The KC Chiefs Are Efficient Losers

by Chiefs

Denny Medley-US PRESSWIRE

According to osmguy.com’s annual Cost Per Win Efficiency Standings, the Kansas City Chiefs are the most efficient losers in the NFL.

What are the Cost Per Win Efficiency Standings?

I’ll let them explain:

The 2011 NFL cost per win efficiency standings were created by dividing each team’s 2011 total salary by their number of regular season wins during 2011. While the salary cap causes the NFL cost per win efficiency standings to be more balanced than our MLB cost per win analysis, which was our top story last year, the range in payrolls and wins does lead to some interesting results. Currently, NFL payrolls range from $92,768,120 (Jacksonville Jaguars) to $123,553,646 (Minnesota Vikings). How efficient each team is with their payrolls will be an important thing to keep an eye on because starting in the 2013 season, all teams will be spending within 10% of the same amount.

So basically the rankings are determined by which team was most efficient with their money. That is to say, who won the most games for the least amount of money per win.

The best in the NFL at this exercise are the Green Bay Packers. The Packers won 15 games and spent a total of $109,198,003 which was good for $7,279,867 per win. In second place is the San Francisco 49ers. They spent $104,604,488 and won 13 games for $8,046,499 per win.

There were only three teams that spent less than the NFL average on player salary that won more than eight games in 2011 and those teams are the Packers, 49ers and Bengals.

Nine teams (Patriots, Steelers, Saints, Ravens, Lions, Texans, Falcons, Titans, Giants) spent more than the NFL average and won nine games or more. One of those teams was the eventual Super Bowl Champion New York Giants.

Where do the Chiefs come in to all this?

Of the losers, or teams that won fewer than seven games, no team was more efficient to the Chiefs. Kansas City spent $93,446,708 on player salaries and won seven games, paying only $13,349,530 per win. They were 16th in the NFL in efficiency but they were the top sub-.500 team. In short, even though the Chiefs didn’t win a lot of games, they got really good value on the wins they did get.

Six of the eight division losers won five games or less. The Bills won six games and the Chiefs seven.

While this is interesting, there are other factors that aren’t included. For instance, the AFC North had a fairly easy schedule, helping the Bengals win more games than they probably should have. Had the Bengals played the same schedule as say, the Chiefs, they may have lost a couple of more games, thus taking a hit on their efficiency.

Still, the chart does illustrate that generally (but not always), the teams that spend more than the NFL average win more. This is a potential chicken-or-the-egg argument though. For instance, the Green Bay Packers are a young team and thus have a low payroll. As they develop stars, their team is going to get more expensive if they wish to keep those players. That means if the Packers are going to be a consistent winner, they are likely to move up (or down on the chart) as far as salary goes. Teams that might be one-year wonders thanks to an easy schedule, like the Bengals or the 2010 Chiefs, could eventually find it difficult to remain efficient because they are likely to win few games unless they keep their good players, which will be potentially more expensive.

The chart in no way proves that spending equals winning. I would view it more that teams that win consistently are forced to spend more generally. But as teams like the Minnesota Vikings and St. Louis Rams teach us, spending does not necessarily guarantee winning.

The good news is that right now and last year as well, the Chiefs were efficient. That efficiency will allow them the financial flexibility to continue winning if they chose. That likely means their payroll will go up at least a bit in the 2012 season and should begin to creep toward the league average. The 49ers and Packers, while incredibly efficient, still spent over ten million more than the Chiefs.

If the team truly is cheap, however, they are likely to either fall in efficiency or remain about the same. Remember, the Chiefs are the most efficient losers so if the goal is to win as many games as possible (which it is) they are still doing a bad job.

This is why, to me, there is absolutely no excuse for the Chiefs not to re-sign Dwayne Bowe and Brandon Carr. There are a couple of reasons for this. For starters, the Chiefs have zero receivers better than Dwayne Bowe and only one CB (and it is debatable) better than Brandon Carr. Next, the team has incredible financial flexibility. They can afford to give both Carr and Bowe whatever they want. Twice. Both players are productive. The Chiefs might have to overpay a little bit for them but that is the cost of doing business in the NFL. A team keeping its own developed stars is crucial.

