View Full Version : How many times have you heard a football organization say they are cashed out?
The Bad Guy
10-19-2004, 01:50 PM
I was thinking today about this "we can't afford anyone, we are cashed out" company line that Vermeil, Peterson and everyone else has fed us.
How is this going to change for next year? Every player besides Wesley is under contract for next year. If the Chiefs are cashed out now, then conventional wisdom says they will be next year as well when Trent, Priest, Gonzalez, Roaf and Morton are do substanical pay increases.
It's disheartening to think that Jack Harry may be right that the window of this team is closed.
I've never heard an organization say we have no more money to spend on upgrades.
It's sad to say, but this team deserves to be 1-4 right now when they can't manage the draft, their money, and the free agent moves they do make turn out to be garbage.
The 3 free agents they brought in last year are awful. Barber, McCleon and Holliday all should be cut after this season.
Sure-Oz
10-19-2004, 01:51 PM
It sucks to be chiefs fans right now. I love how everyone in our division has improved and tried to but us. Raiders don't count on that but still.
KCTitus
10-19-2004, 01:59 PM
I really only pay attention to the front office of one team, so I would say I have no idea what other teams say.
I did hear CP once this year talk about that and mentioned that they seem to only be able to do it every other year, which gave me the impression that they would try to do some things next year. Not exactly comforting for this year, however.
Ultra Peanut
10-19-2004, 02:02 PM
I'm honestly beginning to think we're doomed to a Bengals/Cardinals-like franchise for the next ten years.
Rausch
10-19-2004, 02:02 PM
I disagree on Barber, but the rest is pretty much dead on...
Soupnazi
10-19-2004, 02:06 PM
It pains me to say it, but this team won't win a championship until Lamar Hunt is gone.
KCTitus
10-19-2004, 02:07 PM
It pains me to say it, but this team won't win a championship until Lamar Hunt is gone.
I come to this realization about 6 years ago...
KCTitus
10-19-2004, 02:15 PM
Yeesh... what kept ya watchin, then?
Because the moment I say 'F*ck it, I give up', that's the same year they go and win it all.
I've heard Jim Irsay of the Colts say it 21388921643 times this offseason, well maybe not the words "cashed out", but that it's become very difficult to be able to compete financially.
I think we'll be active in the FA market this offseason... don't ask for a zillion reasons, I just do.
Skip Towne
10-19-2004, 02:17 PM
I come to this realization about 6 years ago...
I'm going to figure this out next year.
KCTitus
10-19-2004, 02:18 PM
Well, then... for the sake of the rest of us, would you PLEASE say, "F*ck it. I give up."?
C'mon, take one for the team, here.
LOL...
No way, man!
How is this going to change for next year? Every player besides Wesley is under contract for next year. If the Chiefs are cashed out now, then conventional wisdom says they will be next year as well when Trent, Priest, Gonzalez, Roaf and Morton are do substanical pay increases.
You are missing the key component. Large signing bonuses were paid last year. Not so much this year. The NFL standard is to spend large cash chunks in alternate seasons.
Expect a good FA offseason coming up.
Mr. Laz
10-19-2004, 02:22 PM
How many times have you heard a football organization say they are cashed out?.
never...
i've heard them say that we need stadium improvement to stay competitive etc.
but since the current financial setup in football i dont recall ever hearing it.
it's complete bullchit IMO ... everything i have ever heard was that the chiefs make between 15-30 million dollars in profit every year.
EVEN when the chiefs paid out the big bonuses to Green,Gonzo etc they made a profit.
i think Lamar uses chiefs profits to keep his soccer stuff going
KCTitus
10-19-2004, 02:23 PM
Thanks a lot, jerkface.
See if I ever jump on a grenade for you.
I'd just push you over it in your stupor ;)
BigRedChief
10-19-2004, 02:26 PM
Expect a good FA offseason coming up.
