1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!

    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers. We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Do You Think Aj Should Have Signed Ty Law?

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by Jrocthadino, Jul 23, 2006.

?

Do You Think AJ Should Have Signed Ty Law?

  1. Yes

    37.5%
  2. No

    62.5%
  1. Jrocthadino

    Jrocthadino BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Ratings:
    +12
    giddyup!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. CrmWestwood

    CrmWestwood BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    154
    Ratings:
    +43
    KC sucks and LAW belongs there!!!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. WonderSlug

    WonderSlug Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2005
    Messages:
    9,747
    Ratings:
    +851
    Nope.

    I have confidence that our secondary will vastly improve this year, without Law.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    52,523
    Ratings:
    +4,847
    Sure. Try. But not sign him at a great cost.
     
  5. ChargerRay

    ChargerRay #FireMcCoy #FireReich #FirePagano Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    8,489
    Ratings:
    +853
    Before the draft, I thought for the right price, Law would be a great addition to our defense. But the guy took forever to sign and that convinced me that at this point of his career, it's strictly about the money and not winning. So I've changed my mind.

    I like what we've done so safe to shore up the secondary. McCree will help immediately, and Cromartie will eventually become a stud. He's already better than Sammy Davis, and he's yet to play in a real game.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Trumpet_Man

    Trumpet_Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,996
    Ratings:
    +654
    Yes.

    I would have made it an incentive laden contract, plus some voidable years as well to protect the team.
     
  7. Jrocthadino

    Jrocthadino BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Ratings:
    +12
    There you go... 3 people kinda agree with me... I'm not crazy!
     
  8. Lancer 1

    Lancer 1 Eternal Optimist

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2006
    Messages:
    1,007
    Ratings:
    +309
    I say no!:no:

    Too old, too expensive! :wave:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. sdchrger

    sdchrger Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,025
    Ratings:
    +820
    That's all well and good except for the fact that he would have never signed it.

    It's kinda like saying that we should have signed Hutchinson but only for 3 mil a year.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Boltdiehard

    Boltdiehard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Messages:
    5,817
    Ratings:
    +1,171
    He wanted too much money. :no:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Edgar

    Edgar BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Messages:
    90
    Ratings:
    +22
    I voted yes - but it is kind of a trick question. I wanted him to sign him because I truly believe this guy could have made a huge impact on Cromartie, Jammer, and Florence. A Pro Bowl Veteran that has some of the best coverage skills in the NFL, even at his age, could have only helped this team. We had plenty of Cap space - and I think Law would have fit well on this team.

    However, I do not think you sign him at "all costs". Law certainly wanted the big $$$ - and KC coughed it up. Time will only tell if he was worth it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    From profootballtalk.com - rumormill .....

    DETAILS ON LAW DEAL

    We've obtained from a league source specific information regarding the first two years of cornerback Ty Law's contract with the Chiefs.

    As we suspected, it's no bell ringer.

    Law got $4 million to sign, and will be paid a $1 million base salary in 2006. (As a vested veteran, his base salary is fully guaranteed if he's on the Week One roster.)

    In 2007, there's a $1 million option bonus due in March, a $3 million base salary, and a $1 million roster bonus.

    This leaves a whopping $25 million over the last three years of the deal -- and it's highly unlikely that Law will ever see that money.

    For now, then, it's a one-year deal with a team option for year two. And kudos to the Chiefs for pushing the bigger hit in 2007 deeper into the league year. As a result, the Chiefs can choose to pay the $1 million option bonus in March and squat on Law's rights before making a decision in August as to whether he merits the remaining $4 million that he's due to receive in 2007.

    The better deal for Ty would have been to require the Chiefs to fish or cut cheese on day one of the league year, via a $4 million roster or option bonus. Then, if the Chiefs had opted not to keep him, Law would have been on the free-agent market early (at which time his agents would have demanded too much money, no one would have been interested, and he would have signed another deal like this one in late July).

    Still, it's not as if Law and his agents had much leverage to force the decision day into March. We're told that they made a last-ditch effort to shop the deal in search of something better, but generated no interest.
     
  13. CrmWestwood

    CrmWestwood BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    154
    Ratings:
    +43
    EXACTLY- He is a over-priced over-rated overly-old P.O.S. and I hope that he dies in K.C.

    If you can't tell I think we shouldn't of signed him!
     
  14. CrmWestwood

    CrmWestwood BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    154
    Ratings:
    +43
    WOW- I can't believe he signed that reasonable of a contract...I still hate him, but I probably would've signed him for that kind of money...(watch me back-pedal):icon_rofl:
     
  15. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    If .... it's a one year deal and KC cuts him before they pay the offseason 2007 bonus, then the Chiefs will have $3.2 million in "dead space" to amortize against their 2007 salary cap.

