Do Carl and DV really want any FA's?

[Red Dawg]

Bell and Hartwell have injury concernes according to the Chiefs even though money is probably Hartwell's biggest obstacle to becoming a Chief. Rolle has a narrow spine and is lucky to be walking according to the Chiefs. We will be picking up Superman in the second round of the draft so keeping our second instead of getting Surtain is a better option. Smoot? We don't want to talk to him, he's too healthy apparantly.


I can here it now at the end of the month, Carl will say that unfortunately all the FA's were injured too badly or would have killed us against the cap.

Carl has a loser mentality.

[Mark M]

Carl has a loser mentality.

Ahh ... I love the smell of irony in the afternoon.

MM
~~:)

[jcroft]

They want them really bad -- as long as they're FREE agents.

[memyselfI]

They want them really bad -- as long as they're FREE agents.
ROFL ROFL ROFL

[jcroft]

I think they not only want them to be FREE agents, but also AGENT-free.

[crossbow]

They are saving their cap money so they can nail down a quarterback from Frisco. If they have enough left they will get a safety and convert him to corner.

[Mark M]

DAMMIT, CARL!!!

MM
~~:cuss:

[jcroft]

They are saving their cap money so they can nail down a quarterback from Frisco. If they have enough left they will get a safety and convert him to corner.

Either that or trade a draft pick to the Rams for a washed-up nickelback.

[KCTitus]

The only thing missing on that thread post was looser (chiefsplanet spelling) then it would have been perfect.

[Nightfyre]

What is Hartwell's injury concern?

[ChiTown]

Nah.

They're just phuggin toying with us.....................

[KCTitus]

What is Hartwell's injury concern?

missing mullet.

[Coogs]

You know there actually may be a problem with the cap. I know that is not what anyone wants to hear, but we resigned some players two or three years ago to big backloaded contracts. Those players are getting older, and the backloaded portions of their contracts are starting to become due. Those players are Shields, Green, Holmes, Richardson, Roaf, Gonzo and the likes on the offensive side of the ball.

Restructuring may not be that easy either, as usually base salary is converted over to signing bonus to lengthen out "hit" to the yearly cap. Problem is, all these guys don't have much time left, so lengthening out thier contracts doesn't really solve the problem.

Just a thought.

[Warrior5]

Yes.

[Cormac]

Either that or trade a draft pick to the Rams for a washed-up nickelback.

Hey, that's a great idea. Maybe we can give St. Loser our 2nd round pick for Aeneas Williams and move him back to CB......:p

[PastorMikH]

No, I don't think Carl and DV want any FAs. The only thing I've seen them do so far is to parade several big-name players through KC to make the fans and the media happy.

[BigChiefFan]

You know there actually may be a problem with the cap. I know that is not what anyone wants to hear, but we resigned some players two or three years ago to big backloaded contracts. Those players are getting older, and the backloaded portions of their contracts are starting to become due. Those players are Shields, Green, Holmes, Richardson, Roaf, Gonzo and the likes on the offensive side of the ball.

Restructuring may not be that easy either, as usually base salary is converted over to signing bonus to lengthen out "hit" to the yearly cap. Problem is, all these guys don't have much time left, so lengthening out thier contracts doesn't really solve the problem.

Just a thought.
Then we should have used all the cap room we had LAST year to restrcuture some contracts, so they would have made more LAST year and LESS this year. That's not excuse in my book. Carl has already CLEARLY said "I've got money to spend on FAs"

[KCTitus]

No, I don't think Carl and DV want any FAs. The only thing I've seen them do so far is to parade several big-name players through KC to make the fans and the media happy.

THIS is happy? LOL...

[PastorMikH]

Then we should have used all the cap room we had LAST year to restrcuture some contracts, so they would have made more LAST year and LESS this year. That's not excuse in my book. Carl has already CLEARLY said "I've got money to spend on FAs"



I agree.

