn't want to increase that number.


That's incredible. It's not like Surtain was coming off an injury like Bell or Law, where a team essentially signed the guys to a one year deal.

I like Surtain. I think he's a damned good corner. But, with the talk of KC switching to a cover two scheme, I don't think paying a corner that type of money is the best option.

Mecca
02-14-2006, 09:21 AM
The way Surtains contract was structered........Half the signing bonus was last year, the other half is this year. That's how his hit is so high. You'll get a hit like that when you do a 2 tiered signing bonus to try to work the cap from the previous year.

jspchief
02-14-2006, 09:21 AM
That's incredible. It's not like Surtain was coming off an injury like Bell or Law, where a team essentially signed the guys to a one year deal.

I like Surtain. I think he's a damned good corner. But, with the talk of KC switching to a cover two scheme, I don't think paying a corner that type of money is the best option.I agree. I thought the $12 million signing bonus was stretching it. Apparently the deal was even richer than we thought.

I think Surtain is a quality CB. But I don't like the idea of 15% of our cap going to our two CBs. That just seems like too many eggs in one basket.

jspchief
02-14-2006, 09:23 AM
The way Surtains contract was structered........Half the signing bonus was last year, the other half is this year. That's how his hit is so high. You'll get a hit like that when you do a 2 tiered signing bonus to try to work the cap from the previous year.That explains it. I don't remember that, but it makes sense.

That's certainly easier to swallow than my intial thinking that he was getting another bonus on top of the 12 mil.

Mecca
02-14-2006, 09:23 AM
Then I would just restructure Gonzo, Shields, Green, Surtain, and Warfield, and push their cap hit to next year. Of course, Lamar may have salary obligations of close to $200 mil for 2007, but hey, it ain't my money.

And you're right. You would have to keep slackass Woods around for another year.

The Chiefs talk about how they'll be at such a disadvantage without a cap, because they're a small market team. But I would argue that they'd be better off without the cap, at least in the short-term, because Carl's weak-ass cap management skills would no longer be an obstacle.

Of course it wouldn't be better when the Cowboys and Redskins outbid us for any good player.........by the way the Broncos are the team that turns the most money in this division.

Chiefnj
02-14-2006, 09:30 AM
The way Surtains contract was structered........Half the signing bonus was last year, the other half is this year. That's how his hit is so high. You'll get a hit like that when you do a 2 tiered signing bonus to try to work the cap from the previous year.

If it was a "signing bonus" it would be spread out over the length of his contract and his cap hit wouldn't be so high.


From the Coalition Board:

P_____Player_____Base salary_____Cap number
CB_____Patrick Surtain_____$1,335,000_____$8,335,000
QB_____Trent Green_____$5,700,000_____$8,298,808
LB_____Kendrell Bel1_____$2,710,000_____$7,247,500
OL_____Will Shields_____$5,100,000_____$6,666,666
TE_____Tony Gonzalez_____$3,600,000_____$6,531,370
OL_____Willie Roaf_____$3,500,000_____$5,546,904
OL_____Brian Waters_____$545,000_____$5,412,500
RB_____Priest Holmes_____$3,250,000_____$5,330,804
LB_____Shawn Barber_____$2,750,000_____$4,707,142
CB_____Eric Warfield_____$3,125,000_____$4,264,285
DT_____Ryan Sims_____$1,567,000_____$3,910,005
DE_____Eric Hicks_____$2,100,000_____$3,650,000
DB_____Greg Wesley_____$2,500,000_____$3,766,666
OL_____Casey Wiegmann_____$1,600,000_____$3,133,333
DB_____Jerome Woods_____$1,600,000_____$2,908,333
CB_____Dexter McCleon_____$2,000,000_____$2,775,000
DB_____Sammy Knight_____$ 835,000_____$2,650,000
WR_____Eddie Kennison_____$2,050,000_____$2,633,333
DT_____John Browning_____$1,500,000_____$2,400,000
OL_____Chris Bober_____$1,500,000_____$2,175,000
LB_____Derrick Johnson_____$310,000_____$1,775,000
KR_____Dante Hall_____$1,250,000_____$1,725,000
DB_____William Bartee_____$1,100,000_____$1,629,166
OL_____John Welbourn_____$1,400,000_____$1,406,400
RB_____Larry Johnson_____$741,000_____$1,263,857

jspchief
02-14-2006, 09:32 AM
I see a lot of mention of restructuring Shields.

