Drew Brees Uses 2009 Chiefs As Example Of Low-Spending Teams

I always hated trying to figure out the Cap and what not. I’m just damned glad football is back!

An employer HAS to spend money so that you have more money in your pocket. He may be in his late 20’s but he sounds like he is an entitled teenager to me. Dislike

Its not even 10am Arrowhead Time and Joel’s got 4 stories and a fanshot in, and Chris has a story too. Someone ate their wheaties today!

but you will only be so competitive spending that low. No need to break the bank on any guy but all the recent SB winners spent much more money than we have recently.

Is that we were under the minimum but we
 had to pay at the end of the year to get back to the floor. I believe this was done by giving each player an equal percentage oud the shortfall whereas last year, with no floor our cap, we did not have to do anything.

The biggest reason why the Chiefs, and many of the other low spending teams, spent so little is because they are a rebuilding and largely young team which tends to cost you alot less in salaries. If you have a good GM like we do you’ll have a guy that plans well into the future in his rebuilding process and this is only going to help him. By having a floor that has to be reached, rebuilding teams can front load contracts to make the floor which will free up cap space down the line when presumably(in an ideal world) there team is no longer rebuilding and needs to pay some of their younger players or new players more money.

I’m not a Jerry Jones fan, but it has too be frustrating for him and other big market team owners, that share a portion of their revenue with the small market teams, only to have those teams not spend the money to be more competitive. It’s the salary cap, and revenue sharing that makes the NFL competitive, and allows the smaller market teams a chance to compete with the “big boys.” I know Jones has been a real critic oft he profit sharing model the league uses, and I can kindof see why. I’m sure you that live in the KC area, and support the Royals, wish that they would commit more money to salaries. Also, Clark Hunt stated he likes the new CBA agreement, which would mean he doesn’t have an issue using a larger percentage of profits on payroll. As far as Drew Brees, I could care less what his opinion is, as he was one of the biggest whiners during the whole CBA thing , but I do agree wtih him on this issue.

If a team is in a total rebuilding effort like the Chiefs have been in, it doesn’t make sense to force them to pay a bunch of young players big dollars while they are developing.
I would have liked to seen the salary floor tied to the total years of service of the players.

and I was just as irritated as most of you guys. It’s fine to have an opinion on this, but to actually use a team as a way of crucifying a team wanting to spend their money wisely instead of overpaying their players is stupid. He should’ve really thought about what he was saying before he said it.

You see the problem here is that Drew is focused on the money side of it for the players, not with winning or losing. But what he fails to see in the 2009 Kansas City Chiefs is that we didn’t have a roster to support a higher Salary for this team. Yes we may have gotten by lower than the norm. Yes the 2010 Chiefs improved, but have they earned the privilege to get paid? We are seeing an increase in talent level yes. But why should a team full Brodie Croyles, Lance Longs, Bobby Wades, Andy Allemans, and Sean Ryans have to be paid a higher amount when they don’t deserve it? This is like putting a tag on the Royals roster and making them get paid like the Yankees and Red Sox. We only have to reach a minimum you say, but I say again, is the roster deserving of that? Certain players may, yes, but when you put a minimum on it as Drew uses the 2009 Chiefs, that means one of two things. Your better players are gonna get paid an astronomical amount, or your entire roster is gonna get paid more causing worser players to get paid the same as a good player when its not deserving.

I believe the Chiefs will spend, but they will do so when it is right to do so.

You are pretty much just asking teams to spend more money for the sake of player’s salaries to go up. I realize that there is more to it but for simplicity sake that is the upshot of the statement made by Brees. So you kind of take the motivation out of some player’s hands to work hard for their increased payroll and you are asking the owners to pay more money for players that probably don’t deserve it. It would be easy to make that case that the owners don’t have to sign somebody because their price is overinflated because of the new CBA but some team at some time is going to have a need for that player and they are going to end up spending more than they should. What is wrong with winning on a reasonable budget? If you can get the most of young players that are paying their dues until their next contract why pay them a bunch of money up front?