The whole key to the offseason right here

[Chris Meck]

I brought this up in another thread, but I feel like it may warrant it's own.

IF you cut Houston, it costs you $7 million, (5.6 if you wait till June 2 but you kinda can't wait that long to free up the cash)

If you tag and keep Ford, it's going to cost you like $16 million.

So you've got $23 million conservatively wrapped up in one position: RDE.

IF you keep Houston at $21 million, and tag and trade Ford's $16 million,

you have $21 million in that RDE position. PLUS you get the pick for Ford, which will be I think a decent #2 and perhaps a low #1.

With the extra high pick, you draft a RDE somewhere in your 4 picks in the top 64, along with a CB, and a S.

You'll have enough for one, maybe two impact FA's and be set for next year, when you can cut Houston for only $1.5 dead cap.

I think we've been looking at this wrong; it's a net savings to keep HOUSTON and let FORD go. He's also the better all-around player.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

Panthers or browns at 16 and 17 respectively. Maybe?

I'm just looking at possible needs along with a spot we could seriously have a shot at getting to without giving up too much.

I like any of those options.

He's a good player, and if your docs give his back a thumbs up, he's a smarter bet if you need to win now than a draftee.

IF his run defense doesn't scare you.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The Chiefs are dangling the rumors that Houston could be cut. All the signs point to the Chiefs making Houston a restructure or else cut decision.

are they? because I've only seen speculation by random people on fansites and bloggers with no actual contact with the team or Houston or his agent.

Just speculation.

which, actually, is all I've seen about Houston refusing to rework his deal; although I wouldn't doubt it if he doesn't want to take less money. Still, you could maybe move some of it to a signing bonus or something.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The Chiefs are dangling the rumors that Houston could be cut. All the signs point to the Chiefs making Houston a restructure or else cut decision.

I'm going to have to ask for a link here because I must've missed that somehow

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

It's been claimed he won't restructure for less guaranteed money.

I can't blame him, I wouldn't either.

Even if they DON'T convert some to bonus or whatever, he's still cheaper to keep than cut and pay Ford.

He's about an equal pass rusher and a much better run defender.

I imagine Houston and his agent know that's not reasonable. I'm guessing he's threatening to test the open market to drive up his value. I imagine he and his agent know he's not going to stay on his current contract.

Right now he doesn't have much guaranteed new money left. So paying off that demand isn't that unreasonable.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I imagine Houston and his agent know that's not reasonable. I'm guessing he's threatening to test the open market to drive up his value. I imagine he and his agent know he's not going to stay on his current contract.

Right now he doesn't have much guaranteed new money left. So paying off that demand isn't that unreasonable.

You can (and would) cut him next year rather than pay him $19 m and only have $1.5 m dead cap. As for this year, it won't have anything to do with his market value, which would be pretty high, but not $21 m. Might be a couple or 3 years at $15? Just a guess.

I have no issues with any posturing right now; both sides are going to play hardball, it's just business.

I'm sure Houston's agent has figured out what we did, that it's cheaper to keep him at his current cap number than it is to cut him and pay Dee Ford.

[YontsRBake]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

Look around and see if you can show me wrong.

I can’t find a definitive answer. From what I can find, Pats took dead money for Cassel but I can’t find anything saying we took dead money for doing the same thing with Allen. I feel like it’s very unlikely teams don’t take a penalty for doing this though, or it would be far more common.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by SAUTO

I'm going to have to ask for a link here because I must've missed that somehow

https://fansided.com/2019/02/21/just...rumors-chiefs/
I'm guessing we're working on the OP which responds to reports that the Chiefs will keep one or the other. Seems a lot more smoke around the Chiefs favoring keeping Ford, and cutting Houston. Between the reports that the Chiefs are willing to cut Houston & the reports that Houston won't restructure... can't imagine that smoke happens without the Chiefs putting a restructure ultimatum in front of him.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by YontsRBake

I can’t find a definitive answer. From what I can find, Pats took dead money for Cassel but I can’t find anything saying we took dead money for doing the same thing with Allen. I feel like it’s very unlikely teams don’t take a penalty for doing this though, or it would be far more common.

If you're trading a player under contract, there may well be some dead money, and that may or may not be on a contract by contract basis, I don't know.

If you're tagging a player, you are committed to paying him that tag number and have to do so or cut him outright. But there's no dead cap, because there's no cap number other than the one year deal you've committed to.

