Larry Johnson refusing to report to camp (1 Viewer)

[Family Matters]

What this is about is how much KC is willing to pay. It's as simple as that. They will have to decide if they are willing to pay fair market money to LJ. If not and if he insists on fair market then this will get ugly. There could be some compromise that makes them both happy but we'll have to see if that exists. My guess is LJ will have to make more concessions than KC.

Remember the Gates deal? SD played hardball wile Gates wanted to paid like a top TE? Well Gates got top TE guarenteed money but he had to compromise by doing a longer term which is what SD wanted. I can see something similar happening here only with bigger money involved due to the higher cap dollars.

Disagree strongly in both regards.LJ has never made it sound like Kansas City the city or the franchise is his long-term choice as a place to play. Hasn't he publicly said he didn't fit into the community in the past? If LJ sat the first half of the season he'd still have plenty of takers once he hits the market while KC would pretty much lose an entire season if LJ chose to sit. KC has more to lose in this situation. KC is more likely to bend imo.

The Gates deal was different for several reasons;

- part of the higher $ will be due to higher cap dollars as you mention but a much bigger difference is the fact LJ is a franchise RB. If he wants to be paid in the same ballpark as other franchise RB's(LT in particular) that's a huge departure from top TE $. A much bigger financial commitment especially with regard to signing bonus.

- at the time of the Gates negotiation he had only one great year on his resume(and hadn't broken 1000 yards) compared to LJ's two years of domination. LJ's earned his $ more than Gates had at the time of his negotiation.

- Gates was 25yo so SD was definitely interested in a long-term six year deal. Is it realistic to assume Gates would be playing at a high level at the ripe old age of 31 in the waning years of his contract? I think so. More likely than LJ will still be earning his $ at the age of 34. KC will be required to give LJ a giant signing bonus but realistically only has 2-3 more years of LJ at his prime to spread that huge signing bonus out.

I'm very careful to avoid criticizing KC in this situation despite the fact LJ has earned his extension based on his play on the field. The team that LJ plays for next year is going to have to make a huge financial commitment for a guy that will be 29yo and will likely be declining in a year or two. IMO KC has already answered the question whether or not they are willing to pay what the market will be for LJ by not giving him his extension. The question is asked and answered.

When I referred to a situation similar to Gates, that was not intended as a comparison of the players as much as how it might be negotiated. I can see similarities but you make good points defining their differences.KC has the upper hand and they will decide his fate. If they decide they son't want pay him the money then they can always trade him and LJ has no say in it. I'm sure he and his agent recognize this but that doesn't mean they won't try to force KC's hand.

As to KC asking and answering the question, I'm not so sure. They made an offer. They are low balling which is common at this point of the negotiations, which is exactly what SD did to Gates. It's what every club does. But they did make an offer and that says they want him but as to what price is the question. I'm just not so sure it's been answered yet. I am concerned that they won't want to pay fair market and I don't know that LJ is willing to move on his demands.

One last thought. As I remember things, KC wanted LJ real bad and drafted him in spite of their coaches (Vermeil) wishes against doing so. What, if anything, has changed that they no longer want him? If the love is still there then a deal has a good chance of getting done. If not then maybe they will part ways. But I really wonder where all the love is right now after the owners has passed and LJ is making demands. If anyone has any local info on this angle please speak up.

 

[BoltBacker]

One last thought. As I remember things, KC wanted LJ real bad and drafted him in spite of their coaches (Vermeil) wishes against doing so. What, if anything, has changed that they no longer want him? If the love is still there then a deal has a good chance of getting done. If not then maybe they will part ways. But I really wonder where all the love is right now after the owners has passed and LJ is making demands. If anyone has any local info on this angle please speak up.

I see where you're coming from but again I have a different perspective on KC drafting LJ. Did KC draft LJ because they wanted him real bad or because that summer Priest had been making contract demands(and skipped camps and the entire preseason that year if I recall)? To me it was a very similar situation to this one(at that time Priest was 29yo after being used sparingly early in his career). Was this tid-bit before the '07 draft just a coincidence...."April 20, 2007, 22:19

Chiefs :: RB

Chiefs Looking At First-Day RBs In Draft

Adam Teicher, Kansas City Star - [Full Article]

The Kansas City Chiefs are reportedly looking at several first-day running backs in the 2007 NFL Draft, in effort to find a young back who can back-up and possibly share part of the load with starting running back Larry Johnson. " ~FBG News

... or is it history repeating itself? Of course Vermiel was against drafting LJ because he wanted a pick to help KC win a playoff game and they already had the best RB in football at the time. KC had a LOT of holes to fill on that team... in fact they could have drafted just about any position other than RB/TE/OL and it would have helped the team tremendously.

Priest ended up getting an extension in that case and showed up in time to play the first game but it was one of those "terms were not disclosed" deals which always makes me wonder if the team is letting him save face by getting his new contract but it's nowhere near what Priest wanted or could have gotten on the free market. Priest was a very different cat than LJ though. I don't think Priest wanted to leave KC and that Vermiel offense/OL. LJ doesn't have as much to walk away from as Priest did.

 

[az_prof]

This is going to get messy. LJ is a volatile guy who can't shut his face. Peterson is known as a notorious lowball/hardball guy. Over the long haul, this hurts Peterson and the Chiefs more than LJ. The kid is going to get traded at some point and get his money as long as he stays healthy. I think that's obvious. But what Peterson is doing is ensuring that no legitimate FA worth having will truly want to come to KC. And when his young players who do develop start sniffing a little freedom, they know Peterson will lowball/hardball them too. At some point, yes, it's a business and it's a ruthless business. And at some other level, you have to avoid the label of just plain being out of touch. The small bump up from what the Fins gave up for Green, was it worth the pain and suffering down the road to know no one will EVER, and I mean EVER, give KC any kind of hometown discount again? The Pats spent some big money this off season. Do you think the issue with Deion Branch, a clear Brady favorite, had nothing to do with all that? You don't want to sign players to bad contracts sure, but you also don't want to leave the perception that you will never ever take care of your own.

The Pats had money to spend this off season because they didn't waste it all by over paying for Deion Branch. If the Chiefs give LJ 28 million guaranteed, they won't have the money or cap space to bring in any Free Agents next year. I think it is foolish to give away that much money to a RB when an average RB can do as well if you have a great offensive line. OL and QB are what matter on offense.

 

[Family Matters]

This is going to get messy.

LJ is a volatile guy who can't shut his face. Peterson is known as a notorious lowball/hardball guy.

Over the long haul, this hurts Peterson and the Chiefs more than LJ. The kid is going to get traded at some point and get his money as long as he stays healthy. I think that's obvious. But what Peterson is doing is ensuring that no legitimate FA worth having will truly want to come to KC. And when his young players who do develop start sniffing a little freedom, they know Peterson will lowball/hardball them too.