:bong:Put down the crack pipe. :LOL:
Have you looked at the list of FA that King Carl has brought in here? Theres a thread on the front page that has the list. It ain't pretty. but some how he will get it done next year...Don't hold your breath. :shake:
shaneo69
10-19-2004, 02:34 PM
I was thinking today about this "we can't afford anyone, we are cashed out" company line that Vermeil, Peterson and everyone else has fed us.
I've never heard an organization say we have no more money to spend on upgrades.
It's sad to say, but this team deserves to be 1-4 right now when they can't manage the draft, their money, and the free agent moves they do make turn out to be garbage.
The 3 free agents they brought in last year are awful. Barber, McCleon and Holliday all should be cut after this season.
Actually, the Rams have said this to their fans this year. They matched RFA offers to Jeremetrius Butler and Brandon Manumaleuna, then had no more money to spend. They weren't able to replace Grant Wistrom, Brian Young, Kyle Turley, Dave Wohlabaugh, or Travis Fisher via UFA or trade, but they've got by nonetheless. Of course, their cap problems come from paying players who took them to two Super Bowls. Carl can't use that excuse.
Calcountry
10-19-2004, 02:55 PM
It pains me to say it, but this team won't win a championship until Lamar Hunt is gone.
I agree. He has only won ONE Super Bowl and he has owned the team the entire time. Maybe we should trade for the Saints owner.
Calcountry
10-19-2004, 02:58 PM
never...
i've heard them say that we need stadium improvement to stay competitive etc.
but since the current financial setup in football i dont recall ever hearing it.
it's complete bullchit IMO ... everything i have ever heard was that the chiefs make between 15-30 million dollars in profit every year.
EVEN when the chiefs paid out the big bonuses to Green,Gonzo etc they made a profit.
i think Lamar uses chiefs profits to keep his soccer stuff going
How to fire Carl, Vote no on that stadium upgrade issue that is on the ballot. lmao.
BTW, I hear Sacramento is looking for another franchise. :p
The Bad Guy
10-19-2004, 04:01 PM
You are missing the key component. Large signing bonuses were paid last year. Not so much this year. The NFL standard is to spend large cash chunks in alternate seasons.
Expect a good FA offseason coming up.
Who did they pay large bonuses to? Hicks, Browning, Woods, Dunn and Wesley together didn't total even 9 million in bonus money.
Mr. Laz
10-19-2004, 04:04 PM
How to fire Carl, Vote no on that stadium upgrade issue that is on the ballot. lmao.
BTW, I hear Sacramento is looking for another franchise. :p
yea, because the chiefs' fans only have 2 choices
support/cheer and call Carl Peterson their King
or
be critical of the job he's doing and lose their football team
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Who did they pay large bonuses to? Hicks, Browning, Woods, Dunn and Wesley together didn't total even 9 million in bonus money.
He was saying that we didn't spend that much this year, the big money was spent two years ago when we had to deal with Trent, Priest, Barber, Holliday, McCleon, etc...
I really don't know, I do remember reading something somewhere that I believe said Lamar had to defer some of that bonus money to this past offseason.... I don't think any of us truly know if or how the money's being spent.
Bowser
10-19-2004, 04:12 PM
He was saying that we didn't spend that much this year, the big money was spent two years ago when we had to deal with Trent, Priest, Barber, Holliday, McCleon, etc...
I really don't know, I do remember reading something somewhere that I believe said Lamar had to defer some of that bonus money to this past offseason.... I don't think any of us truly know if or how the money's being spent.
What a crock! WTF does two years ago have to do with this year? Or are we the only team that the salary cap doesn't reset and grow every year for?
Mr. Laz
10-19-2004, 04:17 PM
What a crock! WTF does two years ago have to do with this year? Or are we the only team that the salary cap doesn't reset and grow every year for?
well that's kinda the problem ... we HAD salary cap room
Vermeil said we had salary cap room, that we didn't have money has an organization.
ie lamar/carl made a decision to not speed the money for whatever reason.
in otherwords, we pull an Bengals/Arizona manuever and chose not to spend our full cap money this year.
keg in kc
10-19-2004, 04:21 PM
If memory serves, both Green's and Holmes' contracts were structured in such a way that the majority of their bonus money came this year. I don't have exact numbers, but I would assume we payed the two of them in the neighborhood of $10 to 15 million combined in '04. Although I could be wrong about that; I'm not nearly as in tune with this kind of crap as I used to be.
