Where Has This Whitlock Been All My Life?

А интересно, сам автор читает комментарии. Или мы тут сами для себя пишем? :)

Actually, no they didn't:

The team offered Brees a 5-year, $50 million contract that paid $2 million in base salary the first year and the rest heavily based on performance incentives, notably that he line up under center 75% of the season. Brees took the incentive-based offer as a sign of no confidence by the Chargers and promptly demanded the type of money a top 5 "franchise" quarterback would receive.

After the Chargers refused to increase their offer, Brees met with other teams. New Orleans and the Miami Dolphins were interested in him. New Orleans made him a large offer that included $10 million in guaranteed money the first year and a $12 million option the second year. Miami asked Brees if he would be willing to take less guaranteed money so they could fit him under their salary cap, but Brees refused and also did not accept the suspicious results of a grueling 6-hour physical in Miami. The Dolphins ended negotiations with him and traded for Minnesota Vikings QB Daunte Culpepper instead.

Brees then quickly signed a 6-year, $60 million deal with the New Orleans Saints on March 14, 2006.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Brees

Nawlins acquired Brees via a TRADE.

1)What? The Dallas Cowboys have signed free agents to no effect? Terrell Owens? Leonard Davis? Now potentially Pacman Jones. They only had the best record in the conference last year, and are again predicted to win the conference (I believe they’ll beat the Vikings in the Championship game).

Here was my response...I said for many years meaning those many years where they were in decline and they signed numerous free agents with no effect....You response was just cherry picking in the last couple of recent years, I was talking about all those years including the numerous down years....where they struggles and did not do very much...

2) The thing about those trades for Moss and Welker, by the way, was that the Pats still had to spend a lot of money to pull those off, and traded draft picks for those guys. Salary cap-wise, they were basically the same as signing lucrative FAs.

My response...But they were not free agents, they were trades....my point made and also you forgot the first couple of years when they won superbowls...they basically signed lower tier free agents but a few actually turned out to be genius signings because they turned out to be better than anyone thought they would be...but when they signed them they were not highly thought of...

And everyone LOVES to use the Redskins as an example. Well, they do make the playoffs nearly every year, and if they get improved QB play they might make a Super Bowl soon. The Seahawks are also big spenders, yet nobody likes to bring them up. Probably because their winning their division every year along with their recent Super Bowl birth isn’t good for the anti-FA argument. Kerney. Julian Peterson. Nate Burleson. Julius Jones.

My response...Again you are right for the past two years...but what about the 7-8 years before they got into the playoffs....they signed everyone like it was going out of style...only in the last couple of years did they get to the playoffs....again my point made...you are only looking at the last couple of years...I am looking at a greater time span...When you do research you must use a greater time span to get legitmate data...only using a two year period does not count in stat 101...if a team signs numerous free agents for many years and finally gets into the playoffs....you have to count all the down years before you do your analysis...

What was the most instrumental part of the Saints’ historic turn around? Not the drafting of Bush or Colsten, which both were key. It was the free agent signing of Drew Brees.

my Response....On this one you are right but there is always an exception that proves the rule...

I agree, the draft should be the foundation of any good NFL personnel plan. You must use free agency, however, to put your team over the top. You don’t field a team like New England or Dallas just be drafting–you also have to sign players and make trades.

OK so we do agree...but to think that you can use free agency as a way to get to the superbowl or to make a dynasty like new england is not supported by the facts...the problem is when you sign a free agent it is not cost effective. You are loaning a player for about 3 or so years at best before they start going down hill....good drafting will accomplish much more because you have the player for 8 or 9 years rather than just 3....so you have to draft another player to make up the difference. The problem with the chiefs is not that the made bad choices with free agents...and in fact the opposite was true. There free agent signings were very good...but they came at the expense of good drafting...as mitch hostice pointed out last year...during the vermeil years we lost a total of 9 draft picks by trades etc, from which we could never recover from. By the way the superbowl winners NY did not really sign any free agents of consequence last year....and up til last year new england did not sign any free agents that were considered upper tier....in fact billichuk has stated that free agent signings are over rated....he may have changed his mind recently though as you pointed out...

San Diego won a Super Bowl recently? That's news to me.