    If they keep him just two years, they will amortize another $800,000 off the initial signing bonus, leaving $2.4 mill + the remaining non-amortized option bonus (which is $750,000) for a total of $3.15 mill in "dead space" against their 2008 salary cap.

    If these numbers from pft.com are correct, then Ty Law's cap hits are:

    2006: $1.8 million

    2007: $5.05 million

    Here's how I figure those:

    2006 he receives $4 mill signing bonus, which is spread over 5 years. That amortizes to $800,000 per year. $1 mill base in 2006, makes a combined salary cap hit of $1.8 million for this season.

    In 2007, he receives an option bonus of $1 million. That is amortized at $250,000 per year over the remaining 4 years of his contract. Roster bonus of $1 mill figures directly into that year's cap (option bonuses can be prorated, roster bonuses are current year cap hits). Plus, his base of $3 mill.

    Dollars in Mill - 2007 hit

    3.0 base
    0.8 proration of signing bonus
    1.0 roster bonus
    0.25 proration of option bonus
    ____

    $ 5.05 mill cap hit in 2007

    Sound right???
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Trumpet_Man

    Trumpet_Man Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,996
    Ratings:
    +654
    I did not look at the numbers but as a vested veteran only ~$750k max or so is charged against the cap even though his base salary is whatever..........
     
  17. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    I think the vet minimum is $812k this year.

    Also, I think only vets who sign minimum deals with no bonuses get their teams some cap relief.
     
  18. boltssbbound

    boltssbbound Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2006
    Messages:
    7,031
    Ratings:
    +1,516
    I didn't realize roster bonuses were prorated.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Kwak

    Kwak ....

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,269
    Ratings:
    +674
    I voted No. It is a good deal for the chiefs and I might have considered it, but I think we have what we need with the draft( Damit! Sign the boy already) and the addition of McCree.

    The nice postion from the Chiefs side is that they don't have to pay most of the big money in 2007 until August and as was pointed out, he will never see any of the BIG dollars from that contract.

    It looks like a max 2 yr deal for KC, so for them it is a good deal. Also after 2 years they will have many old guys retiring on the O, so there is no chance they will keep around an aging CB for a lot of $$. They will be doing a bit of rebuilding.
     
  20. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    Roster bonuses are not usually prorated (but I believe some can be), but are most usually treated as base salary for cap purposes.

    Option bonuses are prorated, and treated like signing bonuses for cap purposes.
     
  21. Jrocthadino

    Jrocthadino BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Ratings:
    +12
    wow and he signed for only a couple more dollars than mcree, considering he should be cut after the 2007 season.

    I simply just cannot belive that so many of you still voted NO. You actually believe this secondary will actually improve next year. You actually believe Cromardie is going to be Jesus!

    Point is that we could of had him, but we sat on our hands. What's the reasoning... The real reasoning? AJ and 9 of you believe he is over the hill and will be a liability on the field.

    All I hear on the boards is we need dwight smith... yadda yadda yadda. Last time I checked he hadnt played Corner since his days in Tampa. But lets not forget that in the superbowl, brian kelly got the nod alongside barber, while smith rotated into safety. (he had two picks aginst the raiders in that game and I believe that he should have been MVP). Please remember why jackson and smith had four interceptions in that game. It was the pass rush as well as 2 great corners who were left out on islands. Kelly and Barber got were skilled enough to play out on an island (and get no glory) allowing the safeties to run free and catch some bombs from gannon.

    Truth be the matter Corner is a MUCH different position than safety. Ty Law is a guy that you can leave out on an island against most of the top recievers in the league. Letting us set up against only 4 remaining eligible recievers.

    I really hope I'm biting my words about Law!
     
  22. CrmWestwood

    CrmWestwood BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    154
    Ratings:
    +43
    Yea, for the money I would of taken him...he was asking for 9mill so that's why I said no...if we could've got him for this little money I would of been stoked.
     
  23. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    Age is just one factor on why I voted "No" to Ty Law.

    On one of the Chargers.com threads about Law, McRugs posted some links to Jets media articles that suggested the team (and fans) weren't happy with Law's first 5-6 games. He drew a bunch of penalties AND gave up the long ball. Over the last 9-10 games is when he got the bulk of his INT's, but still had penalties, and still gave up big plays. Half or more of his INT's were in the two games against the Bills, and well over half of his INT's were cherry picking in the second half of the season when the Jets were way out of contention. When your team sucks, you can take extraordinary chances, because even if you don't pick the ball, it isn't going to matter for a playoff push.

    Law has always been best as a zone coverage CB. His man skills are average at best. He is not an "island" (man to man) type CB at all. He does have VERY good balls skills. Don't expect another 10 INT season from Law. It won't happen.

    Law wanted to go to one of three places:
    1. Any team that offered mega-money.
    2. To the Pats, because that's his home.
    3. To Herm Edwards, because Herm lets his vets "rest" more than most coaches.

