Justin Houston Contract Rumor...

[ChiefGator]

Yeah, yeah.. Bleacher report.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...ey-from-chiefs

Says Justin Houston wants a JJ Watt type contract from the Chiefs. Watt signed a six year 100 million deal with Houston.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/houston-texans/j.j.-watt/

Those numbers actually seem fairly reasonable, assuming Houston keeps at his trade. Probably ends up being a little bit less guaranteed, but I could certainly live with that salary cap hit year-by-year.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by ILChief

A. Houston is worth it and Albert isn't
B. Hali is reaching the end so we don't really have a replacement. Ford is Hali's replacement, not Houston's

I agree with both. Hell, I'm not even comfortable with Ford as Hali's replacement but it is what it is.

It's no secret the Chiefs feel like they have some leverage because they at least have a candidate to replace him in Ford...

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Rausch

KC has to overpay to get a top talent. It just is what it is.

And someone will pay Houston. He's in the prime of his career and almost broke the NFL sack record while also being used in coverage - not an every down pass rusher.

The Chiefs have been getting a steal with Houston for years and now that he's earned his payday we still want him for less than he can make elsewhere. That's not going to happen...

Maybe on the open market, but in the end virtually every team is in the same boat on the open market. Sometimes they'll have a QB that draws talent to their squad. Sometimes they'll have a coach that people want to play for or a recent run of success.

But at least 2/3 of the teams in the NFL are similarly situated in the FA market. Pure market size doesn't mean as much as it used to now that the NFL has become such a national monolith. The NFL is 'the shield' now; it's not a regional game. If you're a star, you're a star and it's regardless of where you play. Peyton Manning became a national icon from Indianapolis.

In the open market, you're fighting uphill. The way teams succeed is to simply keep guys off the open market and that's the benefit of the franchise tag. Sure, Houston could go to a 'nicer city' and get paid....in 2 more years. 2 years is an eternity in this league. 2 years ago Justin Houston was just a nice OLB prospect with a 10 sack season in his first full year as a starter. He was...what...Alex Okafor? Junior Galette? That's how fast the landscape changes in this league.

2 years is a looooong time to wait to set yourself up for life. So yeah, Houston could choose to pass on the long-term security, play for 2 years under the tag and then go chasing money in a major market. But he won't. If the Chiefs offer him anywhere close to what he'd get on the open market, he'll take it.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Rausch

How often are players tagged two years in a row genius?...

Dorsey won't want to tag him two years in a row. If you're going to keep a guy long term, that move doesn't make any sense. It creates no cap flexibility and the team will want to get his contract off the books cap wise quickly.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by MGM

He is man but, the fact is that doesn't matter.

Look at Ed Reed. He was amazing back there at safety. He got a ton of picks. He never got shut down corner back money. Why? Because he played safety and not corner. His impact on the game was every bit as influential as a shut down corner if not more.

A pick isn't a pick and a sack isn't a sack. It's about position.

A shutdown corner can shutdown an entire side of the field. In no way are corner/safety, DE/OLB similar.

Houston has more sacks over the past two seasons, 24 fee tackles, 8 fewer passes defensed, and one fewer INT, in 5 fewer games.

[booger]

Originally Posted by Baconeater

I'm more worried about someone going deliverance on my ass.

Storm lake you got the Laotian maffia to worry about. Fort Dodge stay away from the flats. Otherwise meth is popular there. Little towns in between have nice folks. Stay out of the corn fields no matter what! Just tell them you better recognize, I know booger from cp if u get caught in any tough spots. Plus wear a condom while riding. Bird flu in the counties up there on some of the chicken and turkey farms. Don't do nothing I wouldn't do you'll be fine

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Dorsey won't want to tag him two years in a row. If you're going to keep a guy long term, that move doesn't make any sense. It creates no cap flexibility and the team will want to get his contract off the books cap wise quickly.

Exactly what I'm saying. There's either a long term deal or he's gone after this year.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Rausch

I agree with both. Hell, I'm not even comfortable with Ford as Hali's replacement but it is what it is.

It's no secret the Chiefs feel like they have some leverage because they at least have a candidate to replace him in Ford...

I don't think the Chiefs see Ford as any kind of viable replacement for Houston.

Houston's ability to set the edge against the run is highly undervalued by fans, IMO, but GMs and coaches recognize that value.

Ford is not someone you can line up on the left side and expect to even come close to Houston's productivity and versatility.

[MGM]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Dorsey won't want to tag him two years in a row. If you're going to keep a guy long term, that move doesn't make any sense. It creates no cap flexibility and the team will want to get his contract off the books cap wise quickly.

No, it probably won't happen. Dorsey's business contract plan here is pretty easy to speculate about. He is offering him a contract that would make him the highest paid linebacker right now. He probably won't take it because he wants to paid like a d-linemen. Dorsey is making a good educated guess that he won't have the numbers he had last year and will offer the same contract next March. He bets Houston will see the light and take the deal.