[shaneo69]

You know there actually may be a problem with the cap. I know that is not what anyone wants to hear, but we resigned some players two or three years ago to big backloaded contracts. Those players are getting older, and the backloaded portions of their contracts are starting to become due. Those players are Shields, Green, Holmes, Richardson, Roaf, Gonzo and the likes on the offensive side of the ball.

Restructuring may not be that easy either, as usually base salary is converted over to signing bonus to lengthen out "hit" to the yearly cap. Problem is, all these guys don't have much time left, so lengthening out thier contracts doesn't really solve the problem.

Just a thought.

That's what I mentioned the other day. Our real problem seems to be that we haven't handled the cap correctly since day one. We haven't won a playoff game since the cap came into play for the '94 season. And the same guy has been running the show this whole time.

[crossbow]

What is Hartwell's injury concern?

I think he would injure Lamar's checkbook. According to other threads on this Board the Chiefs offered him 8 mil and he wants 10. Not realy that far apart. They could split the difference and get it done if he wants to play here.

[PastorMikH]

THIS is happy? LOL...


:)

Well, everybody was happy wednesday and thursday. Perhaps if they HAD ACTUALLY SIGNED THEM WE'D STILL BE HAPPY!!!! :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[KCTitus]

:)

Well, everybody was happy wednesday and thursday. Perhaps if they HAD ACTUALLY SIGNED THEM WE'D STILL BE HAPPY!!!!

Sorry, man, I missed the 'happy' part...

[PastorMikH]

I think he would injure Lamar's checkbook. According to other threads on this Board the Chiefs offered him 8 mil and he wants 10. Not realy that far apart. They could split the difference and get it done if he wants to play here.



Why don't we just go ahead and give him the 10 mil? It's not like we are going to use it to sign anyone else with.







If anyone hasn't noticed, I'm just really, really irritated at the impotence in the front office.

[PastorMikH]

Sorry, man, I missed the 'happy' part...



Sadly, it appears the rest of us did too.:(

[Mark M]

No, I don't think Carl and DV want any FAs. The only thing I've seen them do so far is to parade several big-name players through KC to make the fans and the media happy.
Do people honestly believe this ... that an organization would spend thousands of dollars to wine and dine players just so fans and the media would be "happy?"

What happens when the player doesn't sign, even when KC offers more money (i.e. Trotter)?

Does an organization ask doctors who have spent 30+ years practicing medicine with the highest of ethical standards to lie or make stuff up so KC could offer less money?

Seriously ... do some of you out there really believe this stuff?

MM
~~:spock:

[jcroft]

Seriously ... do some of you out there really believe this stuff?

MM
~~:spock:

I don't believe THAT stuff. What i do believe is this:

1. The Chiefs are cheap.
2. The Chiefs are conservative when it comes to injury concerns. Things that other teams would look past seem to be dealbreakers for the Chiefs.
3. The Chiefs are more interesting in making money than winning games. Of course, every team is interesting in making money, but the great ones seem to really believe that winning in the key to bottom line success, as well.

[KCTitus]

With as much money invested in the offense of this club, it's hard to agree that they're 'cheap'. KC has shown it will pay for players, they just allways happen to be the wrong ones--ask Clint.

[jcroft]

With as much money invested in the offense of this club, it's hard to agree that they're 'cheap'. KC has shown it will pay for players, they just allways happen to be the wrong ones--ask Clint.

That's true to some degree, but when was the last time the Chiefs won a bidding war with another team? The Chiefs rarely are willing to one-up another team to get the player they really want.

[crossbow]

Do people honestly believe this ... that an organization would spend thousands of dollars to wine and dine players just so fans and the media would be "happy?"

What happens when the player doesn't sign, even when KC offers more money (i.e. Trotter)?

Does an organization ask doctors who have spent 30+ years practicing medicine with the highest of ethical standards to lie or make stuff up so KC could offer less money?

Seriously ... do some of you out there really believe this stuff?