The only excuse the Chiefs have for letting either Bowe or Carr go is if the player absolutely refuses to play in Kansas City. In fact, only one of them should get away in that instance because the Chiefs can force one player to stay via the franchise tag. And as excuses go, “he doesn’t want to play here” is not a good one. Why doesn’t he want to play here? The team can afford to pay him whatever he wants. The team is loaded with young talent; why would the player leave?

I am mostly alright with the Chiefs’ spending so far. I’ve been saying for a while that we would get the real scoop on whether or not the Chiefs are cheap when it came time to lock up their stars. So far, I’ve been pretty impressed. Charles, DJ, Tamba and Flowers are all bought and paid for. The team is obviously finished rebuilding. The time to start playoff runs is now.

To do that, the Chiefs will need to spend a little more filling holes in free agency and they absolutely must retain Bowe and Carr.

If they don’t, it will be clear to me that money is more important than winning in Kansas City.

Never miss a chance to get your fix! Follow Arrowhead Addict on Twitter and be sure to like our Facebook page.

Tags: , , ,

Comments
Comments have been disabled for this post.
Sort: Newest | Oldest

We will find out soon enough as to the thinking of Hunt and Piol as to the money issue. Yeah, Hunt can afford the contracts, but will he? The signings mentioned in your article says Hunt wants to win and is willing to spend. This free agent period will tell the tale. If the Chiefs are aggressive to the needs of the team, then we should be in good shape going into the season. The draft is also paramount, but will not impact the roster to the extent of free agents. We will know soon.

That headline, right above that picture, was perfect. Efficient losers, indeed.

@natasha2marie Better than being inefficient losers, right? At least we're half way to being efficient winners. :)

@Ehud Well, as I see it, a loser is a loser. But in no way do I think of myself, you or any of these other Chiefs fans as losers. Hunt and Pioli have made it clear that they are doing things THEIR way. They are too smart to buy a win by paying players. If it was up to the Addicts, the salary cap would have been maxed out, Carr/Bowe re-signed and Richardson benched (for improvement purposes, of course), among other things.

@Ehud But your optimism is the mark of a true Chiefs fan. :)

The only issue I have is with the line, "The only excuse the Chiefs have for letting either Bowe or Carr go is if the player absolutely refuses to play in Kansas City." What if they are asking for a ridiculous contract? For example, should Bowe be making 16 million a year? That's Larry Fitzgerald money (if you average out the years of the contract). The way I see it, Bowe should be getting Brandon Marshall type money (about 10 mil a year). If I was GM, the number I would have in mind for Bowe is around 10 million per year (averaging out). For Carr it would be around 8 million a year. If they asking for much more than that I'm not sure a deal can (or should) get done. To be honest, I could see Bowe not wanting to stay if the Chiefs aren't going to bring in a better QB. He has to learn a new offensive system, again. I feel the franchise tag is strong with this one.

@Ehud They should pay him whatever it takes to keep him because he is their best (and only) #1 receiver and because they have the money. He may be asking for a lot but he isn't asking for Fitzy money because he'd never get it, not from the Chiefs or anyone else. Well, maybe if Al Davis was still alive. Chances are Bowe's agent is trying to project what the market will pay for Bowe and Pioli refuses to pay it. The agent is probably asking for something a little high and Pioli is probably asking for something a little low. The point is, the Chiefs have the money to offer Bowe a fair, if not slightly expensive deal and he'll take it.

@Arowhead_Addict I agree. I'm just throwing scenarios out there. Just curious how much people feel Bowe is worth monetarily.

@Ehud I really think they're going to franchise him. And I'm fne with that, actually, if it means they're buying time to get a long-term deal worked out.

@Ehud I really think they're going to franchise him. And I'm fine with that, actually, if it means they're buying time to get a long-term deal worked out.

