KANSAS CITY, MO - DECEMBER 18: Brandon Carr #39 of the Kansas City Chiefs celebrates with fans after the Chiefs defeated the Green Bay Packers 19-14 to win the gameon December 18, 2011 at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City, Missouri. (Photo by Jamie Squire/Getty Images)
Here's what Pioli said about Carr when asked on SiriusXM NFL Radio today:
You can never have too many good corners. There's a chance. Brandon Carr has told us, and he's told the public, he wants to be here. We've told him that. Brandon wants to be here. We want him here. Now it's just a matter of finding out, can we come to the right deal?
And then, earlier this week (Tuesday), Nick Wright of 610 Sports said he had talked with Brandon Carr recently (Monday) and that Carr apparently wanted Wright to make a couple of things clear regarding his status with the Chiefs, including this:
"There's a couple things [Carr] wanted to make very clear," Wright said earlier this week. "One was, on some of the blogs and I think some of the media locally, there's been this line of thinking that one of the reasons that the Chiefs went out and got Stanford Routt is that Carr must have made it clear to the Chiefs brass that he didn't want to come back. That, and this is coming straight from Brandon Carr, that's nonsense."
(Note: I don't know who was saying that. I didn't hear or read it.)
"If Scott Pioli thinks he did make it clear to Carr that we still want you, that's a conversation they need to have again because when I talked with Brandon at length around 7:30 last night, the clear feeling he had gotten was that this was the Chiefs moving on from him."
Now, maybe Carr's message was lost in translation (seems like a pretty easy message to get straight though) but isn't it amazing that we have two such completely different takes on the same situation.
I understand there's some jockeying going on in the media but I think most people do (or should) recognize the situation for what it is.
Carr has had a terrific start to his NFL career and thus has earned the right to enter free agency and make gobs of money. Who doesn't want to be the No. 1 guy? Anybody who knocks Carr isn't looking at his situation realistically. At least that's what I think. He's one of my favorite Chiefs and I'd love if he were back but the Chiefs aren't going to pay him $10 million a year and commit $25 million next year to three cornerbacks.
For the Chiefs, they now have options with Stanford Routt, who is only being paid $10.5 million in the first two years of his deal (hardly overpaying, if you ask me). They could still potentially do a deal with Carr but they've set themselves up if that doesn't happen. There's also an argument that Routt and his deal is a better value than what Carr could command elsewhere.
I'm not gonna get mad at Carr because he's played so well in his NFL career that other teams want him. And I'm not gonna get mad at the Chiefs creating another option considering the flexibility it gives them.
I mean, I really have a hard time getting worked up about either side.
For me, this is one of those rare debates where it's hard to blame anyone. (My lack of opinion would make me a horrible radio host.) Hopefully, though, the Chiefs and Carr surprise us all and agree to a new deal making this a moot point.
That's my take on it anyway. What's yours?