That seems like a stretch. On one hand we're asking him to stick around one more year rather than retire, but then we're going to expect him to take a pay cut too? Shields is a good guy, I'm sure. But that may be pushing it.

Chiefnj
02-14-2006, 09:46 AM
I see a lot of mention of restructuring Shields.

That seems like a stretch. On one hand we're asking him to stick around one more year rather than retire, but then we're going to expect him to take a pay cut too? Shields is a good guy, I'm sure. But that may be pushing it.

The only thing you could do is spread that 5 mil around to future years by converting it to a signing bonus. Mortgaging the future for a one year run.

jspchief
02-14-2006, 09:49 AM
The only thing you could do is spread that 5 mil around to future years by converting it to a signing bonus. Mortgaging the future for a one year run.Which I think is stupid. Will Shields isn't going to be the difference. He was very average for the first half of last year anyway.

I'd love to have him back. But I'm not willing to f*ck up the next era of Chiefs football to take one last swipe with our current fading team.

Count Zarth
02-14-2006, 10:52 AM
Bell and Barber, bye!

Cormac
02-14-2006, 10:59 AM
****ing Jerome Woods........thanks for nothing...

If this isn't misdirected anger, I don't know what is. Do you remember the headhunting Jerome Woods who was one of the best safeties in the league at a time when the Chiefs D was for real? Do you remember how much our problems on D in 2002 were attributed to his leg injury (rightly or wrongly)? Do you remember how well he played in 2003 returning 2 INTs for TDs (and helping disguise how lousy our D actually was)?

The guy was well worth the 1st round pick given for him, he has played his entire career on our team, and has never let us down on or off the field. He cashed in a big contract that was thrown at him when he was in decline. So what? That's not his fault. Try slinging the insults at the person that offered him the contract......

Harumph.......:harumph:

TEX
02-14-2006, 11:02 AM
Release Kendrell Bell? Did the Chiefs ever sign him?

What's WORSE than signing ALL your own crappy _efensive free agents after a season whrn they were the WORST _efense in all of football?

Signing them to contracts with long-term cap implications. Just brilliant! :shake:

TEX
02-14-2006, 11:10 AM
Bell and Barber, bye!

Yep. And what does that tell you about the ability of the Chiefs front office to identify a defensive weakness and fix it?

DJJasonp
02-14-2006, 11:12 AM
Many have mentioned Trent restructuring....

But didnt he just restructure a year or so ago? He's a nice guy and all, but how many times do you go back to a guy and ask him to take a cut?

These sort of things sort themselves out. I bet over half of the NFL teams are over the cap right now.

Bye to Barber, Bell, and possibly warfield. Hello to starting CB Benny Sapp.

By the way...Woods is done. Yes, he was a hard hitter at one point in his career, but he hasnt been the same since the leg injury. Great guy or not, if you cant get it done....(see Mike Mazlowski).

TEX
02-14-2006, 11:12 AM
Of course it wouldn't be better when the Cowboys and Redskins outbid us for any good player.........by the way the Broncos are the team that turns the most money in this division.

I agree, but there is a certain moderator here that will actually argue that fact about the Broncos... ROFL

Wile_E_Coyote
02-14-2006, 11:33 AM
has Benny Sapp turned into this offseason's Rich Scanlon

Ari Chi3fs
02-14-2006, 11:41 AM
LJ needs to be paid more... wow. He will be grumbling soon about contracts...

htismaqe
02-14-2006, 11:59 AM
I agree, but there is a certain moderator here that will actually argue that fact about the Broncos... ROFL

It's easy to laugh when you don't have any facts, isn't it?

It's no coincidence that the Broncos turn the most money and they're also the only team in the AFC West to get draft picks taken away for cheating the cap.

Again, you bitch about the Chiefs and have nothing to back it up. So keep flapping your gums. It just makes you look bitter.

Cormac
02-14-2006, 12:23 PM
Bye to Barber, Bell, and possibly warfield. Hello to starting CB Benny Sapp.

By the way...Woods is done. Yes, he was a hard hitter at one point in his career, but he hasnt been the same since the leg injury. Great guy or not, if you cant get it done....(see Mike Mazlowski).

