We know already that the FA WR market this upcoming season is going to be a relative desert. The Draft offers a lot of potential at WR, but we also know that it will take a rookie at least two seasons to get up to speed in our offense. So any rookie WR we pick up will probably be no more than a 12-15 snap/game guy.

AT DL, particularly DT, again, history tells us that replacing a player of Jones' skills and abilities is almost a complete crapshoot. They just don't come along that often. We also know that playing on the DL in our defense is fairly complicated; how long for a rookie DL to get comfortable and really be able to play as a 3-down starter? And what FA DLs are out there that can produce anything like the kind of chaos that Jones can? I can't think of one.

Again, I'm not saying we're screwed if we can't keep Jones, because I trust in Veach and Coach Spagnuolo, but the defense won't be nearly as effective without Jones, IMO. Just look at his overall production vs. the top 3 DLs last season. Only Aaron Donald has similar numbers, and 3rd is way in the rear-view mirror.

Nope...this team is built for now. You have Hill, Kelce, Schwartz, HB, Jones and Clark for the next few years...all pretty much in their prime. (Kelce/Schwartz at the tail end).

Mahomes is, far and away, the best QB in the AFC...that window is open. There is a QB void right now...

Worry about the future in about 3 years....this team will always be in the running as long as Mahomes is healthy.

If Aaron Donald wasn't a generational player at DL...Jones would be the best at his position and the media would be slobbering over him.

You could argue that keeping Jones...makes average DBs look better.

love Chris Jones but who would trade a first and ....?

I dont understand the logic that you arent invested in winning now (and in the future) by considering trading Jones. Approximately 20 million in cap savings and at worst a first and third rounder. Take your pick of pretty much any two free agents and likely a top 20 draft pick. People acting like you are punting on next year by trading Jones I'd almost argue the opposite.

Has anyone even offered a 1st yet? The best I've heard is a 2nd.

I agree, it makes too much sense. Besides I want MVPennell to get a shot as our run stuffing DT. If the other team cant run on us, then their QB is going to have to outthrow Mahomes. Good luck.

You build your lines and QB...KC moves Jones, it might take years to replace him.

Draft picks dont mean shit...Speaks and K-pass were both 2nd rounders. hell...Leonard Williams was considered a no-brainer steal when the Jets got him at #5 overall. Jones has nearly twice the amount of sacks....Rated #2 in the NFL.

You dont trade away home-grown top talent...

Where you hearing this? No team can offer anything until we tag him and etc. I am calling BS. Most speculation is on a 1st and 3rd this year or a 1st this year and a 1st next year.

2 first round picks is the starting point...like I said earlier, teams drafting top 10 DL are HOPING he might be as good a Jones. The odds of that pick turning into the 2nd best in the NFL are pretty slim...

I’m pretty sure I read a story not two weeks ago on arrowhead pride or something where it was rumored the Colts were considering offering at least a second round pick for Jones. I’m in the middle of something right now or I’d look it up myself.

31 teams would give up a 2nd round pick for Jones...

Not an offer.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

Tell Aaron Rodgers that.

ESPN speculation

Why does everyone always act like Aaron Rodgers was some mistreated player that the Packers didn't do enough to help him succeed on offense? This is the record/off rank/def rank of the Packers since Rodgers became starter-

08 - 6-10/5th/22nd
09 - 11-5/3rd/7th
10 - 10-6/10th/2nd/SB champs
11 - 15-1/1st/19th
12 - 11-5/5th/11th
13 - 8-7-1/8th/24th
14 - 12-4/1st/13th
15 - 10-6/15th/12th
16 - 10-6/4th/22nd
17 - 7-9/21st/26th (Rodgers played in only 7 games)
18 - 6-9-1/14th/22nd
19 - 13-3/15th/9th

They had an offense that was ranked in the top 5 for 6 out of his first 9 seasons. Sure the offense haand been as good the last couple years, but id say some of that has to do with the fact that Rodgers is getting older. If anything this proves you need to keep your all pro defenders cuz AR only 1 SB and that was when the D was the 2nd best in the league. In every single playoff loss the Packers scored 20 or more points and averaged 27 points a game. Hell in 2009 they lost 51-45 in the playoffs. The D gave up an average of 36 ****ing points a game. This is why you keep the impact players on D. They make that whole side of the ball better.

