PDA

View Full Version : Teicher: Chiefs won't go shopping despite new CBA


tk13
03-10-2006, 02:39 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/14061032.htm

Chiefs won’t go shopping despite extra $7.5 million

By ADAM TEICHER
The Kansas City Star

The Chiefs had an extra $7.5 million of salary-cap room dropped in their laps when the NFL and its players agreed to a last-minute extension of the collective-bargaining agreement.

That extra cap space won’t make the Chiefs major players when the free-agency signing period begins tonight.

“It really doesn’t change our thoughts on free-agency,” president/general manager Carl Peterson said. “We didn’t plan to be much of a player this year no matter what the salary-cap figure was.

“We’re not going to bring anyone in for the first few days. It’s not a priority. We’ll observe who’s out there and let the other teams spend the big dollars.”

The salary-cap increase from $94.5 million to $102 million should give the Chiefs a chance to retain their own free agents. Peterson said the Chiefs would make a stronger effort to re-sign fullback Tony Richardson and defensive tackle Lional Dalton, the two starters among their nine unrestricted free agents.

One option for both players is the one-year veteran minimum contract. Richardson would receive a salary of $810,000, Dalton $710,000, but each would cost the Chiefs only about $400,000 against their salary cap.

“We’ll see if there’s something there that makes sense both for them and for the Chiefs,” Peterson said. “They are guys that played for us and started for us, and we’d like to have them back. It will come down to contracts and salaries, as it usually does.”

Peterson said the Chiefs would try to re-sign some of the players who are heading into the final seasons of their contracts. Three such players are tight end Tony Gonzalez, defensive end Jared Allen and linebacker Kawika Mitchell.

Allen, who is due a base salary of $385,000 this season, has outperformed the contract he signed as a fourth-round draft pick two years ago.

Running back Larry Johnson has four seasons left on his contract, but the Chiefs may decide to give him a raise over the $741,000 salary he is scheduled to make this season.

The Chiefs’ other unrestricted free agents will be wide receiver Marc Boerigter, quarterbacks Todd Collins and Damon Huard, defensive end Carlos Hall, cornerback Dewayne Washington and long snappers Kendall Gammon and Ed Perry.

The Chiefs tendered minimum one-year contracts to offensive lineman Jordan Black, defensive lineman Jimmy Wilkerson, cornerback Benny Sapp and kicker Lawrence Tynes.

Black and Wilkerson, as three-year players, are restricted free agents, giving the Chiefs the right to match any contract offer they might receive. Sapp and Tynes, as two-year players, are exclusive free agents, giving the Chiefs sole negotiating rights.

The Chiefs appear to be short at cornerback after last week’s release of Eric Warfield and Dexter McCleon. They combined to make 15 starts last season, and their departure leaves the Chiefs with no obvious candidates to start opposite Patrick Surtain.

Sapp, Julian Battle and Alphonso Hodge are their other cornerbacks. The Chiefs seem content with Sapp as their nickel back. Battle, a former third-round draft pick, was struggling even before losing all of last season to an Achilles’ tear.

Hodge played little as a rookie last season.

“I think we’re OK there,” Peterson said. “(Coach Herm Edwards) likes Benny Sapp very much. Julian Battle is very, very talented. Also, this draft has a lot of quality at the cornerback position. We feel we’ll be able to come out of the draft with some help. Unlike some of our former coaches, Herm likes to and will play younger players, including rookies.”

Ty Law, who signed with Edwards’ Jets last season, is a free agent. So are Surtain’s former Miami teammate Sam Madison and former Raider Charles Woodson.

Peterson suggested the Chiefs might move on without any of them or another veteran cornerback.

“That’s possible,” Peterson said. “I can’t say that for sure right now. We brought in a couple of veterans late in the process last year, and one of them (Washington) was with us for the season. That could happen again.

“Herm has to get out on the field with our guys, and he’ll have a better feel for all of that.”

Peterson and Edwards have indicated interest in wide receiver Terrell Owens once he’s released by the Eagles. Peterson again said the Chiefs wouldn’t be aggressive in that pursuit.

“I think I’ve been specific regarding our plans there,” Peterson said. “If Terrell and his agent are interested in a one-year contract with no guarantees and a lot of incentives, then we’re interested. He knows that, and his representative knows that. They haven’t called me back on that yet, and they may not call me back.

“That’s a very distant thing. I’m not focused on that right now. We’ll have to see how things go.”

Spicy McHaggis
03-10-2006, 02:42 AM
They could have just written "Carl goes on annual vacation".

keg in kc
03-10-2006, 02:48 AM
I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

alanm
03-10-2006, 03:40 AM
Teicher has left me in shock and awe at his indepth analysis on the Chiefs situation. :eek: Really.. I'm speechless. :eek:

Fruit Ninja
03-10-2006, 03:54 AM
Its all bullshit, they need help on Defense, they have to sign someone there. Hicks cant rush the passer anymore, Dalton and Browning are done. Sims, hell i joined in on the "he is a bust" wagon.

Rausch
03-10-2006, 04:06 AM
Carl says the exact same $#it every year. Every year a poker face.

Every year he says we'll sit on our hands.

Every year he's full of BS.

Just a thought, but perhaps we should wait and see what happnes. Just throwing a line out there...

royr17
03-10-2006, 04:06 AM
This is all bullshit. They have cap room, so they'll go after some players.

They said the same thing last year, and the year before, and the year before that.

Its just all a publicity thing.

Guru
03-10-2006, 04:35 AM
:hmmm: Carl BS? No way. ROFL

Dunit35
03-10-2006, 05:14 AM
Re-sign the players we have that deserve contracts. Like Carlos Hall, T-Rich and Dalton as a reserve.

