Chiefs release Ben Grubbs

[Micjones]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...iled-physical/

Just a year after trading for Ben Grubbs and giving him a new four-year deal, the Kansas City Chiefs are parting ways with the veteran guard.

According to Howard Balzer of the Sports Xchange, the Chiefs released Grubbs on Wednesday with a failed physical designation.

Grubbs played in just seven games for the Chiefs before landing on injured reserve with a neck injury.

The Chiefs replaced Grubbs at left guard with Jeff Allen and Zach Fulton for the remainder of the season. But Allen signed with the Houston Texans on Wednesday, leaving the Chiefs with one fewer option to potentially replace Grubbs this season.

Fulton and Jah Reid would be potentially replacements already on the Kansas City roster.

Grubbs turns 32 on Thursday. He could still see interest on the market from line-needy teams if he can move beyond the neck injury that ended his 2015 season.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

There are better way to do it.

Ways that don't create more dead money


Pretty much the worst thing you can do when dealing with the cap is create dead money.

Name it.

The way Dorsey did it also created $4 million in rollover by drastically reducing in cap hit for last season. That $4 million in roll-over will essentially cover his dead money for this season.

The extension didn't hurt us. At all. His cap hit for the 2015 season was reduced by enough to pay for the dead money created. It was dollar in, dollar out.

The trade was fine. The extension was fine (and really, the upside built into it was enormous). It just didn't work out.

That's football.

[frozenchief]

Originally Posted by DenverChief

$5.2m in dead money and $1.1m in savings.

He was cut because he failed the physical. I thought if a player fails a physical the salary is not counted against the salary cap and is thus not dead money. If he's cut in general, yes, but not in these circumstances.

Maybe I missed that but at least I knew Grubbs played guard.

[Chief Northman]

Originally Posted by frozenchief

He was cut because he failed the physical. I thought if a player fails a physical the salary is not counted against the salary cap and is thus not dead money. If he's cut in general, yes, but not in these circumstances.

Maybe I missed that but at least I knew Grubbs played guard.

If that was the case, teams would be reporting players "failed physicals" all the time......

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by frozenchief

He was cut because he failed the physical. I thought if a player fails a physical the salary is not counted against the salary cap and is thus not dead money. If he's cut in general, yes, but not in these circumstances.

Maybe I missed that but at least I knew Grubbs played guard.

Lord no.

Every team has its own baselines for failed physicals. If a team could just designate guys with a failed physical designation anytime they wanted to avoid a cap hit, the abuse would be off the charts.

The Redskins took a cap hit for a dude that got murdered. The NFL doesn't really give a great number of ****s when it comes to your cap hit - you're pretty much always going to have to deal with that dead money.

[frozenchief]

Originally Posted by Chief Northman

If that was the case, teams would be reporting players "failed physicals" all the time......

Physical exams are available for independent verification so the union can see player passed or failed to avoid this problem. If a player retires the salary is not d ad money because the player is backing out of the contract. If the player fails the physical, the player is physically unable to complete the contract, hence it shouldn't be dead money.

I've been trying to find an answer this morning. I should be working.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by frozenchief

Physical exams are available for independent verification so the union can see player passed or failed to avoid this problem. If a player retires the salary is not d ad money because the player is backing out of the contract. If the player fails the physical, the player is physically unable to complete the contract, hence it shouldn't be dead money.

I've been trying to find an answer this morning. I should be working.

Again, your very premise is incorrect.

When a player retires, his money generally counts against the cap. I believe there are limited exceptions granted for signing bonus money that is able to be re-captured by the team, however. For instance, if the Lions elect not to purse Megatron's remaining signing bonus, it's going to count against their cap. If he gives them the finger and fights them in court, it counts against the cap until they actually win a judgment and recover it.

If he had a roster bonus that was spread out over the remainder of the cap and it triggered in the past, that amount CANNOT be recovered by the team and any remaining pro-rated amount will accelerate against the cap.