I've pointed out dozens of examples of how almost every playoff team from last year had at least one star that they added via free agency. You are obviously just not going to see it any other way on this one. Let's just draft our entire 53-man roster, save our money like a bunch of cheapskates, and cross our fingers that it works!

I'm fine with this year, but in the future we will need to spend. And acquisitions like Jared (an unsigned disgruntled star player for draft picks) are, for all intents and purposes, basically free agent pick-ups. Also, as Zach always points out, the Chiefs just do a poor job when it comes to free agents. Both as far as bringing new ones in, or keeping their own guys. We've let Rich Gannon, Jon Tait, Joe Horn, Tony Richardson, etc...go, and most of those guys made Pro Bowls afterward. As far as bringing in guys, since we don't want to pay top dollar we typically go with old guys, guys coming off injuries, or guys who didn't play with their former team.

I just don't get how you keep using the Patriots. They brought in Donte Stallworth and Adalius Thomas last year via FA, and Randy and Welker were picked up for draft picks, they were glorified free agents. On the other side of last year's Super Bowl, the Giants picked up possibly their best player, Plaxico Burress, through free agency. At worst, he was one of their three best players last year, and their best offensive weapon.

I don't care if it's through free agency or trades, but we better start using some of our cap room as this rebuilding project moves on. It will be a tremendous waste of resources if we continue to lead the league in cap room saved.

Free Agency is generally a waste of money when you consider:

1) That most teams resign their best players without them really being available on the open market (or else trade them to get some value from them as in the case of Jared Allen). That means that the vast majority of free agents are not top tier talents that would be worth the inflated salary free agents demand. Look at the best free agent Tackle in free agency a couple years ago. Damion McIntosh. Can you really say that was money well spent?

2) The players that DO make it to free agency are usually there because there is something about them their team didn't like. They're too old, they're a bad locker room guy, they want too much money, etc. What ends up happening is you have guys that have these defects getting paid grossly more than they are worth. Of course, it is not ALWAYS the case that there is something negative about the guy, but in probably 90% of the situations, this is the case. If the player is that great, why did his original team let him go?

The thing is, you always hear people talk about how "free agency is a necessity in today’s NFL", and yet the dominant teams that have won Super Bowls: New England, Indianapolis, Pittsburg, San Diego do very little as far as big name free agents. They will pick up under the radar guys that end up flourishing on their team, but they do not go out and spend big money in free agency as a rule.

Of course, as we've already pointed out, a team that DOES spend obscene amounts of money in free agency, Dallas Cowboys, has not won a playoff game in 12 years.

Every team has some free agents. The question is whether it is advantageous to pay overinflated salaries to marginally better than average players or to do what the Chiefs have done this year, which is to get guys that were undervalued by their team or didn't have an opportunity. That is also what the dominant teams of the last decade have done.

And I just don't understand this contention that free agency is a complete waste of money. Yes, sometimes it doesn't work. But free agency is a necessity in today's NFL. Every time Chiefs fans bag on FA, King Carl jumps up and down saying, yay, we don't have to spend on free agency! Argh...

But I don’t see him ever amounting to anything on an NFL squad and apparently neither do the rest of the scouts and coaches in the NFL.

Just couldn't disagree more. He was a defensive back in college and while with the Phins, for one. He left the Arena League and came straight to the Chiefs, so other teams really haven't had the opportunity to bring him on as a WR. After what I've seen so far (which includes stand-out performances in several Chiefs' games), someone else will sign him if we cut him.

That's just my $.02. I just want Saturday to get here, because if he gets reps he will step up again. Nothing else can really be said until the Chiefs give him the shot he's earned.

Anyways, back to the Sippio bandwagon (sorry had to work all day and missed out on a lot).

I'm not disputing who started the bandwagon, AA was the first place I ever even heard of Sippio. I'm just saying its nuts because we probably saw collectively 15 minutes of selective Sippio footage from Hard Knocks and a handful of YouTube clips from the Arena League AND THATS IT.

The coaches see him several hours every day in practice and don't have near the opinion of him as the Sippio Fanatics.

