ChiefsPlanet - Chiefs Nate Taylor: Chiefs expected to franchise OBJ again [not happening]

The Ravens should do this with Lamar Jackson by giving him the non-exclusive franchise tag.

Let these guys test the market and see if anyone else in the league is willing to give them the ridiculous contract they think they are worth.

Lamar would get a record setting deal if they let him do that.

notorious

03-07-2023 11:53 AM

It's obvious, the answer is right in front of you!

Niang takes over RT, Mahomes decides to throw for 5000 yards left-handed.

Simple solution.

Skyy God

03-07-2023 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 493rd (Post 16841611)

I agree, which is why I’m a bit miffed at what we’re doing. Having said that, I trust Brett Veach because he’s the best. And there’s absolutely zero chance they don’t do everything possible to ensure Mahomes has himself a competent LT.

OBJ played at a pro bowl level for 2/$23M.

Market value for that player is $23M per.

And we’re reasonably likely to get a 2024 3rd or 4th.

Veachy won that trade.

staylor26

03-07-2023 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cave Johnson (Post 16841627)

OBJ played at a pro bowl level for 2/$23M.

Market value for that player is $23M per.

And we’re reasonably likely to get a 2024 3rd or 4th.

Veachy won that trade.

Not to mention Nick ****ing Bolton.

SAGA45

03-07-2023 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Franchise (Post 16841569)

It’s more likely that Brown refused to sign the tag because he knows he’s going to get offers on the market and he’ll get to choose his new team.

It's not up to him if he wants to get tagged or not. It's up to the team. The only thing he would control is whether or not he wants to play on the tag and get paid.

Mecca

03-07-2023 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAGA45 (Post 16841638)

It's not up to him if he wants to get tagged or not. It's up to the team. The only thing he would control is whether or not he wants to play on the tag and get paid.

If he refuses to sign the tag though you can't trade him, it's playing leverage.

DJ's left nut

03-07-2023 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 16841629)

Not to mention Nick ****ing Bolton.

Yeah, the fact that people still argue about the relative merits of that deal is insane.

We won a Super Bowl with OBJ playing LT for us. And part of our ability to do that was the rollover room created by paying him asswipe money in 2021, not to mention him playing slightly below market in 2022.

It was a win before the Championship. It's an obvious home-run maneuver now. And the risk was always so de minimis anyway as to make it wholly defensible from minute 1.

milkshock

03-07-2023 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAGA45 (Post 16841638)

It's not up to him if he wants to get tagged or not. It's up to the team. The only thing he would control is whether or not he wants to play on the tag and get paid.

and he's not going to elect to sit out the whole season without pay.

milkshock

03-07-2023 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRM08 (Post 16841618)

Tampering by other teams with Orlando perhaps. If they can get him without doing a trade, that would be their top choice. Orlando refuses to sign a franchise tag and other teams refuse to give KC any reasonable trade assets. So he gets a clean break to sign wherever.

he cant refuse the tag, without going without pay for a season.

The Franchise

03-07-2023 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAGA45 (Post 16841638)

It's not up to him if he wants to get tagged or not. It's up to the team. The only thing he would control is whether or not he wants to play on the tag and get paid.

Until he doesn't sign it. Then what are you doing?

SAGA45

03-07-2023 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 16841642)

If he refuses to sign the tag though you can't trade him, it's playing leverage.

Either way, it's not up to him whether or not the tag gets used, is my point.

tredadda

03-07-2023 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 16841508)

Again, the shortness of the talks really lead to two possibilities. Either they're so far apart it's never going to happen or they're close enough that using the tag wasn't necessary.

Of course the first option is more probable. But people are acting like the 2nd option doesn't even exist.

While option two is definitely it is a remote one. One can safely infer from what we do know that most likely option 1 is the correct one. Looking at a few things, here is what can be inferred:

1. They could not come to an agreement last year.
2. Brown signed the tag and bet on himself
3. In doing so he had another Pro Bowl season along with anchoring a line that gave up zero sacks in the SB against a team that finished third all time in sacks.
4. As such his asking price would not have stagnated and if anything probably went up significantly.
5. Tagging a guy a second time is a bad look for the team if he were to even agree to it.
6. No point in tagging him if the possibility of signing him long term was not available.

milkshock

03-07-2023 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAGA45 (Post 16841648)

Either way, it's not up to him whether or not the tag gets used, is my point.

not a particularly good point tbh

you cannot refuse to sign the tag, well you can but you go without pay and not play for another team for the season

madness.

tredadda

03-07-2023 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 16841629)

Not to mention Nick ****ing Bolton.

And Creed as he would not have gotten one of them.

Skyy God

03-07-2023 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 16841643)

DJ clearly bills in .2 increments.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:58 AM.