Brett Veach hopes Chris Jones can play next week; increased talks last 2 days

[RunKC]

For the mega thread hating crew

#Chiefs GM Brett Veach says he's hopeful that DT Chris Jones will play in their season opener vs. the Lions, which is just eight days away.

Veach mentioned that there has been increased communication on an extension over the past two days. pic.twitter.com/MpLGt0mYhz

— Ari Meirov (@MySportsUpdate) August 30, 2023

[TLO]

4

[TLO]

3

[TLO]

2

[TLO]

1

[TLO]

HAPPY 500TH POST!!!!!!!

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Of course that’s his approach at this point. He’s attempting to use the threat of losing games in his absence as leverage to achieve a better contract. It’s not like they’re 20mm/yr apart - it’s probably ~3mm/yr that the Chiefs could certainly make happen but don’t feel they should. Jones hopes that the threat of having a season upended in his absence is enough to wring some concession from the team.

His thought is: lose some money here upfront by missing games but make up for it with a better contract when the defense struggles in his absence and the team caves.

It’s a bold strategy, Cotton.

Definitely bold... The Chiefs almost went to the SB in 2018-19 with one of the worse defenses in Chiefs history...

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by Fishels

I still don’t really understand how a player can just choose not to play when they are under a contract. I’m not asking people to explain it because I don’t really care(and I’m sure it has been explained 100 times before). But it’s really dumb. Unless it’s an injury or family emergency you have to play on your team with your contract.

It’s really depressing because we simply don’t need this hanging over us. The chiefs can go back to back without Jones but I’d prefer to give it a go with him thank you very much. It’s making my hype for the opening of the season go down in all honesty

I kinda wanna see how we play without him to be honest. Imagine if yhe defense balls out fot 2 or 3 games...then what Chris.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Simply Red

there is no 'bad news' - Next. Man. Up!

I don’t think it’s bad news as much as it is shitty that the chiefs are the victim of bad timing. We will move on without him if necessary but it shouldn’t have come to this. Jones’ agent like so many agents right now, it seems, are playing by old rules.

[O.city]

https://twitter.com/profootballtalk/...lHXA6BeO88mpxA

[Delano]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Of course that’s his approach at this point. He’s attempting to use the threat of losing games in his absence as leverage to achieve a better contract. It’s not like they’re 20mm/yr apart - it’s probably ~3mm/yr that the Chiefs could certainly make happen but don’t feel they should. Jones hopes that the threat of having a season upended in his absence is enough to wring some concession from the team.

His thought is: lose some money here upfront by missing games but make up for it with a better contract when the defense struggles in his absence and the team caves.

It’s a bold strategy, Cotton.

I don’t think it was the original strategy at all. Waiting until after the draft to dig your heels in was the strategy. Jones and Katz are backed into a corner and while it may look like there is some strategy at play, they’re really just sitting on a bad bluff looking to save face. The Chiefs have called the bluff repeatedly with their draft moves, signings, and trades. Signing Omenihu with the knowledge he would be suspended kind of says the Chiefs are fine for these first few games. Veach had to know the CO and CJ things would happen concurrently and was ok with the risk.

I really wonder what the offer on the table is. Is it a few million in annual value or is it an extra guaranteed year?

[Rainbarrel]

Sorry, not sorry

Some road playoff wins would shut down another haters angle

[Delano]

Originally Posted by O.city

https://twitter.com/profootballtalk/...lHXA6BeO88mpxA

I think copypasta of the article or even a link to the article is infinitely better than a twitter link. It’s just, like, planet etiquette dude…

[duncan_idaho]

I can’t imagine the Chiefs are trying to beat the current #2 contract by a grand total of $250k/year on average. So I don’t believe what Florio is saying.

I do believe the Chiefs are at something like $26M AAV and the Katz’s are trying to get it up to $28.5M on AAV, though, since that’s what the info they clearly provided Florio is pursuing for.

[Red Dawg]

Jones agents **** this up. Mo way they came out in March and told Veach the number and he would hold out no matter what. What messed shit up worse is the William's contract was less they thought it would be. He didn't touch the yearly average of AD. But he did get 66 mil guaranteed. That may be an issue but Jones is old. He surely doesn't think he should get more.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Of course that’s his approach at this point. He’s attempting to use the threat of losing games in his absence as leverage to achieve a better contract. It’s not like they’re 20mm/yr apart - it’s probably ~3mm/yr that the Chiefs could certainly make happen but don’t feel they should. Jones hopes that the threat of having a season upended in his absence is enough to wring some concession from the team.

His thought is: lose some money here upfront by missing games but make up for it with a better contract when the defense struggles in his absence and the team caves.

It’s a bold strategy, Cotton.

Its a very selfish strategy, which is okay but, at the same time it hurts the cohesiveness of the team together working towards the same goal of back to back SB's.