@Big Matt Yeah, I figure Bowe is the one they franchise. It is actually cheaper to franchise Bowe this year than Carr (9.4 million vs 10.6). Since I'm thinking Bowe's contract will end up at about 10 million a year, that saves about a half million to just have him be on the tag. Also, according to the language in the new CBA (if I understand it correctly), you can't just franchise a guy to get him to play one more year. You have to franchise him with the intent of re-signing him. That's good news for whoever catches the tag although, how good is up in the air because I can't figure how that is in any way enforceable. I will say that if the Chiefs can get a franchise QB while Bowe is tagged, I think re-signing him to a long term deal gets a lot easier.

And this is good because........... Except for KCmike, losing is normally considered a bad thing. This is the year, Pioli makes his move now or the Chiefs make no move until he is gone.

@tm1946 I guess when you have nothing intelligent to say you can just make things up. When have I ever said that losing is not bad? Show me the post or clam it up. Just because I don't want to wallow in your delusions of future failure (like when you said Tony Mo won't last next year) while ignoring the accomplishments of our team since the depths of despair in 2008 (2-14 remember?). Nice conclusion - if Pioli doesn't "make his move now" then the Chiefs will not make ANY more "moves" next year or the year after? So your Doomsday forecast is they will just sit around and do nothing - Right.

How about a little optimism what does it hurt at this point. I say Bowe signs and Carr gets the tag. It is time to start to put the money where the mouth is. I want Bowe, Carr, and a couple high priced FA.

I don't know how talented Stanford Routt is, but if we got him could we let Carr walk and be ok with that? Any insight on that? Just for the record, I hope we keep him.Seems like we're only a few key pickups away from being a really good team...maybe not elite yet, but really good. Free agency and the draft is going to be fun this year. Then if we can just avoid big injuries next year...

I have a zero confidence in Clark Hunt and Scott Pioli.It wouldn't suprise me if they let Dwayne Bowe go.It would be interesting to see how they would sell it to the fans. then It would be time to get the paper bags ready and where them at Arrowhead.

yeah well im sick of this losing crap

[...] to Original Content From Arrowhead Addict: read more Related Articles Share About Author [...]

Pins and needles waiting for a deal to get done. It's like last minute I think they have until March right?

@Danny W There are a lot of minutes in 32 days - little early to be calling it last minute. Don't worry they will get one with the franchise tag and a contract with the other. Pioli hasn't let a single star go yet although most ignore that fact when complaining about him. He's not about to start now unless they both don't want to play here (Not) in which case one of them, probably Bowe would stay via the tag.

RICK TORREY 52 pts

We will find out soon enough as to the thinking of Hunt and Piol as to the money issue. Yeah, Hunt can afford the contracts, but will he? The signings mentioned in your article says Hunt wants to win and is willing to spend. This free agent period will tell the tale. If the Chiefs are aggressive to the needs of the team, then we should be in good shape going into the season. The draft is also paramount, but will not impact the roster to the extent of free agents. We will know soon.

natasha2marie 92 pts

That headline, right above that picture, was perfect. Efficient losers, indeed.

Ehud 147 pts

natasha2marie Better than being inefficient losers, right? At least we're half way to being efficient winners. :)

natasha2marie 92 pts

Ehud Well, as I see it, a loser is a loser. But in no way do I think of myself, you or any of these other Chiefs fans as losers. Hunt and Pioli have made it clear that they are doing things THEIR way. They are too smart to buy a win by paying players. If it was up to the Addicts, the salary cap would have been maxed out, Carr/Bowe re-signed and Richardson benched (for improvement purposes, of course), among other things.

natasha2marie 92 pts

Ehud But your optimism is the mark of a true Chiefs fan. :)

Ehud 147 pts

The only issue I have is with the line, "The only excuse the Chiefs have for letting either Bowe or Carr go is if the player absolutely refuses to play in Kansas City."