I hope we don't end up cutting Barber and Bell. I hope we can keep one on a restructured contract. That would leave us with Fox coming off an injury, and almost no depth. I have seen nothing from Griffin yet, not to mention Grigsby or the mighty Scanlon.

Also, Warfield should be kept. He's been a very good corner for the last 2 or more years now. The days of him being a liability are over IMO. Not that I wouldn't like him to take a paycut.

Sapp would be a very good full time nickel, IMO. With Battle, Hodge, Washington, Garrett etc. we have our choice of depth. But nobody to replace Warfield, IMO.

I wasn't saying Woods needs to be kept. He is over the hill, and I wish we could release him without shooting ourselves in the foot, but it's not his fault that we overpaid him.

Halfcan
02-14-2006, 01:47 PM
Could Warfield be a cap casualty? With his off-field problems, I wonder if the Chiefs think he's not worth it.

Lets hope so!

Chiefnj
02-14-2006, 01:59 PM
Lets hope so!

Because KC is so deep at corner??

kczoo
02-14-2006, 02:39 PM
If the Chiefs want to sign Terrell Owens or another high-priced free agent when the signing period begins next month, they will have to clear some space under the NFL's salary cap. Documents show the Chiefs would save about $4 million in cap space by releasing linebacker Kendrell Bell. Others who could be in danger include cornerbacks Eric Warfield (savings of about $2.7 million) and Dexter McCleon (about $1.2 million).
-- Kansas City Star

The Chiefs will approach several players about restructuring their contracts to create cap space. Pro Bowl tight end Tony Gonzalez is likely atop the list. He not only has one of the highest cap numbers on the team (about $6.5 million) but also is heading into the final year of his contract.
-- Kansas City Star

TEX
02-14-2006, 02:40 PM
It's easy to laugh when you don't have any facts, isn't it?

It's no coincidence that the Broncos turn the most money and they're also the only team in the AFC West to get draft picks taken away for cheating the cap.

Again, you bitch about the Chiefs and have nothing to back it up. So keep flapping your gums. It just makes you look bitter.


More like it's easy to laugh at you for trying the skew the "facts" in your favor. In this post, you agreed that the Cheating Donx do turn the most $$$ - so do you think it's because they sign the most fee agents?

Besides, they got their draft picks taken away (twice for the same thing) because they didn't gain any real advantage for accounting for Elway and T.D.'s salaries the way they did. It was all there - it was just for "cash flow purposes and provided no real advantage." Just ask any Cheating Donx fan...

penguinz
02-14-2006, 02:41 PM
Damn n00bs.

kczoo
02-14-2006, 02:42 PM
Bite it

Phobia
02-14-2006, 03:05 PM
The cap savings for Bell is higher than that.

Mr. Laz
02-14-2006, 03:11 PM
LJ needs to be paid more...

STFU STFU

htismaqe
02-14-2006, 05:12 PM
More like it's easy to laugh at you for trying the skew the "facts" in your favor. In this post, you agreed that the Cheating Donx do turn the most $$$ - so do you think it's because they sign the most fee agents?

Besides, they got their draft picks taken away (twice for the same thing) because they didn't gain any real advantage for accounting for Elway and T.D.'s salaries the way they did. It was all there - it was just for "cash flow purposes and provided no real advantage." Just ask any Cheating Donx fan...

There's no need to skew anything.

I asked you to produce a list of teams that sign more free agents than the Chiefs year-in and year-out.

You know you can't produce anything of the sort, so you continue to poke fun instead of backing up your obviously unsupportable position.

Mr. Laz
02-14-2006, 08:30 PM
There's no need to skew anything.

I asked you to produce a list of teams that sign more free agents than the Chiefs year-in and year-out.

You know you can't produce anything of the sort, so you continue to poke fun instead of backing up your obviously unsupportable position.
just curious ...


but you produce a list that shows the chiefs signing as many or more than other teams year-in and year-out?

htismaqe
02-14-2006, 08:33 PM
just curious ...


but you produce a list that shows the chiefs signing as many or more than other teams year-in and year-out?

I'm not the one that contested that the Chiefs never do anything in free agency and would rather take vacations than work on improving the team.

I could absolutely produce such a list, otherwise I never would have issued the challenge.

But I wasn't the one that made a baseless, absurd assertion...

