ChiefsPlanet - Football Jake Long wants “at least” $10 million per

Page 4 of 7

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

Jake Long wants “at least” $10 million per (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=269377)

RUSH	01-28-2013 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 9357527)

Where have you read that??? I have seen it as anywhere from 15.4 to 15.6 in literally dozens of places.

Quote:

CB: Franchise: $10.668 Transition: $8.939

DE: Franchise: $10.984 Transition: $8.994

DT: Franchise: $8.306 Transition: $6.919

K/P: Franchise: $2.926 Transition: $2.654

LB: Franchise: $9.455 Transition: $8.216

OL: Franchise: $9.660 Transition: $8.560

QB: Franchise: $14.642 Transition: $12.845

RB: Franchise: $8.079 Transition: $6.851

S: Franchise: $6.798 Transition: $5.899

TE: Franchise: $5.962 Transition: $5.105

WR: Franchise: $10.357 Transition: $8.716

http://m.nfl.com/news/0ap1000000117300/

CoMoChief

01-28-2013 05:58 AM

Jake Long made Tamba Hali look stupid a couple years ago IIRC

AustinChief

01-28-2013 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RUSH (Post 9357673)

http://m.nfl.com/news/0ap1000000117300/

I was wrong. I was reading it in every article discussing specific LTs and what they would be owed if franchised and so I assumed that was the number. I was right that if Miami tags him he will get $15.4 million or so...

Quote:

As for the franchise tag, the tender for an offensive lineman in 2012 was worth $9.383 million and will remain in that area as the salary cap is expected to remain flat in 2013. However, that won't matter for Long as his franchise tag would be worth $15.36 million, 120 percent his 2012 cap number of $12.8 million.

Mr_Tomahawk

01-28-2013 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 9355610)

I'd gladly give him $10M per year just to never hear "Luke Joeckel" ever again.

this

htismaqe

01-28-2013 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 9357686)

And BlackBob actually believed that we would TAG Albert and still draft Joeckel at #1 overall...

Amnorix

01-28-2013 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcaj22 (Post 9355598)

His equally stupid friend Michael Lombardi is about to ruin the Browns though

so theres that

This raises an interesting philosophical question -- can you really "ruin" a team like the Browns, which have been a complete mess for over a decade now? There's really nowhere to go but up.

Fat Elvis

01-28-2013 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix (Post 9358105)

This raises an interesting philosophical question -- can you really "ruin" a team like the Browns, which have been a complete mess for over a decade now? There's really nowhere to go but up.

...paging Scott Pioli...

Sorter

01-28-2013 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnorix (Post 9358105)

This raises an interesting philosophical question -- can you really "ruin" a team like the Browns, which have been a complete mess for over a decade now? There's really nowhere to go but up.

Oh, one can always add more kindling and gasoline to an already burning dumpster fire.

DJ's left nut

01-28-2013 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 9357686)

Wow. I never knew that rule.

An interesting note to take from that is that I guess that would place Bowe's franchise figure at about $12.4 million vs. 9.6 for Albert.

$3 million in cap space can do a lot of things for this club. It once again emphasizes my thought that Bowe should be the guy we extend long-term while letting Albert play the season under the franchise tag.

NJChiefsFan

01-28-2013 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis (Post 9358144)

...paging Scott *****...

ROFL Game, set, match.

saphojunkie

01-28-2013 04:59 PM

This is why I ****ing hate the whole "draft Joeckel and your left tackle position is set for the next 10-15 years!"

Bullshit.

Your LT is set for the next four years, until your guy is ready to get his big second contract.

Assuming we can sign Albert for at least four years, what's the ****ing difference? You can't just re-draft a franchise left tackle every four years in perpetuity, constantly avoiding re-signing him as a veteran.

God I hate everyone who thinks the Chiefs should draft joeckel under ANY circumstances except "Branden Albert has spine AIDS."

HotCarl

01-28-2013 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saphojunkie (Post 9359100)

Joeckel would be healthy, and 6 years younger.

Pasta Little Brioni

01-28-2013 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotCarl (Post 9359110)

Joeckel would be healthy, and 6 years younger.

...and an absolute waste of a 2-14 season. Number one overall pick and we don't improve the team one bit with the pick.

Sorter

01-28-2013 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotCarl (Post 9359110)

Joeckel would be healthy, and 6 years younger.

Drafting Joeckel means you're probably going to have your pick of either Manuel or Landry Jones as your franchise QB.

Additionally, I'm curious as to why people are just writing Donald Stephenson off like chopped liver.

Good QBs make their OL better. Barry Richardson didn't give up a sack in the 3 games he played with Orton. That should be all the reasoning you need to take Geno at 1.1

htismaqe

01-28-2013 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotCarl (Post 9359110)

Joeckel would be healthy, and 6 years younger.

You're assuming Albert isn't healthy. We have no proof that he isn't.

Joeckel being 6 years younger means absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:58 PM.

Page 4 of 7

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page