At some point, yes, it's a business and it's a ruthless business. And at some other level, you have to avoid the label of just plain being out of touch. The small bump up from what the Fins gave up for Green, was it worth the pain and suffering down the road to know no one will EVER, and I mean EVER, give KC any kind of hometown discount again?

The Pats spent some big money this off season. Do you think the issue with Deion Branch, a clear Brady favorite, had nothing to do with all that? You don't want to sign players to bad contracts sure, but you also don't want to leave the perception that you will never ever take care of your own.

The Pats had money to spend this off season because they didn't waste it all by over paying for Deion Branch. If the Chiefs give LJ 28 million guaranteed, they won't have the money or cap space to bring in any Free Agents next year. I think it is foolish to give away that much money to a RB when an average RB can do as well if you have a great offensive line. OL and QB are what matter on offense.

To an extent this comment makes some sense because it does take a good O-line to have an effective running game. But suggesting that any back would do just as well is not reality. If it were then you would never need and LT or Sanders or Brown, right? Of course great backs make a difference. That's why we say guys like Sanders and Brown are some of the best we've ever seen. And I think many would argue that Det have a good O-line all the years BArry played there.As for big money, the cap situation has changed dramatically and they have the money to pay. We've seen it with DB's, OLman and Dlineman as well. It's all up to the team.

As for KC, the real issue is more likely "will" they pay, not can they. In this regard KC is alot like other small market teams such as Pitts and Cinncy in that they don't like paying the big bucks. It affects their bottom line moreso than say teams like Dallas.

 

[Family Matters]

One last thought. As I remember things, KC wanted LJ real bad and drafted him in spite of their coaches (Vermeil) wishes against doing so. What, if anything, has changed that they no longer want him? If the love is still there then a deal has a good chance of getting done. If not then maybe they will part ways. But I really wonder where all the love is right now after the owners has passed and LJ is making demands. If anyone has any local info on this angle please speak up.

I see where you're coming from but again I have a different perspective on KC drafting LJ. Did KC draft LJ because they wanted him real bad or because that summer Priest had been making contract demands(and skipped camps and the entire preseason that year if I recall)? To me it was a very similar situation to this one(at that time Priest was 29yo after being used sparingly early in his career). Was this tid-bit before the '07 draft just a coincidence...."April 20, 2007, 22:19

Chiefs :: RB

Chiefs Looking At First-Day RBs In Draft

Adam Teicher, Kansas City Star - [Full Article]

The Kansas City Chiefs are reportedly looking at several first-day running backs in the 2007 NFL Draft, in effort to find a young back who can back-up and possibly share part of the load with starting running back Larry Johnson. " ~FBG News

... or is it history repeating itself? Of course Vermiel was against drafting LJ because he wanted a pick to help KC win a playoff game and they already had the best RB in football at the time. KC had a LOT of holes to fill on that team... in fact they could have drafted just about any position other than RB/TE/OL and it would have helped the team tremendously.

Priest ended up getting an extension in that case and showed up in time to play the first game but it was one of those "terms were not disclosed" deals which always makes me wonder if the team is letting him save face by getting his new contract but it's nowhere near what Priest wanted or could have gotten on the free market. Priest was a very different cat than LJ though. I don't think Priest wanted to leave KC and that Vermiel offense/OL. LJ doesn't have as much to walk away from as Priest did.

I'm going to defer to the local guys that have the insight but as I recall there some tension between Vermeil and the ownership/GN over drafting LJ and it was more than the Holmes thing. Vermeil wanted his guy and they wanted theirs. The tension followed around until Holmes got injured and that forced Vermeil to go to LJ. Alot of the tension that LJ felt had to do with Vermeil and his dislike of LJ.So again I am wondering where that relationship is today. Does KC still love LJ? Anyone?

 

[erymer]

Anytime anyone signs a written contract, they need to abide by that contract. I pour concrete for a living, and if I violated the terms of a contract between me and the homeowner or business,... well I'd be taken to court and the judge would ask me why I violated the contract... no excuses, I'd be in the wrong, and probably be sued. ALL players should think before they sign on the dotted line. Don't wait a few years and then decide they are worth more than the current contract that they signed years ago. That's immature. He should Honor the contract that he SIGNED. Period.

I used to feel exactly the same way, but look at it this way. Teams don't fully honor the contracts they have with players. They cut players all the time before their contracts are up and the players have to scramble to find another team to sign on with. Teams cut players to save money and they end up as a salary cap casualty. Did the player do anything wrong? Probably not, he was just trying to live up to his contract. It seems to be a bit of a double standard. It's ok when teams do it, but players are considered greedy or immature. To me there isn't any difference between the two.

 

[msommer]

Since in one league I have to face the LJ owner twice I'm cheering for a lengthy hold out...

That, a long life and for LJ

 

[The Kansas Comet]

The Pats had money to spend this off season because they didn't waste it all by over paying for Deion Branch. If the Chiefs give LJ 28 million guaranteed, they won't have the money or cap space to bring in any Free Agents next year. I think it is foolish to give away that much money to a RB when an average RB can do as well if you have a great offensive line. OL and QB are what matter on offense.

That's not necessarily true. It all has to do with the amount of cap room the Chiefs have right now (and project to have in the future) and how the contract is structured. I think they were about $7 million under in March. Also, the salary cap is projected to increase another $7 million to $116 million for the 2008 season (and it will have a similar increases in 2009, 2010, and 2011 as well), which allows for flexibility in signing free agents. Getting rid of Green's $7.2 million salary this year also helped clear some space (as did cutting Knight, Turley, and trading Dante Hall). It just depends on how the team sets up the contract - there's enough room to pay LJ close to what he wants in the near term without messing up the salary cap in the long term.

 

[clinton_c]

IMHO - LJ will be trade to Dallas for Julius Jones and one of their firsts next year. Dallas will be able to pay the man

Just to make a few things clear involving Dallas.1. Everyone can forget Dallas trading the Cleveland 1st rounder...that baby is like a pot of Gold to the Cowboys.2.Jones is a FA, so I am not sure why K.C. would trade for him (unless it is just to give him an audtion for a contact extension)3.Now I can't see KC taking less than a 1st rounder for LJ, so the Cowboys could trade for LJ by offering their own 1st (probably in the 20's with LJ aboard) and then either Jones or Barber.4.There is plenty of whisper that Dallas is hard-up for McFadden from Ark next year...remember Jones is an Ark grad and loves him some razorback football. Any trade and extendion of LJ would end that dream.5.there is alot of talk that Parcells system held Julius Jones back (sounds like excuses to me), so it seems that Dallas wants to see what he has.Personally if I was Dallas I would see if they could work something out for LJ....to many variables go into getting McFadden, and if you get a superstar for say Jones+late 1st round pick you would have to do it....you then still have the Cleveland pick to select another very talented player.

 

[Keysersoze666]

Just to add a few FACTS to the conversation ...

