Frank Clark listed as the KC Chiefs worst contract

[LongSufferingToady]

The Kansas City Chiefs have a lot of big-name players and number of significant football decisions to make this offseason because of the financial costs involved in their presence on the roster together. One of the biggest decisions is around pass rusher and defensive end Frank Clark.

A recent column from Bleacher Report’s Alex Ballantine calls out the single worst contract on every NFL team and it’s not surprising in the slightest that Clark’s deal is listed under the Chiefs’ heading. After all, general manager Brett Veach handed him an incredibly lucrative deal after trading for him and the escalation these days is enormous.

This season, the cap hit for Clark was the single highest cap total for any non-quarterback in the NFL. In fact only six quarterbacks were scheduled for a bigger cap hit in 2021 than Clark at $25.8M: Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Jimmy Garoppolo, and Ben Roethlisberger. Even scarier is that this total only climbs higher for each of the next two seasons.

It’s not a big surprise that Frank Clark’s mammoth deal is considered the Chiefs’ worst contract at the present time.
This is the cost of shoving money down Into the bottom of the proverbial bag when organizing the deal. The Chiefs knew this, of course, but it makes for a tough pill to swallow when the first year of such a large contract lands at $6.5 million and three others eclipse the $25 million mark.

Here’s the conundrum for the Chiefs. First, there’s no easy way out of this deal. There’s a load of dead cap space that comes with just setting Clark free. Second, the Chiefs don’t exactly have a ton of proven pass rushers on the roster already. They need Clark, much as they’d like him to cost less.

Even more important is the fact that Clark’s deal is going to start look normal in terms of the market as years go by. Already, Clark will be the third-highest cap hit among defensive ends in 2022 and that’s before any further extensions are signed or new deals in free agency. While Clark is getting paid more, the truth is that he’s dropping in terms of his market position from the highest cap hit of any defender in the NFL to the top three at his position. As Ballantine notes:

“That’s the going price for an elite edge-rusher. The problem is that Clark hasn’t been that for the Chiefs.”

If the Chiefs want someone to fill the role Clark is supposed to fill, then they have to pay someone this much anyway. And they already have Clark as someone around whom they have to plan. How does a team stomach the costs of ridding themselves of one lucrative deal deemed not worth it and then sign someone else for that same rate? The truth is they likely don’t.

The best way forward here would likely be to come to some terms on a renegotiation, realizing just how crippling this deal could be in some respects. That said, Clark isn’t a bust at his position. If the Chiefs moved on, in other words, they would lose very real production.. It’s just that he’s so expensive that the production doesn’t match.

Here’s the thing, if the Chiefs are raising a Lombardi at the end of this road they’re on, none of these costs will matter. Clark is a menace in the postseason and has proven himself capable of carrying this team defensively when they need it. Maybe that’s the best way to justify this deal in the end and just eat the costs knowing it’s all part of the championship package.

https://arrowheadaddict.com/2022/01/...orst-contract/

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief

Delusional...Rewatch this years games with and without Clark...

Oh that's okay - I'll totally take the word of a guy who honestly tried to argue that anyone who doesn't understand that Clark's just supposed to occupy blockers in a 4-3 under scheme doesn't understand football.

I've seen more than enough Frank Clark and after my week of trying every spicy ramen I can get my hands on, my stomach is in nowhere near good enough shape to handle any intentional viewings of him specifically.

[IowaHawkeyeChief]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

He hasn't been a key part of this defense apart from a handful of games in his entire Chiefs career.

By and large he's been along for the ride.

As I've said before - Daniel Sorensen was a MASSIVE part of the 2019 Championship. Yet nobody defends that worthless ass for it. Nobody keeps pointing to that and saying "hey, we need to lay off Sorensen - he was huge when we won the title..."

And damn sure nobody says anything silly like "his job is to set the edge and he's good at that" as though A) that's his job or B) he's even worth a damn at it.

We have excuse after excuse for Frank Clark and nobody else on this roster sans the genuine HoF talents get that kind of latitude. Not even Mathieu. But for whatever reason we still have the Frank Clark stans trying to pretend like he has Tyson Jackson's job and he's just some braindead 3-tech who's supposed to go out there and 2-gap.

It's just nonsense. The weakside end in a Spags system is supposed to just set the edge. Yeah...sure thing.

