Let's talk about the Nate Taylor monologue

[Direckshun]

Nate Taylor, on the most recently episode of Time's Ours Only Weird Games, said that the Sneed dynamic is a punishment for both the Chiefs and Sneed, despite the fact that both parties did everything right.

They drafted him, they developed him, they rostered him and played him.

He did everything they asked, he had zero off the field concerns, and played for them at an All Pro level.

And now, because the marriage between the parties was so successful, he likely has the leave the team and play elsewhere.

I was thinking this over. And I agree, this is a less than ideal situation for both teams -- sure Sneed gets paid, and the Chiefs likely get compensation. But the best outcome would have been for Sneed to stay in KC and get paid here. That's just structurally unlikely, however, because of the restriction of the salary cap.

I also think that maybe this is the least worst way we can approach the issue.

Maybe the league could carve out salary cap exceptions for players that a team drafts. Or maybe even that a team drafts on the third day, to reward both sides for their development and hard work.

What are your thoughts on this issue? How might you opt to resolve it?

[Gary Cooper]

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

Can't pay everybody.

That's the downside of being a great team and winning multiple championships. Everyone wants a piece of that pie.

Sneed is likely to play elsewhere because the Chiefs probably aren't going to pay what he's worth, unless he's willing to take a discount. Fans think he should so that the band can be kept together in order to 3 peat and continue winning.

A fans perspective is almost always gonna differ than how a player sees it.

The NFL means Not For Long, and Sneed has no choice but to get his bag.

Sneed wasn't a 1st rd pick with a 1st rd rookie contract making millions. He was a 4th rd pick who played far above his salary. This is probably his only chance to really make some cash while he's in the league. Can't blame the guy it is what it is.

That's the way I see it. Plus, he's already won two Championships. He has nothing left to prove. Getting the maximum contract should be his top priority for himself and family.

[Brooklyn]

hard cap is tough to work with.

wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do it like NBA with an apron and luxury tax with ability to go over the cap to sign your own player (i.e. Bird Rights).

not sure its viable with 53 guys vs like 15 on a basketball roster, but end of the day if we could go over the cap to keep Sneed, I think everyone wins and we'd probably already have Jones locked up too.

[Basileus777]

Originally Posted by Brooklyn

hard cap is tough to work with.

wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do it like NBA with an apron and luxury tax with ability to go over the cap to sign your own player (i.e. Bird Rights).

not sure its viable with 53 guys vs like 15 on a basketball roster, but end of the day if we could go over the cap to keep Sneed, I think everyone wins and we'd probably already have Jones locked up too.

A soft cap would be a competitive disadvantage as Clark Hunt is not going to outspend these other NFL owners.

[Armyofme]

Originally Posted by O.city

It really is terrible. Taylor is bad.

There isn't a Chiefs show worth a shit to be honest.

Nate's theatrics, screeching, veering off topic and interruptions are maddening! The juice isn't worth the squeeze for that guy.

If it wasn't for Seth, I would have abandoned the show a while ago. He has some really great, insightful takes.

[Dunerdr]

Originally Posted by Armyofme

Nate's theatrics, screeching, veering off topic and interruptions are maddening! The juice isn't worth the squeeze for that guy.

If it wasn't for Seth, I would have abandoned the show a while ago. He has some really great, insightful takes.

Same. I mentioned it in another thread. If you put Seth with Nick Jacobs or Craig stout where they could really just talk ball that would be great.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Brooklyn

hard cap is tough to work with.

wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to do it like NBA with an apron and luxury tax with ability to go over the cap to sign your own player (i.e. Bird Rights).

not sure its viable with 53 guys vs like 15 on a basketball roster, but end of the day if we could go over the cap to keep Sneed, I think everyone wins and we'd probably already have Jones locked up too.

The NBA cap has become a complicated shitshow of variable 'max deals' tied to revenue percentages, bad contracts being signed with the express purpose of offsetting other bad contracts to make deals work and players actually being OVERPAID by their present team because of the oddities of the Bird Rights.

The NBA system is not great. Now if you were to take it and make it go from covering a team with 15-20 players to 53+ it would be an even BIGGER mess. Especially when you consider the broad disparity between similarly situated players who play different positions (not the case in the NBA; a great PG is going to get paid roughly the same as a great C).

Nah - the NBA system just couldn't work in the NFL, IMO. And frankly there's no good reason for the NFL to implement it.

The NFL broke the NFLPA's backs decades ago. Why would they ever go backwards from there?

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The NFL broke the NFLPA's backs decades ago. Why would they ever go backwards from there?

the NFL got a 17th game and the players didn’t even get another bye week.

[Pinchshot]

It's Pat's fault for restructuring. We messed up a 10 year deal.

[TinyEvel]

Nah, this works a lot like in business. At least, my business.

