Chris Jones may sit out 2020 season

[qnet 1,150]

21 hours ago, DieHard said:

It seems strange that there is anger towards Jones. Nobody likes being tagged. Stud players want you to mortgage the future to get them what they deserve. He deserves to get paid, it just doesn’t make sense for us. We made this decision when we signed Clark and HB. He has a right to be mad,  but the team made the correct decision. There was never going to be a second contract.

I'm not really angry with him. It just frustrates me that this makes players so mad. 16 million is still a lot of money. I'm looking at it from a regular person's standpoint, so that may not be fair.

[DieHard 2,061]

1 minute ago, qnet said:

I'm not really angry with him. It just frustrates me that this makes players so mad. 16 million is still a lot of money. I'm looking at it from a regular person's standpoint, so that may not be fair.

I agree. I would take my 16 and blow it up for my entrance into FA. This is a big money year for him one way or another. That’s some pretty good motivation. Hope he plays angry all year.

[xen 1,010,220]

8 minutes ago, qnet said:

I'm not really angry with him. It just frustrates me that this makes players so mad. 16 million is still a lot of money. I'm looking at it from a regular person's standpoint, so that may not be fair.

Ok so would you be happy if you were one of the best at your job but not only does your work pay you less than others but keeps you from shopping your services to another company so you can make more?

[qnet 1,150]

1 minute ago, xen said:

Ok so would you be happy if you were one of the best at your job but not only does your work pay you less than others but keeps you from shopping your services to another company so you can make more?

Of course not, but the NFL doesn't really compare to a regular job. That's why I said my opinion may not be fair. I can't honestly say how I would act, at that age, if I were in his position. Especially with his agent and other players, most likely in his ear. 

[xen 1,010,220]

11 minutes ago, qnet said:

Of course not, but the NFL doesn't really compare to a regular job. That's why I said my opinion may not be fair. I can't honestly say how I would act, at that age, if I were in his position. Especially with his agent and other players, most likely in his ear. 

It's not comparable at all to other jobs.  Not even to entertainers since they're unlikely to get injured on the job.  Yet people always insist on making that comparison every time a contract dispute comes up.  The nfl is a violent sport with short careers and a lot of money at stake.  I don't blame players for trying to get what they can get.  The vast majority never put themselves in a position to get a contract like Jones would command on the open market.  And while 1 year 16 mil sounds great to us average Joe's, consider that whatever he signs for he'll get about half after uncle sam and his agents, and he has to weigh that against the possibility of serious injury.  So 8 mil really vs the possibility of 100 mil + (or I guess to be fair, half that, so say 50).

[West 6,713]

Hey, we should all pay mucho taxes and thank the government for the roads to get to practice on.

sorry, I couldn't resist.

w

[sith13 1,746]

11 hours ago, xen said:

Ok so would you be happy if you were one of the best at your job but not only does your work pay you less than others but keeps you from shopping your services to another company so you can make more?

I can't agree with players on this one. He has signed a contract that enables his employer to retain his services for 2 more years with certain increase in his pay. If Jones doesn't like the terms he can complete his lawful obligations and then seek employment elsewhere. A lot of people end up in similar situations but don't get to bitch about it like NFL stars.

[xen 1,010,220]

7 hours ago, sith13 said:

I can't agree with players on this one. He has signed a contract that enables his employer to retain his services for 2 more years with certain increase in his pay. If Jones doesn't like the terms he can complete his lawful obligations and then seek employment elsewhere. A lot of people end up in similar situations but don't get to bitch about it like NFL stars.

Uhhh Jones is not under contract.  That's why he got tagged.  He has not signed the tag so there is no contract at all right now.

[kkuenn 3,598]

3 minutes ago, xen said:

Uhhh Jones is not under contract.  That's why he got tagged.  He has not signed the tag so there is no contract at all right now.

Under CBA is what he means. They have his rights up to 3 more years if they want. Whether he wants to play or not is up to Jones. He either signs one or sits and gives up millions.

[sith13 1,746]

36 minutes ago, xen said:

Uhhh Jones is not under contract.  That's why he got tagged.  He has not signed the tag so there is no contract at all right now.

 

32 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

Under CBA is what he means. They have his rights up to 3 more years if they want. Whether he wants to play or not is up to Jones. He either signs one or sits and gives up millions.

Exactly what I mean. Jones signed a deal that gives the Chiefs option of retaining his services for an additional time. 

[xen 1,010,220]

22 minutes ago, sith13 said:

 

Exactly what I mean. Jones signed a deal that gives the Chiefs option of retaining his services for an additional time. 

The option to tag jones has nothing to do with the deal he signed as a rookie.  It is allowed under the CBA his union negotiated, of course, but jones has not signed anything.

[qnet 1,150]

With the way Mahomes is deal done, maybe they can work something out for Chris Jones now. I can only dream. 

[sith13 1,746]

Just now, xen said:

The option to tag jones has nothing to do with the deal he signed as a rookie.  It is allowed under the CBA his union negotiated, of course, but jones has not signed anything.

He signed his rookie deal under the existing CBA which gave Chiefs the option. He already knew the rules and agreed to them when he signed that deal. Now he has the option of denying the rules and leave or comply with the rules and continue to work in the NFL. 

[xen 1,010,220]

39 minutes ago, sith13 said:

He signed his rookie deal under the existing CBA which gave Chiefs the option. He already knew the rules and agreed to them when he signed that deal. Now he has the option of denying the rules and leave or comply with the rules and continue to work in the NFL. 

Ok now we're just arguing semantics at this point.  The fact is Jones is not under contract.  Like at all.  The fact that his former employer has a collectively bargained option to keep him from signing elsewhere doesn't mean that he's under contract.  I was reacting to your original post.  