LJ was born on 11/19/79 ... which means he's TWENTY-SEVEN now and will be 28 during the season, NOT 29.

He's a 4 year vet and here are his yearly touches (carries + receptions) so far:

2003 = 21

2004 = 142

2005 = 369

2006 = 457

TOTAL = 989 ... an average of 247 per ... or 413 over the past 2 years

That is barely 2.5 years in NFL terms, do you belive in AGE or MILEAGE?

Ladanian Tomlinson was born on 6/23/79, which means he's FIVE Months OLDER than LJ.

Here are LT2's touches in comparison:

2001 = 398

2002 = 451

2003 = 413

2004 = 392

2005 = 390

2006 = 404

TOTAL = 2448 ... an average of 408 over SIX years ... or 397 over the past 2 years .. ONLY SIXTEEN less per season than LJ over the last two years. It's ONLY FIVE less per season over LT2's CAREER!

To conclude, the league's TOP RB is older than LJ and has 1500 MORE touches ... yet people are worried about LJ's durability? WHAT??? I won't make the assumption that LJ is LT2's equal, but it's a SILLY argument to consider LJ even remotely OLD or USED.

 

[Family Matters]

Just to add a few FACTS to the conversation ...

LJ was born on 11/19/79 ... which means he's TWENTY-SEVEN now and will be 28 during the season, NOT 29.

He's a 4 year vet and here are his yearly touches (carries + receptions) so far:

2003 = 21

2004 = 142

2005 = 369

2006 = 457

TOTAL = 989 ... an average of 247 per ... or 413 over the past 2 years

That is barely 2.5 years in NFL terms, do you belive in AGE or MILEAGE?

Ladanian Tomlinson was born on 6/23/79, which means he's FIVE Months OLDER than LJ.

Here are LT2's touches in comparison:

2001 = 398

2002 = 451

2003 = 413

2004 = 392

2005 = 390

2006 = 404

TOTAL = 2448 ... an average of 408 over SIX years ... or 397 over the past 2 years .. ONLY SIXTEEN less per season than LJ over the last two years. It's ONLY FIVE less per season over LT2's CAREER!

To conclude, the league's TOP RB is older than LJ and has 1500 MORE touches ... yet people are worried about LJ's durability? WHAT??? I won't make the assumption that LJ is LT2's equal, but it's a SILLY argument to consider LJ even remotely OLD or USED.

Key you are right on. But people who argue that there's something wrong with LJ will simply dismiss logic with the "but I know he's going to get injured" theory. Some of them are the same ones that said that about LT after his 2nd & 3rd seasons. So while you point out the obviuos to many there will always that fringe group of folks that can predict injury.Now for those that want to argue that he might hold out, well now that's an arguement that might have some merit. Considering KC's penchant for playing hardball and trying to prove their point, (ala Trent Green) this in fact could be a reality. It's the only thing I see that could result in fewer touches and productivity. All that other stuff (Line concerns, age and wear and tear) makes for fun debate but has little to do with what will happen on the field, IMHO.

 

[erymer]

Just to add a few FACTS to the conversation ...

LJ was born on 11/19/79 ... which means he's TWENTY-SEVEN now and will be 28 during the season, NOT 29.

He's a 4 year vet and here are his yearly touches (carries + receptions) so far:

2003 = 21

2004 = 142

2005 = 369

2006 = 457

TOTAL = 989 ... an average of 247 per ... or 413 over the past 2 years

That is barely 2.5 years in NFL terms, do you belive in AGE or MILEAGE?

Ladanian Tomlinson was born on 6/23/79, which means he's FIVE Months OLDER than LJ.

Here are LT2's touches in comparison:

2001 = 398

2002 = 451

2003 = 413

2004 = 392

2005 = 390

2006 = 404

TOTAL = 2448 ... an average of 408 over SIX years ... or 397 over the past 2 years .. ONLY SIXTEEN less per season than LJ over the last two years. It's ONLY FIVE less per season over LT2's CAREER!

To conclude, the league's TOP RB is older than LJ and has 1500 MORE touches ... yet people are worried about LJ's durability? WHAT??? I won't make the assumption that LJ is LT2's equal, but it's a SILLY argument to consider LJ even remotely OLD or USED.

 

[Family Matters]

IMHO - LJ will be trade to Dallas for Julius Jones and one of their firsts next year. Dallas will be able to pay the man

Just to make a few things clear involving Dallas.1. Everyone can forget Dallas trading the Cleveland 1st rounder...that baby is like a pot of Gold to the Cowboys.

2.Jones is a FA, so I am not sure why K.C. would trade for him (unless it is just to give him an audtion for a contact extension)

3.Now I can't see KC taking less than a 1st rounder for LJ, so the Cowboys could trade for LJ by offering their own 1st (probably in the 20's with LJ aboard) and then either Jones or Barber.

4.There is plenty of whisper that Dallas is hard-up for McFadden from Ark next year...remember Jones is an Ark grad and loves him some razorback football. Any trade and extendion of LJ would end that dream.

5.there is alot of talk that Parcells system held Julius Jones back (sounds like excuses to me), so it seems that Dallas wants to see what he has.

Personally if I was Dallas I would see if they could work something out for LJ....to many variables go into getting McFadden, and if you get a superstar for say Jones+late 1st round pick you would have to do it....you then still have the Cleveland pick to select another very talented player.

The part that makes you stop and pay attention is that comment. Dallas has no control over getting McFadden so it doesn't really make sense that would "hold out" for that remote possibility. The bottom line is if they (Jones) feel LJ will help them get over the hump to win a title then they would.As for the trade suggestion, I can see Dallas wanting LJ. I can't really see the value in KC wanting Jones or Barber. What's he going to do for them that would make want to trade LJ away? If they were that good than Dallas would just keep them and do without LJ it seems. The problem is Dallas has no RB they can't put on the field and call him their goto guy. And of course that would explain their wanting LJ. I think it would make more sens for them include a top D player or O-line guy. But who knows. Maybe Dallas no interest at all.

Of course they may be waiting to see how it plays out. The closer to beginning of the seaon they get, the better deal they might get if they were to trade.

 

[joffer]

Just to add a few FACTS to the conversation ...LJ was born on 11/19/79 ... which means he's TWENTY-SEVEN now and will be 28 during the season, NOT 29.

don't spoil everyone's fun, at the current pace he'll be 56 by week 1.

 

[Sudsy]

Anytime anyone signs a written contract, they need to abide by that contract. I pour concrete for a living, and if I violated the terms of a contract between me and the homeowner or business,... well I'd be taken to court and the judge would ask me why I violated the contract... no excuses, I'd be in the wrong, and probably be sued. ALL players should think before they sign on the dotted line. Don't wait a few years and then decide they are worth more than the current contract that they signed years ago. That's immature. He should Honor the contract that he SIGNED. Period.

