Ty Law

[bogie]

I heard this morning on the radio that the Jets will release him. Do we still want him? Can we afford him?

[MOhillbilly]

to slow.

[jspchief]

We have over 13 million invested in our current starting CBs for '06. That's about 15% of the total cap.

I seriously doubt we want that percentage to get higher.

[Kerberos]

I heard this morning on the radio that the Jets will release him. Do we still want him? Can we afford him?

If he wants to play for Herm and will sign for league min. I'm sure we could bring him in to compete for the position against Warfield.

:D



.

[kaplin42]

while I think he could only make our secondary stronger, he will want too much money, and as stated we dont want/have the money to invest in that area any more.

[bogie]

What a difference a year makes.

[Wile_E_Coyote]

Jets D-'04.........'05

total D #7.....#12

score #4......#23

pass #14.....#2

take aways #31...#12

rush #5.....#28

[Archie Bunker]

CB is not the problem. Warfield and Surtain are just fine.

[nychief]

we have our own salary cap problems.

[bogie]

Okay, so no "go get him Carl" threads for Ty Law this year.

[Smed1065]

Thank goodness, had my fill last year

[CoMoChief]

to slow.


Are you talking about 10int's too slow? Because we all know that Eric Warfield is one of the faster DB's in this league.

[Dunit35]

Cost of Ty Law=too high...We need to practice making sure our cap is under the max.

[Hoover]

I really don't think we can afford or really need a new CB

I'm happy with what we got, give Surtain and Warfield a chance to play an entire year together.

[milkman]

I really don't think we can afford or really need a new CB

I'm happy with what we got, give Surtain and Warfield a chance to play an entire year together.

With a competent D-Line, and a fast, playmaking safety behind them.

[BigMeatballDave]

Money should be spent on the DL.

[DJJasonp]

Serious case of deja-vu going on right here.......

[Kylo Ren]

Cut Warfield, McCleon, Bartee, Woods and sign Law.

[jspchief]

Cut Warfield, McCleon, Bartee, Woods and sign Law.How much of our cap would you like to see allocated to the starting CB position? Right now it's 15%. Law isn't going to come cheaper than Warfield, so I assume you think we need to spend even more than 15% of our total cap on our two starting CBs?

[sedated]

Warfield's cap number is 4.2 million.

I'm sure Law's number for 2006 would be far below that.

If we can exchange Warfield for Law for less money, I say go for it.

then spend the extra money on the DL (assuming we can get under the cap)

[jspchief]

Warfield's cap number is 4.2 million.

I'm sure Law's number for 2006 would be far below that.

If we can exchange Warfield for Law for less money, I say go for it.

then spend the extra money on the DL (assuming we can get under the cap)What about next year? You think Surtain and Law will get cheaper as their contracts progress?

I'm sorry, but this team isn't good enough to screw our future for one last gasp effort. Besides, you don't build championship teams that way.

[phxchief]

I'd rather play our current starters to their strengths and get the best out of them than just sign another high-profile player.

Quality > quantity.

Doesn't matter if we have 4 All-Pro's starting at DB if they're all put in shitty positions.

[htismaqe]

What about next year? You think Surtain and Law will get cheaper as their contracts progress?

I'm sorry, but this team isn't good enough to screw our future for one last gasp effort. Besides, you don't build championship teams that way.

You just don't care if this team improves. You and Carl Peterson.

[sedated]

We've said "this is the year" for 3 years now.

Eventually it has to come crashing down.

I wanna a Super Bowl out of it first, dammit

[htismaqe]

We've said "this is the year" for 3 years now.

Eventually it has to come crashing down.

I wanna a Super Bowl out of it first, dammit

I want a Super Bowl too.

And I'm firmly convinced that signing guys like TO or Law will actually DECREASE our chances of that happening.

[phxchief]

I'm sorry, but this team isn't good enough to screw our future for one last gasp effort.

That's absurd.

(1) Any team that wins 10 games should be considered good enough to make a run, and that simply means that adding what may be the "final piece" to an almost-complete puzzle MAY be a good move.

(2) You're implying, it seems, that we should continue to build for the future as opposed to taking a serious shot right now.