What a crock! WTF does two years ago have to do with this year? Or are we the only team that the salary cap doesn't reset and grow every year for?
Yeah but we're talking about signing bonus money, which is paid up front. The signing bonus counts against the cap equally across the life of the contract, but if you give a guy a 20 million dollar bonus, you give him all of that money after he signs the contract usually, not in increments. I don't think we have the money to compete with the Redskins of the world, but I don't have the numbers and contracts in front of me, none of us do. There are a ton of reasons why things could possibly be the way they are, from Carl just being greedy to maybe something like there being incentives or other unknown things in people's contracts that count toward the cap that we don't know about...
Bowser
10-19-2004, 04:34 PM
Yeah but we're talking about signing bonus money, which is paid up front. The signing bonus counts against the cap equally across the life of the contract, but if you give a guy a 20 million dollar bonus, you give him all of that money after he signs the contract usually, not in increments. I don't think we have the money to compete with the Redskins of the world, but I don't have the numbers and contracts in front of me, none of us do. There are a ton of reasons why things could possibly be the way they are, from Carl just being greedy to maybe something like there being incentives or other unknown things in people's contracts that count toward the cap that we don't know about...
Yeah, I get all of that. But if we are 6 mil under the cap right now, what's the explanation?
I've heard Vermeil mention "IR money". WTF is that?
keg in kc
10-19-2004, 04:38 PM
I've heard Vermeil mention "IR money". WTF is that?Players on IR count against the cap.
Yeah, I get all of that. But if we are 6 mil under the cap right now, what's the explanation?
I've heard Vermeil mention "IR money". WTF is that?
I still don't know where anyone can prove that we're 6 million under the cap. Maybe we are, but I've never trusted John Clayton's numbers, a couple years ago everyone bashed them for being inaccurate (he had teams being over the cap after the point in the offseason where you cannot be over the cap, had the Raiders some 50 million over the cap, etc.)... I don't think anybody truly knows where we are in relation to the cap.
Maybe we are under the cap, I don't know. I was talking about incentives that come as the season goes along that count against the cap... none of us have any idea what the wording is in everybody's contract. Here's an example of an incentive that nobody even thinks about....
The rising use of workout bonuses as a way to calm players is the only thing that has not led to more player outbursts and complaints, say agents, team executives and players. While there is no exact number available, NFL officials believe workout bonus money paid to players has increased by a factor of 10 over the past decade.
It basically works this way: If a team is unsure a player will attend the workouts or conditioning programs -- or there is fear that player might gain significant weight over the offseason -- the franchise will take a portion of the player's salary and turn it into a bonus the player receives only if he participates in a majority of the offseason workouts.
The bonus money can range from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars.
"Sometimes the workout bonus is given to a player the team likes because it can be easily achieved," said agent Brad Blank, who represents dozens of NFL players. "But more and more I think the workout bonus has become almost like a bribe to get some players to show up to offseason programs."
Blank added that the bonuses might also keep players from publicly complaining once offseason workouts begin.
The largest workout bonus in the NFL, the records state, was $700,000 to Denver Broncos defensive end Trevor Pryce.
According to the NFLPA records, the five teams that pay the most workout bonus money are Denver (approximately $17 million), Kansas City ($10 million), Carolina ($5.6 million), Chicago ($5.1 million) and Cincinnati ($4.8 million).
Baltimore (zero dollars), the New York Giants ($15,000), San Francisco ($30,000), San Diego ($205,000) and Miami ($212,300) are among the bottom five.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/061904/jag_15902492.shtml
listopencil
10-19-2004, 04:51 PM
The one and only main complaint that any Chief fan can make, regardless of how you feel about personnel decisions, would be the cap room. You can honestly debate all of the other changes that KC has made since last year. But if they really went into this season with six (or four, or five, or seven...I've heard a lot of rumors) million of unused cap space then that is inexcusable. That's a move I would expect from a shitty franchise like Cincy or Arizona. Even San Diego. Not from a franchise that went 13-3 and lost a close playoff game. Inexcusable.