I think his point is that if you pay one player too much the rest of the talent level of the team drops.

No one made him ask for that contract.

I don't blame a guy for getting what he can. His right. That said don't act like the team is failing because you are 20% of your team's cap (sarcastic over estimation.)

If Jones is as good as everyone here says then he should have much more value than a 2nd round pick.

Khalil Mack(/w conditional 2nd and 5th) was traded to Chicago for two 1sts, a 3rd a 6th. Chicago made Mack the highest-paid defender in NFL history.

Another example is Frank Clark he was 25yrs old when we gave up a 1st and 2nd pick for Clark along with a 100m dollar contract.

Mack was 27, Clark was 25 when they were traded.


Chris Jones is 25 now, so how did it go from getting all that for Mack/Clark to talking about getting a 2nd for jones?

If Jones is that good then a 1st and 3rd should be the starting point for any trade. If Jones isn't good enough to be worth a 1st and 3rd then we probably shouldn't be giving him a huge contract.

The talent drops when you remove one of the best players off your defense...losing average/replaceable players makes no discernible difference.

Paying too much for average players hurts your team...*see Hitchens*.

Highly drafting players that dont impact your team hurts them too..*see Speaks*

Hope this cleared that bit of confusion up...

Trading Jones will leave a void...take Oakland for example. They traded Mack but kept Carr. They ended up using their #4 overall pick to replace him (Ferrell)...then spent the Mack pick on a RB. They used their Cooper pick on a safety that played one game...and are likely to use their first 2020 pick on a WR to replace him.

That's a terrible return...they got a safety and a RB (so far) for Mack and Cooper. They had already spent draft picks #4 overall (Cooper) and #5 overall (Mack)...then have to spend another #4 overall to replace him (Mack). They are now going to use ANOTHER high #1 pick on a WR.

What happens to Jones is an Andy OG call. He needs a team for Mahomes. Tag and trade. We need the picks more than another guy breaking the bank on the DL.

Thanks for doing all that to prove my point that we need to keep Chris Jones.

A terrible return? They got a guy at running back who is going to be a pro bowl caliber player for the next several years in Jacobs. We will see how they use their second first rounder this year at the 19th pick. That is draft picks ALONE. You never touched on how they are spending the $23.5 million a year in cap savings ON TOP of the draft picks. If you think the Bears got the better end of that deal you're crazy. Raiders are ascending. Bears are descending. Much in large part to that trade. Mack has been healthy and producing as well. What happens if he gets dinged up this year (which I fear with Jones)? The Bears completely unravel.

The fact that used one of those 1st round draft picks they got on a RB is so stupid. I'd be completely pissed if the Chiefs wasted a 1st round pick on a RB and then if it were a pick that we got for a HOF talent in his prime I'd be livid. You can find equally talented backs in the mid rounds.

The Bears aren't descending because of that trade. They are descending because they're idiots and traded up one spot to get a terrible ****ing QB. If they had even an average QB they'd be decent. I wouldn't consider one 7-9 season as ascending either, especially when you look at the team's the Raiders beat.

Broncos
Colts
Bears
Lions
Chargers
Bengals
Chargers

37-75

Not one of those teams had winning records. Hell they beat the Bears and the Bears still had a better record than the Raiders. The Bears even made it to the playoffs since that trade and went 12-4.

Also that trade is not the reason for the Bears being shitty. Its because they have shitty Turdbiscuit as their QB. The Bears would be damn good if the QB was even mediocre, because they have an elite defense. Why is that defense so elite now? Probably because they traded for Mack.

You added this ignorant shit after I already quoted you. It's football. People get injured. What happens if Mahomes gets his big deal and gets injured? He's been hurt before so why don't you fear that he will be injured again? People using this god damn Berry and Houston got injured, so now everyone we sign long term will get injured is ****ing reeruned. We just gave Clark a big deal and howd that turn out? God damn people are stupid.

Two firsts has to be the minimum to have a seat at the table on a trade for Jones. Forget this firsr and third bullshit. If Jones is everything his fanatics claim he is, two firsts is the start point for negotiations and really shouldnt be a question.

