If we can bring Clemons in on a low cost deal, I'm all for it.

Walker called him "average" and that the Dolphins wanted a game changer

average and now hopefully cheap/low cost would be perfect for the Chiefs though,

if guys like Byrd, Ward, Whitner are too expensive/bank breakers then if you like PFF, they have him graded out as the 5th best FA safety

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...gent-safeties/

4.1 @ 1150 snaps? to compare Kendrick Lewis had a -2.8 at 1072 snaps and Demps had a -4.4 at 600 some snaps. Absolutely horrible. Clemons and Abdullah would be perfect.

We need to look at what Seattle's secondary did, and the personal they had, and just replicate that as much as possible.

What's sad is I really felt like we had something like that for the first half of the season – and then it completely fell apart. I don't know how that happens.

Seattle actually rotates their d-line and secondary and our DC just watches paint dry.

I don't want to see Hali, Houston, and Poe get more than 70% of the defensive snaps next season. That means drafting a good OLB though who can swing to either side and give both players some rest.

Not facing NFL caliber QBs will make any team look good.

May want to get a CP patent on Chris cLemons.

This.

We started sucking when vet QBs figured out that our coverage wasn't actually very good and so they always threw the ball before our pass rush even had a chance to get to them.

You know what's crazy? If Pioli didn't insist on his ****ing 2-gap 3-4, the Chiefs probably would have run a 4-3 under. I think signs point to Haley wanting to run that scheme, since he brought Clancy Pendergast in and was a very vocal critic of the Tyson Jackson pick.

Why do you keep on saying this when its not true?
Posted via Mobile Device

That's what zilla does.

He sells bullshit.

In Tambas case, for all he's done for the Chiefs I wouldn't be upset if they made him a Chief for life. Rewarding kinda thing.

It's not something you can do very often but in this case I think you could

That's what milkman does. When you don't have an answer, just attack the poster

You can't restructure his current contract because it just means you're on the hook for $14M in 2014 and you make him even more expensive to cut [EDIT: $14M in 2015]

If you offer him a contract extension, you are essentially giving him a contract based on his value today which is a pro bowl outside linebacker. In 2 years, you will negotiate his contract as a 32-33 year old who, who knows, may not be worth much of anything by that point. Who even said he's even worth keeping past 2015?

It depends on how much you're going to pay to let that happen. If he's 33 and is a backup pass rusher at best, I don't want to sink a starting contract on the guy.

What you do, bullshitter, is turn the money from the last years of his current contract into up front money with a signing bonus that can be spread over the life of the extension, which allows you some flexibility to cut him in a couple of years when, theoretically, his play begins to decline.

Or you can, you know, just turn his base salary into a signing bonus instead of giving him an extension...
Posted via Mobile Device

Hali and his agent are not stupid.

If Hali negotiates today, he has complete leverage. They know Hali is pretty much guaranteed $8.25M this year. They know he's uncuttable. And if they negotiate a contract extension, they will have three motives: 1) maximize his signing bonus, which is critical for the twilight years; 2) make sure the signing bonus fully accounts for the $8.25M that are guaranteed anyway, so it's basically like negotiating in $8.25M PLUS a totally new contract for 2015 to 2018 (or whatever end year); 3) since Hali is coming off a pro bowl year and shown no clear signs of decline, they will negotiate his twilight years with that in mind. The Chiefs will likely end up with a contract that has a much higher signing bonus than they want which, despite what you write, means the Chiefs will NOT have good flexibility to cut him in the later years of the contract.

In 2015, the Chiefs have complete leverage because Hali is an easy target to be cut. And you can negotiate a new contract without the baggage of guaranteed money on the existing contract.

Why would you do that? It means you're on the hook for $14M in 2015 and you've now pretty much made that money guaranteed. If we let it ride, we pay $11M today but have flexibility to cut him in 2015 or leverage to renegotiate a much more reasonable extension.

Why?
Posted via Mobile Device

If you let his contract ride, he only costs $2.5M in dead money to cut in 2015.

If you turn today's base salary ($6M plus $2M roster bonus) into bonus money, he will cost $6.5M to cut in 2015. You've pretty much guaranteed a bigger 2015 contract.

The only way a restructure makes sense is if you extend the contract. Unless you restructure twice in 2 years, but I don't know if that's ever actually been done.

Not true at all. Hali Base Salary is 6.25m he's due a Roster Bonus of 2m not sure when that kick's in. If the Chiefs cut him they save 5.5m vs the cap. Hali doesn't have complete leverage.