MM
~~:spock:

Here is what I believe:

Carl and company know what they want but don't want to overpay for it. They will try to get the players they need but they aren't going to compound last years mistakes by over reacting and over spending. I have been very critical of the Chiefs decision making but honestly I was fooled into thinking Cunningham would have made a bigger impact then he did. I saw improvement at the beginning of the year until the Indy game. That blowout in the second half destroyed their confidence and they never got it back. So here we are: desperate to fix the defense before the offense gets too old to take the field.

[PastorMikH]

Seriously ... do some of you out there really believe this stuff?

MM
~~:spock:



Yeah Mark I do. Over the last 2-3 years I have seen the same problems with this team. EVERY STINKING YEAR I hear Carl say that they are going to fix the problems. Oddly, every year they try to put bandaids on only to have the same problems. Now, here we sit, some of the best DBs and LBs on the market were in our reach, Players that could really fix the problems, and we are letting them go because the front office can't close the deal.

As for the cash spent stuff, how much $ do you think the Chiefs make from the fans? Keep the fans happy with a bunch of promises and they will keep spending money.

[Coogs]

Then we should have used all the cap room we had LAST year to restrcuture some contracts, so they would have made more LAST year and LESS this year. That's not excuse in my book. Carl has already CLEARLY said "I've got money to spend on FAs"

It's not really the money this year that is the issue. Go to this site...


http://www.nflpa.org/Media/main.asp?subPage=Active+Player+Search


and look at the "Base Salaries" of our offensive guys the next 3 or so years. They escalate through the roof. And how many of these guys will go beyond two to three more years? Not many. Therefore, restructuring this year, or last for that matter, doesn't really make the problem go away.

[Mark M]

I don't believe THAT stuff. What i do believe is this:

1. The Chiefs are cheap.

Tell that to Priest, or Tony G., or Trent, or Shields, et al. There's a difference between being "cheap" and focusing on players we as fans may want.

2. The Chiefs are conservative when it comes to injury concerns. Things that other teams would look past seem to be dealbreakers for the Chiefs.
This I agree with because I personally know their docs. Jon Brown is incredibly conservative with injuries. But, in the long run, it's the right thing 99% of the time.

3. The Chiefs are more interesting in making money than winning games. Of course, every team is interesting in making money, but the great ones seem to really believe that winning in the key to bottom line success, as well.
This is the one that gets me. I find it hard -- if not impossible -- to believe that Lamar doesn't realize that winning makes him more $$ than losing. A good product = more revenue, and if he doesn't know that, then he'd been broke a long, long time ago.

Plus, no way in hell does Carl's ego let him walk into a room full of NFL execs and think "Damn ... 16 years and no Super Bowl. But we make money!!"

Don't get me wrong -- I want Carl gone. Wanted him gone a long time ago. But some of the accusations are just ... well, silly. No one has any facts to back them up. NONE. Sure, we've got bad draft picks and crappy FA pickups, but so do about 28 of the 32 teams.

I guess I'm just more willing to accept that there are things that we as fans will never be able to comprehend. Sure, we can rip the team, the front office, etc. I guess I just want to see a bit more logic used, rather than some simplistic, makes no sense theory.

MM
~~:shrug:

[Mark M]

As for the cash spent stuff, how much $ do you think the Chiefs make from the fans? Keep the fans happy with a bunch of promises and they will keep spending money.

If Lamar thought his customers were that stupid, and treated them as such, he'd never have made a single dollar. Seriously ... that's just bad business.

Carl? Well ... who knows. But, again, I think his ego is such that he'd much rather have a desire to brag about winning a Super Bowl then how much $$ the team made. Without that trophy, he's a 16 year loser. That's not good for his ego.

MM
~~:shrug:

[KCFalcon59]

I guess we now know the answer. Hell no they don't want any FA. Cheap bastards.

[Clint in Wichita]

With as much money invested in the offense of this club, it's hard to agree that they're 'cheap'. KC has shown it will pay for players, they just allways happen to be the wrong ones--ask Clint.