I used to feel exactly the same way, but look at it this way. Teams don't fully honor the contracts they have with players. They cut players all the time before their contracts are up and the players have to scramble to find another team to sign on with. Teams cut players to save money and they end up as a salary cap casualty. Did the player do anything wrong? Probably not, he was just trying to live up to his contract. It seems to be a bit of a double standard. It's ok when teams do it, but players are considered greedy or immature. To me there isn't any difference between the two.

Once again, no team has ever not honored a contract, ever. If they failed to do so they would get sued. The contracts allow them to cut players. It is the very nature of the contracts they sign. They pay substantial bonuses to the players for just that right.

 

[Family Matters]

Anytime anyone signs a written contract, they need to abide by that contract. I pour concrete for a living, and if I violated the terms of a contract between me and the homeowner or business,... well I'd be taken to court and the judge would ask me why I violated the contract... no excuses, I'd be in the wrong, and probably be sued. ALL players should think before they sign on the dotted line. Don't wait a few years and then decide they are worth more than the current contract that they signed years ago. That's immature. He should Honor the contract that he SIGNED. Period.

I used to feel exactly the same way, but look at it this way. Teams don't fully honor the contracts they have with players. They cut players all the time before their contracts are up and the players have to scramble to find another team to sign on with. Teams cut players to save money and they end up as a salary cap casualty. Did the player do anything wrong? Probably not, he was just trying to live up to his contract. It seems to be a bit of a double standard. It's ok when teams do it, but players are considered greedy or immature. To me there isn't any difference between the two. :whoosh:

Once again, no team has ever not honored a contract, ever. If they failed to do so they would get sued. The contracts allow them to cut players. It is the very nature of the contracts they sign. They pay substantial bonuses to the players for just that right.

While you are mostly correct in this, what some are trying to say is that the contracts are skewed to the owners, not the players. When a player in in the last year of his contract for example, he cannot negotiate a new one unless the owner is willing. And while that's what the contract calls for the player assumes all the risk. If he gets injured he could lose the opportunity to make a living in the NFL. What many guys try to do is protect themselves against that happeneing. You really can't blame them. As was stated earlier, look at what heppened to Walker. He was pressurered/forced to return without a new deal and got injured. He could have lost it all but he was lucky in the sense that he still got a new3 deal. It just wasn't as good as what he would of gotten if he had not gotten injured.So while you are right and the owners do honor their deals, as they are written, they are risk advers for the most part to the owners. If a player gets injured they don't have to pay wexcept what was paid in guarenteed money already. They can walk away from a deal anytime they want with the only risk being their "cap hit" which isn't real money. The player can't do the same. So I put that on the CBA/Players Union for putting these deals together. Upshaw hasn't exactly helped the players out. The big boys do well such as the Mannings. But the majority of guys do not fair so well. They don't get that much in guarteeed money. And that's 90% (give or take) of all the players.

 

[veto87]

pay Emmitt !

remember that ?

 

[Obie Wan]

Anytime anyone signs a written contract, they need to abide by that contract. I pour concrete for a living, and if I violated the terms of a contract between me and the homeowner or business,... well I'd be taken to court and the judge would ask me why I violated the contract... no excuses, I'd be in the wrong, and probably be sued. ALL players should think before they sign on the dotted line. Don't wait a few years and then decide they are worth more than the current contract that they signed years ago. That's immature. He should Honor the contract that he SIGNED. Period.

I used to feel exactly the same way, but look at it this way. Teams don't fully honor the contracts they have with players. They cut players all the time before their contracts are up and the players have to scramble to find another team to sign on with. Teams cut players to save money and they end up as a salary cap casualty. Did the player do anything wrong? Probably not, he was just trying to live up to his contract. It seems to be a bit of a double standard. It's ok when teams do it, but players are considered greedy or immature. To me there isn't any difference between the two. :whoosh:

Once again, no team has ever not honored a contract, ever. If they failed to do so they would get sued. The contracts allow them to cut players. It is the very nature of the contracts they sign. They pay substantial bonuses to the players for just that right.

While you are mostly correct in this, what some are trying to say is that the contracts are skewed to the owners, not the players. When a player in in the last year of his contract for example, he cannot negotiate a new one unless the owner is willing. And while that's what the contract calls for the player assumes all the risk. If he gets injured he could lose the opportunity to make a living in the NFL. What many guys try to do is protect themselves against that happeneing. You really can't blame them. As was stated earlier, look at what heppened to Walker. He was pressurered/forced to return without a new deal and got injured. He could have lost it all but he was lucky in the sense that he still got a new3 deal. It just wasn't as good as what he would of gotten if he had not gotten injured.So while you are right and the owners do honor their deals, as they are written, they are risk advers for the most part to the owners. If a player gets injured they don't have to pay wexcept what was paid in guarenteed money already. They can walk away from a deal anytime they want with the only risk being their "cap hit" which isn't real money. The player can't do the same. So I put that on the CBA/Players Union for putting these deals together. Upshaw hasn't exactly helped the players out. The big boys do well such as the Mannings. But the majority of guys do not fair so well. They don't get that much in guarteeed money. And that's 90% (give or take) of all the players.

that's because the players are short sighted and/or stupid.Many players want the fame for getting huge contracts which are generated by greatly inflating the last years of a deal. However, it becomes a foregone conclusion that the team will never honor the last year's because they were bogus from the very beginning. Now if the player and his agent are too stupid to understand this, then that is the player's problem.On the other hand, if the deal was structured with huge numbers in the out years to force the team to cut the player so he can become a free agent, then the player should not be whining when they get cut because the team is doing what the contract was designed to accomplish. In either case, all this whining about the one sided contract is bull-crap.If players want to play out their contracts, they should be designed to pay reasonable amounts over the entire term and include incentives to protect against big increases. Smart agents would delay the receipt of guaranteed money in exchange for other terms which would make it less attractive for a team to cut a player.

 

[Family Matters]

Anytime anyone signs a written contract, they need to abide by that contract. I pour concrete for a living, and if I violated the terms of a contract between me and the homeowner or business,... well I'd be taken to court and the judge would ask me why I violated the contract... no excuses, I'd be in the wrong, and probably be sued. ALL players should think before they sign on the dotted line. Don't wait a few years and then decide they are worth more than the current contract that they signed years ago. That's immature. He should Honor the contract that he SIGNED. Period.

I used to feel exactly the same way, but look at it this way. Teams don't fully honor the contracts they have with players. They cut players all the time before their contracts are up and the players have to scramble to find another team to sign on with. Teams cut players to save money and they end up as a salary cap casualty. Did the player do anything wrong? Probably not, he was just trying to live up to his contract. It seems to be a bit of a double standard. It's ok when teams do it, but players are considered greedy or immature. To me there isn't any difference between the two.

Once again, no team has ever not honored a contract, ever. If they failed to do so they would get sued. The contracts allow them to cut players. It is the very nature of the contracts they sign. They pay substantial bonuses to the players for just that right.