Otherwise, dude needs to swallow his pride, play on the tag, and get his extension next offseason. If the guy simply cannot grasp why we are paying Mahomes first, and is going to go all butt hurt and think his production is not recognized or appreciated, then he probably should just move on.

But there isnt a ****ing player in the world that would get a contract before Mahomes. So this butthurt and mixed emotions, i just dont have any tolerance for.

Hey Chris. The dude getting paid before you, He's the reason you have that ring on your finger. You might remember having a front row seat tgere on the sideline in your streetclothes for the 24-0 divisional game in the playoffs. You know, the one where he rattled off 7 straight TD drives, then a fg on the 8th.

Get over it.

Honestly it makes more sense for him to do this. Jones will make more money playing under the tag this year and signing long term after the new CBA is worked out...

Unless youre clairvoyant, we dont know how the Clark deal turned out. Hes played one season of the deal. If he destroys his knee in training camp is it still great? Pops an Achilles after? Some will say the trophy makes it worth every penny already.

That Mahomes point is just ****ing stupid bro.

We are ****ed if Mahomes goes down no matter how much hes paid. You don't send him to another team to avoid paying him. Hes the best player on the planet.

I wouldn't give 2 shits if the Chiefs had to face Jones twice a year. Imagining Mahomes on another team? **** football forever.

1.) I want to see what kind of money Jones is asking for and what our possible draft compensation is before I make a stand one way or the other. This thread is based off the assumption he is asking to be paid as one of the highest defenders in the league.

2.) Jones was on the sideline holding his dick in his hand during our most important game of the year with a fricken calf strain while we went down 24-0. Mahomes' leg could have literally been falling off before you could drag that dude off the field during a game of that importance. Please dont compare the two in that regards. It's a GD embarrassment! Shit the Eagles backup quarterback played the entire game with his hamstring literally falling off the bone! You think Brett Favre would have sat a playoff game with a calf strain? Ronnie Lott? Hell even Mitchell Schwartz? I'm sorry if I hesitate to hand this cat $100 million.

3.) Yes, injuries ARE a part of the game. If you devote too much of your cap to a handful of players and they deal with serious injuries you screw yourself and you screw Mahomes during his prime. An argument can be made to trade Jones for two high draft picks and an extra $20 million a year in cap. That is 4-5 high level staters for the price of Chris Jones. It's called "diversify" look it up if you don't understand.

4.) With Mahomes we will always be players for the top level free agents and often times they will be willing to take significant discounts for a shot at a SB ring (i.e. Chris Harris Jr.) I personally would like to see us have the opportunity to pursue these stud free agents at a discounted price every offseason rather than being handcuffed by the salary cap.

Your math sucks...Ferrell and Jacobs combined cost is around $43 million and that isn't factoring the additional pick this year. This is on top of having to use another #4 overall to replace Mack with an inferior player...that pick could have been used elsewhere or to move down.

How much is the #4 overall pick worth...that has to be factored in when calculating the cost.

Ferrell notched 4.5 sacks....

If KC keeps Jones, they are set at DL and Safety for a while. They can use the draft for CB and LB.

WTF are you talking about? They are both on rookie contracts. Jacobs' cap hit last year was just over $2,000,000. Ferrell was around $5.7 million as a top five pick.

Not that this affects Chris Jones but props to the Raiders for raping Chicago. They clearly won that trade.

And the free money they have for not spending on Mack could likely go to Byron Jones.

$43 million is their combined rookie contracts...#4 and #24.

Byron Jones is not good

That's up for debate...if Trubisky was playing at a competent level, they would be a perennial playoff team.

Are you suggesting that paying Bryon Jones was worth losing Mack and the 4th overall pick to replace him?

You must be new here.

Anyone that uses past players getting injured as a reason to not sign a 25 year old stud is just ****ing reeruned. I dont give a **** if Justin Houston didn't work out and got hurt, that has absolutely no effect on Chris Jones. If youre gonna use Eric Berry as a reason to not sign him long, then you are just a complete reerun, because Jones doesnt have the injury history of Berry, Jones is alot younger than Berry was when Berry got paid, and Jones didnt just come back from cancer.