Brock
03-10-2006, 07:49 AM
This is all bullshit. They have cap room, so they'll go after some players.

They said the same thing last year, and the year before, and the year before that.

Its just all a publicity thing.


ROFL

jspchief
03-10-2006, 08:01 AM
So Carl is wasting all our cap space on locking up our top young players?

Why does he hate to win so much?

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 08:02 AM
He doesnt hate winning...he hates the fans.

The fake ones, not the Real ones.

beer bacon
03-10-2006, 08:03 AM
I am good with Carl locking up our talent and resigning Richardson. I wouldn't mind if we jettisoned Dalton and brought in somebody else though.

jspchief
03-10-2006, 08:08 AM
I am good with Carl locking up our talent and resigning Richardson. I wouldn't mind if we jettisoned Dalton and brought in somebody else though.If we can sign Dalton for vet minimum, I'm all for keeping him.

Players that have that much tenure, with minimum contracts, only like 60% of their contract counts against the cap. There's no reason to not keep him if we can get him that cheap.

58-4ever
03-10-2006, 08:12 AM
Adam Teicher never writes "good news". I think if I ever saw him in person, I'd kick his ass. :hmmm:

beer bacon
03-10-2006, 08:18 AM
Adam Teicher never writes "good news". I think if I ever saw him in person, I'd kick his ass. :hmmm:

I heard he was really a Raiders fan.

greg63
03-10-2006, 08:19 AM
Vintage King Carl. :shake:

BigChiefFan
03-10-2006, 08:21 AM
The CONSERVATIVE approach has gotten us so far, I can see why Carl stands by it. Who the **** wants a Super Bowl?

Dunit35
03-10-2006, 08:23 AM
The CONSERVATIVE approach has gotten us so far, I can see why Carl stands by it. Who the **** wants a Super Bowl?


They're overrated.

Idahored
03-10-2006, 08:24 AM
This is no different than it was in the past. The Chiefs swing on a two year cycle. They pick up big buck free agents one year and the next they focus on re-signing the players on our roster.
2006--re-sign current players and extend contracts.
2005-Brought in top free agents:Knight, Bell, Surtain.
2004--re-sign current players and extend contracts.
2003--Brought in top free agents:Barber....I can't remember the others at the moment.

It's a pattern and I think it is a good one. I do hope we find an opportunity to beef up our D line though, that is a weakness for sure.

I think it is a great idea to lock up the players on our roster that deserve it also.

Chiefnj
03-10-2006, 08:24 AM
At least Herm has the first year excuse that he wasn't allowed to bring in his players.

cdcox
03-10-2006, 08:27 AM
Carl puts out a lot of propaganda, but history has demonstrated that he is a pretty straight shooter when it comes to describing our general level of activity in free agency. The two year cycle of the level of free agent activity has been discussed at length and has been followed in practice over the last several years. And it is not only a matter of cap, it is a matter of the cash that the operation has in order to fund the signing bonuses. You may argue that Lamar should dig into his personal finances to fund players, but it just ain't going to happen. We've been over these issues a gabillion times over the last several years. And still some of you think we will be highly active in free agency this year.

Dunit35
03-10-2006, 08:32 AM
This is no different than it was in the past. The Chiefs swing on a two year cycle. They pick up big buck free agents one year and the next they focus on re-signing the players on our roster.
2006--re-sign current players and extend contracts.
2005-Brought in top free agents:Knight, Bell, Surtain.
2004--re-sign current players and extend contracts.
2003--Brought in top free agents:Barber....I can't remember the others at the moment.

It's a pattern and I think it is a good one. I do hope we find an opportunity to beef up our D line though, that is a weakness for sure.

I think it is a great idea to lock up the players on our roster that deserve it also.

In 2003 we brought in Shawn Barber, Dexter McCleon and Vonnie Holliday. Weird that all three are not on this team anymore.

Chiefnj
03-10-2006, 08:40 AM
CP has his priorities straight. The smart move is to tie up guys like Allen, Johnson, Kawika and possibly TG. Keeping and developing your own talent is the best way to go.

That being said, the outlook for 2006 doesn't seem that good to me. On offense, it looks like the plan is to do a one more year push with Shields and Roaf. That makes sense, but the defense, without adding some veteran talent seems problematic.

A cover 2 with KC's existing DL, the chance of a rookie corner starting, a slower safety in Knight and another safety that may not pick up the playbook so quickly? Gun's going to be creating some new cuss words this year.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 08:45 AM
In 2003 we brought in Shawn Barber, Dexter McCleon and Vonnie Holliday. Weird that all three are not on this team anymore.

That is weird...so I guess, I'll put you down as celebrating the fact that KC doesnt enter the FA market this year, since they'd just sign the wrong guys anyway.

:thumb:

ROYC75
03-10-2006, 08:57 AM
Plus it's an even year.....2006. Generally we do crap in even years.

Yep, the planet is not aligned with the stars ( Chiefs ) . We are doomed I tell ya ,doomed !

ct
03-10-2006, 09:04 AM
...
Peterson and Edwards have indicated interest in wide receiver Terrell Owens once he’s released by the Eagles. Peterson again said the Chiefs wouldn’t be aggressive in that pursuit.

“I think I’ve been specific regarding our plans there,” Peterson said. “If Terrell and his agent are interested in a one-year contract with no guarantees and a lot of incentives, then we’re interested. He knows that, and his representative knows that. They haven’t called me back on that yet, and they may not call me back.

“That’s a very distant thing. I’m not focused on that right now. We’ll have to see how things go.”

This is very interesting! I'm NOT on the TO bandwagon, but for this kind of a deal, I'd give it a shot.