What is the Chiefs' average overall defensive ranking over the last 3 years, with 2 different coordinators no less?

[KCTitus]

What is the Chiefs' average overall defensive ranking over the last 3 years, with 2 different coordinators no less?

We could have played that statistical game with the offense in the 90's and Peterson was still here. How does one explain the dichotomy? The HC--Marty focused on defense, DV on offense.

[shaneo69]

I find it hard -- if not impossible -- to believe that Lamar doesn't realize that winning makes him more $$ than losing. A good product = more revenue, and if he doesn't know that, then he'd been broke a long, long time ago.

Plus, no way in hell does Carl's ego let him walk into a room full of NFL execs and think "Damn ... 16 years and no Super Bowl. But we make money!!"

Don't get me wrong -- I want Carl gone. Wanted him gone a long time ago. But some of the accusations are just ... well, silly. No one has any facts to back them up. NONE. Sure, we've got bad draft picks and crappy FA pickups, but so do about 28 of the 32 teams.

I guess I'm just more willing to accept that there are things that we as fans will never be able to comprehend. Sure, we can rip the team, the front office, etc. I guess I just want to see a bit more logic used, rather than some simplistic, makes no sense theory.

MM
~~:shrug:

I guess my question to you would be...."If the Chiefs had the same record these past 11 years with no playoff wins, but the crowds started dwindling to about 50,000 per game from about 1999 to the present, would the Chiefs have more urgency to improve, or would they approach things the same way?"

Personally, I think if the crowds had started to drop off and they were no longer selling out, I think they'd be working a lot harder to win the fans back. And if that is the case, then I think they're cheating the current fans who have stuck around despite no playoff wins in 11 years.

[jcroft]

I don't believe THAT stuff. What i do believe is this:

1. The Chiefs are cheap.
2. The Chiefs are conservative when it comes to injury concerns. Things that other teams would look past seem to be dealbreakers for the Chiefs.
3. The Chiefs are more interesting in making money than winning games. Of course, every team is interesting in making money, but the great ones seem to really believe that winning in the key to bottom line success, as well.

Does the fact that Rolle is now a Raven prove my point number two?

[KCTitus]

I guess my question to you would be...."If the Chiefs had the same record these past 11 years with no playoff wins, but the crowds started dwindling to about 50,000 per game from about 1999 to the present, would the Chiefs have more urgency to improve, or would they approach things the same way?"

Personally, I think if the crowds had started to drop off and they were no longer selling out, I think they'd be working a lot harder to win the fans back. And if that is the case, then I think they're cheating the current fans who have stuck around despite no playoff wins in 11 years.

I agree...however, I think it would take less than 50k. The 80's they averaged about 20k for several years before Lamar hired CP.

[Mark M]

I guess my question to you would be...."If the Chiefs had the same record these past 11 years with no playoff wins, but the crowds started dwindling to about 50,000 per game from about 1999 to the present, would the Chiefs have more urgency to improve, or would they approach things the same way?"

Personally, I think if the crowds had started to drop off and they were no longer selling out, I think they'd be working a lot harder to win the fans back. And if that is the case, then I think they're cheating the current fans who have stuck around despite no playoff wins in 11 years.
Well, considering that the stadium was more than half empty from about 1974 to 1989, I'd say it'd take longer than 11 years and many, many less than 50K.

And the fans that have stuck around for 11 years have about another 12 to go to match me, and another 12 on top of that to match others.

Although, what I find so amusing is that we, as fans, are damned if we do and damned if we don't:

If we go to the games, we're just suckers who are making Lamar rich.
If we don't, we're bandwagon fans who only support a winner.

Nice little double-edge sword, ain't it?

MM
~~:sulk:

[Clint in Wichita]

We could have played that statistical game with the offense in the 90's and Peterson was still here. How does one explain the dichotomy? The HC--Marty focused on defense, DV on offense.