In their situation yes. They drafted Ferrell (4.5 sacks) and Crosby (10 sacks) on cheap deals to replace him. They used a pick on Josh Jacobs, have another early pick this year and money for a Byron Jones big FA splash.

I want to keep Chris, but if Veach trades him and gets that type of return for him? You won’t find me bitching

Berry is an anomaly. The dude came back from cancer and had one of his best seasons ever. Nobody knew about the Haglunds deformity and it basically ended his career super early into the new contract.

I hope to God they sign Byron Jones long term. Reports say he will be getting the biggest DB contract ever and to ecpect him to get 16-18 mil a year. Talk about a terrible deal. Paying a guy who is will be 28 at the start of the season is completely reeruned and is exactly the move you dont make.

ESPN rated him the 8th best available free agent behind
1. Dak
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Ngakoue
5. Scherff
6. Clowney
7. Tannehill

I get why they put the QBs ahead of him, but I definitely question Clowney Scherff and Ngakoue... not that those dudes aren't damn good but Jones is so ****ing under appreciated by so many

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/sto...players-market (ESPN+)

Hopefully not a repost

No it's not. Not sure where you are pulling those numbers. I'm talking cap hit per year.

Using players getting injured on huge contracts in our teams recent history AS A REASON NOT TO BREAK THE BANK FOR ONE PLAYER is not reeruned.

Its simply a " Hey, remember when we gave Berry all that money? That was awesome".

We are still eating millions of dollars of that contract.

Houston was a gigantic waste of 105 million.

The point is, you think you have a player in Jones, that we just cannot live without, and must drop a mega deal in his lap.

I'm saying the only player that way of thinking applies to, is Mahomes. Losing Mahomes would irreversibly cripple the franchise for years.

Losing Jones would be a minor annoyance, given the massive haul we would get in return.

I'd view Jones leaving as similar to losing Kareem Hunt's production. Yeah dude produced, was top 3 in his position in the league, and was awesome, but hes not here now so plug n play.

Is Damien Kareem Hunt? No. But the dude balled out in his stead. Veach and Spags could do the same replacing Jones. Not the same caliber, but not a scrub either, and we save a shit ton of cap doing it and retain or sign more players to keep this thing going for the next decade along with the draft picks we will land.

Whatever Veach decides, im good with. He stays, we have a monster DT locked up and hopefully stays injury free.

He offloads him for a haul, hey, gonna be exciting to see what Veach with the roster with his acquired resources.

If i had to lean one way or the other, I take the big haul in a trade. Never was a fan of a huge amount of your cap riding on one player, then riding on the pine in the case of injury.

So was Houston.

Nobody can predict a guy destroying his whole knee right after signing a massive contract.

This is true for every player we (or any other team) sign. It happens.

Guys that stay on the sidelines because of the small, nagging stuff is something you can try to avoid, but major reconstructions, etc are what they are.

For clarification, im not blaming the players. Its nobody's fault that they were injured. But dropping that much money on one player, is a gamble.

When you gamble, you are going to lose at one point or another.

Injuries are a major aspect of pro football. Its not a matter of IF you are going to be injured, its WHEN, and for HOW LONG.

If Veach is comfortable letting 200 million ride on two trench players, where violent contact is experienced every single play, then okay.

Its simply not a gamble that has paid off for the Chiefs.

Name any Chief (aside from Frank Clark who has played one season on his) given a monster contract that worked out, and was worth the money.

It depends on what your definition of "worked out" really is. If you're criteria is "we won a SB with that guy" then the list is pretty short. But that's an unfair metric IMO, because even just getting to a SB is an extremely rare and difficult thing to do, and it requires an entire team to get that done. Much less win one.

On the other hand, if your parameters are statistical production, leadership, etc. then the list is significantly larger.

Take Alex Smith for example. Alex signed a 4-year extension, including 45 million guaranteed, IIRC back in 2014 to be the Chiefs starting QB. Now despite the fact that he ultimately couldn't get the Chiefs to the big game, he was in fact well worth his contract. He took over a team that in the previous season went 2-14 or whatever it was, and led the Chiefs to five consecutive winning seasons, four of which totaled at least ten wins, two consecutive AFC-W championships, and four playoff appearances.

Except between 1990-95, the Chiefs had never experienced a such a period of consistent success in franchise history.