Unless you think the Chiefs will actually cut Hali, his base salary for this year is pretty much guaranteed, which make his roster bonus pretty much guaranteed. $5.5M is a LOT of dead money for a player as good as Hali still is.

Don't get me wrong i'm with you. Let Hali play this year out cut him next year. Cut him in 2015 and with the 9m you save give it to Houston.

Well, I'm open to an extension. But I'd prefer for that extension to be built for a 33 year old probably well past his prime at that point.

You're the only one talking about ah extension.
Posted via Mobile Device

Didn't I just point out to you how unreasonable it is to talk about a restructure without an extension?

I think i just saw something out of Cleveland saying that keeping Mack is their #1 priority in FA. I think we just have to cross our fingers and hope that Kush steps up at this point.

#Mizzou CB E.J. Gaines says he had an informal interview with the #Chiefs last night. Said they talked about playing in the slot.

Mack?

Hudson is fine. Center is far from a priority.

I don't agree that Hudson is fine. Hudson would be far better suited at guard.

However, I don't think paying someone 60 million is the answer at C.

Kush should be given a shot.

Fine, in that it's not a priority like S and WR.

Center isn't a priority but Hudson isn't 'fine'

No Hudson's not fine. Mack would be a great addition. Give me him over Albert if it came down to it.

Fine enough not to break the bank with Mack.

That would be stupid.

Move him to LG and sit Allen.

I wouldn't pay that either just saying he'd be a nice addition.

Fisher
Hudson
Kush
Schwartz
Stephenson

It may end up being like that.

That's the way it should be.

I don't think anyone noticed how well Kush did in the finale. He was super quick to get set up or to the second level. I think the kid has a chance to be a good player.

Then, look back at Hudson's rookie year when he played left guard (a position he was an all American at at Florida St.) a few games filling in. He was damn good there.

Seriously

They had a left tackle playing right tackle
A left guard playing center
A swing tackle playing left guard

Just end the bs and line up the way they should line up

Fisher (every scout in the world thought this guy was a special talent at left tackle)
Hudson (Stud left guard in college, experience at center will help him make adjustments with Kush)
Kush (very talented guy. A lot higher ceiling than most think.)
Schwartz (guy solidified the right side of the line when he got in the lineup)
Stephenson (at least an above average starter at right tackle, with potential to be top 5)

You'll have to pardon my ignorance. I don't know enough about Hudson. But if Hudson was undersized for Center, isn't that a bigger problem at Guard? The other guy that played well against San Diego was Rokevius Watkins. I think the original reason he was cut was because of work ethic so that's always something.

This really has to be it.

The guys were just gassed. There really is no other way to explain how our pass rush fell off the way it did.
Well, that and no adjustments after teams started game planning for what we were doing. Can't overlook the lack of aggression either.

Regardless, our DBs will struggle if we fail to get pressure again. I'm pretty sure keeping them fresh will help tremendously, though.

Hudson needs to stay at C. That's where he best fits in the NFL...

Source: Cap will be higher than $132 million

Posted by Mike Florio on February 25, 2014, 1:50 PM EST
cash-money-pile-stack-550x556
Reuters
Back when the owners were told that the salary cap would climb from $123 million in 2013 to $126.3 million in 2014, a source with knowledge of the cap calculation said it will be higher.

Now that reports have put the salary cap as high as $132 million for 2014, the same source has said, once again, it will be higher.

Per the source, the cap could be a “few million” higher than $132 million. If this means $3 million more than reported, the cap could be as high as $135 million. That would amount to an 9.75 percent increase over last year, the biggest spike by far since the 2011 labor deal was negotiated.

It’s unknown whether the increase in the cap, which is based on revenues but inevitably is negotiated by the NFL and the NFLPA, will result from efforts to borrow against future cap increases. In past years, the quid pro quo for an increase in the cap has included an agreement by the NFLPA to permit cap penalties to be imposed on the Cowboys and Redskins for treating the uncapped year of 2010 too literally.

A cynic may wonder whether the spike in the cap for 2014 is aimed at helping NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith fend off a 2015 challenge from Sean Gilbert or, possibly, Hall of Famer Derrick Brooks.

Regardless, the cap could be increasing by similar amounts in the future. Per the source, the 2014 bump is expected to become the trend in future years.

The new tv deals are gonna make the salary cap explode. It could be 150 in 2 years.

