ChiefsPlanet
Page 4 of 10 123 4 5678 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Larry Johnson loses Grievance (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=205453)

orange 04-06-2009 01:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 5644746)
It makes more sense to keep him if he's cheaper now.

We won't find another starting RB as talented this offseason for that money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 5644765)
Unfortunately that won't be the case under any circumstances. If we keep him, we pay him all the money. The only way he's cheaper is if he agrees to renegotiate with the Chiefs. I don't think any of us LJ fans are disillusioned enough to believe he'll do that.

He wants to play here now if he can make that money because he knows he's not going to make it anywhere else. If he makes $1 less, he'd rather do it anywhere but with the Chiefs.
But if they keep him, he's NOT cheaper. He still has the same contract, just not guaranteed - plus the Chiefs have to pay him back money they deducted last year for the suspended game. IF Larry stays on, he will cost the Chiefs MORE than if they had simply honored the contract and not filed the grievance. :doh!:

Mr. Flopnuts 04-06-2009 01:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaChapelle (Post 5644759)
They have money to burn and he showed up to voluntary workouts. Thinking in business terms, I don't see the advantage is cutting him.
We can definitely afford the salary, and the bonus. I just don't see why you bring the grievance in the first place if you intend on keeping him should you win. I want him on the team this year as much as anyone, but it's time to be realistic now.

Mr. Flopnuts 04-06-2009 01:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by orange (Post 5644795)
But if they keep him, he's NOT cheaper. He still has the same contract, just not guaranteed - plus the Chiefs have to pay him back money they deducted last year for the suspended game. IF Larry stays on, he will cost the Chiefs MORE than if they had simply honored the contract and not filed the grievance. :doh!:
Exactly. He's as good as gone.

Kyle DeLexus 04-06-2009 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyCoffey (Post 5644766)
but there's no certainty that we ARE cutting him. We just saved alot of money, we can shop him and if we don't like the options available, pioli and hailey go to LJ and say, here's your chance, play for a trade next year.
How did we save a lot of money? If we cut we save money, if he plays he makes whats in his contract.

LaChapelle 04-06-2009 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 5644797)
We can definitely afford the salary, and the bonus. I just don't see why you bring the grievance in the first place if you intend on keeping him should you win. I want him on the team this year as much as anyone, but it's time to be realistic now.

Realistic?

Is he publicly acting the bitch? Is there even the slimiest chance you could get something for him? Take emotion out of it and you should keep him until proven otherwise.

DeezNutz 04-06-2009 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaChapelle (Post 5644813)
Is he publicly acting the bitch?
At this very moment? Probably...

Mr. Flopnuts 04-06-2009 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaChapelle (Post 5644813)
Realistic?

Is he publicly acting the bitch? Is there even the slimiest chance you could get something for him? Take emotion out of it and you should keep him until proven otherwise.
You get millions of dollars by cutting him. You also get less risk in his off the field trysts for the next season. What's the distraction going to be this year? It's risk vs. reward and I can't think of anyone that would sign LJ to the contract the Chiefs did back in 2007, today. So that being said, as completely emotionless as possible, would you honor his contract right now if you didn't have too? Will Scott Pioli?

acesn8s 04-06-2009 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyCoffey (Post 5644766)
but there's no certainty that we ARE cutting him. We just saved alot of money, we can shop him and if we don't like the options available, pioli and hailey go to LJ and say, here's your chance, play for a trade next year.
I could see that but I don't think that they want anyone tearing down what they are trying to build.

crazycoffey 04-06-2009 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by acesn8s (Post 5644825)
I could see that but I don't think that they want anyone tearing down what they are trying to build.
but it was just in arguement for the cutting him stance in negotiations for trading him. I agree they don't want him, it's just not smart to give him away, right? Unless the wheels have really fallen off and they just cut him.

Really I'm ok eitherway, stay and be a team player, or get cut. That's my personal stance.

LaChapelle 04-06-2009 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 5644824)
You get millions of dollars by cutting him. You also get less risk in his off the field trysts for the next season. What's the distraction going to be this year? It's risk vs. reward and I can't think of anyone that would sign LJ to the contract the Chiefs did back in 2007, today. So that being said, as completely emotionless as possible, would you honor his contract right now if you didn't have too? Will Scott Pioli?
As far as I can tell the money is going to either be spent or wasted. Unless there are conditions in his contract that have to be met on some bonuses. You can recoup next year.

kcxiv 04-06-2009 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 5644751)
I can see him going to either Cleveland or Seattle. Cleveland especially, with Mangini's love of play-action.
Isnt Jamal Lewis in Cleveland still? he's basically the same as LJ. He may even be able to block. lol

orange 04-06-2009 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 5644797)
We can definitely afford the salary, and the bonus. I just don't see why you bring the grievance in the first place if you intend on keeping him should you win. I want him on the team this year as much as anyone, but it's time to be realistic now.
They filed the grievance not to save money, but to get back their leverage.

"Larry - act up again, and we've got something for you."

http://www.thewilbournegroup.com/Spe...wWithHoles.jpg

LaChapelle 04-06-2009 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaChapelle (Post 5644837)
As far as I can tell the money is going to either be spent or wasted. Unless there are conditions in his contract that have to be met on some bonuses. You can recoup next year.

He could actually help them for being fined for being under the cap limit.

crazycoffey 04-06-2009 01:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle DeLexus (Post 5644812)
How did we save a lot of money? If we cut we save money, if he plays he makes whats in his contract.

but when do we HAVE to make that decision? The grievance bought us time if we want to trade him/ or cut him. We essentially could have just saved money from next year if he plays this year. We just opened up several options. Plus it could be a "fire" for LJ, to play mad again.

So if there's no trade options this year, we pay him this years salary. But from winning the grievance we then could be in the same position next year. He does poorly, he's cut. he does very well, he's traded or resigned. Either way we would only HAVE to pay him for this year, not next. Winning the Grievance was awesome in dealing with this diaper wearing primadonna..

kcsam07 04-06-2009 01:27 PM
i dont think this means lj is for sure gone. i really dont think this changes the way the chiefs feel about him me personally im on the fence i like larry as a player but as a person hes an a-hole


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:08 AM.
Page 4 of 10 123 4 5678 Last »
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.