And in reference to your "gambling" scenario, the fact that the Chiefs ultimately lost on Houston and Berry actually tells us that the Chiefs should gamble on Jones, mathematically speaking. The law of averages says that gambling on Jones should work out positively for the Chiefs because those two gambles didn't work out.

I dont recall Alex making insane top qb money, but sure. So, one guy then?

As for your take on gambling, that because Houston and Berrys contracts flopped, and ****ed us for 15 million dead money this year, and 8 million next, your answer is go ahead and gamble another 100 million alongside the 100 mil you already have riding on Clark, who has already in his first year battled numerous injuries for no other reason than "Hey, we are due for one of these things to work out eventually." ?

I'll just say I disagree and leave it at that because i cannot begin to put into words how completely ridiculous a mindset like that is.

ESPN is also speculating that Chris Jones is only worth a 2nd round pick.

Thus, I dismiss their opinion on the subject

Breaking the bank for Jones will hurt the overall roster. Too much money on the DL.

There's more than Alex; as I wrote above it was one example.

As for your highlighted sentence, tell that to Andy Reid and Patrick Mahomes. When things got tough, they both had the mindset of "keep firing, just keep firing," did they not?

You don't win it all by being safe. You win it all by taking chances. Which was exactly my biggest problem with Alex; he didn't take enough shots when the game was on the line. You want to win big, you have to take big risks. Every uber successful person knows that.

Im sorry, but are you comparing an organization ignoring their history of being burned and just throwing big contracts out and hoping it doesnt blow up in their face to Andy Reid telling the best ****ing qb on the planet its okay to keep throwing?

Again, the level of fail here is staggering.

One is a coin flip. Its either gonna work, or it isnt.

Putting the football in Patrick Mahomes hands and removing his leash is hardly gambling bro. Thats the ****ing safe play.

Oh Andy Reid, that gambler! Putting the ball in Mahomes hands with the biggest game on the line! What coach has the guts to do that?!!

I want to resign Jones but would give him 19M per season. Maybe just maybe 20M.

No to anything more than that. And yes to a trade if he plays hardball.

We should have learned our lesson with Berry and Houston. There is no point to handing out those massive deals and end up having to throw away those players because their play unsurprisingly take a dip.

Give Jones a reasonable deal and at least you can somewhat manage if his play falls off a bit which is very possible.

John Randle, and the dude was only 6'1 245lbs. Guy was a ****ing beast. 137.5 sacks playing DT. 9 of 14 seasons double digit sack totals, half sack away from being 10 out of 14. Trash talk second to none. Eyeblack second to none.

Circa '99-'00 Warren Sapp was pretty God damn terrifying also.


Im sure there are others, but Randle and Sapp immediately come to mind when you talk qb killing DTs.

Reggie White played and rotated to RDE ,DT, and LDE positions on the line for the Packers when he was called upon to do so

Give it up. No chance he will play here unless he signs the tag. Even if he does probably traded. We need more picks with only 5.

Are you going to add anything of substance or are you just going to keep repeating the same thing over and over.

Really? How so?

Awww, who's a cute little noob? You are! Yes you are...:D

He's been posting almost that same exact thing all over this thread. Multiple times a day.

Ah. This one has yet to partake of the delicious antifreeze while perishing atop the burning AIDS tree before being pulled down with nuthooks.

Letter and lot of numbers guy, this will end badly for you.

No.

You take calculated risks. But no one on here wants to do... you know... the calculating.

“Big,” “calculated,” we’re arguing semantics at this point. The point is that you have to roll the dice sometimes.

Funny how everybody talks about Houston and Berry, but what about guys like Clark and Mathieu? Yea they weren’t Chiefs before, but they’re still guys you gave a 2nd contract to. There’s no difference.

Yes you do have to roll the dice and to decrease the chances of a bad contract you have to calculate the risks. You do that by taking these factors into account;

Age - is the player at the end of his prime?

Chris Jones is just now getting into his prime. This was the first year where he looked like an absolute stud and took games over. He's just gonna get better and you don't just get rid of that type of game changing ability

Injury history - Football is extremely physical and most players get hurt and miss games, but has the player missed multiple games every season and constantly has nagging injuries that keep him at less than 100% when he actually does play?