Well, hello, but what have we been doing for the last 15 years? It makes no sense to build for the future when the past is on it's last legs. "One more shot" makes all the sense in the world given that "one more year" is about how long we'll get from numerous key players.

Surrounding them with quality talent now is the right thing to do if you're trying to get them -- and, of course, the fans -- a championship.

I'm not advocating we DO this, but I don't want to see us sit around like plums with our hands under are arse whilst other teams get better. We need to get better, and that doesn't just happen with cheap FAs and draft choices.

[sedated]

What about next year? You think Surtain and Law will get cheaper as their contracts progress?

I'm sorry, but this team isn't good enough to screw our future for one last gasp effort. Besides, you don't build championship teams that way.


you build championship teams through the draft.

:banghead:

that sh!tty drafting has created such urgency.

we don't have a whole lot to look forward to after 2006 (exceptions include - LJ, Parker?, Waters, DJ, KMitchell, JAllen)

[phxchief]

And I'm firmly convinced that signing guys like TO or Law will actually DECREASE our chances of that happening.

How so? (Not T.O., but Law, since this is a Law thread)

So long as his cap number THIS year doesn't prevent us from doing what else we NEED to do (sign rookies and key FAs), how can he hurt?

He's certainly an upgrade at the position. Again, i'm not advocating a big splash in the FA market at the CB position, but I wouldn't be AGAINST it or worry that it HURTS our chances.

[htismaqe]

(1) Any team that wins 10 games should be considered good enough to make a run, and that simply means that adding what may be the "final piece" to an almost-complete puzzle MAY be a good move.

Yes, we need that final piece.

It's not Ty Law.

[Archie Bunker]

Yes, we need that final piece.

It's not Ty Law.

or T.O.

[htismaqe]

How so? (Not T.O., but Law, since this is a Law thread)

So long as his cap number THIS year doesn't prevent us from doing what else we NEED to do (sign rookies and key FAs), how can he hurt?

He's certainly an upgrade at the position. Again, i'm not advocating a big splash in the FA market at the CB position, but I wouldn't be AGAINST it or worry that it HURTS our chances.

Well, I'm a realist.

We already know that Law's salary WILL prevent us from doing what we need to do.

We need to face the fact that he's not gonna work for the vet min, and we have MUCH bigger needs.

[jspchief]

That's absurd.

(1) Any team that wins 10 games should be considered good enough to make a run, and that simply means that adding what may be the "final piece" to an almost-complete puzzle MAY be a good move.

(2) You're implying, it seems, that we should continue to build for the future as opposed to taking a serious shot right now.

Well, hello, but what have we been doing for the last 15 years? It makes no sense to build for the future when the past is on it's last legs. "One more shot" makes all the sense in the world given that "one more year" is about how long we'll get from numerous key players.

Surrounding them with quality talent now is the right thing to do if you're trying to get them -- and, of course, the fans -- a championship.

I'm not advocating we DO this, but I don't want to see us sit around like plums with our hands under are arse whilst other teams get better. We need to get better, and that doesn't just happen with cheap FAs and draft choices.I just don't believe mortgaging the future is the way to build a championship team. You don't have to f*ck your future to win now.

[phxchief]

We already know that Law's salary WILL prevent us from doing what we need to do.


We don't. It's not unreasonable to think we could get Law under contract playing for a fair price in 2006.

I dunno what he made in 05, but it can't be that many millions more than Warfield is due to make.

[phxchief]

I just don't believe mortgaging the future is the way to build a championship team.

I don't believe signing Ty Law is mortgaging your future. In fact, i'm 99% sure of this.

You don't have to f*ck your future to win now.

I don't believe Ty Law f*cks KC's future.

[phxchief]

Yes, we need that final piece.

It's not Ty Law.

I didn't say it was; i'm not of the opinion that we need Law.

But i'm certainly of the mind that we're a legitimately good team that should be making "last gasp efforts", which MAY include a signing like Law.

[jspchief]

I don't believe signing Ty Law is mortgaging your future. In fact, i'm 99% sure of this.

