Chiefs and Packers have talked about Larry Johnson

[HatestheEagles084]

I disagree with every post made so far and therefore will not contribute to this thread anymore

Even my post?

Kinda funny, since I argued the exact opposite of those who said the Packers shouldn't bring him in. There are both sides of the view presented in this thread, and I'm guessing you'd fall into the 'he'd be a good fit' group.

haha no, i kind of tuned everybody out after the 5th post and just ranted...that said, I'd love to have him here, no matter how not-plausible this is...

 

[pyledriver80]

I disagree with every post made so far and therefore will not contribute to this thread anymore

Even my post?

Kinda funny, since I argued the exact opposite of those who said the Packers shouldn't bring him in. There are both sides of the view presented in this thread, and I'm guessing you'd fall into the 'he'd be a good fit' group.

haha no, i kind of tuned everybody out after the 5th post and just ranted...that said, I'd love to have him here, no matter how not-plausible this is...

I agree, WTF are you people thinking? I would take LJ any day of the week.

I am stunned, well, not totally.

 

[PackFanInSC]

With LJ wanting (conservatively) in the neighborhood of LT's 8 year $60 mil contract, that would be a cap hit averaging $7.5 million. With a salary cap of $109 million and Brett making $11 million, that would tie up $18.5 Million or 17 percent of your payroll on 2 players. Even if much of the $60 million was backloaded, you would have to give LJ a HUGE signing bonus as he tries to protect himself from getting cut as age catches up with him. No matter how you slice it, it would be a big hit on the cap -- unless someone (like KGB) was let go to make room.

 

[Pack93z]

With LJ wanting (conservatively) in the neighborhood of LT's 8 year $60 mil contract, that would be a cap hit averaging $7.5 million. With a salary cap of $109 million and Brett making $11 million, that would tie up $18.5 Million or 17 percent of your payroll on 2 players. Even if much of the $60 million was backloaded, you would have to give LJ a HUGE signing bonus as he tries to protect himself from getting cut as age catches up with him. No matter how you slice it, it would be a big hit on the cap -- unless someone (like KGB) was let go to make room.

I totally agree that it would tax the cap, but so is another rumored trade in which we have two fairly well compensated players. We really don't have to worry much about this because the cost to make the trade would be probably more than Ted would part with during the rebuilding phase.

 

[all about da packers]

See about taxing the cap, IF we get LJ, you can let him finish his contract, and then Franchise tag him. He's making less than a million this year, and then he'll make around 6.5 million with the franchise tag next year.

After that, I think we'll have Favre's salary coming off the books, so your looking at 11-12 million more in cap space. Even using 8 million of it on LJ, we'd still come out winners.

 

[porky88]

See about taxing the cap, IF we get LJ, you can let him finish his contract, and then Franchise tag him. He's making less than a million this year, and then he'll make around 6.5 million with the franchise tag next year.

After that, I think we'll have Favre's salary coming off the books, so your looking at 11-12 million more in cap space. Even using 8 million of it on LJ, we'd still come out winners.

That will never happen. If the Packers trade for L.J. they will pay a hefty price in compensation. There is no way they’ll want a one and done year with him or even just two years with him.

L.J. will also want a new contract if he gets traded so he could just hold out. To many thing stand in the way. The Pack would have to give him a contract extension which happens most of the time in this type of situation.

 

[all about da packers]

Those are some very real negatives you point porky, and something that is very valid.

I thought about that too, and the only solution I came up with would be a 'wink-wink' under the table deal that the Pack will pay Johnson once Favre is gone.

Of course, I don't think Johnson would be foolish enough to except such conditions.

 

[Pack93z]

Hey it is something other than the GM debate

Maybe this is the reason for all the trade talk surrounding LJ, the Chiefs don't have the cap room for their rookies let alone a new deal for Johnson...

Chiefs RB headed for holdout?
Posted: Wednesday May 02, 2007 10:33AM ET
The Chiefs are bracing for a training-camp holdout by running back Larry Johnson. Johnson has 3 years left on the deal he signed as a rookie in 2003. He is scheduled to make $1.85 million this year and $967,000 next year. The Chiefs have been talking to Johnson's agent about a new deal, but the two sides still are far apart. A club source put the odds of Johnson holding out this summer at 50-50.