Halfcan
02-14-2006, 09:18 PM
Because KC is so deep at corner??


No because he sucks and is overpaid.

cdcox
02-14-2006, 10:21 PM
Contracts are NEVER renegotiated on the basis of a player giving money back to the team because he is a good guy. The three types of renegotiation are:

1. Good player that has a high cap number primarily due to base salary. This contract can be renegotiated to give more money to the player immediately in the form of signing bonus (i.e. guaranteed money). Benefit to the player: he gets guaranteed money now. Benefit to the team: can stretch the signing bonus over multiple years, there by freeing cap space. Disadvantage to team: you are likely going to end up with dead cap $ someday when you are still paying that stupid signing bonus after the player is no longer on the team.

2. Player isn't worth his base salary and the player, the team, and your six-year-old daughter all know it. Player basically agrees to tear up his
old contact for a more realistic base salary. Benefit to the player: he doesn't get cut and end up with nothing. Benefit to the team: they keep a known comodity at market value. Disadvantage to team: you end up keeping a player that keeps a more promising young guy off the team.

3. Poison pill. Previous contract had an unrealistic roster bonus or salary in a out year of the contract. Basically forces the contract to be renegotiated. Can then revert to case 1 or 2 above, depending on player's performance. Grbac was a classic example. Chiefs thought they would pull a #1, but dickhead just wanted out.


Trent Green, Tony Gonzonales, Shields would fit catagory 1 if they agree to rework.

Bell is an example of catagory 2/3 (if he had played well enough, Chiefs would have just paid the roster bonus). I'm wondering if some kind of #2 deal might be worked out for Woods.

CoMoChief
02-14-2006, 10:26 PM
Warfield - Restructure
McCleon - Dont let the ****ing door hit you on the way out you piece of shit.
Hicks - Read the above statement
Bell - Restructure
TonyG - Restructure
Will Shields - make him happy so he will stay longer
Trent Green - Restructure
Jerome Woods - Restructure


In a perfect world this would happen, but who knows. Tony G seems he would have too big an ego to restructure but I dunno.

cdcox
02-14-2006, 10:40 PM
In a perfect world this would happen, but who knows. Tony G seems he would have too big an ego to restructure but I dunno.


It has NOTHING to do with ego. It is about guaranteed $.

According to the article (which I would not take as Gospel), Gonzo's salary is $3.6M and his cap number is $6.5M. As far as guaranteed money TG has $3.6M coming to him once he makes the opening day roster. The Chiefs could sign him to and contract with an $8M signing bonus and all the sudden he has another $4.4M in guaranteed money in his pocket. The contract has a relatively low base salary the first few years, and is stretched out over a several years. All the sudden Gonzo's cap number is under $3M per year, even though he personally has 2x more money in his pocket today than he would have had under the old contract. Gonzo isn't going to be giving up anything in a contract renegotiation - just the opposite.

Deberg_1990
02-15-2006, 04:20 AM
If this isn't misdirected anger, I don't know what is. Do you remember the headhunting Jerome Woods who was one of the best safeties in the league at a time when the Chiefs D was for real? Do you remember how much our problems on D in 2002 were attributed to his leg injury (rightly or wrongly)? Do you remember how well he played in 2003 returning 2 INTs for TDs (and helping disguise how lousy our D actually was)?

The guy was well worth the 1st round pick given for him, he has played his entire career on our team, and has never let us down on or off the field. He cashed in a big contract that was thrown at him when he was in decline. So what? That's not his fault. Try slinging the insults at the person that offered him the contract......

Harumph.......:harumph:

I wont get in to it too much. Ive said many times on here he was nothing all that special even in his best years. He didnt even make the Pro-Bowl until his 8th or 9th year in. I say, dont let the door hit you on the way out Jerome.....

htismaqe
02-15-2006, 07:28 AM
It was funny listening to Teicher take calls on 610 yesterday about the cap...

"Well, what all of you need to understand about the cap is...uh...well...uh...you need to understand...uh...uh..."

He doesn't know any more about it than we do.

milkman
02-15-2006, 07:28 AM
I wont get in to it too much. Ive said many times on here he was nothing all that special even in his best years. He didnt even make the Pro-Bowl until his 8th or 9th year in. I say, dont let the door hit you on the way out Jerome.....