“That’s possible,” Peterson said. “I can’t say that for sure right now. We brought in a couple of veterans late in the process last year, and one of them (Washington) was with us for the season. That could happen again.

CP also seemed to leave a door slightly ajar for a CB, which I also found interesting.

Iowanian
03-10-2006, 10:28 AM
Carl's "2 year cycle" seems to be really helping him with his "5 year plan".

In a meeting the other day, it was suggested that I come up with a "5 year plan"....I started snickering and no one understood why.

kaplin42
03-10-2006, 10:43 AM
So what are our Cap numbers now? Does anyone know?

MVChiefFan
03-10-2006, 10:53 AM
It seems as if we're stuck on the wrong years. The years we go after free-agents is the year they all suck then while we're standing pat, good guys are going left and right. I LOVE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wile_E_Coyote
03-10-2006, 10:55 AM
So what are our Cap numbers now? Does anyone know?

Shefter on NFL Network last night the Chiefs were 2.5 million over. Who knows where the hell he got that # from

Chiefs Pantalones
03-10-2006, 10:59 AM
This is no different than it was in the past. The Chiefs swing on a two year cycle. They pick up big buck free agents one year and the next they focus on re-signing the players on our roster.
2006--re-sign current players and extend contracts.
2005-Brought in top free agents:Knight, Bell, Surtain.
2004--re-sign current players and extend contracts.
2003--Brought in top free agents:Barber....I can't remember the others at the moment.

It's a pattern and I think it is a good one. I do hope we find an opportunity to beef up our D line though, that is a weakness for sure.

I think it is a great idea to lock up the players on our roster that deserve it also.

Yeah, it's a great pattern!!! No Super Bowl appearances or victories!!! Why change?!

HOORAY MEDIOCRITY!!!! ROFL

The Chiefs just kill me.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 11:11 AM
Since we are not going to sign anybody, this most likely means our CB's are going to be Surtain, Battle, Sapp, Hodge, or Washington.

Then what about the WLB? Keyaron Fox?

Our Line is probably going to stay the same. Lovely.

This team has so many holes to fill on defense it's not funny. So, with that being said, our defensive lineup will probably look like this next year:

LE-Hicks
DT-????? probably Browning
DT-Sims
RE-Allen
WLB Fox
MLB K.Mitchell
SLB D.Johnson
CB Surtain
CB Battle
FS Wesley
SS Knight

:rolleyes: great, we are going to replace Warfield and Bell with injury prone (rookies) starters.

beer bacon
03-10-2006, 11:15 AM
Since we are not going to sign anybody, this most likely means our CB's are going to be Surtain, Battle, Sapp, Hodge, or Washington.

Then what about the WLB? Keyaron Fox?

Our Line is probably going to stay the same. Lovely.

This team has so many holes to fill on defense it's not funny. So, with that being said, our defensive lineup will probably look like this next year:

LE-Hicks
DT-????? probably Browning
DT-Sims
RE-Allen
WLB Fox
MLB K.Mitchell
SLB D.Johnson
CB Surtain
CB Battle
FS Wesley
SS Knight

:rolleyes: great, we are going to replace Warfield and Bell with injury prone (rookies) starters.

Rookies? I hope we draft them in the 1st and 2nd rounds then.

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 11:20 AM
Yeah, it's a great pattern!!! No Super Bowl appearances or victories!!! Why change?!

HOORAY MEDIOCRITY!!!! ROFL

The Chiefs just kill me.

They're only mediocre on the field.

What's funny is that people actually accept Carl's "every other year" BS and act like it's the only way you can run an NFL organization. Oh but wait, that's right, the Chiefs play in tiny farmtown KC so Lamar doesn't have any extra money to spend. Chiefs fans have two choices....get season tickets for the "Arrowhead experience" and be a real fan, or go find another team to root for.

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 11:26 AM
Since we are not going to sign anybody, this most likely means our CB's are going to be Surtain, Battle, Sapp, Hodge, or Washington.

Then what about the WLB? Keyaron Fox?

Our Line is probably going to stay the same. Lovely.

This team has so many holes to fill on defense it's not funny. So, with that being said, our defensive lineup will probably look like this next year:

LE-Hicks
DT-????? probably Browning
DT-Sims
RE-Allen
WLB Fox
MLB K.Mitchell
SLB D.Johnson
CB Surtain
CB Battle
FS Wesley
SS Knight

:rolleyes: great, we are going to replace Warfield and Bell with injury prone (rookies) starters.

With Carl stating that the Chiefs will not be active in FA, how can anyone be optimistic that our defense (and our team as a whole) will be any better this year?

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 11:36 AM
With Carl stating that the Chiefs will not be active in FA, how can anyone be optimistic that our defense (and our team as a whole) will be any better this year?

Can I get a ruling, here? Is this the Official 'Seasons Over' post or did I miss it?

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 11:38 AM
Can I get a ruling, here? Is this the Official 'Seasons Over' post or did I miss it?

Sure, why not.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 11:40 AM
Sure, why not.

ROFL

I guess the question before us is, the Official Seasons Over post actually 'official' if it comes before the FA period opens?

I might need a second.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 11:41 AM
That extra cap space won’t make the Chiefs major players when the free-agency signing period begins tonight.

“It really doesn’t change our thoughts on free-agency,” president/general manager Carl Peterson said. “We didn’t plan to be much of a player this year no matter what the salary-cap figure was.

This quote here, has me convinced it's all about the money. Lamar doesn't want to spend. Oh well. Keep the team the same. Money in your pocket is more important.

“We’re not going to bring anyone in for the first few days. It’s not a priority. We’ll observe who’s out there and let the other teams spend the big dollars.”

