So there's an article on NFL network saying that Orlando Brown is expected to sign for 6 years $145 mil.
That comes to $24.16 mil/yr and makes him the highest paid offensive lineman in football. It also would give him the 19th highest salary per year in the NFL
How would you feel if that is the contract he ended up signing?
I'm fine with it. He is a top 5 LT and he's only 26 next season. A young great LT is a guy you can't let leave. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MIAdragon:
It’s as absurd as those saying he’s going to “reset” the market.
Well there's what we want to happen and what is likely to happen.
There's zero chance any of the involved parties think he's worth 10-12 million a year.
There's a non-zero chance the involved parties think he's worth a top-of-market deal. Both sides are much closer to the top end than the bottom.
Now, giving him that kind of deal, considering his play, might seem absurd but it's still far more probable than him getting what amounts to a LB salary for playing the 2nd or 3rd-most important position in the game. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
According to Adam Schefter it was..
Sure it’s a 3 year deal dressed up as a 6 year deal, but that’s pretty much every contract. The 49ers can get out of Trent Williams contract the same way. The last 3 years were designed that way just like Orlando’s.
But this was definitely not a team friendly offer.
That isn't what it says at all.
You're calling a 5 year, $95 million deal a 3 year, $95 million deal because you think the back end is fluff and he'll get cut after 3. Okay...so the FLUFF comes off there, y'know? So you're probably looking at something more along the lines of 3/$60 with only 2/$38 guaranteed or something like that.
I don't know if that's 'team friendly', but it damn sure ain't what YOU'RE saying it is either. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
My understanding was that the sticking point with Brown and his neophyte agent were the voidable years/un-guaranteed money that nearly all NFL deals contain.
He wanted every year and every dime guaranteed, so yeah, top paid LT with every minute and dime guaranteed.
He's been playing better, but I don't think he's the best LT in the game. I don't know that I've seen anything at all that would indicate he'll be more realistic this time around.
We'll see, I guess.
I say they should just tag him again and maybe even use the Non-exclusive tag so he can go out and see what trade offers he could get. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Balto:
I say they should just tag him again and maybe even use the Non-exclusive tag so he can go out and see what trade offers he could get.
The risk with tagging him is that you don't find a trade partner. He ain't playing on a 2nd tag. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
The risk with tagging him is that you don't find a trade partner. He ain't playing on a 2nd tag.
Then that only means he can't play anywhere else and we don't have to pay him /shrug his call
PLUS one of my points was that if he didn't find a trade partner that will give Veach even more fire power on why he shouldn't be the highest paid LT in the NFL [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
The risk with tagging him is that you don't find a trade partner. He ain't playing on a 2nd tag.
Meanwhile your cap space is tied up in him so you're hamstrung on what you can do to replace him. Putting him on the tag puts you completely on the defensive.
I don't think there are any tampering/collusion issues if you called around prior to tagging a guy and said "hey, any interest?", but shit - I'm not real sure about that one. I know you're not technically supposed to discuss players that aren't under team control - would OBJ qualify there as someone who COULD get the tag?
I gotta believe these guys know when/how they can get a deal done for someone via tag/trade before they do it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Balto:
Then that only means he can't play anywhere else and we don't have to pay him /shrug his call
PLUS one of my points was that if he didn't find a trade partner that will give Veach even more fire power on why he shouldn't be the highest paid LT in the NFL
We have a cap hold unless/until we rescind the tag.
You can't just go spend the money. Now you COULD rescind the tag if you can't get him traded. That's akin to just letting him walk. And technically you could do it after the first wave of FAs.
But man, you'd get some SERIOUS blowback for that from prospective FAs. That's really boning the guy.
Then again, if he doesn't get a !@#$ing agent until then, I'm not sure you have to bear much responsibility for it... [Reply]
I know everyone here is dying to hear my take on the OBJ negotiation, so here it is:
Offer a five year, 100M deal with 50M signing bonus and 69 (nice) M gtyd in the first three years. Take it, or we franchise tag.
I would then offer him to test the market to find a trading partner under the tag, provided two conditions:
1) if no deal is struck, he either plays under the tag for the full season or agrees to the aforementioned offer, and
2) the chiefs have a right of first refusal to match the offer he chooses.
This way, the chiefs allow him to test the market and validate their offer since he appears to over value himself. Either way, the chiefs don't have to pay more than what they are willing to. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
The risk with tagging him is that you don't find a trade partner. He ain't playing on a 2nd tag.
:-) Based on what? Him and his agent bloviating about possibly missing games last year? When it came time to actually follow through, he didn't even miss TRAINING CAMP. If it comes down to it and we tag him again, he's free to huff and puff all he wants about missing games. Brown was playing barely above replacement level for much of the early season anyway, so we'd eventually end up right back where we are if he did decide to sit out. Or a team had their OT get hurt and got desperate enough to throw us a premier pick or two for him. [Reply]
1. There's no way the Chiefs are jettisoning Brown without a backup plan in place. Said backup plan will most likely need to be executed AFTER the tag is applied or even signed. That calls into question whether the Chiefs would have to shop him BEFORE tagging him, which may be against the rules.
2. If you tag him, you're on the hook for his salary whether he plays or not. The Chiefs have very little leverage at all in this. They're either going to have to pay him or they're going to have to let him walk. A tag and trade isn't likely. [Reply]
1. There's no way the Chiefs are jettisoning Brown without a backup plan in place. Said backup plan will most likely need to be executed AFTER the tag is applied or even signed. That calls into question whether the Chiefs would have to shop him BEFORE tagging him, which may be against the rules.
2. If you tag him, you're on the hook for his salary whether he plays or not. The Chiefs have very little leverage at all in this. They're either going to have to pay him or they're going to have to let him walk. A tag and trade isn't likely.
2. No, if he refuses to play under the tag he doesn't get paid. [Reply]
1. There's no way the Chiefs are jettisoning Brown without a backup plan in place. Said backup plan will most likely need to be executed AFTER the tag is applied or even signed. That calls into question whether the Chiefs would have to shop him BEFORE tagging him, which may be against the rules.
2. If you tag him, you're on the hook for his salary whether he plays or not. The Chiefs have very little leverage at all in this. They're either going to have to pay him or they're going to have to let him walk. A tag and trade isn't likely.
3. There are very limited options as a backup plan. There’s nobody available in FA and the #1 projected LT Olumuyiwa Fashanu is going back to Penn St next year. Paris Johnson from Ohio St is now the 2nd ranked LT after Skoronski and this mother****er just started playing LT this year.
If anything you’ll probably see Broderick Jones pass him up throughout the draft process and be picked in the top 15 where we can’t get him.