No. Hudson being undersized at Center is an issue when he goes up against NTs one on one.

I hope our Oline just competes for all the positions next year.


personally i think Hudson's size is a real issue unless you are pulling your center all the time. In this day and age, i would rather just get a real athletic big guy that is mobile enough to move rather than have to deal with helping your center on every play.

Hudson has a utility interior backup would be the best outcome

probably the same for Allen

In a perfect world....

Fisher dominates the competition and wins the LT spot. Hudson slides to LG. Kush shows enough growth to take over the starting center spot. Schwartz is re-signed to play RG. Stephenson excels at RT. Allen moves into the swing tackle position and all we need to do is find a backup OG/C.

what about that backup OG that looked so good in the Charger game?

Rinshaw?

I thought Kush and Rinshaw looked really good in that game.

Rokevious Watkins

This

Yep....like Boss said....Watkins. Add him to the backup spot and we'd be good. I'm not of the mindset that our offensive line is as ****ed as some people think. We need to get Schwartz signed though.

I know one thing. They aren't acting like they are gonna just hand the LT job to Fisher.

They have said that they have him penciled in at rt
They didnt even play him in the playoff game

Watch them take Taylor Lewan at 23.

It'll be WR. Has to be. Or Safety. Does Reid have a long history of 1st rd OL? I'm too lazy to look.

I would say that your understanding of the situation and who has what leverage here is pretty overstated. An extension for Hali would be mutually beneficial because the signing bonus is prorated to the salary cap over the life of the contract. therfore, the net present value of the deal for Hali is higher due to the stacked signing bonus and his costs are defrayed over a longer time period. Meanwhile, you restructure the deal so the salary obligation is minimized and augment it with roster bonuses and voila - both parties win.

Let's just spell out some specific numbers for everyone's understanding.

Tamba signs an extension - 24 million (19 guaranteed) for an extra 3 years. Let's say with a 15 million signing bonus for simplicity.

For the first two years, his signing bonus hit would be his old signing bonus plus 15 million divided by the five years of his contract.

For the remainder of the contract, it would just be the 15 million divided by the five years of his contract.

Therefore, the signing bonus portion of his cap hit would look like:
6M/6M/3M/3M/3M

His salary for the deal could be restructured (13M+9M):
2/2/6/7/7

Roster bonuses:
0/0/2/2/2

Therefore, his cap cost for each year of the deal:
8/8/11/12/12
or if we cut him in '16:
8/8/9

compared to his current cap figures:
11.5/12


Bottom line:

Saves the Chiefs 3.5M this year and 4M next year. He can be cut in 2016 to provide cap savings of 2M.

Hali gets 16M now, 2M over the course of '14 and 2M in 2015. We probably pay him his 9M in 2016, but can cut him.

instead of: 8.5M over the course of '14 and MAYBE 9M over the course of '15

Win. Win. In fact, I would bet you could optimize this deal further for the Chiefs and Hali would take it. It's his last chance for a big score.

I don't think it's going to be a safety. They'll either roll with Commings, Abdullah or sign one of the FA safeties available.

Hali is guarantees 8.25 m this year. Basically.

You are basically asking him to restructure the rest of the deal to a 2-year 10 million dollar contract and a very unguaranteed 2016 as a replacement to his existing one year 11m deal in 2014. There is no way he signs that. Hali will want a deal that makes him tough to cut in his twilight years.

OK, that makes sense. I still worry about his size. We aren't playing zbs anymore and Reid likes 300+ lb mailers.

I really wonder if Hudson is "undersized." I dont think nfl.com or the chiefs website accurately reflect his current weight, which i speculate is closer to 310 lbs.

http://media.al.com/mobile-press-reg...67f7bb38ab.jpg

http://media.al.com/mobile-press-reg...d3c39ab83a.jpg

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.n...33455633_n.jpg

Although I am open to competition, I too believe Hudson should stay at Center. It seems he has done a good job with the line calls.

http://www.kansas.com/2013/12/13/317...ps-chiefs.html

People need to stop talking about Hudson as if he is undersized.

He is fine, size wise, for a starting center in the NFL.

Actually we went back to ZBS in the 2nd half of the season and the Oline looked better after the change.


dunno what we will do next year

Then he's weak and needs to start eating his spinach.

He's a center.

His job is to make the right calls, and seal off his guy.

Centers are rarely, if ever, maulers.