During the Peterson era, the Chiefs have always fallen short on one side of the ball. Now it's the defense, which is even more frustrating because the Chiefs had a solid defense and now it's a distant memory.

I really don't understand the Chiefs' hesitation to make a move.

What are they afraid of? Missing the playoffs?

[KCTitus]

During the Peterson era, the Chiefs have always fallen short on one side of the ball. Now it's the defense, which is even more frustrating because the Chiefs had a solid defense and now it's a distant memory.

I really don't understand the Chiefs' hesitation to make a move.

What are they afraid of? Missing the playoffs?

Yep, I agree...and I dont understand the reluctance either. The Rolle signing is frustrating.

[CosmicPal]

No, DT, they really don't wany any free agents.

They've been in the league for a very, very long time. They're not interested in winning championships. They're not even working this off season, nor have they ever worked any off-season. They come to Arrowhead when they feel like it. They don't evaluate players. They don't go to combines. They just pig out on Hayward's BBQ and spend most evenings comparing wines from various regions around the world.

They are more interested in ripping you off then they are in fielding a winning football team. Good gawd, why else would they put so much damn time and energy into their jobs- you really think its to win a championship?

:rolleyes:

I'm sorry dude...don't mean to pick on you, but I'm sick of this beetchin' on the Planet. "CP sucks" "We're not gettin any FA" "The team is imploding"

Here's a clue for you Sherlock- the team only has so much money to spend on Free Agents. We have a lot of needs and only so much money to go around. Of course, they want the best, but they also want to fill as many positions as possible- JUST BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SCORE A FREE AGENT ON THE FIRST DAY doesn't mean they're not interested...Damn, most of the guys they've brought in, with the exception of Hartwell, have had past injury problems- and they are being safe with their money....Just chill everyone....

[ROYC75]

Well, considering that the stadium was more than half empty from about 1974 to 1989, I'd say it'd take longer than 11 years and many, many less than 50K.

And the fans that have stuck around for 11 years have about another 12 to go to match me, and another 12 on top of that to match others.

Although, what I find so amusing is that we, as fans, are damned if we do and damned if we don't:

If we go to the games, we're just suckers who are making Lamar rich.
If we don't, we're bandwagon fans who only support a winner.

Nice little double-edge sword, ain't it?

MM
~~:sulk:

So am I a bandwagon fan if I cancel my Sunday Ticket ?

[htismaqe]

No, DT, they really don't wany any free agents.

They've been in the league for a very, very long time. They're not interested in winning championships. They're not even working this off season, nor have they ever worked any off-season. They come to Arrowhead when they feel like it. They don't evaluate players. They don't go to combines. They just pig out on Hayward's BBQ and spend most evenings comparing wines from various regions around the world.

They are more interested in ripping you off then they are in fielding a winning football team. Good gawd, why else would they put so much damn time and energy into their jobs- you really think its to win a championship?

:rolleyes:

I'm sorry dude...don't mean to pick on you, but I'm sick of this beetchin' on the Planet. "CP sucks" "We're not gettin any FA" "The team is imploding"

Here's a clue for you Sherlock- the team only has so much money to spend on Free Agents. We have a lot of needs and only so much money to go around. Of course, they want the best, but they also want to fill as many positions as possible- JUST BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T SCORE A FREE AGENT ON THE FIRST DAY doesn't mean they're not interested...Damn, most of the guys they've brought in, with the exception of Hartwell, have had past injury problems- and they are being safe with their money....Just chill everyone....

Save it for someone else.

The lights are on but nobody's home.

[whoman69]

I am sure that Carl wanted to pull the trigger on Rolle, but the physical sealed the deal. Its like opening a broken Christmas present. That said, he should have gotten someone to sign on the dotted line by now. With Rolle gone, and Law seemingly off the list, the fact that we really didn't even look at Lucas, there's nothing out there right now. Smoot seems the obvious choice, but I don't even think we have had contact with him. Zero in on one guy and it falls apart, and now it seems we are lost. The same thing seemed to happen when we lost out on Douglas.