He does have some skills, don't get me wrong. They wouldn't have invited him back for camp again this year if he didn't. But I think he is more of a practice body than a guy they want to use on the 53 man roster. He's a smart player that can help teach the other, more physically gifted WRs and expose our CBs to some different tricks they wouldn't get from the rest of our rookie WR group.

But I don't see him ever amounting to anything on an NFL squad and apparently neither do the rest of the scouts and coaches in the NFL.

Yes, Cowboys had the best record in the conference last year. You know when their last playoff win was?

Dec. 28, 1996

12 years.

So if you guage a teams success or failure by playoff wins (as every Peterson detractor does) you would have to say that the Cowboys, despite always spending tons of money on big name free agents, have been a complete failure.

Good point, Zach. Well I'd have to say age + the fact that he looked mediocre at best in a Chiefs uni, has scared away any potential buyers. If he were 5 years younger or we'd used him correctly, who knows, someone (maybe even the Patsies) would probably take a chance on him. Patsies love to sign them some over-the-hill backers, and hey, what can I say, it's been working for them. Except for that last Superbowl.

Comparing Kevin McMahan to Sipp, while funny, is utterly ridiculous.

One just showed up and had 2 catches for 29 years. The other was the best receiver ever to play in the AFL, had a great training camp and preseason last year, didn't get a shot all of last year, then came out and had 3 catches for 57 yards and the game-winning TD.

Humorous, but try again :)

What? The Dallas Cowboys have signed free agents to no effect? Terrell Owens? Leonard Davis? Now potentially Pacman Jones. They only had the best record in the conference last year, and are again predicted to win the conference (I believe they'll beat the Vikings in the Championship game).

The thing about those trades for Moss and Welker, by the way, was that the Pats still had to spend a lot of money to pull those off, and traded draft picks for those guys. Salary cap-wise, they were basically the same as signing lucrative FAs.

And everyone LOVES to use the Redskins as an example. Well, they do make the playoffs nearly every year, and if they get improved QB play they might make a Super Bowl soon. The Seahawks are also big spenders, yet nobody likes to bring them up. Probably because their winning their division every year along with their recent Super Bowl birth isn't good for the anti-FA argument. Kerney. Julian Peterson. Nate Burleson. Julius Jones.

What was the most instrumental part of the Saints' historic turn around? Not the drafting of Bush or Colsten, which both were key. It was the free agent signing of Drew Brees.

I agree, the draft should be the foundation of any good NFL personnel plan. You must use free agency, however, to put your team over the top. You don't field a team like New England or Dallas just be drafting--you also have to sign players and make trades.

He does have his website http://kendrellbell.com/ lol

nice Maine!

xxxlp - If Kendrell was so good, why is he still jobless?

Now that everyone has cast their votes on Webb vs. Sippio, I would like to announce I am starting the Kevin McMahan fan club. He had 2 catches for 29 yards against the Bears and he's from friggin' Maine! That right there should get him a shot at starting. I am sure he has a compelling back story just like Sippio since he came to a state that is .000001% black to play ball.

Give McMahan the Man a chance. Herm's keeping him down!It's politics man, politics!

Here is an article that explains my position on the relative ineffectiveness of signing free agents unless you are already on the cusp of winning a superbowl....IN fact if free agent signings were the most important variable in winning superbowls then the washington redskins should have 8 superbowls right now....you also use the example of the Dallas cowboys....it took them many years to get back to where they are now and you are right they have signed numerous free agents during those long years with no effect....read on....

LAKE FOREST, Ill. – Contrary to what all the hype this week might indicate, the NFL does not award the Lombardi Trophy to the team that spends the most money during the offseason.

Recent history shows that franchises like the Bears that believe in re-signing their own players and building through the draft are much more successful than those that shower unrestricted free agents with lucrative signing bonuses and megabucks contracts.

Last summer the Bears signed cornerback Charles Tillman to a six-year extension.
The San Francisco 49ers, for example, were a popular dark-horse Super Bowl pick last season after signing cornerback Nate Clements to an eight-year, $80 million that made him the highest-paid defensive player in NFL history.

The 49ers also signed safety Michael Lewis and linebacker Tully Banta-Cain to free-agent deals and promptly declined from 7-9 to 5-11. San Francisco’s defense didn’t quite make the meteoric rise that some expected, improving in the NFL rankings from 26th to 25th.