This is ok. It's not like we're that bad on defense. Geez, we we're only 26th in the league last year. That's a big improvement. Geez, you've done so much on D, take a break.....relax, you deserve it. Go plan a vacation to the Mayan Riviera.

“I think we’re OK there,” Peterson said. “(Coach Herm Edwards) likes Benny Sapp very much. Julian Battle is very, very talented. Also, this draft has a lot of quality at the cornerback position. We feel we’ll be able to come out of the draft with some help. Unlike some of our former coaches, Herm likes to and will play younger players, including rookies.”

Oh my. We are going to start Julian Battle next year. I smell it. They're going to go with an injury plagued, rattled DB. Why? Because it is evident Gunther has a boner for him. Julian has barely been on the field since he was drafted, and can't cover without getting away with an illegal contact flag. Oh no the Chiefs are going to experiment using another project at CB. Then people are going to say, "why do we keep converting safeties, and trying to use them as corners?" Oh I smell the return of Bartee, Warfield. AGAIN!

Peterson suggested the Chiefs might move on without any of them or another veteran cornerback.

“That’s possible,” Peterson said. “I can’t say that for sure right now. We brought in a couple of veterans late in the process last year, and one of them (Washington) was with us for the season. That could happen again.

Big mistake.


“Herm has to get out on the field with our guys, and he’ll have a better feel for all of that.”

This is an excuse to cover up for the lack of talent on the defensive side of the ball.

“I think I’ve been specific regarding our plans there,” Peterson said. “If Terrell and his agent are interested in a one-year contract with no guarantees and a lot of incentives, then we’re interested. He knows that, and his representative knows that. They haven’t called me back on that yet, and they may not call me back.

“That’s a very distant thing. I’m not focused on that right now. We’ll have to see how things go.”

In your dreams. T.O. ain't coming here for what you're asking. Unless, NOBODY in the league signs him. Giving him no choice. Don't see that though.

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 11:42 AM
ROFL

I guess the question before us is, the Official Seasons Over post actually 'official' if it comes before the FA period opens?

I might need a second.

There is no free agency period for the Chiefs. This is the "every other year", remember?

Mr. Laz
03-10-2006, 11:43 AM
Carl's "2 year cycle" seems to be really helping him with his "5 year plan".

heh

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 11:44 AM
There is no free agency period for the Chiefs. This is the "every other year", remember?

No, I think even if the team doesnt decide to sign Owens or Law tomorrow, they're still included in the FA period like every other team. If the CBA differs for KC, I havent seen it. Maybe nflpa.org hasnt updated that part yet.

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 11:50 AM
No, I think even if the team doesnt decide to sign Owens or Law tomorrow, they're still included in the FA period like every other team. If the CBA differs for KC, I havent seen it. Maybe nflpa.org hasnt updated that part yet.

No, it's not specified in the CBA, but Carl/Lamar have voluntarily pulled their team off the FA field. Kinda like Mike Brown/Bill Bidwell/William Ford do each year.

cdcox
03-10-2006, 11:50 AM
Oh my. We are going to start Julian Battle next year. I smell it. They're going to go with an injury plagued, rattled DB. Why? Because it is evident Gunther has a boner for him. Julian has barely been on the field since he was drafted, and can't cover without getting away with an illegal contact flag. Oh no the Chiefs are going to experiment using another project at CB. Then people are going to say, "why do we keep converting safeties, and trying to use them as corners?" Oh I smell the return of Bartee, Warfield. AGAIN!



Now you see why most of us weren't as anxious and you and Cherryontop to depart with Warfied. You got your wish about dumping him, but -- surprise -- that doesn't mean we are going to go out and get someone better. The net effect of cutting Warfield will be to make the Chiefs worse, which is exactly what everyone else was saying.

arrowheadnation
03-10-2006, 11:53 AM
I swear, if Bennie Sapp starts at CB next season, I may strangle Carl Peterson myself.

ChiefsCountry
03-10-2006, 11:53 AM
We will sign some players but not the major free agents, which this year doesnt seem that bad. No really big names out there.

PHOG
03-10-2006, 11:56 AM
No, I think even if the team doesnt decide to sign Owens or Law tomorrow, they're still included in the FA period like every other team. If the CBA differs for KC, I havent seen it. Maybe nflpa.org hasnt updated that part yet.

Possibly, in a discreet subclause, this is Tagliabue's last parting gift to the Chiefs shortly before retiring.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 11:56 AM
With Carl stating that the Chiefs will not be active in FA, how can anyone be optimistic that our defense (and our team as a whole) will be any better this year?

Well you never know. It is glaring though that we lack talent there, and lots of it. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure that out. If this defense is the same because of inactivity in FA, then I expect it to be the same next year. Why? Because I'm one of those people who covets drafts, but believes, and doesn't expect rookies to contribute substantially to help improve the team immediately. There are 3 simple ways to build your team, either through FA, draft, and/or trades. Some people say FA is not the best way to go, I sortof disagree, you still have to find a way to upgrade your player personnel. To upgrade your personnel on defense becomes THAT much harder when your GM and owner elect not to be active in FA.

But, this team decides not to be active in FA. I don't know about that man? This organization is ****ing weird.

*The only thing I can hope for as a fan of the Kansas City Chiefs, is to hope that this team has an AMAZING draft, and/or just hope that Peterson is bluffing and is shooting up a smoke screen.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 11:57 AM
No, it's not specified in the CBA, but Carl/Lamar have voluntarily pulled their team off the FA field. Kinda like Mike Brown/Bill Bidwell/William Ford do each year.

Interesting...well, I guess every other year is better than every year like those other three. Considering just how bad KC is at FA, Im not sure if that's a good or bad thing, however.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 11:58 AM
Rookies? I hope we draft them in the 1st and 2nd rounds then.