I think Dorsey will meet him in the middle. I mean if he really wants $50 million guaranteed he will get that. It just won't be a $100 million dollar contract. It will be $70-80 million with $50 million guaranteed.

There is no reason for Dorsey to give him Watt money right now. No GM would do that right now. Those kind of deals get done in March.

[thabear04]

Originally Posted by MGM

I wish we had kept Albert over Bowe back then.

Why so we can have Branden Albert for a few games so he can get hurt.

[Red Dawg]

Houston will sign if he wants to be here. No doubt he has been offered probably 50 mil guranteed or close to it. If he declines it to make an attempt at FA next year he will get less because he will not have another 22 sack year.

I will say it again. KC will not tag him again so this is it. If he wants to stay he will take the huge pile of cash and stay. It's a big contract and I hope he wants it but he may want to play elsewhere for less money.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Dorsey won't want to tag him two years in a row. If you're going to keep a guy long term, that move doesn't make any sense. It creates no cap flexibility and the team will want to get his contract off the books cap wise quickly.

Houston's good enough that any contract that creates 'cap flexibility' will be a mistake, IMO.

This isn't a situation where a tagging a guy gives him an inflated figure in year 1 like it does with some QBs. No, Justin Houston's fair market AAV is probably in the $16 million range. If you try to put a $9 million cap hit in year 1 and an $11 million cap hit in year two, you're going to have to have done so via a severely backloaded salary structure. So in year 3 when you're looking at trying to get Poe and Kelce re-signed (maybe Fisher) and Maclin's contract has gone up, you're now going to have to pay the piper for the money you saved in years 1 and 2.

So let's say you've gone with a 6 yr deal with a $48 million signing bonus for simple math. If you want to get year 1 at a $9 million figure, you're giving him a $1 million salary and then $3 million in year 2. Figuring that 6/$96 million would be his FMV (and that's probably low), you now have to give him $42 million in salary over the next 4 years. I'm thinking the $18-22 million cap charges in 17-20 don't sound like a lot of fun to deal with.

This deal shouldn't be backloaded. It will severely hamstring the team's financial standing going forward. If you're not looking to backload a long-term deal, well then you're really not losing anything by simply tagging him 2 years either.

[MGM]

Originally Posted by aturnis

A shutdown corner can shutdown an entire side of the field. In no way are corner/safety, DE/OLB similar.

Houston has more sacks over the past two seasons, 24 fee tackles, 8 fewer passes defensed, and one fewer INT, in 5 fewer games.

Ok, we see it differently. The same thing happened when Jimmy Graham wanted to be paid like a wide receiver. The same thing happened to Terrell Suggs a few years ago. Both players argued they played "hybrid" type positions.

I am just telling you the reality of the situation. I have tried to explain it the best I can. This has everything to do with position and not production. That is the hold up.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Maybe on the open market, but in the end virtually every team is in the same boat on the open market. Sometimes they'll have a QB that draws talent to their squad. Sometimes they'll have a coach that people want to play for or a recent run of success.

But at least 2/3 of the teams in the NFL are similarly situated in the FA market. Pure market size doesn't mean as much as it used to now that the NFL has become such a national monolith. The NFL is 'the shield' now; it's not a regional game. If you're a star, you're a star and it's regardless of where you play. Peyton Manning became a national icon from Indianapolis.

In the open market, you're fighting uphill. The way teams succeed is to simply keep guys off the open market and that's the benefit of the franchise tag. Sure, Houston could go to a 'nicer city' and get paid....in 2 more years. 2 years is an eternity in this league. 2 years ago Justin Houston was just a nice OLB prospect with a 10 sack season in his first full year as a starter. He was...what...Alex Okafor? Junior Galette? That's how fast the landscape changes in this league.

2 years is a looooong time to wait to set yourself up for life. So yeah, Houston could choose to pass on the long-term security, play for 2 years under the tag and then go chasing money in a major market. But he won't. If the Chiefs offer him anywhere close to what he'd get on the open market, he'll take it.

He's not going to get tagged and play under it two years in a row. I don't know why people think this. The only reason we'd tag him a second year is to try and trade him and get something in return. He won't play a 2nd year under the tag.

And it's not about market size - it's about the franchise. Not only has this team not been in a SB it hasn't even won a single playoff game in over 20 years. On top of that there are teams in states that don't pay state income tax. That may seem small but it's a lot of money when you make millions. On top of this we're talking about a player who feels like he's been underpaid and frankly is a little pissed he's not getting what he thinks he deserves.

[Eleazar]

Originally Posted by MGM

I wish we had kept Albert over Bowe back then.

Why? At least Bowe was nice enough to get busted for drugs and let us out of his contract.

[O.city]

The total money is basically eye candy these days.