The Washington Redskins were in the same boat, giving 32-year-old middle linebacker London Fletcher a $10.5 signing bonus and inking cornerback Fred Smoot early in the free-agent process.

The only notable free-agent acquisition for the eventual Super Bowl champion New York Giants was linebacker Kawika Mitchell.

After the Minnesota Vikings signed Giants free agent tight end Visanthe Shiancoe to a five-year, $18.5 million deal last offseason, New York replaced him by selecting tight end Kevin Boss in the fifth round of the draft from Western Oregon.

While Shiancoe caught 27 passes for 323 yards and 1 TD for Minnesota, Boss stepped in after Jeremy Shockey sustained a season-ending injury and helped the Giants win the Super Bowl, making a key 45-yard reception in New York’s upset win over the New England Patriots.

Speaking of the Patriots, they signed free-agent linebacker Adalius Thomas to a five-year, $37.5 million contract. But two players they acquired via trades—wide receivers Randy Moss and Wes Welker—made a much greater impact, combining for 210 receptions, 2,668 yards and 31 TDs.

The two best free-agent signings last year arguably were defensive end Patrick Kerney, who finished second in the NFL with 14½ sacks after leaving the Falcons to sign a six-year, $39.5 million contract with the Seahawks; and guard Eric Steinbach, who helped solidify the Browns’ offensive line after leaving the Bengals for a seven-year, $49.5 million deal.

Other free agents didn’t provide as much bang for the buck. The Dolphins won only one game all season after signing linebacker Joey Porter to a five-year, $32.5 million contract. The Bills finished 30th in the NFL on offense after inking guard Derrick Dockery to a seven-year, $49 million deal. Tight end Daniel Graham caught just 24 passes for 246 yards and 2 TDs after signing a five-year, $30 million contract with the Broncos.

In a telling article in the Chicago Tribune a year ago, NFL columnist Don Pierson wrote that “the free-agency season is more of an NFL plot to steal publicity from basketball and baseball than it is a sure-fire plan to improve teams.”

Pierson pointed out that the top six free agents in 2006 (as ranked by Pro Football Weekly) all failed to help their new teams win more games than the previous season. One of those players, center LeCharles Bentley, signed a six-year, $36 million deal with the Browns but still has yet to take a snap since hurting his knee in his first training camp practice.

Remember the outcry when the Redskins outbid the Bears for free-agent wide receiver Antwaan Randle El in 2006, signing the Chicago native to a seven-year contract worth $31 million including $11.5 million in bonuses?

After losing out on Randle El, the Bears turned to the draft to replace fumble-prone return specialist Bobby Wade and landed a decent prospect named Devin Hester in the second round.

Or we haven't used them correctly, in my opinion. Kendrell Bell, for example. I've said it before and I'll say it again. He was a good LB when he came here. We just didn't utilize him right. A middle linebacker in a 3-4 scheme does not translate well to an outside backer in a 4-3. We asked him to do different things (mainly; pass coverage) that he didn't do in Pittsburgh, where he was great. A great player in one scheme doesn't mean he will be the same dominating player in another one. We just didn't play the FA market intelligently.

The Cowboys have a ton of FAs, and they might have the best team in the league. The Pats JUST signed Adalius Thomas last year. Plaxico Burress came to NY through FA. Same with Woodsen to GB. All the best teams last season signed big FAs in the past three-four years or so. I could go on and on...

Who says you can't draft well AND utilize FA? The problem is that we have signed the wrong guys. We've gone with second-tier guys or washed-up stars and it hasn't worked.

Quote from Adam says....Well, we do lead the league in both cap room and sellouts. Put the two together, and then consider we haven’t won a playoff game in 15 years. Maybe I never got my Chiefs rose-colored specs, but I think all of that proves that sellouts are the first priority, winning is the second priority. Also, the fact that ownership was so willing to splurge on the stadium after historically being stingy when it comes to FAs (and our own free agents) says something to me as well.

Well Adam I hate to be in the position to defend Carl Peterson but lets try not to let the facts get in the way of our opinions...First although you are correct that this year the chiefs have alot of money available in the salary cap....that is a recent thing...if you look at their cap history they have always been in the top teams with all their salary cap being used. So that part of your theory is just rubish....

second of all your theory that they care more about income than winning...another part ludicrous...without winning they would not fill up the stadium...many of us remember the years when the stadium was not full because we were losing.

