PDA

View Full Version : Let Tony G go, why keep him?


Tuckdaddy
01-08-2007, 08:13 PM
If we can get something for him then great but if he doesn't want to be here then let him roll. I've said it before and I'll say it again. There have been alot of SB winners over the years and none of them have had TG.

We need O-line, DT's and WR's. Not TG. I love Tony, he's maybe my all time favorite Chief but paying him what he wants will be a mistake. He does not give you the red zone threat he use to.

88TG88
01-08-2007, 08:14 PM
He does not give you the red zone threat he use to.
how do u figure

Tuckdaddy
01-08-2007, 08:15 PM
how do u figure


He can't beat double teams like in the past. He moves the chains but has not been that great inside the thirty.

88TG88
01-08-2007, 08:18 PM
because we always hand off to LJ not because he cant

ferrarispider95
01-08-2007, 08:27 PM
I say get rid of him too, if not Carl will over pay.

Kris wilson could be a decent weapon and we can pick up another tight end through the draft or FA.

Tony has a big ego and is going to want top dollar, and from the way it sounds he doesnt mind going elsewhere. He is also pretty self centered and a borderline prick. If he wanted to be a Chief so bad, he would stay.

Rausch
01-08-2007, 08:30 PM
Let one of he best players in the NFL at his position go?

Are you ****ing retarded?

FAX
01-08-2007, 08:33 PM
I think Mr. Tuckdaddy may well be retarded, Mr. Rausch. However, TG is gone if we don't franchise him. And, based on Herm's comments, it appears that the Chiefs would likely be unwilling to match another offer or pay the franchise tag fee. Ergo, the answer to both questions is probably yes.

FAX

ferrarispider95
01-08-2007, 08:41 PM
Let one of he best players in the NFL at his position go?

Are you ****ing retarded?

He maybe one of the best at his position, but how much weight does a a tight end carry in winning a championship. There is a lot more positions that we need and could contribute more to the team.

Plus Carl will end up overpaying, because I dont think he even wants to stay.

Tuckdaddy
01-08-2007, 08:42 PM
Let one of he best players in the NFL at his position go?

Are you ****ing retarded?

How is this retarded? Save the bucks for bigger needs is not retarded. We need DT's, a ton of OL and game breakers at WR not a 30 plus TE that wants to be the highest paid in the league. For the cash he wants we could get two monster DT's or top end O-linemen.

shaneo69
01-08-2007, 08:44 PM
You have to at least franchise him, if for no other reason than to get some kind of draft pick compensation when he decides on a team that he wants to play for.

After the Tait fiasco, I doubt if Carl puts the transition tag on him.

el borracho
01-08-2007, 09:25 PM
1. How do we know what kind of money Gonzalez is asking?
2. How much room under the cap do the Chiefs have? If the answer is "I don't really know" then there is no reason to care what Carl pays Gonzalez. It's not like it is your money.
3. In answer to the question "why keep him?" I would say because he is our best receiver (the only one opposing teams respect) and a very good blocker.
4. Look at his stats; Gonzalez will decline at some point but he has not yet. He may very well have 3 more years of high production. Do you really want to toss that aside?
5. Yes, the Chiefs have many positions of need. Letting Gonzalez go will not fill all those positions.

Honestly, Carl should negotiate first and, if negotiations go poorly, then tag Gonzalez. At that point one would have to look at trade offers (if there were any) and decide what is best for the Chiefs but letting Gonzalez go for nothing is stupid.

blueballs
01-08-2007, 09:33 PM
you have another thread titled Start Croyle in '07
if you want to start Croyle keep Tony G
he would be the rookie QB's best friend

Mecca
01-08-2007, 09:35 PM
Based upon what Vernon Davis and Antonio Gates make and his agent being Tom Condon I got a pretty good idea what he's asking....

Pitt Gorilla
01-08-2007, 09:36 PM
Franchise him. You don't really have to "over-pay" then and you can get picks if someone else does. Win/win.

Sure-Oz
01-08-2007, 09:39 PM
He'll be franchised anyway, so it won't matter.

88TG88
01-08-2007, 09:48 PM
Franchise him. You don't really have to "over-pay" then and you can get picks if someone else does. Win/win.
im not sure but doesnt the franchise tag also mean u have to make that player one of the top paid at that position

KCJohnny
01-08-2007, 09:51 PM
14. Look at his stats; Gonzalez will decline at some point but he has not yet. He may very well have 3 more years of high production. Do you really want to toss that aside?


Tony Gonzales is still at the top of his game, not diminished by age at ALL. His off-season weight program actually contributed to an increase in his brutalizing of defenders in YAC this season. I agree, he has at least 3 years left at PB level with 70-80 catches and 700-1000k yards a year easy.

Mecca
01-08-2007, 09:53 PM
im not sure but doesnt the franchise tag also mean u have to make that player one of the top paid at that position

It would pay him quite a bit because of the recent TE contracts, I believe it's the average of the top 3 at the position.

Pitt Gorilla
01-08-2007, 09:55 PM
im not sure but doesnt the franchise tag also mean u have to make that player one of the top paid at that positionYes, you would. But, for a player of his ability, that's not a terrible thing. He'd have to be an average of the top 3 or something like that, which is probably less than he'd get on the open market.