While you are mostly correct in this, what some are trying to say is that the contracts are skewed to the owners, not the players. When a player in in the last year of his contract for example, he cannot negotiate a new one unless the owner is willing. And while that's what the contract calls for the player assumes all the risk. If he gets injured he could lose the opportunity to make a living in the NFL. What many guys try to do is protect themselves against that happeneing. You really can't blame them. As was stated earlier, look at what heppened to Walker. He was pressurered/forced to return without a new deal and got injured. He could have lost it all but he was lucky in the sense that he still got a new3 deal. It just wasn't as good as what he would of gotten if he had not gotten injured.So while you are right and the owners do honor their deals, as they are written, they are risk advers for the most part to the owners. If a player gets injured they don't have to pay wexcept what was paid in guarenteed money already. They can walk away from a deal anytime they want with the only risk being their "cap hit" which isn't real money. The player can't do the same. So I put that on the CBA/Players Union for putting these deals together. Upshaw hasn't exactly helped the players out. The big boys do well such as the Mannings. But the majority of guys do not fair so well. They don't get that much in guarteeed money. And that's 90% (give or take) of all the players.

that's because the players are short sighted and/or stupid.Many players want the fame for getting huge contracts which are generated by greatly inflating the last years of a deal. However, it becomes a foregone conclusion that the team will never honor the last year's because they were bogus from the very beginning. Now if the player and his agent are too stupid to understand this, then that is the player's problem.On the other hand, if the deal was structured with huge numbers in the out years to force the team to cut the player so he can become a free agent, then the player should not be whining when they get cut because the team is doing what the contract was designed to accomplish. In either case, all this whining about the one sided contract is bull-crap.If players want to play out their contracts, they should be designed to pay reasonable amounts over the entire term and include incentives to protect against big increases. Smart agents would delay the receipt of guaranteed money in exchange for other terms which would make it less attractive for a team to cut a player.

I guess you don't get what I'm saying on this. First off I wasn't referring to the deals you referenced above. They are what they are and what the players are after is the guarenteed up front money becuase they know these deals will never see the end. Now let's take a look at the rookie contracts. They don't have a choice and how these deals are done for the most part as they are slotted. They are mostly 1 sided in risk. As I posted earlier, they get a 4 or 5 year deal and guarenteed money is higher in a 5 year deal than the 4 so player has to decide which he thinks is better for him. Now when a player plays like a stud, but is paid like a 6th rounder, they want to try and leverage their position. They try to do this because of the risk of injury. If they get injured they are screwed. Sadly, they have no leverage. If a team doesn't want to negotiate a new deal with them then they can be forced to play under the current deal. OTOH-if the team wants to cut the player without any casue, they can and the player has no recourse. The only thing holding the owner accountable to anything is the cap.If you don't agree with this take then that's fine. But let's not make it out something to be that it isn't either. It's a world that the owners rule and the players get what the owners will give them. Pretty simple really. And when a player gets a nice deal, which is rare, then good for him. That's very few people that make those out rageous deals. The other players get paid at a rate that hardly begins to make them wealthy. They play their 4-6 years (avg career) and then if they are healthy enough they work different jobs. Some, sadly, are not healthy enough and then get screwed by the players union when they are denied benefits. But I digress.But don't allow the media hype of guys like Manning making it good skew your view of the average player. They are nigh and day from one another. The similarity is that they play in the NFL.

 

[BoltBacker]

Just to add a few FACTS to the conversation ...LJ was born on 11/19/79 ... which means he's TWENTY-SEVEN now and will be 28 during the season, NOT 29.

Has anyone in the thread said LJ would be 29 this year?BTW.... if Tomlinson was due a contract next year his milage would absolutley be an issue both with regard to the size of the contract he could command and his trade value. The reason it's never brought up in the case of Tomlinson is he has several more years left on his contract and he hasn't threatened to holdout.

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

Hard Knocks on HBO (at KC Chiefs Training Camp) sure is gonna be lame with no Larry Johnson or Trent Green.

Boooooring....

 

[BoltBacker]

Hard Knocks on HBO (at KC Chiefs Training Camp) sure is gonna be lame with no Larry Johnson or Trent Green.Boooooring....

On the crontrary I think the QB situation will be one of the more fun scenarios to see unfold. Huard should have the job sewn up based on his play on the field but it seems like KC is really doing everything they can to leave the door open for Croyle.It'll be very interesting to see if Bowe/Webb are ready to push Kennison into the background.... I have my doubts.Also will be following the continued progress of that defense. It'll be much improved this year.If nothing else Herm will say something that will make all the Herm-haters come out in droves.KC if full of drama this offseason.

 

[bjabrad]

mini-pollLJ to the Titans for LenDale and/or Brown and a nice pick ? (if i'm not mistaken the Titans have the cap to pay him)LJ to Dallas for Julius or Barber and a nice pick ?LJ to GB for BJax or Morency and a nice pick ?LJ to NYG for Jacobs (Christian Okoye II) and a decent pick ?LJ to CHI for Benson and a decent pick ?LJ to a team unnamed above ?LJ plays for KC ?LJ sits the year and becomes FA ?i vote (with my heart) and pick the Titans

If I remember correctly from the McCardell and Branch situations, if a player sits out for the year then the clock isn't running on the contract and LJ would still have to play out his last year at $1.9M in 2008. I believe there are a minimum number of games a player has to get in in order to qualify as having played a season (if holding out). Does this sound familiar to anyone else?Probably getting ahead of myself but if this is accurate then it might be a better idea for LJ to play under his current contract until he satisfies the minimum games to qualify for a season and then hold out in mid season or pull up with a lame injury that mysteriously won't let him perform at 100%.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

IMO, athletes are normally in the wrong in regards to holding out.This is not one of those cases. I'd hold out too.

 

[Bailiver]

IMO, athletes are normally in the wrong in regards to holding out.This is not one of those cases. I'd hold out too.

:X

 

[RoosterScott]

Does anyone know what the Priest Holmes situation is? Did he officially retire, health status, etc????. Just a question

 

[Beaumont]

Does anyone know what the Priest Holmes situation is? Did he officially retire, health status, etc????. Just a question

He's not retired and he is not coming back. He is milking his injury for his cash ...

 

[KC_Guy1966]

The deal will get done in due time. We're talking about a lot of money here - and the season still is a while away.

Just look back a few weeks: Anyone wanted to see a solution for the Trent Green issue immediately - and finally they came up with a way to accomodate all side's interest.

Same is going to happen here. Big money business is not a day-to-day thing. The media coverage on the issue may finally get LJ a million more or less .. but the deal will be done. No way the Chiefs let him go NOW (different thing in about two years time, when they will have got the current transformation process done).

He'll end up with a LT type contract, but nor above it.