You're way out there on what you think earns cap credits. Very few of these mechanisms do. A failed physical designation is nothing more than a courtesy extended to the rest of the league. Teams do it as a good faith measure to other squads.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Name it.

The way Dorsey did it also created $4 million in rollover by drastically reducing in cap hit for last season. That $4 million in roll-over will essentially cover his dead money for this season.

The extension didn't hurt us. At all. His cap hit for the 2015 season was reduced by enough to pay for the dead money created. It was dollar in, dollar out.

The trade was fine. The extension was fine (and really, the upside built into it was enormous). It just didn't work out.

That's football.

He could have manipulated the contract of any player he knows he's keeping, at minimal risk. Alex Smith is not going anywhere, covert his base salary into a bonus. Smith is playing out his contract, we lose nothing.

listen ... i'm not saying Dorsey sucks or anything

but the Grubbs move didnt' work out, giving him a new contract really didn't work out

As for rollover, if we had cap room to rollover then we didn't need to make room by giving Grubbs a new contract.

we created rollever and then flush the rollover with dead money. Waste.

[scho63]

No tears shed here

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Mr. Laz

He could have manipulated the contract of any player he knows he's keeping, at minimal risk. Alex Smith is not going anywhere, covert his base salary into a bonus. Smith is playing out his contract, we lose nothing.

listen ... i'm not saying Dorsey sucks or anything

but the Grubbs move didnt' work out, giving him a new contract really didn't work out

As for rollover, if we had cap room to rollover then we didn't need to make room by giving Grubbs a new contract.

we created rollever and then flush the rollover with dead money. Waste.

We didn't have the cap room to rollover. It wasn't a waste at all - it created cap space that immediately paid for itself. We didn't 'flush' the rollover; we forward paid it.

The new contract made no difference at all. If you believe a Smith restructure could have been done then, well it can still be done now.

That new contract had absolutely no detrimental impact on the 2016 cap. It paid for itself.

[TimBone]

Originally Posted by BossChief

June 1 designation or nah?

Also, it's good to have a GM that's not afraid to admit mistakes.

That's been one of my favorite things about Dorsey and Reid. Pioli would have never admitted wrong doing on a player so quickly. These guys have little ego. "Well, that was a mistake, let's cut him and move forward."

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by TimBone

That's been one of my favorite things about Dorsey and Reid. Pioli would have never admitted wrong doing on a player so quickly. These guys have little ego. "Well, that was a mistake, let's cut him and move forward."

It helps that they've generally done a good job of giving themselves an out and the one time they didn't, he smoked his way into giving them one.

Dorsey and Reid have never had a really painful cap cut they've had to make. Flowers was the worst and I don't believe his contract came on their watch.

So I'm not convinced they're any less likely to double down on a mistake as anyone is, they've just been very smart thus far in ensuring that their decisions are generally pretty easy ones to make.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

We didn't have the cap room to rollover. It wasn't a waste at all - it created cap space that immediately paid for itself. We didn't 'flush' the rollover; we forward paid it.

The new contract made no difference at all. If you believe a Smith restructure could have been done then, well it can still be done now.

That new contract had absolutely no detrimental impact on the 2016 cap. It paid for itself.

we just disagree.

[TimBone]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

It helps that they've generally done a good job of giving themselves an out and the one time they didn't, he smoked his way into giving them one.

Dorsey and Reid have never had a really painful cap cut they've had to make. Flowers was the worst and I don't believe his contract came on their watch.

So I'm not convinced they're any less likely to double down on a mistake as anyone is, they've just been very smart thus far in ensuring that their decisions are generally pretty easy ones to make.

That's just as fine by me.

[thabear04]

Getting let go and its your birthday poor Grubbs.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

Now let's dump Fanaika.

Signing Fanaika last year, to me, is far and away the very worst decision that Dorsey has made as the GM of this team.

It was an absolutely horrible decision, no matter how badly the Chiefs needed OL help.

That guy needed to be cut before he was ever signed.