In particular the part below is inaccurate which is what i was referring to.  Nowhere in Jones's contract does it contain language about tags as that'd part of the CBA, not individual contracts.  So no. Jones did not sign anything that enables the tag, his union did. Btw they didn't tag him under the CBA in effect at the time his rookie contract was signed so technically not even that part is true...  And yes I know this is all just semantics, which is why i started this post off with 'we're just arguing semantics'.

Let's quote it again:

"He has signed a contract that enables his employer to retain his services for 2 more years with certain increase in his pay."

 

[Balto 723]

I still think Buckner's 4 year $84M is what he's looking for.  Looks like the Colts actually just extended Buckner 4 years so he is really on the books for 5 years.

With Pat's new contract on the books I think Veech will look at a 4 year or even a 3 year deal for Jones.  Pat's contract is very team friendly for the next 3 season and maybe longer depending on salary cap increases.

With Pat's contract KC could front load a Jones contract vs back loading.  Keep the team together for the next 4 season with hopes that Veech drafts well to replace all these now older expensive players going into Pat's expensive years.

[xen 1,010,220]

9 minutes ago, Balto said:

I still think Buckner's 4 year $84M is what he's looking for.  Looks like the Colts actually just extended Buckner 4 years so he is really on the books for 5 years.

With Pat's new contract on the books I think Veech will look at a 4 year or even a 3 year deal for Jones.  Pat's contract is very team friendly for the next 3 season and maybe longer depending on salary cap increases.

With Pat's contract KC could front load a Jones contract vs back loading.  Keep the team together for the next 4 season with hopes that Veech drafts well to replace all these now older expensive players going into Pat's expensive years.

Yeah I been thinking maybe a shorter deal is in the cards for jones.

[Lamardirts 2,114]

What about 3/60 with 42 guaranteed.   18, 20 , 22 per year.  He’s 28-29 when the deal is done in time for another big pay day.

[Balto 723]

1 minute ago, Lamardirts said:

What about 3/60 with 42 guaranteed.   18, 20 , 22 per year.  He’s 28-29 when the deal is done in time for another big pay day.

Deal!  Even though I’d flip year 1 and 3 so if something happens we can cut/trade after year 2 with zero dead money

[jetlord 10,209]

1 hour ago, Balto said:

Deal!  Even though I’d flip year 1 and 3 so if something happens we can cut/trade after year 2 with zero dead money

I didn't think the Chiefs had the cap space to pay Jones $22 million this year.  He's on the books for $16 and after signing the rookies, the Chiefs are up against it. 

[Balto 723]

3 hours ago, jetlord said:

I didn't think the Chiefs had the cap space to pay Jones $22 million this year.  He's on the books for $16 and after signing the rookies, the Chiefs are up against it. 

ok go $20, $22, $18

Could trade Hitchens and add $4M

[DieHard 2,061]

Hitch isn’t going anywhere this year IMO. There is no one to replace him. Jones will not get a monster deal here. I think you can have a couple high dollar defensive players on this team like HB and Clark but there is a limit for an offensive team. Justin Houston deserved a big deal too. Best Lb in the league coming off 22 sacks.

Next year we need a starting MLB, CB, G, WR, C, OLB. There is depth that can develop at other positions, but not much talent beyond the current starters at these spots.

[sith13 1,746]

18 hours ago, xen said:

Ok now we're just arguing semantics at this point.  The fact is Jones is not under contract.  Like at all.  The fact that his former employer has a collectively bargained option to keep him from signing elsewhere doesn't mean that he's under contract.  I was reacting to your original post.  

In particular the part below is inaccurate which is what i was referring to.  Nowhere in Jones's contract does it contain language about tags as that'd part of the CBA, not individual contracts.  So no. Jones did not sign anything that enables the tag, his union did. Btw they didn't tag him under the CBA in effect at the time his rookie contract was signed so technically not even that part is true...  And yes I know this is all just semantics, which is why i started this post off with 'we're just arguing semantics'.

Let's quote it again:

"He has signed a contract that enables his employer to retain his services for 2 more years with certain increase in his pay."

 

Jones gave his employer that option when he signed his rookie deal which entered him to the NFLPA, and he's a member of. If he didn't like being in NFLPA he shouldn't sign his rookie deal or find a way to resolve his grievance within the union. 

The quoted part is true except that it should be 3 (my bad). Every NFL contract comes with the option of the tag due to the CBA which enables the employer to retain the services of any player following the duration of the signed contract. Players bitching about the rules they have agreed to isn't really something worth sympathizing IMO. 

[jetlord 10,209]

11 hours ago, Balto said:

ok go $20, $22, $18

Could trade Hitchens and add $4M

Considering that LB is one of the weaker position groups, Hitchens can't be spared this year.  His replacement wouldn't come all that cheap, and HItch knows the Spags system.  Surprised that you didn't recommend releasing Fisher to save $$$. 

[oldtimer 8,686]

Just now, jetlord said:

Considering that LB is one of the weaker position groups, Hitchens can't be spared this year.  His replacement wouldn't come all that cheap, and HItch knows the Spags system.  Surprised that you didn't recommend releasing Fisher to save $$$. 

he's too busy figuring away to trade MVPAT even with his no trade clause

[THEWIZARD 247]

On 7/6/2020 at 4:02 PM, jetlord said:

And they might have won the SB the year before with him.  I'm not a Hunt fan, but recognize that the yards he put up in 2017 and the start of 2018 did big things for the Chiefs.  We're getting way off the original point which is that one non-QB player, no matter how important to the team, is going to make or break the season all by himself.  It takes a TEAM to be successful.  

Do you think they would have won this year without Kelce? Maybe, but I don't  think so.