I disagree

Centers are not the catchers of the NFL, it matters what they do other than 'call the game'. Having a center that always needs help really hurts in short yardage.

We need an upgrade at center. Not a "catcher" calling the game. Our interior line sucked.

That last sentence is a load of shit.

Bullshit

NOTE: Assumed discount rate for all NPV calculations is 5%, which is pretty conservative.

Your first statement is simply not true. Contracts in the NFL aren't fully guaranteed. He may have a portion of his salary that is guaranteed, but I doubt it. I would bet his guaranteed years are already behind him.

Your second statement is also simply not true. Hali would have 19 million in guaranteed money in my second scenario of which, he would get 15 upfront. His 2014 and 2015 salaries would also be guaranteed. This deal is based upon the figures Terrell Suggs got from the Ravens. And Hali probably wouldn't command as much as Suggs would in the open market.

Also, if Hali wants a deal that makes him tough to cut in his twilight years, he simply won't get it. He is 30 years old and already has lost a step. It's not just about what he wants, but what he can get. In my contract, he gets a deal with a guaranteed NPV of 18,719, a probable NPV of 25,630 and a possible NPV of 40,086.

That compares favorably to a deal with a NPV (assuming he is retained this year and cut next year) of 8,095 with a possible NPV of which would be that plus the NPV of whatever he could get on the open market after that.

I mean, just crunch the numbers.
In thousands
My contract offer, possible scenarios:
2 years @ NPV of 18,719 + NPV of whatever he can get in the market at age 32 (100% probability of getting this money)
or 3 years @NPV of 25,629 + NPV of whatever he can get in the market at age 33 (80% probability of getting this money)
or 4 years @NPV of 33,033 +NPV of whatever he can get in the market at age 34 (20% probability of getting this money)
or 5 years @NPV of 40,086 + NPV of whatever he can get in the market at age 35 (5% probability of getting this money)

Or his current deal, possible scenarios:
0 years + NPV of whatever he can get in the open market at the age of 30 (5% probability of this scenario)
1 year @ NPV of 8,095 + NPV of whatever he can get in the open market at age 31 (95% probability of getting this money)
2 year @ NPV of 16,258 + NPV of whatever he can get in the open market at age 32 (25% probability of getting this money)

I mean, the deal I propose is categorically better.

Hell, let's compare this to Terrell Suggs deal.

Terrell Suggs deal is structured such that he can be cut in 2016 for 0.2M in cap savings, cut in 2017 for 1.8M in cap savings or cut in 2018 for 4M in cap savings.
Again, in thousands
2 year NPV of his deal: 15,580
3 year NPV of his deal: 19,468 (probably won't be cut.)
4 year NPV of his deal: 22,759 (maybe 50% chance of not being cut?)
5 year NPV of his deal: 25,893 (maybe 25% chance of not being cut?)

Bump for the sake of my edit.

Hali's contract in 2014 is basically guaranteed. Unless you think the Chiefs would take a $6M cap hit this year to cut him with no backup plan.

I'm going to cut out all the stuff you wrote about NPV because it's long and has no place here. NPV is worthless and overcomplicated. Hali doesn't care about the NPV of his contract. He cares about how much money he is guaranteed, and how much money MIGHT be guaranteed. Period. There's no reason for him to care about the value of his contract in years where he knows he'll be cut anyway.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Source: Cap will be $133 million per team <a href="http://t.co/u2GSiIHKAc">http://t.co/u2GSiIHKAc</a></p>&mdash; ProFootballTalk (@ProFootballTalk) <a href="https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/statuses/439190619911507968">February 28, 2014</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Any idea on where that puts us? Around $8 million right now?

http://overthecap.com/teamcap.php?Team=Chiefs&Year=2014

They have us at 122m

Thats idiotic.

Is it?

IS IT!?!?

Gotta admit, $12m is going to make things super interesting. The good news is that we don't have to do any restructuring. And we can still extend Berry and net us another $3-4m.

The main problem is, Alex Smith is going to eat up at least half of that cap room. Then it's going to be a bunch of value signings.

This team will still need to improve through the draft.

I wonder if they restructure Colquitt's deal.

If I ran the world, I'd restructure Fasano.

$4m/year is highway robbery for what he's giving us.

Awesome, it's good that we will get more room to spend.

If I ran the world, Fasano's contract would be way down on my list of things to fix.

Why? He already accounts for 8mil under his current deal. Unless you think he's going to account for $14+ mil this year (which he won't), you're wrong.