Chiefs Chiefs forced to spend $20 million to meet new salary floor? - Page 14

FloridaMan88 · 07-15-2011, 07:54 AM

So it appears from most reports that the agreed upon 2011 salary cap will be $120 million with the salary floor constituting AT LEAST (and this could be increased) 90% of the salary cap (about $108 million)

Most reports had the Chiefs payroll last season near $90 million.

This means that the Chiefs will be forced to spend about $20 million just to meet the salary floor.

Clark's Chiefs will be FORCED to pursue an aggressive approach in free agency.

milkman · 07-16-2011, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I think if you're a QB and you have two receivers who could be excellent, an excellent receiving tight end, and 1 or 2 backs out of the backfield who are very effective with screens, and you still claim you need an all-world receiver, you've got problems.

If the Chiefs field a top 5 defense, a top 5 running game, and the QB can't win games (even with 3 very good receivers), then we're doomed no matter what. I agree that without good QB play, we're fighting an uphill battle. The problem is, with your scenario, we're putting all our eggs in Cassel's basket. At least with my scenario, you can protect a bad or young QB (see Sanchez) if you choose to develop one, and you may even be able to protect an average QB into the Super Bowl. In my scenario, even if you lose Cassel, the Chiefs have a chance to quickly turn things around.

No, I am not putting all my eggs in one basket.

I believe that Belcher is going to continue to progress, and I'm talking about spending some money to upgrade the NT position in front of him.

And,once again, I also think a reliable slot receiver is more valuable to this offense and to Cassel than you do.

That's a guy that Cassel will utilize to move the chains, moreso than the two guys on the outside.

Titty Meat · 07-16-2011, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

No, I am not putting all my eggs in one basket.

I believe that Belcher is going to continue to progress, and I'm talking about spending some money to upgrade the NT position in front of him.

And,once again, I also think a reliable slot receiver is more valuable to this offense and to Cassel than you do.

That's a guy that Cassel will utilize to move the chains, moreso than the two guys on the outside.

It's too bad you don't usually sign guys who will start off on PUP because what you described is Steve Smith. He's not as fast as Breaston but the guy is a master at moving the chains and making catches on 3rd downs. I can't stat it enough how much I would love to get him. It's a must we get a great slot guy because as good as Bowe is he's not always consistent and you can't rely on a rookie WR his first year.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 07-16-2011, 06:18 PM

Defense is NOT the problem, FFS.

**BossChief** · 07-16-2011, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini

It's too bad you don't usually sign guys who will start off on PUP because what you described is Steve Smith. He's not as fast as Breaston but the guy is a master at moving the chains and making catches on 3rd downs. I can't stat it enough how much I would love to get him. It's a must we get a great slot guy because as good as Bowe is he's not always consistent and you can't rely on a rookie WR his first year.

Not only will he start on pup, he doesn't know the offense and cant do much on pup to learn it.

He also adds a similar weapon to what we already have, while Breaston would add a deep threat with consistent hands.

Breaston would be a better fit.

JMO

**BossChief** · 07-16-2011, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan

Defense is NOT the problem, FFS.

To win playof games, we absolutely MUST get stronger at the POA in those a gaps.

That goes for both sides of the ball, but I think we did exactly that with the Hudson pick.

ChiefsCountry · 07-16-2011, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

So you want to give up draft picks and a huge contract to sign an inside backer?

It sounds even more stupid when 2012 draft is going to be loaded at the ILB position.

**BossChief** · 07-16-2011, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I think if you're a QB and you have two receivers who could be excellent, an excellent receiving tight end, and 1 or 2 backs out of the backfield who are very effective with screens, and you still claim you need an all-world receiver, you've got problems.

If the Chiefs field a top 5 defense, a top 5 running game, and the QB can't win games (even with 3 very good receivers), then we're doomed no matter what. I agree that without good QB play, we're fighting an uphill battle. The problem is, with your scenario, we're putting all our eggs in Cassel's basket. At least with my scenario, you can protect a bad or young QB (see Sanchez) if you choose to develop one, and you may even be able to protect an average QB into the Super Bowl. In my scenario, even if you lose Cassel, the Chiefs have a chance to quickly turn things around.