    Even though he went to one of his choices, that team is still going to incur dead money after this season or after 2007. $3-4 mill in dead money might not mean much to you, but in a year or two it could mean not being able to re-sign a young player SD wants to keep.

    Most posters complain about Jammer's penalties, but you'll get all those AND more from Ty Law. The extra enforcement by the NFL on CB's holding was due primarily to Law's mugging of Indy WR's a few years ago in the playoffs.

    I don't want Dwight Smith - so take me off that bandwagon. Here's an ESPN chat wrap on him:
    Add in two gun incidents, and reports that he was making a nuisance out of himself in NOLA - just to get out of his deal - and there is no way AJ would show interest in him.

    ~~~

    BTW: Who is suggesting Cromartie "will be Jesus?" I expect Cro to come in and grab the nickel job, while competing for Florence's CB spot. He has rare athleticism and is a playmaker, but he's just a rookie - so anything special he does is gravy.
     
  24. Thumper

    Thumper WHS

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,615
    Ratings:
    +1,467
    Hutchinson for 3 mil a year, we shoulda done that! :icon_eek: :icon_tease:
     
  25. Jrocthadino

    Jrocthadino BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2005
    Messages:
    128
    Ratings:
    +12
    Shamrock, you have it right

    I could not agree with you any more!

    I know I'm very biased about Law, it's just that I realize that we have the biggest holes at the cornerback position. I mean last year I thought jammar fletcher was our best corner. What does that say about our secondary considering our offseason!

    I throw out most off Law's ints last year. I mean 3 picks in that last game against the Bills, big woop! But considering in the NFL, talent is most scarce at corner. We have noone who can play that position like Law does. We have nowhere else to spend our money. (Who would you axe on the OLine anyways?) I believe were that close to making a real run, but the pass will haunt us! Just like it did last year!
     
  26. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    Jammer has bad ball skills. He wasn't an "interception machine" at Texas either. His physical style also tends towards getting penalties, similar to Law. However, Jammer is a good man to man corner and doesn't give up many long yardage plays. A couple that appeared to be given up by him this past season IMO were the fault of the safety - primarily in cover two and four schemes.

    Florence has the best ball skills of last years CB's, and has good man skills. However, he is frequently injured, and tends to something get the Sammy Davis look in his eyes (lacking confidence).

    I didn't think much of Fletcher at all. He did get a couple picks these last couple years, but he is just a guy IMO. He lacks the physical presence of a big corner, which Marty has repeatedly states is his preference. CB's must also support the run, which is why Jammer and Cromartie will make an excellent pairing in the schemes Marty and Wade employ.

    Could Law be good this year? Sure. Will age finally creep into his play - as it appeared to at times last year? Maybe. Regardless, KC will be stuck with $3 to $5 mill in dead space in either 2007 or 2008. I heard Adam Schefter talk about Law's contract, but didn't catch all of it. The numbers sounded higher than the pft.com citings from above.

    I would much rather AJ use the rest of the cap to lock down a few more young players like he did with Hardwick. Jammer, Olivea, Dielman, Wilhelm, Cooper, etc are all candidates for contract extensions. Keep your good young core group, and you can have a chance at winning for multiple years. If you gamble future cap money on a couple older vets - and don't win - then you have lessened your chance at getting there in the future.

    I like the path that AJ has chosen.
     
  27. Shamrock

    Shamrock New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2006
    Messages:
    11,922
    Ratings:
    +1,243
    Chiefs | More on Law's deal
    Tue, 25 Jul 2006 16:59:10 -0700

    Adam Schefter, of the NFL Network, reports the Kansas City Chiefs offered CB Ty Law an average of $6 million per year over five years. He signed the deal that included $8 million in guaranteed money. Law received a $4 million signing bonus, $1 million in base salary for the 2006 season, and $3 million worth of guarantees that are written into the years 2007 and 2008. Even if the Chiefs release Law after this season, they still will owe him another $3 million in guarantees.

    That was from KFFL. So I guess I'll need to refigure those numbers. Not sure how the prorations are though. Basically, if Law is released after this season, it would be a $6.2 mill "dead space" cap hit on their 2007 salary cap.

    Without knowing the specifics on the bonuses, I can't say how much of the $3 mill will be incorporated into Law's 2007 cap hit if he's kept on the team for that season. Once those details are out, I could make some assumptions on his 2008 dead space hit if released after the 2007 season.

    It's much pricier than first thought.
     
  28. BFISA

    BFISA Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2005
    Messages:
    41,645
    Ratings:
    +2,172
    Sure, why not...LT needs someoneta abuse in practice :icon_mrgreen: :lol: :icon_banana: :icon_rofl:
     
  29. CrmWestwood

    CrmWestwood BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2006
    Messages:
    154
    Ratings:
    +43
    ahhhhhhhhhhhh I see...so he's still 7 mill plus, I wouldn't of signed him for that kind of money.
     

Share This Page