What if they are asking for a ridiculous contract? For example, should Bowe be making 16 million a year? That's Larry Fitzgerald money (if you average out the years of the contract). The way I see it, Bowe should be getting Brandon Marshall type money (about 10 mil a year). If I was GM, the number I would have in mind for Bowe is around 10 million per year (averaging out). For Carr it would be around 8 million a year. If they asking for much more than that I'm not sure a deal can (or should) get done.

To be honest, I could see Bowe not wanting to stay if the Chiefs aren't going to bring in a better QB. He has to learn a new offensive system, again. I feel the franchise tag is strong with this one.

Arowhead_Addict 491 pts

Ehud They should pay him whatever it takes to keep him because he is their best (and only) #1 receiver and because they have the money.

He may be asking for a lot but he isn't asking for Fitzy money because he'd never get it, not from the Chiefs or anyone else. Well, maybe if Al Davis was still alive.

Chances are Bowe's agent is trying to project what the market will pay for Bowe and Pioli refuses to pay it. The agent is probably asking for something a little high and Pioli is probably asking for something a little low.

The point is, the Chiefs have the money to offer Bowe a fair, if not slightly expensive deal and he'll take it.

Ehud 147 pts

Arowhead_Addict I agree. I'm just throwing scenarios out there. Just curious how much people feel Bowe is worth monetarily.

Big Matt 199 pts

Ehud

I really think they're going to franchise him. And I'm fine with that, actually, if it means they're buying time to get a long-term deal worked out.

Ehud 147 pts

Big Matt Yeah, I figure Bowe is the one they franchise. It is actually cheaper to franchise Bowe this year than Carr (9.4 million vs 10.6). Since I'm thinking Bowe's contract will end up at about 10 million a year, that saves about a half million to just have him be on the tag.

Also, according to the language in the new CBA (if I understand it correctly), you can't just franchise a guy to get him to play one more year. You have to franchise him with the intent of re-signing him. That's good news for whoever catches the tag although, how good is up in the air because I can't figure how that is in any way enforceable.

I will say that if the Chiefs can get a franchise QB while Bowe is tagged, I think re-signing him to a long term deal gets a lot easier.

tm1946 183 pts

And this is good because...........

Except for KCmike, losing is normally considered a bad thing. This is the year, Pioli makes his move now or the Chiefs make no move until he is gone.

KC MikeG 320 pts

tm1946 I guess when you have nothing intelligent to say you can just make things up. When have I ever said that losing is not bad? Show me the post or clam it up. Just because I don't want to wallow in your delusions of future failure (like when you said Tony Mo won't last next year) while ignoring the accomplishments of our team since the depths of despair in 2008 (2-14 remember?). Nice conclusion - if Pioli doesn't "make his move now" then the Chiefs will not make ANY more "moves" next year or the year after? So your Doomsday forecast is they will just sit around and do nothing - Right.

ArrowFan 205 pts

How about a little optimism what does it hurt at this point. I say Bowe signs and Carr gets the tag. It is time to start to put the money where the mouth is. I want Bowe, Carr, and a couple high priced FA.

buhrmanbt 16 pts

I don't know how talented Stanford Routt is, but if we got him could we let Carr walk and be ok with that? Any insight on that? Just for the record, I hope we keep him.Seems like we're only a few key pickups away from being a really good team...maybe not elite yet, but really good. Free agency and the draft is going to be fun this year. Then if we can just avoid big injuries next year...

turner1078 15 pts

I have a zero confidence in Clark Hunt and Scott Pioli.It wouldn't suprise me if they let Dwayne Bowe go.It would be interesting to see how they would sell it to the fans. then It would be time to get the paper bags ready and where them at Arrowhead.

Danny W 137 pts

Pins and needles waiting for a deal to get done. It's like last minute I think they have until March right?

KC MikeG 320 pts

Danny W There are a lot of minutes in 32 days - little early to be calling it last minute. Don't worry they will get one with the franchise tag and a contract with the other. Pioli hasn't let a single star go yet although most ignore that fact when complaining about him. He's not about to start now unless they both don't want to play here (Not) in which case one of them, probably Bowe would stay via the tag.