God I hope we get 2 solid starters in the 1st and 2nd rounds too. Especially after knowing this team will not be active in FA.

TEX
03-10-2006, 12:01 PM
The deal is the spending every other season is NOT working. This team has only 1 playoff appearance in the past 8 seasons and it was a loss at home. Shoot, we have nobody left on the team from the vaunted free agent class of '03. So, bragging about the fact the we "brought in players" to improve the_efense last year means NOTHING sicne the SAME thing was said a few years ago. There is a gaping hole at CB and we have MAJOR issues on the D-Line and it's OBVIOUS. The thinking that we're "ok" there reminds me of the whole RBBC BS we endured for many seasons. Well look what happened when we FINALLY went out and added a REAL RB... I'm NOT saying to break the bank, but I do feel we need to get some players in here that can help. :shake:

kaplin42
03-10-2006, 12:04 PM
I would almost be willing to bet we arent active this year, because they know that we are gonna have to do some major rebuilding next year. With the cap being 109 next year and with money we can save by not going to big into FA this year, they are setting themselves up to be financialy capable or decent aquisitions.

TEX
03-10-2006, 12:04 PM
We will sign some players but not the major free agents, which this year doesnt seem that bad. No really big names out there.

Yep, and the ones that are out there will probably end up in Denver.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:06 PM
The deal is the spending every other season is NOT working. This team has only 1 playoff appearance in the past 8 seasons and it was a loss at home. Shoot, we have nobody left on the team from the vaunted free agent class of '03. So, bragging about the fact the we "brought in players" to improve the_efense last year means NOTHING sicne the SAME thing was said a few years ago.... I'm NOT saying to break the bank, but I do feel we need to get some players in here that can help. :shake:

Im confused...do you want KC to not sign players like they did in 2003 or to sign players like they're not going to in 2006?

edit: or do you want them to not spend in odd years since the ones they sign suck and spend in even years when the FA's are a lock?

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 12:08 PM
Interesting...well, I guess every other year is better than every year like those other three. Considering just how bad KC is at FA, Im not sure if that's a good or bad thing, however.

According to Rufus, KC is one of the best when it comes to signing FA's. Of course, he usually mentions that a couple paragraphs after pointing to the much heralded, but failed, class of 2003 to illustrate why we shouldn't sign FA's.

Really just depends what point he's trying to make. If he's trying to illustrate Carl's genious, he'll point to Marcus Allen, James Hasty, and Priest Holmes. If he's trying to show how stupid fans/media are, he'll point out the FA's of 2003 that Carl was forced to sign because of fan/media demands.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:10 PM
According to Rufus, KC is one of the best when it comes to signing FA's. Of course, he usually mentions that a couple paragraphs after pointing to the much heralded, but failed, class of 2003 to illustrate why we shouldn't sign FA's.

Really just depends what point he's trying to make. If he's trying to illustrate Carl's genious, he'll point to Marcus Allen, James Hasty, and Priest Holmes. If he's trying to show how stupid fans/media are, he'll point out the FA's of 2003 that Carl was forced to sign because of fan/media demands.

LOL...sounds like Rufus is a student of The Lexicon.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 12:11 PM
You know what pisses me off about Carl Peterson? In all the years he managed to be here as President/GM, he always builds his teams around the coaches he hires. In essence, whatever they say, will do and go.

He can never step up like a REAL leader and take charge of this organization. I'll bet most of the words that come out of his mouth are him pullin the strings right out of Lamar's hand.

Logical
03-10-2006, 12:11 PM
Carl says the exact same $#it every year. Every year a poker face.

Every year he says we'll sit on our hands.

Every year he's full of BS.

Just a thought, but perhaps we should wait and see what happnes. Just throwing a line out there...2004 he did exactly what he said he would. I am trying to recall a major signing in 2002 and I cannot think of any, can you?

Wile_E_Coyote
03-10-2006, 12:14 PM
goodnight, the Steelers were far from perfect
the Pats were not loaded down with stars
every team is an injury or two away from a top ten draft pick

greg63
03-10-2006, 12:14 PM
Carl's "2 year cycle" seems to be really helping him with his "5 year plan".

In a meeting the other day, it was suggested that I come up with a "5 year plan"....I started snickering and no one understood why.
:clap:
...That is, what, entering year sixteen??? I think King Carl's full of Raiduhs

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 12:16 PM
2004 he did exactly what he said he would. I am trying to recall a major signing in 2002 and I cannot think of any, can you?

Johnny Morton? Because we had to fix our offense.

Logical
03-10-2006, 12:19 PM
Carl's "2 year cycle" seems to be really helping him with his "5 year plan".

In a meeting the other day, it was suggested that I come up with a "5 year plan"....I started snickering and no one understood why.

I suggest you see how it works when you submit it saying this is the low cash expenditure year I will not pursue any new opportunities and work to maintain the status quo. Next year I will work hard to expand our improvement through key improvements (of course after I take my vacation). I will repeat this cycle in years 3 and 4 then in year 5 I will re-evaluate my options and negotiate myself a contract extension.

Logical
03-10-2006, 12:20 PM
Johnny Morton? Because we had to fix our offense.Sort of the Lionel Dalton of 2004 equivalent. Say what you want about Carl he is consistent. If a team wants to be consistently middle of the road Carl is your man.

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 12:23 PM
Sort of the Lionel Dalton of 2004 equivalent. Say what you want about Carl he is consistent. If a team wants to be consistently middle of the road Carl is your man.

So what will the equivalent of that be for this year? Guess we'll have to wait until about 6/15 to find out.