The real problem is that we have been signing free agents at the expense of draft pick...instead of building up our team by draft picks we choose older veterins as the basis of our teams and more times than not these veterins started to lose a step while playing for us. So we have a history of signing many free agents who are in the top 10 of available free agents, and infact our signing of free agents actually was more successful than their choices of draft picks....Whereas teams such as new england (until the last year or so) would sign free agents from the bottom tier and win superbowls with them...To quote Bill Cowher "free agents are over rated"....also The head coach of the new england patriots also made a similar quote 4 year ago....and look at all the free agent signing that the New York Giants made last year, the year the won the superbowl>.. (a hint no one of significance)....

I have disagreed with Adam more than anyone in this world (Im his brother), but I have to say he was one of the first to tell you about Bobby.

I can vouch that Adam was down with the Sip forever...I would have to say that HBO helped shape our early perceptions quite a bit...but its obvious he has the size and hands on Webb.

You guys that don't think selling tickets is first and foremost on the KC execs minds are totally and completely wrong. Not trying to be a dick here.... Tickets are the lifeblood of ANY sports team and what matters most. I know from working in the industry and talking with executives on the staffs of several sports teams - and the Inside sales department of a team is the only place that is hiring in sports. Tickets, by a mile, are the most important thing to any team - MORE THAN THE SUPERBOWL -W.S. - OR NBA CHAMPIONSHIP. Especially in the NFL with only 8 home games to make hay on those $100+ tickets. Full house = mo' money mo money mo money!

More proof:

http://arrowheadaddict.com/2007/09/02/chiefs-screw...

http://arrowheadaddict.com/2007/09/02/is-bobby-sip...

http://arrowheadaddict.com/2007/08/14/who-is-bobby...

I have been clamoring for more Sippio for a year. I have also been calling for less Webb for that long. You guys have to admit, I was right on Parker, and Webb didn't exactly set the world on fire last year.

http://arrowheadaddict.com/2007/12/03/bobby-sippio...

I mean, it’s great to see our boy on special teams and on obvious running downs, but what about in the fourth quarter when we had to air it out? Seriously, Sippio can’t be any worse than Jeff Webb and Samie Parker, who combined for two receptions and 10 yards. Hell, Jared Allen had a better receiving game than those two. And Kris Wilson is worthless. I even think he would have came down with a few balls that Dwayne Bowe dropped. Not saying he’s D-Bo by any stretch of the imagination, but the guy’s hands are like glue.

Go ahead and say that I don’t see practice… blah, blah, blah. I’ve seen him play arena ball, his highlights, Hard Knocks, in the preseason, etc… — I have eyes, a brain and know football. The guy is a better player than either Parker or Webb. Like Tupac used to say — I betcha.

Say what ever you want about me, but don't tell me I jumped on this bandwagon. A.A. started this bandwagon.

And, D.J., I was just joking. I'm sure we have plenty in common. For one, we both love the same team. It's just that we don't agree about said team very often.

And I'm not a bandwagon jumper. If anything, I'm a bandwagon starter. I march to the beat of my own drum.

SeanBCool, whatever. I AM THE DRIVER OF THE SIPPIO BANDWAGON!!!

You weren't here then--you were probably busy arguing with somebody--but you can search Sippio on the site search bar and see numerous places where I rave about Sippio and rag on the Chiefs for not giving him a shot--last season.

And I'm down on Brodie because he was handed the job on a silver platter last year and couldn't beat out Damon Huard. Meanwhile, they are beating Sippio with that platter, desperately trying to keep him out of the line-up in favor of their precious pet project Jeff Webb.

Don't make me pull out posts. I started this bandwagon, fellas. It's just gotten a little heavier with a ton of new fans and Whitlock's big ass.

And I'll write about whatever I damn well please. I felt like someone needed to stand up and say this dude deserves some playing time, so I did just that. Nobody else was talking about him, except Teicher in a negative manner, and then eventually Whitlock (well after me).

DJ is right Adam. You are jumping on the bandwagon.