I don't believe Ty Law f*cks KC's future.Again, I'll go back to the percentage of our salary cap we already have tied to our starting CBs. The argument could be made that it is already too high. Adding Law will only make that number bigger. He's not going to be cheaper than Warfield. Odds are, he will be as expensive or more expensive than Surtain. It's too much money into one position, and they will be contracts that are not easy to escape.

[htismaqe]

We don't. It's not unreasonable to think we could get Law under contract playing for a fair price in 2006.

I dunno what he made in 05, but it can't be that many millions more than Warfield is due to make.

Ty Law and his agent wanted $10M guaranteed LAST YEAR, before he got 10 INT's and made the Pro Bowl.

If you think he's gonna sign for a fair price, I got some land for ya.

[phxchief]

Ty Law and his agent wanted $10M guaranteed LAST YEAR

I wanted a Ferrari last year. I didn't get one.

What's your point?

Unless you're gonna tell me Law earned $10mil, which is the only relevant thing here. Talking the talk and signing on the dotted lines are two completely different things.

------------------------------------------

Chiefs | Law could rejoin Edwards
Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:12:05 -0800

Keven Lerner, of the Sun-Sentinel, reports New York Jets CB Ty Law expects to be released shortly and that a reunion with former Jets head coach Herman Edwards, who is now coaching the Kansas City Chiefs, is a possibility. Law added that he didn't know if the team could afford him and Chiefs CB Patrick Surtain. "Is the (Super Bowl) window still open for the Chiefs?" Law said. "Can the offense still get it done? And can they afford me and Pat?"

-------------------------------------------

Funny, also, after all that yapping last year, he signed for $1M less with NY than NE offered him.

He'll run his mouth for a couple months this year, and undoubtedly sign for a much more reasonable price down the line when he realizes no one is gonna pay up.

[jspchief]

I wanted a Ferrari last year. I didn't get one.

What's your point?

Unless you're gonna tell me Law earned $10mil, which is the only relevant thing here. Talking the talk and signing on the dotted lines are two completely different things.

------------------------------------------

Chiefs | Law could rejoin Edwards
Wed, 15 Feb 2006 12:12:05 -0800

Keven Lerner, of the Sun-Sentinel, reports New York Jets CB Ty Law expects to be released shortly and that a reunion with former Jets head coach Herman Edwards, who is now coaching the Kansas City Chiefs, is a possibility. Law added that he didn't know if the team could afford him and Chiefs CB Patrick Surtain. "Is the (Super Bowl) window still open for the Chiefs?" Law said. "Can the offense still get it done? And can they afford me and Pat?"

-------------------------------------------

Funny, also, after all that yapping last year, he signed for $1M less with NY than NE offered him.

He'll run his mouth for a couple months this year, and undoubtedly sign for a much more reasonable price down the line when he realizes no one is gonna pay up.Why would he sign for less? This year he doesn't have the question of a foot injury to contend with. He also led the league in interceptions. Whatever doubts teams used to drive his price down last year no longer exist.

You post an article where even he admits he could be too expensive, and use it as the argument for why he'll come cheap?

[phxchief]

Why would he sign for less? This year he doesn't have the question of a foot injury to contend with. He also led the league in interceptions. Whatever doubts teams used to drive his price down last year no longer exist.


Because no one will sign him for the huge amount he initially asks for?

Because he still had many questions over his performance, despite making the Annual Popularity Contest?

You post an article where even he admits he could be too expensive, and use it as the argument for why he'll come cheap?

I'm not making the argument he could come cheap. I made the argument that he MAY come at a FAIR price (iirc his price in NY was "fair" by market standards) and a player of his caliber MAY be worth adding to an already-good team.

I didn't make the argument to get him. I said otherwise. I just don't think he kills our future, I don't think he'd be a bad addition and I certainly don't think he hurts.

[Mecca]

Of course I could make the anti arguement look bad by saying right not it doesn't look like any contract will screw your future. Because with no CBA there is no cap after this year......if this is the last capped year then this is the last year the Chiefs have at doing anything.

[Halfcan]

Cut Warfield, McCleon, Bartee, Woods and sign Law.


Best post on this thread.