Pioli on Carr....

[Consistent1]

Brandon Carr - DB - Chiefs

Chiefs GM Scott Pioli insists the signing of Stanford Routt does not affect the team's feelings for free agent Brandon Carr.
"As a matter of fact," said Pioli, "Romeo [Crennel] and I both reached out to Brandon yesterday as this was unfolding and talked to him. ... He knows, and he's known before, he's someone we want to keep here, and he's still someone we want to keep a Chief." That may be true, but it's now easier said than done if Carr draws an attractive offer from another team -- as is expected to be the case.
Source: ArrowheadPride.com
Feb 21 - 4:11 PM

[Dylan]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Talking about Pioli grilling out his employees when they found a candy or gum wrapper in one of the stairwells. That was in the Arrowhead Anxiety story.

Oh, ok...

The media picked up on the story? LOL

[JoeyChuckles]

I thought the thread title was telling us to pee on a car.

Too late.

[BigChiefFan]

I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, because I still think Pioli has something up his sleeve, to really make a big splash.

That said, if they let Carr go without franchising and getting compensation, it will be a bone-headed move.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, because I still think Pioli has something up his sleeve, to really make a big splash.

That said, if they let Carr go without franchising and getting compensation, it will be a bone-headed move.

Are you willing to just let Bowe walk then?

[BigChiefFan]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Are you willing to just let Bowe walk then?

No. One needs to be signed long-term and the other franchised.

Short of ownership being cheap, there's zero reasons, not to at least use the franchise tag on one of the players and get a deal done with the agent that wants to get something done.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

No. One needs to be signed long-term and the other franchised.

Short of ownership being cheap, there's zero reasons, not to at least use the franchise tag on one of the players and get a deal done with the agent that wants to get something done.

There are two sides involved in both of those negotiations. It's not at all clear that one of them can be signed to a long term deal before free agency starts. The only thing that is clearly within Pioli's control is the franchise tag on ONE of those two players. If he manages to get something done with both players, it will be a huge accomplishment.

[BigChiefFan]

Originally Posted by patteeu

There are two sides involved in both of those negotiations. It's not at all clear that one of them can be signed to a long term deal before free agency starts. The only thing that is clearly within Pioli's control is the franchise tag on ONE of those two players. If he manages to get something done with both players, it will be a huge accomplishment.

You've got to admit he's been pretty damn good at getting people signed. He even gets the rookies signed and into camp on time.

It's a little different animal, but I think if he really wants to get something done and the player and agent, do as well, we've got a pretty good shot at getting at least one of them signed, IMO and that's all we need.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.


I also give him credit, just in case we can't retain Carr, we've got plan B in place already.

Carl would have moved Arenas into the starting line-up.

[hometeam]

You guys forget that whoever does not get franchised gets to test FA. There are plenty of suitors for both of them, and with Routt signed, I think that Carr is more likely to get to test FA. And of course, he will get PAID. How many times do 25 year old top tier corners hit FA?

[Chiefaholic]

Let's just pretend for a minute that Carr wants Flowers money. Do you guys seriously think Pioli will tie up $25+ million for a nickle package? And let's say Pioli picks up a few FA's to fill some of the multiple weaknesses we have and we have the option to use the 10+ million to have a bad ass secondary OR fix the gaping hole we have at NT with Soliai and possibly Carl Nicks at OG and keep Hudson at center.

The only way I'd be in favor of keeping Carr would be to sign him to a reasonable deal and move Routt to safety. If both Carr and Routt were asking similar cash, then it's Carr w/o question. But, BC earned a big payday and it doesn't make good business sense to tie that much cash into a secondary when we have gaping holes to fill at OG, RT, QB, and NT.

[O.city]

First off, no way Nicks is a CHief. Dude wants 60 million or more.

Second, IMO you can never have too much of one thing. I guess punters or something like that yeah, but you can never have too many great players. Granted you have to watch your spending.

Thats the catching point. It's hard to wrap up that much money in one spot. However, if they are really going to be that good, then is it really that bad?

[The Franchise]

What about a 3-3-5?

Jackson - Soliai - Dorsey

Hali - DJ - Houston

Flowers - Routt - Lewis - Berry - Carr

[Hammock Parties]

I would like to see Pioli under a car.

[BigChiefFan]

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

Let's just pretend for a minute that Carr wants Flowers money. Do you guys seriously think Pioli will tie up $25+ million for a nickle package? And let's say Pioli picks up a few FA's to fill some of the multiple weaknesses we have and we have the option to use the 10+ million to have a bad ass secondary OR fix the gaping hole we have at NT with Soliai and possibly Carl Nicks at OG and keep Hudson at center.

The only way I'd be in favor of keeping Carr would be to sign him to a reasonable deal and move Routt to safety. If both Carr and Routt were asking similar cash, then it's Carr w/o question. But, BC earned a big payday and it doesn't make good business sense to tie that much cash into a secondary when we have gaping holes to fill at OG, RT, QB, and NT.

On paper that sounds good, but in reality it's hard to replace a 25 year old ascending CB. A bird in the hand, is worth two in the bush. When you have a piece of the puzzle for years to come, you don't look for their replacement, you retain that player and move on to a position that needs upgrading.

If we lose Carr, we took a step-back in the secondary-that's not my idea of building the best team.

[O.city]

I wouldn't want to do that stuff on every down, but with Carr and Routt or Routt and wimbley or Routt, Carr and whoever, you can do some really nasty scary things with this defense.

[Chiefaholic]

Originally Posted by O.city

First off, no way Nicks is a CHief. Dude wants 60 million or more.

Second, IMO you can never have too much of one thing. I guess punters or something like that yeah, but you can never have too many great players. Granted you have to watch your spending.

Thats the catching point. It's hard to wrap up that much money in one spot. However, if they are really going to be that good, then is it really that bad?

I agree to an extent.. If Carr were to accept a deal that allows us to sign Soliai, and a starter on the OL (either LG or RT), then I'de be OK with it. But, right now our greatest defensive NEED is a big NT to eat up blocks and stuff the run. At this point a high salary Carr is more of a luxury than a need. Right now it's more of a wait and see approach to see what kind of contract BC is looking for. For that matter, who's to say he wants to play in KC? He might give a hometown discount to play in Detroit.