Since the preseason game, almost every post you've made has had something to do with your newfound love for Bobby Sippio.

The guy made three good catches against a 3rd string defense. I don't think anyone is against giving the guy a chance. Give it a rest.

Adam

I dunno, I'm sure we have more in common than we would like to admit.

I'm simply not a bandwagon kind of guy and the Sippio Fanatic is the craziest, crack-induced wagon I've ever seen. I've never seen such love for a guy that has never done anything to earn a spot on an NFL roster.

How you can be down on Brodie every chance you get but fight tooth and nail for Sippio seems a preverse contradiction to me. Neither

That didn't even make sense.

Adam:

If you think you have arrived at the correct conclusion and Jabba agrees with you, check your work. lol

Rolls eyes...one day, D.J., you and I might also agree on something. I kinda doubt it, though.

I'd rather be a Sippio Fanatic than a Webb Wackjob, by the way.

Jabba the Whitlocks world takeover scheme has been hatched!

By combining the Whitlock Disciples with the Sippio Fanatics, Jabba is consolidating these groups into one enormous block! Soon they will have enough power to sway the election of the U.S. President.

This cannot stand! Only YOU can prevent Jabba the Whitlock from taking over!

I have to just come out and say it. Ever since he called out Scoop Jackson, I've seen him with rose colored glasses. I don't agree with everything, but since he did that, he has a free pass from me. Besides, WTF kind of a name is Scoop.

I agree with that. I do think, however, that he see's the Chiefs as a business first, and a sports team very distant second. Not all GMs and owners think like that. Personally, I think the sports world is better because of it. As I always say, if you want to own a good business, buy into a franchise of restaurants or Fed-Ex/Kinko's or something. Owning a professional sports team is more than a business--it's a commitment to winning for your fans.

I have issues with many things that CP has done throughout the years but I guess I'm just not cynical to the point of believing that when he praises the team for winning or makes a comment about some particular player's performance, he's only doing it because he believes it will sell tickets. I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure he chose the profession that he did because he has at least some passion for the sport itself. Jabba would have us believing otherwise.

Well, we do lead the league in both cap room and sellouts. Put the two together, and then consider we haven't won a playoff game in 15 years. Maybe I never got my Chiefs rose-colored specs, but I think all of that proves that sellouts are the first priority, winning is the second priority. Also, the fact that ownership was so willing to splurge on the stadium after historically being stingy when it comes to FAs (and our own free agents) says something to me as well. I do think they Chiefs want to win, but I think they care about selling out Arrowhead more. Unfortunately, I honestly do. Clark has a chance to change that perception, though.

Adam, they have to sell tickets. That's a given. Implying it's all they really care about is cynical.

I agree with Whitlock all the time. I just vehemently disagree with him more often :)

Double D, I do agree with his contention about the Chiefs and selling tickets. I also believe that is why they haven't brought in another quarterback. They don't want to dent the Brodie hype at all. Sellouts are King Carl's obsession, hard to argue that.

Well I can't really recall ever agreeing with that fat fuck, but then again I don't go out of my way to read him either.

OK I am sure everyone has at least agreed with Whitlock once in their life. Come on now...

"When you find yourself agreeing with Whitlock, you really have to question your own positions."

-- Maine_Chief

Just thought I'd give that a good old copy/paste.

"The Chiefs would prefer Jeff Webb. But he’s no Bobby Sippio."

Loved that line. Have no clue why anyone think Jeff Webb is better than Bobby. Webb has shown nothing on special teams and Bobby has shown he can make tackles and block. And thats outside of being a WR

Sippio came in the league with the Phins as a DB, and in the Arena League came into his own as a WR.

Aaaannndddd the overstatement of my lifetime award goes to... Jason Whitlock

"it was wonderful to see Johnson run like Jim Brown again."

Really? The only thing that came across to me was his unfailing cynicism towards ownership & management. I felt Jabba's main point was all about how the Chiefs are only interested in selling tickets and how Thursday night's game will further that goal. Just look at his first and last sentences. Seriously.

Even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while

When you find yourself agreeing with Whitlock, you really have to question your own positions.

Mm mmm mmm mmm mmmmmmm, I'm loving it. I'm suddenly craving some chicken mcnuggets.