This was the first year CJ has had injury problems. He has been very healthy his whole career and isnt constantly on the injury report.

Loves the game - Does the player love to play football or is he just looking for his big pay day?

Chris Jones is very vocal about his love of the game and is constantly trying to get better.

Does the player want to be here? Does he love the city, fans, and most importantly loves his teammates?

This is another thing that Jones has been very vocal about. He loves everything about Kansas City and the Chiefs.

So if someonw wants to spew off about calculating the risk and how Chris Jones is a risky signing Id love to see their reasons why. This whole Berry and Houston got hurt bullshit isnt a reason. Give me a legit reason that signing him long term would br bad. Give me some of the negatives when calculating the risk. The money isnt a reason either because you can keep his cap bit low until the cap is crazy high.

People will say Clark and Mathiue can still get hurt. That douche bag wallcrawler was one of those idiots.

Lol. Im sorry, I didn't realize making it through one season of a huge contract makes them invulnerable to injury, and a large chunk of our cap is unable to produce from the sideline for the duration of the injury and potentially into years that they are no longer with the team. Berry and Houstons 15 mil dead money this year was so satisfying to pay them. Cant wait to drop another 8 mil on Berry next season!! Best contract evaaaar.

My bad though. All of Clarks injuries are behind him now obviously, so its smooth sailing on that 100 mil boys!! Back up that Brings truck on Jones!

Jones' production in the divisional playoff alone helping us come back from 24-0, shows why we cannot succeed in the post season without him. WE MUST MAKE HIM THE HIGHEST PAID DEFENDER NAOWWWW!!

Idiot.

This argument isnt against any single player, you short sighted dipshit, it is about the risk associated with dropping 3-4 players worth of cash on one player.

Hasn't panned out well in the past.

Christ youre ****ing obtuse.

You're using a hypothetical injury as your main reason that Mathieu and Clarks contract and Jones' potential contract might be bad, but im obtuse? I know it's literally the only possible reason you have to not sign Jones, but it's making you look like you crawled too high up a wall, fell, and the end result was a mild case of mental reerunation.

Look at a list of the best D tackles to ever play. There's something all of those guys have in common and that is they played either there whole careers with the same team or at most 2 teams. Between these guys who are arguably the best 10 DTs of all time only 3 of them played on more than 1 team.

Casey Hampton - 1 team
Buck Buchanan - 1
Warren Sapp - 2 (Played on 2nd team during his decline. Was 32 years old when he went to 2nd team. Worst years of his career)
Randy White - 1
Cortez Kennedy - 1
John Randle - 2 (went to 2nd team when he was 34)
Bob Lily - 1
Merlin Olsen - 1
Mean Joe Greene - 1
Alan Page - 2 (went to 2nd team at 33 years old)

Teams just don't let their stud D tackles go. When are all pro talent d tackles ever available for trade or in FA? Its just a position that is filled with so many busts that when you get one like Chris Jones you don't let him leave before he's even hit his prime, especially if the only reason you can come up with is that he might get hurt.

Making CJ the highest paid defender in the NFL (IF that’s what he’s wanting) is a big risk and I wouldn’t do it.

That said, if Veach does, then I have to trust he knows something that I don’t (I.e. cap exploding in a couple years).

I can’t honestly believe that a GM like Veach would risk a potential Mahomes dynasty just to pay Jones big bank out of some misplaced sense of loyalty.

So IVIT.

No, we are not.

Big Risk: trying to light your cigarette off of a jet engine.

Calculated risk: making a move on a girl who hasn't expressed verbal consent, but you have read the room and know that it's on, provided you aren't Harvey Weinstein.

Because the defense overall will be significantly worse by losing multiple starters, having no depth, and being unable to upgrade positions of weakness. That's a reason.

It's just one that you - and all the other Chris Jones absolutists - are determined to ignore or dismiss.

Who are the multiple starters we will be losing?

Mathieu, Clark, Nnadi, Ward, Thornhill, Hitchens, Wilson, and Kpass will all be back. Counting Jones that’s 9 of 11. You’re losing Breeland and Ragland in terms of starters.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Per the NFLPA, the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Chiefs?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Chiefs</a> have $21,787,634 in cap space.</p>&mdash; Matt Conner (@MattConnerAA) <a href="https://twitter.com/MattConnerAA/status/1238200878882004994?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 12, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Okafor will be back as well!