I don't believe he belonged in the PB the year he got in, but he did deserve PB consideration a couple of times earlier in his career.

I really think he played at a high level when he and Reggie Tongue were partners.

Neither has played at the same level that they played when they were playing together.

Chiefnj
02-15-2006, 07:38 AM
Trent Green, Tony Gonzonales, Shields would fit catagory 1 if they agree to rework.




I agree. The problem with Category 1 for these guys (which might also include Roaf's 3.5 base) is that Green, Shields and Roaf don't have much time left. If you renegotiate with them and spread out 5-6 mil for each guy over a new contract you are looking at a nice hunk of dead money for years 2007 and 2008. That's not good when you are rebuilding and you have a head coach who just turned tail with a similar situation.

I like Tony G and appreciate everything he's done for the organization, but I'm starting to wonder if it is in the teams best interests to sign him to a new long term contract. He's going to want to be paid top TE money and he will be on the decline. KC could be looking at another Woods type situation.

jspchief
02-15-2006, 07:41 AM
I wont get in to it too much. Ive said many times on here he was nothing all that special even in his best years. He didnt even make the Pro-Bowl until his 8th or 9th year in. I say, dont let the door hit you on the way out Jerome.....The team really had little choice but to re-sign Woods. How can you justify letting your Pro Bowl safety walk from a team that has a clear definciency on defense? He had his first good year since the injury, and to the common fan was probably one of our defensive bright spots. Remember at the time everyone thought it was scheme, not players.

cdcox
02-15-2006, 08:14 AM
I agree. The problem with Category 1 for these guys (which might also include Roaf's 3.5 base) is that Green, Shields and Roaf don't have much time left. If you renegotiate with them and spread out 5-6 mil for each guy over a new contract you are looking at a nice hunk of dead money for years 2007 and 2008. That's not good when you are rebuilding and you have a head coach who just turned tail with a similar situation.

I like Tony G and appreciate everything he's done for the organization, but I'm starting to wonder if it is in the teams best interests to sign him to a new long term contract. He's going to want to be paid top TE money and he will be on the decline. KC could be looking at another Woods type situation.

Good point on the dead money. I definitely would not put myself in a 49'ers-type salary-cap hell just to squeeze another year out of this group of Chiefs.

Gonzo has enough years left that we could handle a several M signing bonus. As you point out, the question is will his production over then next 3 or 4 years justify that kind of $? Cleary Gates is a better pass receiver than Gonzo at this point in time, but Gonzo is very valuable as a run blocker too. I think it would be worthwhile to sign him to a deal that made his cap number around 3 - 3.5 M per season during the next two seasons. Its also important that the deal be structured so that we can afford to dump him or renegotiate from a position of strength after a couple years. What this means is that we cannot afford to give him a astronomical signing bonus. We also need to get more production out of him in the red zone, if we are going to pay him that well.

I'm also not clear in my understanding of how the lack of a CBA screws with the ability spread signing bonuses over multiple years.

Coogs
02-15-2006, 09:19 AM
I agree. The problem with Category 1 for these guys (which might also include Roaf's 3.5 base) is that Green, Shields and Roaf don't have much time left. If you renegotiate with them and spread out 5-6 mil for each guy over a new contract you are looking at a nice hunk of dead money for years 2007 and 2008. That's not good


I think the Eagles have the right philosophy when it comes to signing aging players. IIRC, they basically won't sign anyone over 30.

ct
02-15-2006, 09:19 AM
The way Surtains contract was structered........Half the signing bonus was last year, the other half is this year. That's how his hit is so high. You'll get a hit like that when you do a 2 tiered signing bonus to try to work the cap from the previous year.

Same reason Bell is so high. Also makes it easier to release or renegotiate if things are not panning out so well. That 2nd tier bonus has not yet been paid, so you don't get penalized if you release before it's paid.

I fully expect Bell to be released. Woods should be renegotiated, basically throw him a small bonus to buy out his contract, then release him.

CoMoChief
02-15-2006, 09:25 AM
It's easy to laugh when you don't have any facts, isn't it?

It's no coincidence that the Broncos turn the most money and they're also the only team in the AFC West to get draft picks taken away for cheating the cap.

Again, you bitch about the Chiefs and have nothing to back it up. So keep flapping your gums. It just makes you look bitter.