Mr. Laz
03-10-2006, 12:23 PM
i don't think carl believes in changing coaches and players in the same year either.


doesn't like too much change ... "I believe it scares him".






http://fpw.isoc.net/cyberloin/idols/IdolPics/pic-RobertBlue.jpg

Logical
03-10-2006, 12:26 PM
This quote here, has me convinced it's all about the money. Lamar doesn't want to spend. Oh well. Keep the team the same. Money in your pocket is more important.



This is ok. It's not like we're that bad on defense. Geez, we we're only 26th in the league last year. That's a big improvement. Geez, you've done so much on D, take a break.....relax, you deserve it. Go plan a vacation to the Mayan Riviera.



Oh my. We are going to start Julian Battle next year. I smell it. They're going to go with an injury plagued, rattled DB. Why? Because it is evident Gunther has a boner for him. Julian has barely been on the field since he was drafted, and can't cover without getting away with an illegal contact flag. Oh no the Chiefs are going to experiment using another project at CB. Then people are going to say, "why do we keep converting safeties, and trying to use them as corners?" Oh I smell the return of Bartee, Warfield. AGAIN!



Big mistake.




This is an excuse to cover up for the lack of talent on the defensive side of the ball.



In your dreams. T.O. ain't coming here for what you're asking. Unless, NOBODY in the league signs him. Giving him no choice. Don't see that though.
People are going to accuse you of being me or Laz, get prepared.

Logical
03-10-2006, 12:27 PM
So what will the equivalent of that be for this year? Guess we'll have to wait until about 6/15 to find out.

Yup, I expect one really minor WTF who is this guy before the draft and then an over the hill or problem player signing post June 1st.

htismaqe
03-10-2006, 12:27 PM
i don't think carl believes in changing coaches and players in the same year either.


doesn't like too much change ... it scares him.

The year Vermeil arrived they brought in Green and Holmes and jettisoned Hasty, McGlockton, Wiliams, and Edwards...

TEX
03-10-2006, 12:28 PM
Im confused...do you want KC to not sign players like they did in 2003 or to sign players like they're not going to in 2006?

edit: or do you want them to not spend in odd years since the ones they sign suck and spend in even years when the FA's are a lock?

I want them to use the $$$ that is there to sign players that can help the team regardless of the year. This every-other -year thing isn't working.

Coach
03-10-2006, 12:28 PM
Contracts expired already.

Black, Jordan
Boerigter, Marc
Collins, Todd
Dalton, Lional
Gammon, Kendall
Hall, Carlos
Huard, Damon
Richardson, Tony
Sapp, Benny
Tynes, Lawrence
Washington, Dewayne
Wilkerson, Jimmy

Contracts that will be expiring after the 2006 season.

Allen, Jared
Battle, Julian
Brown, Dee
Cruz, Ronnie
Griffin, Kris
Mitchell, Kawika
Parker, Samie
Sampson, Kevin
Scanlon, Rich
Shields, Will

Perhaps maybe Carl might be trying to resign some players that their contract already expired, and
extend some contracts, especially some of our core young players like Allen, Mitchell? :shrug:

Mr. Laz
03-10-2006, 12:33 PM
The year Vermeil arrived they brought in Green and Holmes and jettisoned Hasty, McGlockton, Wiliams, and Edwards...
and when they brought in goonther the stood pat

bring herm in and they say they are going to stand pat


might be just coincidence :shrug:

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:33 PM
You know what pisses me off about Carl Peterson? In all the years he managed to be here as President/GM, he always builds his teams around the coaches he hires. In essence, whatever they say, will do and go.

He can never step up like a REAL leader and take charge of this organization. I'll bet most of the words that come out of his mouth are him pullin the strings right out of Lamar's hand.

It's been well documented that Carl lets the HC pick the talent he wants about 90% of the time. There have been exceptions. Greg Hill and Larry Johnson to name a couple.

Im not sure I want Carl pick all of our talent, I would prefer the HC, OC and DC doing that, but we can debate that point.

Coach
03-10-2006, 12:35 PM
It's been well documented that Carl lets the HC pick the talent he wants about 90% of the time. There have been exceptions. Greg Hill and Larry Johnson to name a couple.

Im not sure I want Carl pick all of our talent, I would prefer the HC, OC and DC doing that, but we can debate that point.

I was suprised to see that Carl picked Larry Johnson. Fortunately, that one played to our advantage.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:35 PM
I want them to use the $$$ that is there to sign players that can help the team regardless of the year. This every-other -year thing isn't working.

Ok, I think I understand. You want KC to pickup FA's like the 2003 class every single year, then.

Gotcha.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 12:36 PM
Interesting...well, I guess every other year is better than every year like those other three. Considering just how bad KC is at FA, Im not sure if that's a good or bad thing, however.


:spock:

I would suspect it is a bad thing. This team has proven, over and over again they have a hard time building through the draft. They(the Chiefs) have a hard time not just drafting, but even finding role players through the draft.

If it is true that Herm's approach is to build this team through the draft, then I reccommend this team to stop being loyal to their current scouting staff department and recruit some new scouts, and put together a whole new scouting department. It all starts with Lynn Stiles. He needs to go.

I highly doubt Stiles will go though. Another thing, this organization has no balls. They don't fire anybody. So I suspect, Stiles will be here for a while.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:39 PM
:spock:

I would suspect it is a bad thing. This team has proven, over and over again they have a hard time building through the draft. They(the Chiefs) have a hard time not just drafting, but even finding role players through the draft.

If it is true that Herm's approach is to build this team through the draft, then I reccommend this team to stop being loyal to their current scouting staff department and recruit some new scouts, and put together a whole new scouting department. It all starts with Lynn Stiles. He needs to go.

I highly doubt Stiles will go though. Another thing, this organization has no balls. They don't fire anybody. So I suspect, Stiles will be here for a while.