I want to keep Jones and I think we need to ,also tired of reading wall climbers shit on an on about it lol. But isn’t the list you put up almost entirely of people who played before the cap?

Hahaha, what the hell? Let's pretend I'm not using your suggested parameters of what a "big risk" entails, how about that?

My implied version of a "big risk" is shall we say less reckless than trying to light a smoke off the exhaust plume of my aircraft.

Let's try this instead: when I was a kid for a few years I raced downhill (skiiing) in NASTAR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASTAR).

In that discipline there were basically three different 'lines' one could take on any given course. There was a fast line, a safe line, and a compromise line, which was basically between the two. The fast line was the riskiest, steepest line, but would get you across the finish line in the shortest time IF you could stay on your skis all the way down. The problem was that the odds of staying on your skis and on your edges through the entire run on the fast line was always a low percentage route. Kind of skiing's version of a 60-yard Hail Mary pass.

In perfectly ideal conditions you might consider that line. But if the weather was bad, or the surface wasn't ideal, or whatever, you tended to ski closer to the safe line. That might be right on the compromise line, or it might be a little to the fast or slow side depending on the exact situation.

Now what I learned in the short time I competed was that if you wanted any real chance to win, you ignored the safe line almost completely. It was like it didn't exist. Instead the medium or compromise line was your 'safe' line. You skied as close to that fast line as you could and never skied slower than the compromise line. Otherwise you just had no chance to win.

So when I say taking a "big risk" what I'm really saying is aim for as close to that fast line as we can get without losing your edge.

Make sense?

Another example would be pool. I still play pool, though I'm not at the top of my game anymore. But I've played more than a half a million games since I started playing competitively, played in more than a thousand tournaments, and I still play a few local sanctioned tournaments, I just don't play to go to Vegas or Atlantic city or wherever, anymore. So of the things I could say I'm proficient or expert in performance-wise, 8- and 9-ball pool would be among them.

And what I know for a fact is that you can't win in the big tournaments unless you're willing, and more importantly, comfortable taking risks. Some of those risks are just calculated risks of course, but if you want to win a regional qualifier (such as the Desert Classic here in AZ) or if you want to beat the best players in the country you have to be ready to "go all in" every once in a while. Yes, you have to pick your spots; you can't just go all in on every shot or even every game, but there's always that moment in a game or in a match or whatever, when you can try to play conservative and hope to come out on top later, or you can just push all your chips in, so to say, and go for the win. But if you always pick the conservative play, I guarantee you'll never win the big money. That player always ends up some kind of runner-up.

P.S. Some dipstick will think I meant that I won the Desert Classic because of what I posted above. No, I never won the Desert Classic qualifier, but I have placed high enough to qualify for Vegas, which is all I meant.

I thought I heard last week. There would be about 22 mil in roll over money. Must have said about 22 mil with the rollover. Tweaks not explained

XFL just cancelled their whole season however they will still fully pay their players their base salaries and benefits and all ticket season holders will be issued refunds. They will restart in 2021

The level of fail here is ****ing spectacular.

There was no ****ing Salary Cap until 1994.

Are you even ****ing aware of when Free agency where players had any ****ing unrestricted decisionmaking about where they played became an actual thing? When teams no longer had to not only get the team to give up right of refusal, but settle on draft compensation for the right to sign them?

1993.

Pease, tell me the story about how the Chiefs were able to keep Buck Buchanan from going elsewhere, by paying him a huge deal knowing they just couldnt let him entertain offers, while taking care of their "cap space". Lol. Jesus.

Half of these men you listed never even had an option to leave. The only way out was through trade. If the player was good, youd never trade them, and they played for peanuts. If they sucked, nobody was gonna give you shit for them in trade. LMMFAO. They were basicly indentured servants. You want to play, you play here. Or you retire.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Running Away From Corona Like �� <a href="https://t.co/LTsNkvT9m8">pic.twitter.com/LTsNkvT9m8</a></p>&mdash; Demarcus Robinson (@Demarcus) <a href="https://twitter.com/Demarcus/status/1238213884802203651?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 12, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>