 

[Rounders]

The deal will get done in due time. We're talking about a lot of money here - and the season still is a while away. Just look back a few weeks: Anyone wanted to see a solution for the Trent Green issue immediately - and finally they came up with a way to accomodate all side's interest.Same is going to happen here. Big money business is not a day-to-day thing. The media coverage on the issue may finally get LJ a million more or less .. but the deal will be done. No way the Chiefs let him go NOW (different thing in about two years time, when they will have got the current transformation process done).He'll end up with a LT type contract, but nor above it.

I appreciate your optimisim here, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[GregR_2]

...If I remember correctly from the McCardell and Branch situations, if a player sits out for the year then the clock isn't running on the contract and LJ would still have to play out his last year at $1.9M in 2008. I believe there are a minimum number of games a player has to get in in order to qualify as having played a season (if holding out). Does this sound familiar to anyone else?Probably getting ahead of myself but if this is accurate then it might be a better idea for LJ to play under his current contract until he satisfies the minimum games to qualify for a season and then hold out in mid season or pull up with a lame injury that mysteriously won't let him perform at 100%.

From memory, you have to report for 6 games for it to count as an accrued season on your contract. So LJ would sit out the first 10 games and then report.

 

[Double_J]

My draft in my big money keeper league is August 5th. I've got to be honest, as of right now I'm keeping Addai over LJ. It's a ppr league and Addai is the safer pick. Especially with the uncertainty of LJ even playing the first 10 games.

 

[BearsFan]

Priest to the rescue??

Link

 

[Tat]

Priest to the rescue??

Link

Yeah, let's put in a guy who hasn't been hit in 2 years in and he will be fine!

 

[fruity pebbles]

Priest to the rescue??

Link

34 year old RBs don't rescue anybody.

 

[DrJ]

has camp started?? If not, then I think this have been discussed already; actually, it won't even matter until the regular season starts . . . LJ missing a few pre season games is no big deal . . .

btw, if Im Peterson, I trade him and spend cap dollars on rebuilding the team . . . LJ isn't a guy that you want as the "face of the franchise" . . . and he's nearing the AARP age for running backs . . .

got to be the dumbest thing I've ever heard on this msg board. You really DON'T watch football games , do you?

LJ is 27.has 892 carries in his career. Age is a factor with RB's ,yes, but so are other factors, such as the amount of carries, type of offense ( does the RB get hit often, or plow thru to the next level and go one-on-one with the CB's,LB's or safties? ..

Tomlinson is 28,has 2050 carries to his name..so, then, according to your infinite wisdom, if LJ is nearing the AARP age for RB's, LT must be half-dead with one foot in the grave pushing up daisies already, I mean, he has over 2000 carries and all, right? but you're the same guy who would bash LJ and praise LT like he is a demi-god...

you are the same guy who said in another post " I don't know how..I don't know why..I don't know when..but..change is coming'..you've got it all figured out, Nostradamus..

please, for the love of GOD, can we check ID's at the door to make sure we keep loonies like this guy , out of here?!

holy crap.

as for LJ, I think KC will trade him, perhaps to GB, a team that reportedly had a $30mil offer to LJ on the table, the day of the NFL draft..Kc could've used the picks GB was offering too..

in the end, tho, I think LJ will be dealt before the season opens..

LJ is about as close as LT because LT is 28, and LJ is 27. Neither have had any significant injuries during their careers. I don't care about career carries, it's a virtually meaningless statistic. There are physiological changes that happen in your body as it ages. Changes that make playing the RB position more difficult, no matter how many carries you got when you were 23, 24, 25. Your body simply cannot recover as quickly as it did when you were younger. It's why Priest Holmes broke down despite a small workload early in his career, it's why Tiki Barber hung em up despite a small workload early in his. Tiki knew that playing RB at his age was taking a toll on his body.

It's far more likely that both of these guys start to decline some after 28, until 30/31 or so where their bodies just can't take NFL level punishment anymore than it is that LJ will buck the age trend because he was sitting behind Priest Holmes for a few years.

 

[[icon]]

Bumping the real thread back to the top

 

[Andy Dufresne]

please, for the love of GOD, can we check ID's at the door to make sure we keep loonies like this guy , out of here?!holy crap.

For all of you looking for an example of irony...

 

[Footballhead]

Too much farce in here, so I quit reading them all. If I'm repeating what somewhat has said, so be it.

Lets look at it from business stand point. Both parties has the $$$ interest in them, but in my opinion, KC has the leverage here...and if Priest comes back in shape, LJ is in a whole lotta trouble. Sure, LJ is a good running back, he's hard to bring down once he's behind the first line...but getting there in the first place, those holes were created by good run blocking linemen. When it comes to linemen rolling out to make blocks, TE making blocks, WR's making block, KC is one of the best in the league. LJ need to keep that in mind. As for holding out....what will KC lose? They're not even a SB cotender this year. Is LJ willing to wait another year again, pay penalties and still has his rights in KC's hand? I think LJ's best bet would be to get traded and get a contract signed right away because he's not going to get to the secnodary as often as he did in KC.

 

[ditka85]

please, for the love of GOD, can we check ID's at the door to make sure we keep loonies like this guy , out of here?!holy crap.

For all of you looking for an example of irony...

:X Careful Andy. Your stalker may be watching.

 

[fatness]

LJ holds out as talks stall

RIVER FALLS, Wis. | Larry Johnson followed through on his threat to hold out from training camp when he and the Chiefs couldn’t agree on terms of a contract extension.

No surprise there. The revelation was that the Chiefs haven’t made a new contract offer to Johnson in almost two months.

“We’re very far apart, but I can’t tell you exactly how far apart we are because we haven’t received an offer from them since June 1,” said Alvin Keels, Johnson’s agent.

The Chiefs confirmed the date of their most recent offer to Johnson, saying they were waiting for Keels to make what they believe is a more reasonable proposal before they submit a new one

 

[nygiants56]

Just to add a few FACTS to the conversation ...

LJ was born on 11/19/79 ... which means he's TWENTY-SEVEN now and will be 28 during the season, NOT 29.

He's a 4 year vet and here are his yearly touches (carries + receptions) so far:

2003 = 21

2004 = 142

2005 = 369

2006 = 457

TOTAL = 989 ... an average of 247 per ... or 413 over the past 2 years

That is barely 2.5 years in NFL terms, do you belive in AGE or MILEAGE?

Ladanian Tomlinson was born on 6/23/79, which means he's FIVE Months OLDER than LJ.

Here are LT2's touches in comparison:

2001 = 398

2002 = 451

2003 = 413

2004 = 392

2005 = 390

2006 = 404

TOTAL = 2448 ... an average of 408 over SIX years ... or 397 over the past 2 years .. ONLY SIXTEEN less per season than LJ over the last two years. It's ONLY FIVE less per season over LT2's CAREER!