The draft is a bigger crap shoot than FA, IMO.

I think all teams have a hard time in the draft, since I only follow KC's drafts, I have no data to support my opinion.

If you're interested, I'll be happy to forward you an access database that has every draft pick dating back to 1989 and you can run the numbers. Obviously, determining 'bust' or 'success' is a subjective measure, but we might be able to come to some agreement on that.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 12:40 PM
People are going to accuse you of being me or Laz, get prepared.


ROFL ROFL ya probably.

But it doesn't matter. Actually, I want to say you've been pretty cool. I know you don't talk about the Chiefs in the most optimistic way, but you do speak some good words. You tell it like it is sometimes.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:43 PM
But it doesn't matter. Actually, I want to say you've been pretty cool. I know you don't talk about the Chiefs in the most optimistic way, but you do speak some good words. You tell it like it is sometimes.

True...I especially liked his assessment of one Larry Johnson.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 12:44 PM
The draft is a bigger crap shoot than FA, IMO.

I think all teams have a hard time in the draft, since I only follow KC's drafts, I have no data to support my opinion.

If you're interested, I'll be happy to forward you an access database that has every draft pick dating back to 1989 and you can run the numbers. Obviously, determining 'bust' or 'success' is a subjective measure, but we might be able to come to some agreement on that.

I agree. The draft is a crap shoot.

That's okay. But thanx. Too be honest, I've reviewed KC's draft the past 15 years. And they haven't been "cream of crop". Actually they've been pretty baaaad.

Calcountry
03-10-2006, 12:47 PM
The CONSERVATIVE approach has gotten us so far, I can see why Carl stands by it. Who the **** wants a Super Bowl?Only us "non real" fans.

Logical
03-10-2006, 12:48 PM
True...I especially liked his assessment of one Larry Johnson.

I deserved that.:p

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:49 PM
I agree. The draft is a crap shoot.

That's okay. But thanx. Too be honest, I've reviewed KC's draft the past 15 years. And they haven't been "cream of crop". Actually they've been pretty baaaad.

I agree...they have been horrible. However, I would submit the theory that all the other teams are just as bad. Im not inclined to wade through the data, but would be interested to see the results.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 12:52 PM
I agree...they have been horrible. However, I would submit the theory that all the other teams are just as bad. Im not inclined to wade through the data, but would be interested to see the results.

Yeah. You've actually stimulated my curiousity.

Im curious to know how Baaaad we actually drafted in comparison to other teams the last 15 years.

I'd like to compare our past drafts the last 15 years to other teams drafts the last 15 years. And that my friend, is a lot of work to do. ROFL

1punkyQB
03-10-2006, 12:57 PM
I think all teams have a hard time in the draft, since I only follow KC's drafts, I have no data to support my opinion. It seems most do. The only other team I follow closely is Atlanta and they've hit (player made roster, contributed) on almost every draft pick the past two years, which is when they brought in Rich McKay. CP doesn't have to duplicate that, but his batting avg. seems pretty low by comparison.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 12:58 PM
Yeah. You've actually stimulated my curiousity.

Im curious to know how Baaaad we actually drafted in comparison to other teams the last 15 years.

I'd like to compare our past drafts the last 15 years to other teams drafts the last 15 years. And that my friend, is a lot of work to do. ROFL

Yup...it is a lot of work. There were ~4500 picks from 1989-2005. If you limit it to just first round, 510 picks.

Other things to consider is, does a bust at First round, 30th pick rank the same as a First round, 1st pick? What if a player leaves the drafting team for another team, then becomes a 'success'?

I think we'd have to use the draft pick 'value chart' to give each pick a point value...then if they were deemed a success, put that value into a list and add all the values up to see who got the highest score.

Mr. Laz
03-10-2006, 01:06 PM
if all teams are just as bad at player personnel then why are we the ones who haven't won a playoff game in 12 years?

aren't we like in the bottom 3 of the league in terms of futility?


Kansas city
Detroit
Arizona

Logical
03-10-2006, 01:08 PM
Yup...it is a lot of work. There were ~4500 picks from 1989-2005. If you limit it to just first round, 510 picks.

Other things to consider is, does a bust at First round, 30th pick rank the same as a First round, 1st pick? What if a player leaves the drafting team for another team, then becomes a 'success'?

I think we'd have to use the draft pick 'value chart' to give each pick a point value...then if they were deemed a success, put that value into a list and add all the values up to see who got the highest score.

Sounds like a job for cdcox and one of his great software statistical analysis programs.

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 01:08 PM
if all teams are just as bad a player personnel then why are we the ones who haven't won a playoff game in 12 years?

Just lucky, I guess... :shrug:

Seriously, that's a good question and would seem obvious initially, but remember, KC made the playoffs, it seemed, every season in the 90's but failed to win but 2 times.

Making the playoffs has got to count for something...I mean, the team cannot be the worst drafting team in the league and still make the playoffs consistently.

Dunno, though, it could turn out to be true, that KC is in fact the worst.

RedThat
03-10-2006, 01:16 PM
Yup...it is a lot of work. There were ~4500 picks from 1989-2005. If you limit it to just first round, 510 picks.

Other things to consider is, does a bust at First round, 30th pick rank the same as a First round, 1st pick? What if a player leaves the drafting team for another team, then becomes a 'success'?

I think we'd have to use the draft pick 'value chart' to give each pick a point value...then if they were deemed a success, put that value into a list and add all the values up to see who got the highest score.

Sounds good to me KCTitus. Are you gonna create the chart?

KCTitus
03-10-2006, 01:23 PM
Sounds good to me KCTitus. Are you gonna create the chart?

