Law has already turned down a 1 year contract worth 2.5 million...which is more than we have to offer him.

Getting an injury settlement from Maz and Barber, along with resturcturing a contract or two will free up more than enough to get Law here now. I'm not saying it's definatly going to happen. But, I am saying that's it's VERY possible to fit him under the cap this year. Why people act as if this signing is impossible for the organization to achieve is beyond me.

Not a chance in hell. We have not even signed our draft picks and he wants a ton of cash that we don't have.

Maz likely will pass his physical, so injury settlement will be out of the question.

An injury settlement with Barber will free up about 2.75 million, which barely scares the 2.5 he already turned down.

Who are you going to restructure? Not Holmes, Gonzo, or Shields. Maybe Green, but not likely considering this is the first year he is actually getting paid what he is worth. Easy to suggest, but can you actually name very many players that are both willing and deserving of restructure?

Obviously I don't know who the players are that would be willing to restructure their contracts. But, according to Lynn Stiles it IS possible to get him here depending on how much money the front office wants to defer. I'm fairly sure he has a clue about the financial side of the team. So if he says it's possible, then it's possible.....

Where did he say it was possible?

I have a hard time believing he knows whether it's possible or not, considering no one knows what it will take to sign him yet.

He was on the radio doing an interview just the other day along with Gunther and Lamars son. He was asked whether it was possible to get Law under contract. And his response was yes, it's just a matter of how much money the Chiefs want to defer to the furure (basically putting us in cap hell a few years down the road).

Derrick Johnson's contract could conceivably influence it. He's got to fit within the confines of the rookie cap this year, but that doesn't influence his cap number any other season. Because of the CBA extension running out, his contract can't be spread out more than 5 years. But, without even considering the fact that he may be starting and was expected to be a top-10 pick, odds are his agents going to want the same kind of signing bonus 15th picks usually get. Which means he's going to cost more/year than a player would any other year. Which is a future ramification to keep in mind when we're working out a long term contract with a player like Law.

Add that to the major contracts already on the books...

We are probably going to be in cap hell in a few years anyway. You want to make it worse? I wonder how you'll feel in 3 years when following the Oakland Raiders blueprint gets us a 3-13 season....

Nobody wants to be in cap hell. But, we have several of our top players getting up in the years. The window is closing folks... Are you going to be satisifed going into the season with a glaring weakness? Or would you rather take the hit in a few years and have a legit shot at the Superbowl? The question doesn't seem all that hard to me.

I guess thats where we differ in opinion. I don't see the loss of Warfield for a few games as a "glaring weakness" worthy of doing a naked cannonball into cap hell.

It's only going to be 4 games at the most. To me, you treat that like an injury. You don't fuck your entire future over it.

If this team is going to be worth a sh*t in the play-offs, they're going to have to be able to win a few of these games. We won 7 games last year with McCleon as our #2 CB, and we didn't have Bell, Knight, Surtain, and Johnson. My feeling is this team will be better whether we have Warfield or not. I'm not ready to cut off my head to cure my headache.