To conclude, the league's TOP RB is older than LJ and has 1500 MORE touches ... yet people are worried about LJ's durability? WHAT??? I won't make the assumption that LJ is LT2's equal, but it's a SILLY argument to consider LJ even remotely OLD or USED.

great posting! you hit the nail on the head..

this whole thing that somehow LJ is washed up because he had 416 carries last season, is a joke.usually , its the Dodds-types who get caught up in the numbers but fail to see the big picture, i.e, LT is 28 and has 2050 carries in his career, but, hes revered as a god, while LJ is like a broken down Model A, and has just 892 career carries to his name..one is treated like the best RB of all time,while the other is viewed as Eddie George, in his Dallas Cowboy days..

classic case of people over analyzing things, and reading too much into whats really going on out there..

 

[Keith Lewis]

Q: Where do you stand in negotiations with Larry Johnson?

CARL PETERSON: “I’m going to address this one time and one time only because I think that’s all it necessitates. I’ll give you both where we are with Larry Johnson and Dwayne Bowe, our number one draft choice. We have had conversation and will have continuing conversation with representatives of both players. The obvious is they’re not here in training camp.

“The one player is without a contract – Dwayne Bowe – so he doesn’t have to be here. The other player – Larry Johnson — does have a contract for 2007 and he is supposed to be here. I’m sure the question will be asked and it is affirmative. We are going to be fining Larry $14,223 or whatever the amount is (by NFL rules) for every day he’s not here.

“I am personally still optimistic that we will get something done with both these players. I would like to get something done quickly, obviously, but sometimes it takes time. I’ve been through this before with a lot of players. Right now specific to number one draft choices, there are still a lot of them out. The encouraging thing is there are number ones making deals now and we’ll continue to work at that with Dwayne’s agents.

“Specific to Larry, we would like to have him here but very candidly it’s not necessary that he’s here right now. We’ve got a lot of young running backs that I and the team want to look at. Then I think we all know that we’re going to have a little bit older running back getting in here tomorrow. Priest Holmes wants to play football and he should be on the field tomorrow morning. He will be in a physically-unable-to-perform status as about three or four of other players are. We want to bring him along slowly, make sure he doesn’t get hurt, and gauge where he is with his football conditioning.

“But in my personal conversations with him earlier in the week and with our doctors he has indicated he’s very excited about coming back and playing football.”

Q: Were you surprised that Priest wanted to come back and play? We haven’t heard hide or hair of him for the last couple of years.

PETERSON: “Well, I’ve had conversations with him. He doesn’t like to talk to the media which is his prerogative. Nothing will ever surprise me regarding Priest Holmes. He is a truly unique individual and I mean that after 25 years of professional football. He dances to his own tune. I think we know that. He prepares himself for football in his own way. He’s a very quiet person but very much of a team-oriented guy. His words to me specifically were, ‘Carl, I think I can help this football team both on the field and in the locker room and in the classroom to win a championship.’ Then he said: ‘For me, that’s my motivation to come back.’

“We have been in touch with Priest over the last couple of months. Surprised? Probably yes, other than he knew that he had to make a decision before we began training camp and he wanted to let me know.”

Q: Getting back to Larry, have these been tough negotiations. Are they standing pat on what they want? I know you don’t to like to talk contracts, but that’s what you hear from Larry’s camp.

PETERSON: “There has been ongoing conversation. I’d like to think we’re both after the same thing: to get a contract, a multi-year contract. We, like every team in the NFL, have parameters that we must stay within. Certainly at this particular point, frankly, we’re some distance apart in regard to their last proposal and our last proposal. But that’s what negotiations are about. We have not closed the door in any fashion.

Q: Do you feel that he should be here because he is under contract?

PETERSON: “Yes I do. That’s why there is a fine being levied on him. It won’t start until tomorrow at the first regular practice. I’d love to have him here but I respect his thoughts and opinions and we’ve had other veteran players out of camp for a while and did come back and had outstanding seasons. We’re going to keep working at it.”

Q: There’s speculation out there that one reason Priest is here is to gain leverage on Larry.

PETERSON: “That’s inaccurate. I did not know until last week that Priest wanted to play football in 2007. I had had some conversations with him but only to the point that, ‘Priest, we’re going to have to know one way or the other.’

“This is not a related matter even though I know that there are those that say it is. Priest, for the Kansas City, will hopefully be part of this football team in 2007 but it will be in a different role than he was before. We’re not going to ask him to be the workhorse, the guy that touched it over 70% of the snaps. We found out when he was with us before that when he didn’t touch it as much he was very effective and was able to stay healthy.”

Q: As far as Dwayne Bowe, how many guys in front of him in the draft have to get slotted and signed before he comes in, or could you possibly get him in sooner?

PETERSON: “That’s a question for his representation. I think one of the reasons it hasn’t been done yet is because they haven’t been satisfied with enough other first round draft choice signings. Candidly, we all know where the numbers should be. It’s certainly an increase from last year but we’re restricted by a rookie salary pool. We only have so many dollars to spend on our rookies and the agents have that number also. So, they know what we can and can not afford specific to our number one draft choice.”

Q: What do you think realistic expectations are for Priest Holmes?

PETERSON: “Knowing Priest, I would expect he would come and help this football team win. I’m high on Priest Holmes and always have been. Like I said, every time people start to count him out he comes back. I think that’s part of his motivation.

“I said it earlier that if he’s 75 or 80% of what he was before he’s still one hell of a football player and that and the way we would like to use him will, I think, be enough that he could be a big contributing factor to the team’s offense.”

Q: That $14,000 you’re able to fine Larry starts tomorrow. Is that every single day until he shows up?

PETERSON: “Yep, that adds up. But that’s the fine number the league gives us and the player’s association knows.”

Q: Do you think that if this goes on with Larry it will go on into the season?

PETERSON: “I can’t speculate. That will be up to Larry and his representation. I think everyone knows that you have to be in by the 11th game to get full credit for this year and then after that he could void his contract and of course we could put the franchise tag on him in 2008. So, there are options on both sides.”

Q: There are always rumor and innuendo about trading Larry including that the Packers are interested.

PETERSON: “First of all, I have no intention whatsoever of trading Larry Johnson. Like before there was a lot of speculation on that; I have had no teams – zero – call me with an interest in trading for Larry.

“I think the obvious is that any team that would have an interest in him realizes that the compensation they would have to give to the Kansas City Chiefs in draft choices plus the contract that his agent is currently asking for makes it quite prohibitive for anybody to step up to all of that. But I have had no team call me and I have no interest in giving permission to Larry’s representative to shop him because I want him here. He’s a valuable, talented, outstanding football player that I think has my complete support and has done the things we wanted him to do.”

Q: What about Jared Allen? Have you guys had talks with him? He made it perfectly clear that after the season he wanted to become a free agent and didn’t want to be a Kansas City Chief. Has that changed?