Mr. Laz
10-19-2004, 04:56 PM
I still don't know where anyone can prove that we're 6 million under the cap[/url]
the chiefs HAD TO HAVE 7 million dollars to tag John tait
after they didnt match they had AT LEAST that money under the cap
since they didnt match they've added Dalton,Welborn and their draft picks
the draft pick rookie pool was maximum 3.8 million
dalton and welborn sure as heck didnt take up the other 3.2 million
and this is at very least senario
before the chiefs chose not to match, Clayton report 6 million under the cap for the chiefs. He may be wrong some, but i dont imagine him being wrong by the entire 6 million.
your looking at closer to 9.2 million under the cap
minus Daltons minimum contract
minus Welborn's cheap contract(he wanted a new one from philly)
plus/minus however much Clayton was wrong
and that's without restructuring players contracts like teams do to make room.
we had cap room, we just chose not to spend it
I'm referring to incentives that had not counted against the cap yet because they had not been achieved. I'm guessing those workout bonuses count against the cap.... but they didn't count against the cap until the guys who had those bonuses actually achieved them.... just like there may be some easy "play in so many games blah blah" incentives and the like in contracts now that may still not count against the cap because they simply have not been achieved yet.
Is that the problem? It may not be, I don't know, but it's just another theory I like to throw out there. It's no secret that I think even if we did have a couple million bucks under the cap, I think it's no excuse for what's happened this year.
FloridaMan88
10-19-2004, 05:20 PM
This "cashed out" garbage is just a scare tactic the Chiefs are trying to use IMO to get voters to pass the Bi-State tax.
If the Chiefs are so "cashed out" then maybe they should reduce Vermeil's salary since he's one of the highest paid coaches in the league or force Vermeil to trim down his coaching staff which is one of the biggest in the league.
BigChiefFan
10-19-2004, 05:27 PM
The one and only main complaint that any Chief fan can make, regardless of how you feel about personnel decisions, would be the cap room. You can honestly debate all of the other changes that KC has made since last year. But if they really went into this season with six (or four, or five, or seven...I've heard a lot of rumors) million of unused cap space then that is inexcusable. That's a move I would expect from a shitty franchise like Cincy or Arizona. Even San Diego. Not from a franchise that went 13-3 and lost a close playoff game. Inexcusable.
Welcome to my world. The way you explained just summarized why I'm bitter about this year. If we have that kind of cap and didn't spend close to it, you have no choice but to question their commitment, at least that's how I see it.
philfree
10-19-2004, 05:30 PM
I'd like to see the current cap numbers for all the teams. Claytons are as of July 15. and that's worthless at this point. There were alot of teams with as much or more cap space as the Chiefs at that point. One team that stood out to me was Philly. They were $10mil+ under but I don't know if that was pre Owens or not.
PhilFree :arrow:
Logical
10-19-2004, 05:36 PM
The one and only main complaint that any Chief fan can make, regardless of how you feel about personnel decisions, would be the cap room. You can honestly debate all of the other changes that KC has made since last year. But if they really went into this season with six (or four, or five, or seven...I've heard a lot of rumors) million of unused cap space then that is inexcusable. That's a move I would expect from a shitty franchise like Cincy or Arizona. Even San Diego. Not from a franchise that went 13-3 and lost a close playoff game. Inexcusable.
I agree
Who did they pay large bonuses to? Hicks, Browning, Woods, Dunn and Wesley together didn't total even 9 million in bonus money.
Priest, Trent and Tony in prior years...
Phobia
10-19-2004, 07:00 PM
I'm honestly beginning to think we're doomed to a Bengals/Cardinals-like franchise for the next ten years.
Funny you should mention them. They're the only two teams I can think of who routinely have more than $2 Mill in cap room available every season.
Last year we had $4 Mill and this year we're in the neighborhood of $6-7 Mill.
Lovely.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.