The chart already exists...it's used by clubs to determine the relative value when trading picks. I dont have a copy.

cdcox
03-10-2006, 02:01 PM
Sounds like a job for cdcox and one of his great software statistical analysis programs.

It's really tempting. The statistical evaluations of the draft results would be a blast once all the data were in the database. Parsing in the draft picks from the data base probably would be manageable. The real rub would be player evaluations. Pro-football-reference would at least provide the number of years a player stayed with the team and how many probowl years they had. I wish it indicated how many games a player was a starter. For skill players, there is a ton more information that could be included in the metric. I think injury data would also be useful, but very difficult to track down. Maybe you just assume it affects all teams equally over the long run.

I started this post to explain why it would be nearly impossible. Now I consider it in the realm of an interesting problem.

cdcox
03-10-2006, 02:08 PM
The chart already exists...it's used by clubs to determine the relative value when trading picks. I dont have a copy.


Here is a link to the chart. I think it has value in the first round, but it gets pretty stupid later on. Does anyone really believe that the 224th pick has half the value of the 216th pick? I'd probably build my own based on player performance in each round over the years.

http://www.thehuddlereport.com/NickelPackage/tradevaluechart.htm

htismaqe
03-10-2006, 02:29 PM
They're only mediocre on the field.

What's funny is that people actually accept Carl's "every other year" BS and act like it's the only way you can run an NFL organization. Oh but wait, that's right, the Chiefs play in tiny farmtown KC so Lamar doesn't have any extra money to spend. Chiefs fans have two choices....get season tickets for the "Arrowhead experience" and be a real fan, or go find another team to root for.

Don't let the fact that several teams use the "every other year" excuse as well ruin a perfectly good bitch session.

shaneo69
03-10-2006, 04:24 PM
Don't let the fact that several teams use the "every other year" excuse as well...

Only the bad ones.

Logical
03-10-2006, 04:35 PM
Don't let the fact that several teams use the "every other year" excuse as well ruin a perfectly good bitch session.

Do you have some specific examples of which other teams and maybe an article on the subject? Or is this just speculation?

Mr. Laz
03-10-2006, 04:44 PM
Don't let the fact that several teams use the "every other year" excuse as well ruin a perfectly good bitch session.
is this "every other year" method working for the chiefs????


**** no it isn't


so maybe carl should pull that huge stick outa his ass and try a another way.

TEX
03-10-2006, 05:55 PM
Don't let the fact that several teams use the "every other year" excuse as well ruin a perfectly good bitch session.

So what. Does that make it right for the CHIEFS to do the same thing? I'd try and do something EVERY year (like Denver) because you have a definate advantage over those that upgrade every other year. To me, if you know your rival is going to stand pat, you have a definate advantage.

Rausch
03-10-2006, 06:01 PM
The chart already exists...it's used by clubs to determine the relative value when trading picks. I dont have a copy.

Don't waste your time.

There's no section on there that fully describes when a pick is "pissed away."

TEX
03-10-2006, 06:02 PM
Ok, I think I understand. You want KC to pickup FA's like the 2003 class every single year, then.

Gotcha.

Not really. That class was a bust. When you sign Clemons, Barber, and McCleon, and McCleon contributes the most, that kind of says someting about that effort. I hate the fact that we're in this every other year mode. It's so regular that rivals can plan on the thinking.

TEX
03-11-2006, 02:26 PM
I thought not spending all our money last year was going to help this year?

htismaqe
03-11-2006, 03:45 PM
So what. Does that make it right for the CHIEFS to do the same thing? I'd try and do something EVERY year (like Denver) because you have a definate advantage over those that upgrade every other year. To me, if you know your rival is going to stand pat, you have a definate advantage.

It's not about what's right. It's about what's REAL.

Several teams use the "every other year" rule. It's a reality for teams that don't have alot of non-shared (ie. luxury box) revenue. Not all of them are "losers". Indy seems to be pretty successful. Even the Patriots and Steelers aren't active every year. In fact, the most activity the Steelers ever have is letting their own guys GO.

Other owners are willing to dip into their own pockets, above and beyond revenue generated by the football team, when it's necessary.

Lamar Hunt is not.

The difference between the Chiefs and the other teams that use the same philosophy is pretty easy to identify.

Teams with small cash budgets have to build primarily through the draft. The Patriots and Steelers are good at it. The Chiefs are not.

TEX
03-11-2006, 04:34 PM
It's not about what's right. It's about what's REAL.

Several teams use the "every other year" rule. It's a reality for teams that don't have alot of non-shared (ie. luxury box) revenue. Not all of them are "losers". Indy seems to be pretty successful. Even the Patriots and Steelers aren't active every year. In fact, the most activity the Steelers ever have is letting their own guys GO.

Other owners are willing to dip into their own pockets, above and beyond revenue generated by the football team, when it's necessary.

Lamar Hunt is not.

The difference between the Chiefs and the other teams that use the same philosophy is pretty easy to identify.

Teams with small cash budgets have to build primarily through the draft. The Patriots and Steelers are good at it. The Chiefs are not.

I agree with that. My point is if you're not good at building through the draft, try and do something every year to ,ake up for it.

Another problem is the Chiefs havn't spent $$$ wisely either. The FA class of '03 is all gone and none made a significant impact. When you miss like that, staying pat the next year is a big blunder. (Yes, I know we unwisley signed our own crappy _efensive FA's.) I wonder if last year's "haul" will suffer the same fate. It's biggest prize, Kendrell Bell, was/is damaged goods and Sammy Knight is on his last leg. Maybe Carlos Haul can stay healthy and contribute significantly this season? So, all I'm saying is I'd prefer the opportunity to be able to spend a bit every year, rather than shoot our wad every other one.