PETERSON: “You’ll have to ask Jared that. We had to wait to find out what the ultimate punishment was going to be from the commissioner and the National Football League for his two DUI’s (driving under the influence of alcohol) That has been resolved to a two-game suspension down from a four-game. We’re pleased about that and I know that Jared and his representation are.

“But regarding a multi-year contract and his four-game suspension I have said before that he is a player of risk. I want to see how he performs on and off the field this year and I think the NFL wants to see that also. But I would never exclude the possibility of him getting a multi-year contract and going on.”

Q: Is training camp something you look forward to this year even with these problems going on?

PETERSON: “It’s the best time of the year and that’s why I address these problems one time and we won’t address them again. I mean that sincerely. I respect the players and their agents and what they feel they’re compelled to do. But if they’re not here we’re only going to talk to them one time because we’ve got 86 other players who are here and are working very hard to be a Kansas City Chief.”

Q: You excited about the QB competition?

PETERSON: “I am. I’m very interested to see what happens there. I like all our quarterbacks. I think it’s an interesting scenario because we have a veteran quarterback – a 10-year veteran – who has had very few starts in the National Football League. But he’s played behind some pretty talented players in Dan Marino, Tom Brady and Trent Green. Yet, when he’s been asked to start and play he has one hell of a winning record and a touchdown-to-interception ratio. I think he’s a very talented quarterback. He showed us that last year. We would not have gotten into the playoffs with Damon Huard.

“The other side of it is we stepped up and drafted Brodie Croyle and it’s time for him to step up and show us what he can do, stay healthy through training camp and I expect the competition will pick up as we go through training camp.”

 

[Lash]

Carl Peterson quoted on NFL Total Access today:

paraphrased from TV...

"Larry Johnson is not the complete back LaDainian Tomlinson is. Hopefully someday he will get there but he wants to be paid more than Tomlinson right now. He will not receive that kind of deal from us."

both analysts said "Wow" right after I said "wow" sitting on my couch hehe

 

[vasco75]

I really can't see how the Chiefs don't sign LJ. Do they honestly think that they'll be able to do ANYTHING on offense without this guy?? Basically, a rookie at QB with a revamped and inexperienced OL (compared to recent history), no real wide receiver threat, a guy who hasn't played in the NFL for 1.5 years and a bunch of no names that could not start on any other NFL team at the RB position.

Seems to me that they HAVE to get LJ locked up or they'll struggle for first downs, let alone TD's...

 

[massraider]

I really can't see how the Chiefs don't sign LJ. Do they honestly think that they'll be able to do ANYTHING on offense without this guy?? Basically, a rookie at QB with a revamped and inexperienced OL (compared to recent history), no real wide receiver threat, a guy who hasn't played in the NFL for 1.5 years and a bunch of no names that could not start on any other NFL team at the RB position.

Seems to me that they HAVE to get LJ locked up or they'll struggle for first downs, let alone TD's...

Probably. For 2007, anyway. BUt KC is thinking, as they should, long term. Do they want to commit to a guy for the next 4 years, with a contract that'll probably run longer than that? Yeah, he doesn't have much tread on his tire, but everyone is aware of the work he's had the last two years. So KC is gunshy about the abuse that they are responsible for. Which is really a kick in the teeth for LJ. Both sides have legit arguments, IMO. If I was LJ, I would hold out. And if I was KC, I would be wary of committing long term.

You know, if LJ only had 300 touches each of the last two years, there wouldn't be much argument against a new deal for LJ. Which makes me think:

If you are a top RB in the league, and your coach is giving you the ball 30 times a week, and you are only on your rookie deal, should you demand a scaled down workload?

The history is there, backs that get that much work slow down quickly. So if you are trying to have a long, wealthy career, isn't in your best interest to keep you carries below those magic numbers? It's not a very team-oriented attitude, but there's a good chance LJ never gets the deal he deserves because KC used him up.

 

[Banger]

Carl Peterson quoted on NFL Total Access todayaraphrased from TV..."Larry Johnson is not the complete back LaDainian Tomlinson is. Hopefully someday he will get there but he wants to be paid more than Tomlinson right now. He will not receive that kind of deal from us."both analysts said "Wow" right after I said "wow" sitting on my couch hehe

he's right but the salary structure has changed over the past few years so what LT got and what LJ should get are apples/oranges.

 

[saintfool]

man, carl peterson is a hard-###....

 

[bjabrad]

man, carl peterson is a hard-###....

That's a complement because that's exactly what his job is. He has to be a harder ### than the players and the other GM's in the league. Does LJ deserve to get paid? Yes and he will someday but he's already under contract, it's debateable if KC really NEEDS him this year with a focus on the future/test driving Croyle, Priest Holmes back, Louisville RB Kolby Smith, Robert Bennett and NFLE co MVP Derek Ross to run the ball. Carl said today that he will fine LJ but doesn't blame him for not being in camp and doesn't really need him in camp yet since it gives the team to get more looks at the other RB's. KC will evaluate what they've got before deciding if they want to pay Larry big bucks this year. KC and LJ may both benefit if he holds out until the 11th game since LJ gets to keep tread off his tires and KC doesn't have to pay full price for a player that they don't need this year. Probably even healthier for Croyle to have Priest Holmes blocking for him instead of LJ since LJ apparently doesn't care about learning how to block yet. I hate to see it but unless a major RB starter goes down early on a team with superbowl hopes then LJ is staying a Chief and we'll probably see a 70/30 split of LJ/Priest like we did a few seasons ago except that LJ will get the majority of the carries. Peterson will probably low ball an offer to get a good deal on LJ and LJ will have to take it. It won't be LT money because Peterson doesn't have to pay LT money since KC has all the leverage. If LJ doesn't like it he can hold out all year and we can do this again next year since he'll still have a year left on his contract before he can void the final years and KC can still slap the franchise tag on him after he voids his remaining years so what options does LJ have??? None, except to rest himself until the 11th game. So KC has all of preseason and through game 10 to wait for LJ's value to rise and KC to recieve the kind of draft pick compensation that can get them somebody that can take LJ's place. Anybody want to play poker against Carl Peterson?

 

[lord_helmet]

I think projecting Priest to get 30% of the carries is a major stretch at this point, is he even in shape ?

 

[KING]

KC is looking like a team heading full throttle into rebuilding mode. it isn't going to make 1 bit of difference if LJ plays 16 or 6 games. LJ missed his window. if he wanted to play "hard-ball" he should have done it last year. he had that great finish in '06, priest was done, and KC still had playoff aspirations. last years numbers were more about how many carries he had. at 28, he has perhaps 3 productive years left. 27 million divided by 3 is 9 million a year. so thats 9 million, not including salary. who wants to be on the hook to a 30 year old RB for 12-13 million a year? i read that KC offered 14 million. i don't know what the salary structure looked like, but maybe LJ should think hard about that, and get off this ego trip. if i was peterson, i wouldn't blink. let LJ do what he wants this year, and then tag him in '08.