Trade: Chiefs are finalizing a deal to send franchise CB L’Jarius Snead to the Titans, per league sources.
Chiefs are expected to receive a 2025 3rd-round pick, in addition to a 2024 7th-round pick flop, while Snead will sign a new contract. Trade is pending physical for Sneed. pic.twitter.com/GWjyKAgxZq
Lowest @PFF grades of the season for #Titans CB L'Jarius Sneed:
--35.1 overall grade, 30.4 coverage grade.
--Allowed 4 catches on 9 targets for 42 yds and a TD. Flacco had a 95.6 QB rating when targeting him. Flagged for a 33-yard PI penalty. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Hoover:
Holy Crap, are we really bitching about the Ford trade, because that was a horrible deal for the 49ers. Dude played a total of 18 games them over three years before he was out of the league.. Which cost them 40M
LOL
Saying that I would have rather not seeing him in the Superbowl and us get a lesser pick wasn't exactly a bitch about who won the deal. Just saying I like how good the Titans pick is looking in comparison. And that I didn't like seeing him making the Superbowl after costing us a Superbowl the year before. It absolutely did turn out to be a terrible deal for the 49ers. I'm glad, looking back, that the Chiefs got what they got for him. They definitely won the deal [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
I bet he did. He could have taken significantly less to stay and Bert would have gone with that. It might not have been the best choice for him, but I imagine he could have done it.
It's tougher for us to say than for a player to do, though. Most guys will be unemployed before they hit age 35 and have to live off of their earnings for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile, they've got people coming out of the woodwork to ask them to help them out financially. Everyone they know is telling them to get as much as they possibly can, while they can - especially agents who are financially tied to whatever deal they get. And even on top of that, the top players are told that they need to get as much as they can to set the market for other players at their position. It just goes on and on.
It's absolutely possible for someone to take a team-friendly deal, but if someone told me I could take $10m this year from the Chiefs or go play for the Raiders for $15m, it sure would be hard for me to say that extra $5m isn't worth it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's tougher for us to say than for a player to do, though. Most guys will be unemployed before they hit age 35 and have to live off of their earnings for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile, they've got people coming out of the woodwork to ask them to help them out financially. Everyone they know is telling them to get as much as they possibly can, while they can - especially agents who are financially tied to whatever deal they get. And even on top of that, the top players are told that they need to get as much as they can to set the market for other players at their position. It just goes on and on.
It's absolutely possible for someone to take a team-friendly deal, but if someone told me I could take $10m this year from the Chiefs or go play for the Raiders for $15m, it sure would be hard for me to say that extra $5m isn't worth it.
Yup.
This is the one point on their lives where they will have the most amount of leverage to sell their services for unimaginable amounts of money. To take a team friendly deal is to walk away from millions of dollars that could be used to further set up their family. Its not easy to sell yourself shorter than you could have. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's tougher for us to say than for a player to do, though. Most guys will be unemployed before they hit age 35 and have to live off of their earnings for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile, they've got people coming out of the woodwork to ask them to help them out financially. Everyone they know is telling them to get as much as they possibly can, while they can - especially agents who are financially tied to whatever deal they get. And even on top of that, the top players are told that they need to get as much as they can to set the market for other players at their position. It just goes on and on.
It's absolutely possible for someone to take a team-friendly deal, but if someone told me I could take $10m this year from the Chiefs or go play for the Raiders for $15m, it sure would be hard for me to say that extra $5m isn't worth it.
Clark Hunt did an interview during the Chris Jones extension time period where his wording was specific as “we will decide if we will offer Jones a contract or not”…which changed how I look at these scenarios when players leave.
A) it showed me that Clark plays a role in those scenarios, not just a check writer.
B) sometimes the team doesn’t offer a player a contract at all.
Sneed seemed hurt that he wasn’t allowed to stay in KC and with his knee issues, it made me think he was a player they decided to trade versus offering a contract at all. They knew what they had with Trent, Watson, Williams and Connor and decided the team would be better off with using the cap room on CJ95 and getting a pick for him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger:
He's actually been very good for them. Getting beat a few times happens. But overall he's faced some good wideouts and locked them up. Difference is everyone else in that secondary isn't up to his standard.
He has been good yes. But there's been some just missed throws where he got beat that would have made his current ratings much worse.
Always pulling for him as he was such a dog here, but I don't see the defense having fallen off at all since he's been gone [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
It's tougher for us to say than for a player to do, though. Most guys will be unemployed before they hit age 35 and have to live off of their earnings for the rest of their lives. Meanwhile, they've got people coming out of the woodwork to ask them to help them out financially. Everyone they know is telling them to get as much as they possibly can, while they can - especially agents who are financially tied to whatever deal they get. And even on top of that, the top players are told that they need to get as much as they can to set the market for other players at their position. It just goes on and on.
It's absolutely possible for someone to take a team-friendly deal, but if someone told me I could take $10m this year from the Chiefs or go play for the Raiders for $15m, it sure would be hard for me to say that extra $5m isn't worth it.
That's what I'm saying; it would've likely been possible for him to stay, but probably not financially responsible. It was, however, likely his decision to make, so I'm not sure why he'd be upset with it. [Reply]
Feel bad for Sneed that he ended up with a shitty team. But at least he’s getting the big money. I hope he gets every dollar of that $76M contract. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Kinda one of those deals where I ask myself "Who was the last player they were wrong about and let walk that they probably regret".
Charvarious Ward maybe? He's went on to be really good.
Other than that.....
I think that letting Khalen Saunders walk was a mistake. He's been pretty good for the Saints. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bump:
He has been good but it's fine because Wharton and Pennel have been really good
Correct. Same with the Ward example above. People tend to think that if a player that leaves the Chiefs plays well elsewhere that it was a mistake or the Chiefs regret the move. The Chiefs will be letting go of good players every off season during the Mahomes Era. It’s the reality of doing business in the NFL. As long as the replacements the Chiefs bring in do something in between acceptable and obviously great, it’s no problem [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Kinda one of those deals where I ask myself "Who was the last player they were wrong about and let walk that they probably regret".
Charvarious Ward maybe? He's went on to be really good.