If you're able to trade that player, cool, the new team is taking the player and his tag number. They can renegotiate immediately if they want, extend the player and whatever, and that's up to them. the original team is off the hook.

there's no penalty because the tag is a penalty in and of itself: it's an expensive one year contract. If you tag him and nobody wants him, you either have to remove the tag and let him walk for nothing, or pay him the $16 m or so.

But, he'd be last year's most effective pass rusher to hit the market; someone with cap room and need will bite.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

https://fansided.com/2019/02/21/just...rumors-chiefs/
I'm guessing we're working on the OP which responds to reports that the Chiefs will keep one or the other. Seems a lot more smoke around the Chiefs favoring keeping Ford, and cutting Houston. Between the reports that the Chiefs are willing to cut Houston & the reports that Houston won't restructure... can't imagine that smoke happens without the Chiefs putting a restructure ultimatum in front of him.

See I don't see that at all. I'm sure they've talked with his agent about possibilities, but I doubt very seriously there's been any ultimatum this early in the offseason. And ultimatum is for when you really need to do something right now. Free agency hasn't even begun yet, there's time to talk through things. An ultimatum now would be poor negotiating.

[SAUTO]

Well this right here says the patriots didn't have any dead money on cassel https://overthecap.com/player/matt-cassel/1993/

[YontsRBake]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

If you're trading a player under contract, there may well be some dead money, and that may or may not be on a contract by contract basis, I don't know.

If you're tagging a player, you are committed to paying him that tag number and have to do so or cut him outright. But there's no dead cap, because there's no cap number other than the one year deal you've committed to.

If you're able to trade that player, cool, the new team is taking the player and his tag number. They can renegotiate immediately if they want, extend the player and whatever, and that's up to them. the original team is off the hook.

there's no penalty because the tag is a penalty in and of itself: it's an expensive one year contract. If you tag him and nobody wants him, you either have to remove the tag and let him walk for nothing, or pay him the $16 m or so.

But, he'd be last year's most effective pass rusher to hit the market; someone with cap room and need will bite.

So you’re saying any team is able to franchise tag a player, shop them, then remove the tag with no penalty? You get why I’m skeptical here right?

[SAUTO]

And they use the reasoning that releasing Houston almost breaks even on Ford's deal.

But trading Ford almost breaks you even on your savings from cutting Houston and a high pick or 2

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by YontsRBake

So you’re saying any team is able to franchise tag a player, shop them, then remove the tag with no penalty? You get why I’m skeptical here right?

That's exactly what they can do.


Look up panthers and josh norman

[Simply Red]

I'm in the no Houston or Ford camp - I don't care if anyone disagrees - my opinion won't waver.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by YontsRBake

So you’re saying any team is able to franchise tag a player, shop them, then remove the tag with no penalty? You get why I’m skeptical here right?

DUDE. The penalty is that you get nothing, or you pay a big fat one year cap hit. That's the penalty. You could say...tag Case Keenum and try to trade him (if his contract was up...but nobody would take that contract, the tag number would be huge). The whole thing is designed for teams to hold on to premium talent or at least get something equitable for it. BUT if nobody bites you gotta pay it or let them walk.

(Wiki) In the National Football League (NFL), the franchise tag is a designation a team may apply to a player scheduled to become an unrestricted free agent. The tag binds the player to the team for one year if certain conditions are met. Each team only has one franchise tag (of either the exclusive or non-exclusive forms) and one transition tag per year. The transition tag can only be used if the team does not use a franchise tag.

Perhaps originally designed to reduce player movement to bigger markets, which is often evidenced in the other major pro sports leagues, the NFL revenue sharing and a hard salary cap have placed teams on an even playing field relative to salaries. The tag options allow NFL franchises an extended bargaining period for a player that they feel is key to their success. Usually reserved for players of great skill or of high importance to the team, a franchise tag allows a team's general manager the privilege of strategically retaining valuable free-agent players while seeking talent through the NFL draft or other acquisitions without exceeding the League's salary cap.

The designated franchise player will have his one-year salary guaranteed if he elects to play for the team that designated him with the franchise tag and if he does not negotiate a contract with another team.-end Wiki

I know that you can rescind the tag at a certain point, I don't what date that is or what it entails but I'm seeing nothing in researching about any 'penalty'.