As a manager I recruited people out of college, gave them their first job, showed them the ropes and our process, they created things that built their resume and increased their value in the market. And then when they came to me saying they got an offer from XXX company for a certain amount, I often would say "good luck" and hire another. Or, the few rare ones who were worth it, I would get them the salary and or title to keep them there. Or even more likely, I was giving them raises and titles as they grew. My favorite thing to do was to give someone a raise without them asking.
But I let plenty of people walk.

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Nate Taylor, on the most recently episode of Time's Ours Only Weird Games, said that the Sneed dynamic is a punishment for both the Chiefs and Sneed, despite the fact that both parties did everything right.



They drafted him, they developed him, they rostered him and played him.



He did everything they asked, he had zero off the field concerns, and played for them at an All Pro level.



And now, because the marriage between the parties was so successful, he likely has the leave the team and play elsewhere.



I was thinking this over. And I agree, this is a less than ideal situation for both teams -- sure Sneed gets paid, and the Chiefs likely get compensation. But the best outcome would have been for Sneed to stay in KC and get paid here. That's just structurally unlikely, however, because of the restriction of the salary cap.



I also think that maybe this is the least worst way we can approach the issue.



Maybe the league could carve out salary cap exceptions for players that a team drafts. Or maybe even that a team drafts on the third day, to reward both sides for their development and hard work.



What are your thoughts on this issue? How might you opt to resolve it?

I have posted about this a lot in the past.

NFL teams should have at least 2 roster exemptions for what I call Hometown Heroes, players who the team drafted, and that have been to X number of Pro Bowls or have X number of All-Pros.

Fans, and teams, shouldn't have to lose players like Kelce, Jones, or Sneed, because the team drafted well, and those players shouldn't have to leave their only team in order to get market value because they performed well on the field and the team was successful.

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic

I have posted about this a lot in the past.

NFL teams should have at least 2 roster exemptions for what I call Hometown Heroes, players who the team drafted, and that have been to X number of Pro Bowls or have X number of All-Pros.

Fans, and teams, shouldn't have to lose players like Kelce, Jones, or Sneed, because the team drafted well, and those players shouldn't have to leave their only team in order to get market value because they performed well on the field and the team was successful.

How would you define "market value" in this proposal if they're not able to actually hit the open market?

And how would you handle that with players who actually want to switch teams?

[ChiefsFanatic]

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

How would you define "market value" in this proposal if they're not able to actually hit the open market?



And how would you handle that with players who actually want to switch teams?

Obviously, free agents can go anywhere they choose.

As far as market value, I think that is hard define, and I should have worded it differently I guess.

But, I do know that Kelce should have been the highest paid TE for several years, obviously, and if he wanted to be paid what he is worth, he would probably be playing somewhere else. We are lucky that Kelce is different than most players, and isn't all about the bag.

I know that Jones deserves to be at least the 2nd highest paid DT in the league.

I know that Sneed deserves at least $20 million dollars a year.

Maybe a better way to avoid situations like this is to remove the QB salaries from the salary cap numbers. Put some sort of limitation on what teams can pay QBs, like say the max you can pay a QB in a given year is X% of the salary cap max amount.

Like, if the salary cap is $250 million, the max a QB could make is 25% of $250 million, but you still get the full $250 million to pay all other players.

[Oxford]

Originally Posted by O.city

Mahomes is actually underpaid for what he’s worth.

How much money have the chiefs made since he’s been the qb?

That will never be known, and how would you define it? Merchandise sales benefit the league as a whole, NFL players in commercials benefit the league as a whole too. Now factor in that players might be considered depreciable assets as far as the business is concerned and what gets reported as profit on tqxes really gets skewed.

[TwistedChief]

Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic

I know that Jones deserves to be at least the 2nd highest paid DT in the league.

I know that Sneed deserves at least $20 million dollars a year.

But doesn't the way the franchise tag is structured essentially give these players that kind of salary for the upcoming season? CJ would be the second highest paid DT. Sneed would make roughly 20mm.

Regardless, you "know" that Jones and Sneed deserve that. But what about a player like Christian Kirk who people probably had pegged at 10-15mm/yr? And then there's just one team like the Jags who are willing to pay 18mm AAV and suddenly that's the market for him? How would it have worked for Tyreek Hill when the Chiefs were willing to pay a ton but other teams were willing to pay a ton plus a couple million more?

I think the system is set up pretty well right now. The franchise tag is what it is and it creates longer-lasting relationships. And if that doesn't work out, then the player has options and the team has the ability to recoup some value. And that's what's going on with Sneed at the moment. (Jones is on his third contract so is an entirely different beast.)

If you create some system where you're carving out the QB or placing caps on them, you're giving an insane advantage to a team like the Chiefs who have the best QB in the world.

[RunKC]

Imagine how good this Chiefs team would have been before Free Agency and the salary cap worth the way they draft? Yeesh