Delusional, again, he isn't playing near the level of his current contract, but to say he is terrible and doesn't contribute is silly.

[Gary Cooper]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

His interview at the end of the '19 AFCCG made him worth every penny.

You actually understood him?

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

I'm so tired of seeing posts about his great post season, but he lucked into several unimportant sacks and ran into a couple important sacks by riding the coat-tails of other players great performances. I'm ready for him to be gone gone gone.

I'm not saying the Chiefs should keep him around at his salary.

He's obviously overpaid vs what his production indicates. Some of that probably isn't his fault, he was overpaid to begin with, he was never gonna live up to that contract. But I get it...Chiefs deserve more out of the guy. People wanna see more sacks.

But again, Berry and Houston were paid a ton of $$$ and neither showed up in the playoffs. Clark did. He recorded those sacks whether you like how they were obtained or not, and the Chiefs closed out crucial games and won a SB because of it. If he can do it again the next 3 games, hey....worth it

[Willie Lanier]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Oh that's okay - I'll totally take the word of a guy who honestly tried to argue that anyone who doesn't understand that Clark's just supposed to occupy blockers in a 4-3 under scheme doesn't understand football.

I've seen more than enough Frank Clark and after my week of trying every spicy ramen I can get my hands on, my stomach is in nowhere near good enough shape to handle any intentional viewings of him specifically.

Cool your jets (there's my old man saying)

He's been above average; I'll keep that candle lit hoping he goes full Frank Clark

[DTVietnam]

yall worry about money too much..let Veech deal with that..juts enjoy football

bunch of arm chair GMs

Frank Clarks attidude and play helped change this defense from a joke to a respected feared defense

[JPH83]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

No he hasn't. At all.

Again, there's not a single objective metric whereby Clark is even average. He's not 'setting the edge', he's not occupying blockers, he's not winning his reps. He's a warm body.

One thing he actually did well was rush the passer for about 4-6 weeks in the middle of the year. But as a run defender, watch Melvin Ingram actually attack the LOS and tell me that you see anything like that out of Frank Clark.

100% this. Amazes me to see people still talk about his effectiveness against the run. He is bad, at everything, outside of occasional flashes as a rusher. The contract is horrible, the player is rank average ar best, it will be a gift to get rid of both.

[Chris Meck]

What, 4.5 sacks for $29 million dollars?

I mean, really.

[ChiefGator]

You pay to win the game.. hello!?!

[htismaqe]

I can't believe this is even still a discussion.

It's not an either/or situation.

Frank Clark's contract allowed and enabled us to win a Super Bowl in 2019. That's a fact and for that, I'm grateful.

However, Frank Clark's contract in 2021/22 will PREVENT us from winning a Super Bowl if they don't get more money out of him. Cutting him would free up enough cap space to sign 2, if not 3, good players in his stead. This is also a fact and it's really not debatable.

One can be both thankful for Frank Clark and hope that he balls out the rest of the way this your AND acknowledge that it's time to move on after this season.

[Red Dawg]

I have said it before and I will say it again. Does his contract suck? Hell yes. Will he be back in 2022? Probably no chance in hell. Was is worth it? Hell yes. Every move Brett made was part of us getting to the SB twice.

We won the SB and Clark did make some impact. In the locker room for sure with his attitude.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Red Dawg

I have said it before and I will say it again. Does his contract suck? Hell yes. Will he be back in 2022? Probably no chance in hell. Was is worth it? Hell yes. Every move Brett made was part of us getting to the SB twice.

We won the SB and Clark did make some impact. In the locker room for sure with his attitude.

Exactly.

[rtmike]

Too bad we lost Ogbah.

[scho63]

Unless you are 100% sure you will replace him with a better player, why cut him if he has so much dead cap space next year?

What am I missing?

Unless he is a complete bust, is the risk of taking his big cap hit PLUS signing his replacement to a probable high cost add up to a hell of a lot of money?

How much is guaranteed next year?

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by scho63

Unless you are 100% sure you will replace him with a better player, why cut him if he has so much dead cap space next year?

What am I missing?

Unless he is a complete bust, is the risk of taking his big cap hit PLUS signing his replacement to a probable high cost add up to a hell of a lot of money?

How much is guaranteed next year?

He's not going to be that hard to replace. He's not that good. He's decent.

Chiefs can replace him easily.