Chiefs have key free agent decisions to make soon

[Mr. Laz]

Chiefs Have Some Work To Do To Keep Young Stars In Kansas City

by Joel Thorman on Oct 29, 2010 8:05 AM PDT in 2010 Kansas City Chiefs Season

More photos » Ed Zurga - AP

There aren't a lot of downsides to winning games and becoming a good football team. Sundays are more fun, the season goes into January (and February?) and you get to see hometown players doing well.
There's a lot to like.

Of course, the downside is that the players on your team are likely to draw interest from other teams because, as a winning team, they're clearly doing something right. That competition for a player makes it more expensive to keep them when contract time comes around. That's an issue the Chiefs could be facing in the next year (and two).

The Chiefs have a few key critical pieces to their success with contracts coming up.

Free agent after 2010: LB Derrick Johnson, LB Tamba Hali, RB Jamaal Charles, CB Brandon Carr

Free agent after 2011: WR Dwayne Bowe, CB Brandon Flowers

The current labor situation in the NFL makes these things hard to predict but we'll assume they keep the threshold for free agency at four years. That means the Chiefs could keep Charles and Carr in-house as restricted free agents. DJ? Tamba? The Chiefs can offer them a long-term deal, franchise/transition tag them or let them walk.

If you look at the Patriots over the last decade they've had to make some very difficult personnel decisions. At some point, a player we view as critical -- such as Asante Samuel was with the New England Patriots -- will be traded or will walk because the Chiefs can't sign everyone. The key is knowing who to sign and who to let walk. In addition to that, do you let them walk for free (with a compensatory pick coming back)? Do you trade them? There are a lot of decisions to make and how you make those decisions are critical.

This is a high-class problem for the Chiefs to have and one of the reasons Clark Hunt continually pointed to GM Scott Pioli's drafting abilities. The plan is that, for some of these guys as their contracts come up, the Chiefs have someone in their place ready to replace them.

As they say, it's a process.

[El Jefe]

Originally Posted by Laz

Chiefs Have Some Work To Do To Keep Young Stars In Kansas City

by Joel Thorman on Oct 29, 2010 8:05 AM PDT in 2010 Kansas City Chiefs Season

More photos » Ed Zurga - AP

There aren't a lot of downsides to winning games and becoming a good football team. Sundays are more fun, the season goes into January (and February?) and you get to see hometown players doing well.
There's a lot to like.

Of course, the downside is that the players on your team are likely to draw interest from other teams because, as a winning team, they're clearly doing something right. That competition for a player makes it more expensive to keep them when contract time comes around. That's an issue the Chiefs could be facing in the next year (and two).

The Chiefs have a few key critical pieces to their success with contracts coming up.

Free agent after 2010: LB Derrick Johnson, LB Tamba Hali, RB Jamaal Charles, CB Brandon Carr

Free agent after 2011: WR Dwayne Bowe, CB Brandon Flowers

The current labor situation in the NFL makes these things hard to predict but we'll assume they keep the threshold for free agency at four years. That means the Chiefs could keep Charles and Carr in-house as restricted free agents. DJ? Tamba? The Chiefs can offer them a long-term deal, franchise/transition tag them or let them walk.

If you look at the Patriots over the last decade they've had to make some very difficult personnel decisions. At some point, a player we view as critical -- such as Asante Samuel was with the New England Patriots -- will be traded or will walk because the Chiefs can't sign everyone. The key is knowing who to sign and who to let walk. In addition to that, do you let them walk for free (with a compensatory pick coming back)? Do you trade them? There are a lot of decisions to make and how you make those decisions are critical.

This is a high-class problem for the Chiefs to have and one of the reasons Clark Hunt continually pointed to GM Scott Pioli's drafting abilities. The plan is that, for some of these guys as their contracts come up, the Chiefs have someone in their place ready to replace them.

As they say, it's a process.

Man, that's four good players. If we could only keep two, we have to keep Tamba obviously, and JC. I don't think Carr and DJ will really be that hard to keep money wise.

[HemiEd]

This team needs to keep all of those guys.

[DaneMcCloud]

This is dumb article.

First off, the current free agency "threshold" isn't four years, it's SIX years.

The only "key" free agent this offseason is Derrick Johnson.

Bowe won't be eligible until after the 2013 season and Flowers that 2014 season.

It's stupid to speculate if that will change because most likely, teams will decertify the union and the NFL will play under current rules until a new CBA can be ratified.

The last time this happened, it took nearly five years to put a new CBA in place and I wouldn't be shocked if it's years before a new CBA is in place.

Either way, this article is as baseless as it is pointless. Four years was the threshold for RESTRICTED free agency, meaning the team could match or be compensated with draft picks if an RFA was signed.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

This is dumb article.

First off, the current free agency isn't four years, it's SIX years.

The only "key" free agent this offseason is Derrick Johnson.

Bowe won't be eligible until after the 2013 season and Flowers that 2014 season.

It's stupid to speculate if that will change because most likely, teams will decertify the union and the NFL will play under current rules until a new CBA can be ratified.

The last time this happened, it took nearly five years to put a new CBA in place and I wouldn't be shocked if it's years before a new CBA is in place.

Either way, this article is as baseless as it is pointless. Four years was the threshold for RESTRICTED free agency, meaning the team could match or be compensated with draft picks if an RFA was signed.