Give me Breaston in the slot and Belcher at lib over Tucker or Horne in the slot and Harris at ilb any day of the week...that's talking as if we wouldn't even hVe to give up anything to get him or pay the huge deal to acquire him.

But, we would, so it's not even close IMO.

Titty Meat · 07-16-2011, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Not only will he start on pup, he doesn't know the offense and cant do much on pup to learn it.

He also adds a similar weapon to what we already have, while Breaston would add a deep threat with consistent hands.

Breaston would be a better fit.

JMO

It's like saying do I wanna bang the supermodel blonde with big tits or the super model brunette with big tits. It's a great position to be in. I agree Breaston would be a better benefit in the short term but I don't think we can use the word "Deep Threat" as long as Cassel is the QB. Both guys have advantages.

Brock · 07-16-2011, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan

Defense is NOT the problem, FFS.

There's a lot of room for improvement there.

ChiefsCountry · 07-16-2011, 06:54 PM

Here is the thing, signing Breaston would actually be a good thing even with Cassel for several reasons. One is Cassel plays better out of the shotgun set. Breaston allows us to go to that more often. Second, Charles is even more dangerous when the field is more spread out. Not to mention our line is not a big powerful line designed for smashmouth football. They are agile and built for open space. This allows them to be even more effective. I really don't see the downsize. We can get by with Belcher at ILB, we can't get by with the shit we have at WR.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 07-16-2011, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock

There's a lot of room for improvement there.

Improvement yes, but it's not the glaring liability at this point.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 07-16-2011, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan

Improvement yes, but it's not the glaring liability at this point.

Eh, I'd say if the defense has a liability, it's at NT.

Teams can run right up the gut on us. I'm not a huge fan of Belcher, and feel he could be upgraded, but NT and Vrabel's spot are much more important.

Let's face it we won 4 games due to defense and/or special teams.

We had one other game where the defense played well and the offense did shit.

We had a playoff game where the defense held as long as they could while the offense kept turning the ball over.

Honestly, besides the soft schedule, the defense is the biggest reason this team went 10-6 last year.

milkman · 07-16-2011, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Eh, I'd say if the defense has a liability, it's at NT.

Teams can run right up the gut on us. I'm not a huge fan of Belcher, and feel he could be upgraded, but NT and Vrabel's spot are much more important.

Think we've got Vrabel's spot covered.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 07-16-2011, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Think we've got Vrabel's spot covered.

With?

(please don't say Studebaker)

milkman · 07-16-2011, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

With?

(please don't say Studebaker)

Gabe Miller.

07-15-2011, 07:54 AM
FloridaMan88 Mahomes: We Are All Witnesses Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Miami, FL Casino cash: $-537094	Chiefs forced to spend $20 million to meet new salary floor? So it appears from most reports that the agreed upon 2011 salary cap will be $120 million with the salary floor constituting AT LEAST (and this could be increased) 90% of the salary cap (about $108 million) Most reports had the Chiefs payroll last season near $90 million. This means that the Chiefs will be forced to spend about $20 million just to meet the salary floor. Clark's Chiefs will be FORCED to pursue an aggressive approach in free agency.
Posts: 49,742

07-16-2011, 06:18 PM	#198
Sweet Daddy Hate Unsparing Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $10004900	Defense is NOT the problem, FFS. __________________ 1. Merciless, severe. 2. Given freely and generously. 100% refusal to overrate 20 year Head Coaches with ZERO **ing rings as a Head Coach. CP's Official Professor of 'Dem Blues for 2019/2020!**
Posts: 77,135

07-16-2011, 06:54 PM	#205
ChiefsCountry The Insider Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Lake of the Ozarks Casino cash: $-1381248	Here is the thing, signing Breaston would actually be a good thing even with Cassel for several reasons. One is Cassel plays better out of the shotgun set. Breaston allows us to go to that more often. Second, Charles is even more dangerous when the field is more spread out. Not to mention our line is not a big powerful line designed for smashmouth football. They are agile and built for open space. This allows them to be even more effective. I really don't see the downsize. We can get by with Belcher at ILB, we can't get by with the shit we have at WR.
Posts: 51,999

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode