Peterson did get two better offers for Gonzalez. The Bills and Falcons were the bidders but Gonzalez, who claimed he wanted out of K.C., turned down the chance to go to two teams where he would have been a major piece in a puzzle that could lead to the playoffs. Neither one may fit the bill of a traditional Super Bowl contender but they've both got better records than the Packers and, in the Falcons case, a clearer path to the playoffs.
The Kansas City Star reports that the Packers wanted protection, i.e. draft picks, from the Chiefs if Gonzalez didn't play out his contract. That's a silly provision, caveat emptor and all that, and one Peterson shouldn't have agreed to but he shouldn't have agreed to it for a second rounder any more than a third-round selection. Letting it get to that point, asking Gonzalez for his approval and then pulling the plug makes Peterson a guy people, players and management, aren't going to want to do business with in the future.
Not that Gonzalez is any better. He should have gone to Atlanta or Buffalo and made a clean start of things. Whining about wanting to leave and then refusing to budge is just as bad for your team as changing the terms of a deal at the last second. These two guys deserve each other, the Chiefs would be wise to lose both of them.
over 3 years ago
ChiefDJ
8 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
If they were to cut Tony
would the protection picks kick in ?? Perhaps that’s why CP felt the need to bump it up to a second rounder. I really don’t know the answer to that – help me out here !!
I think it was primarily as protection if Tony retired early
He has I think three more years left on his contract and said from the beginning he wouldn’t be playing that long. He only plans to play one maybe two more years.
From what the KC Star said, the provisions essentially said that if Tony retired in less than the three years remaining on his contract (which he will) that the Chiefs would owe the Packers draft picks in compensation. There is no way in hell we would have even considered that.
Its a real shame the rumors got out before the details and got everyone up in arms about Carl supposedly lying to Tony. I wonder if Tony even knew about those provisions before the news conference yesterday. He may not have been so upset.
An all to often
circumstance. From what I’ve read, Tony may have play a part in the proliferation of the story !! Honestly – I don’t see how you canblame Carl in this thing.
Ohhhhhh
So, this really all goes back onto Tony. Carl, who I admittedly can’t stand, found Tony TWO contenders to trade him to and Tony refused??? You’ve got to be kidding me? Then he whines to the media afterwords about not getting traded? Did he think this information wouldn’t surface?
That's kind of
how it appears from what’s been put “out there” so far.
There's usually more to the story than you first hear
Most people don’t like Carl so they naturally assume everything is his fault.
Tony has the right to choose where he doesn’t want to go, and I don’t blame him for not wnating to go to either of those teams. They may be doing OK right now, but they have been bad teams recently and we could just be seeing a flash in the pan with them (which I think is the truth especially with the Falcons) and he ends up on a team that is just as crappy as the one he left.
However, he shouldn’t be as upset as he was publicly when he’s turning down offers.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