That is good to hear Dane, the thought of losing a few of those guys sucks.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

That is good to hear Dane, the thought of losing ANY of those guys sucks.

FYP ed

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

That is good to hear Dane, the thought of losing a few of those guys sucks.

Plus, there isn't a salary cap in place and I've heard rumblings that there won't be a salary cap in the next CBA. Obviously, I don't know if that's true or not but it seems like the focus of the next CBA will be retired players, a rookie pay scale similar to the NBA's and no salary cap. The Union wants veterans to receive more compensation and the rookies less compensation.

The owners are claiming that salaries are through the roof and they can't afford to pay the current 64% of current revenues, yet they won't open the books to the union. Furthermore, there are owners like Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder that want marketing revenues (jerseys, hats, etc.) to stay with the teams and not be a part of the total revenue pool, which will clearly hurt smaller market teams.

Since there are so many issues that the owners need to resolve amongst themselves before even solving issues with the players, I think it's a safe bet the NFL will continue to play under the current CBA rules for years to come.

With NFL football notching 12 out of the top 15 highest broadcasts this past week, the owners won't be foolish enough to lockout the players and anger the networks. I expect things to roll along as they have since the CBA expired after the 2009 season. So in short, let's not get worked up over something like salaries and losing players.

IF Clark Hunt's Chiefs evolve into a championship team the next year or two, I seriously doubt he'll let superstar players like Flowers (and presumably, Bowe, Hali, Charles, etc.) just walk away.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

FYP ed

I think you might need to continue the repairs, if you read it again.

[Direckshun]

I'd be wary with DJ.

I think he's playing for a paycheck.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Plus, there isn't a salary cap in place and I've heard rumblings that there won't be a salary cap in the next CBA. Obviously, I don't know if that's true or not but it seems like the focus of the next CBA will be retired players, a rookie pay scale similar to the NBA's and no salary cap. The Union wants veterans to receive more compensation and the rookies less compensation.

I agree with the last part, but losing the salary cap could send this sport into a MLB scenerio.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The owners are claiming that salaries are through the roof and they can't afford to pay the current 64% of current revenues, yet they won't open the books to the union. Furthermore, there are owners like Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder that want marketing revenues (jerseys, hats, etc.) to stay with the teams and not be a part of the total revenue pool, which will clearly hurt smaller market teams.

If the owners let those two run things, the Redskins and Cowboys will be the Yankees and Red Sox

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Since there are so many issues that the owners need to resolve amongst themselves before even solving issues with the players, I think it's a safe bet the NFL will continue to play under the current CBA rules for years to come.

Without a salary cap?

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

With football being the highest rated programming on the this past week (12 out of the top 15 highest broadcasts this past week were NFL games), the owners won't be foolish enough to lockout the players and anger the networks.

that makes sense

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I expect things to roll along as they have since the CBA expired after the 2009 season. So in short, let's not get worked up over something like salaries and losing players.

We finally have some talent worth locking up, and the $$$ to do it.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Plus, IF Clark Hunt's Chiefs evolve into a championship team the next year or two, I seriously doubt he'll let superstar players like Flowers (and presumably, Bowe, Hali, Charles, etc.) just walk away.

I agree, and think he is probably positioning himself to do just that.

[DMAC]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'd be wary with DJ.

I think he's playing for a paycheck.

He's gone.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'd be wary with DJ.

I think he's playing for a paycheck.

Or, as some of us would prefer to believe, he finally has Coaching with the ability to extract his talents on the field.

It makes me sick to think of all the defensive draft picks that didn't reach their potential, due to Gunther/Herm and Mr. Slap Happy.

[ChiefaRoo]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'd be wary with DJ.

I think he's playing for a paycheck.

He needs to be resigned and if he dogs it Haley should ride him like a circus pony

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

I agree with the last part, but losing the salary cap could send this sport into a MLB scenerio.

I don't think that will happen for more than a few reasons. First off, we didn't see any outrageous spending this offseason. Now granted, part of that is because the most desirable free agents were restricted another year, from five years to six years of service. But we didn't really see teams blowing money on their existing players, either. Chris Johnson got an extension but it wasn't much money at all.

Secondly, the main difference between MLB and the NFL is the TV contract. The Yankees have their own network, which generates hundreds of millions of dollars for the Yankees only. They're not required to share their TV revenue with any other team. In the NFL, the it's a collective television contract that's share equally by all NFL teams.

And to further that notion, buying high priced free agents have never been the solution to a Super Bowl title. Building through the draft has been the key this past decade.

Originally Posted by HemiEd

If the owners let those two run things, the Redskins and Cowboys will be the Yankees and Red Sox

I doubt the other owners will agree to those demands but IMO, Jerry & Daniel already believe they're the most important owners in the league. But their organizations this year resemble the Royals and Blue Jays more than the Yankees and Red Sox.

Originally Posted by HemiEd

Without a salary cap?

Yes, there is currently no cap in the provision, so it will continue until a new CBA is in place and even then, it may not return. I don't think it's as dire a situation as it would have been a decade ago, due to the escalating salaries that have pretty much driven the sport to it's brink.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

I think you might need to continue the repairs, if you read it again.

hey its friday and thats my first comeback this week so i feel like i'm doing great.