Are you talking about mid round draft picks they take away for players like Lynch, Gold, or Bailey or perhaps TO this coming season?

ct
02-15-2006, 09:27 AM
I see a lot of mention of restructuring Shields.

That seems like a stretch. On one hand we're asking him to stick around one more year rather than retire, but then we're going to expect him to take a pay cut too? Shields is a good guy, I'm sure. But that may be pushing it.

Agree, Will has earned his salary. We can't renegotiate with an extension for a guys who's gonna retire at any moment. Ain't gonna happen, better look elsewhere. Now Trent and Gonzo are very good candidates. Gonzo wants a new contract, and Trent seems the type of guy who would help if asked.

ct
02-15-2006, 09:30 AM
...
Also, Warfield should be kept. He's been a very good corner for the last 2 or more years now. The days of him being a liability are over IMO. Not that I wouldn't like him to take a paycut.

Sapp would be a very good full time nickel, IMO. With Battle, Hodge, Washington, Garrett etc. we have our choice of depth. But nobody to replace Warfield, IMO.

...

:clap:

Agree completely!

Chiefnj
02-15-2006, 09:33 AM
Its also important that the deal be structured so that we can afford to dump him or renegotiate from a position of strength after a couple years. What this means is that we cannot afford to give him a astronomical signing bonus. We also need to get more production out of him in the red zone, if we are going to pay him that well.



I really think the Tony G situation is a tough one. In the last two years he has 9 TD's. For the money being expended, I'm not sure if it is commensurate with production. He's going to want top money. On one hand he's deserved and earned it. On the other hand, he'll be on the decline on a team that has a lot of needs - a lot of expensive needs.

Chiefnj
02-15-2006, 09:34 AM
I think the Eagles have the right philosophy when it comes to signing aging players. IIRC, they basically won't sign anyone over 30.

It's a great philosophy to have when you can churn out talent like the Eagles or Steelers do. KC can't, nor can most teams, continually groom young players and have them step up like they do in Philly.

jspchief
02-15-2006, 09:44 AM
I really think the Tony G situation is a tough one. In the last two years he has 9 TD's. For the money being expended, I'm not sure if it is commensurate with production. He's going to want top money. On one hand he's deserved and earned it. On the other hand, he'll be on the decline on a team that has a lot of needs - a lot of expensive needs.Personally, I think Gonzo's decline started a few years ago. He no longer has the hands or speed to warrant the payday IMO. He's still getting the catches, but I think a lot of that has to do with playing in a system that makes him a key receiving focus, alongside WRs that are largely complimentary players.Watching Gates over the last two years, it's become clear to me that Gonzo does not measure up anymore. Maybe he needs to do a little more off-season work, and a little less basketball and acting.

milkman
02-15-2006, 09:54 AM
Personally, I think Gonzo's decline started a few years ago. He no longer has the hands or speed to warrant the payday IMO. He's still getting the catches, but I think a lot of that has to do with playing in a system that makes him a key receiving focus, alongside WRs that are largely complimentary players.Watching Gates over the last two years, it's become clear to me that Gonzo does not measure up anymore. Maybe he needs to do a little more off-season work, and a little less basketball and acting.

I have never been as high on TG as most Chiefs fans, or the national media.

He has never been fast, nor athletic, like Gates.
He's never been a guy that breaks tackles, and his first four or five seasons he had a propensity for drops.

He's had, IMO, two outstanding seasons, and several good ones.

Those two outstanding seasons were, again IMO, a byproduct of the threat that Priest presented as a runner and a pass catching threat out of the backfield.

There have been a number of TEs over the years that I thought were better, and more versatile than TG.

I don't think he has ever been worth the money that he's been paid.

htismaqe
02-15-2006, 10:08 AM
Are you talking about mid round draft picks they take away for players like Lynch, Gold, or Bailey or perhaps TO this coming season?

I could be talking about Lynch or Gold. I'm most certainly not talking about Champ Bailey because he WAS NOT A FREE AGENT. Neither is TO. And neither was Gerard Warren. The free agents they signed last year produced universal derision here, but now, it's heralded as a great move by those that espouse the Chiefs sit on their hands in free agency.

Are you saying that you would have been happy to see the Chiefs trade Priest Holmes away for Champ Bailey? Because that's exactly what the Broncos did.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, isn't it?