On Monday, news hit the wire that former NFL MVP and reigning Super Bowl champion Patrick Mahomes – quarterback of the Kansas City Chiefs – signed the largest contract in professional sports history.
The deal is a 10-year extension worth up to $503 million.
That money, of course, is not guaranteed. It takes into account the $30 million or so remaining on his current deal before the extension kicks in, and there is roughly $25 million in incentives included in the cited maximum.
These incentives would require Mahomes to win the MVP and the Super Bowl every year for the duration of the deal.
While Mahomes is clearly a stud and the future face of the league as Tom Brady winds down his record-breaking career, there’s no way he’s winning double-digit MVPs and Super Bowls. No way.
Nevertheless, if he remains injury free, Mahomes will get around $45 million per campaign into the 2031 season. The extension has a guarantee of $140 million.
No matter how you look at it, that’s a lot of money, particularly in a league that’s currently walking as thin and long a tightrope as the NFL is right now in the current political climate.
There is no doubt that the Chiefs had to pay Mahomes, and pay him well. He plays the most important position in all of professional sports, and he does so at the highest possible level.
But a price tag like this is as much a harbinger of things to come off the field as things to come on it.
Mahomes’ extension is a political contract, and all you have to do to figure out why is take a look at the betting odds at the best election sportsbooks online.
The Chiefs are about to enter an uncomfortable PR nightmare, as two other major Indian-themed sports teams have in recent weeks.
The following political props from BetOnline demonstrate that there is already betting interest in what the new names of “problematic” teams might be.
Washington Redskins New Name if Changed
- Redtails +300
- Generals +400
- Presidents +500
- Lincolns +600
- Veterans +800
- Capitols +900
- Americans +1000
- Memorials +1000
- Monuments +1000
- Kings +1200
- Roosevelts +1200
- Redhawks +1500
- Jeffersons +2000
- Renegades +2200
- Arlingtons +2500
- Hogs +5000
- Snowflakes +50000
- Trumps +50000
Cleveland Indians New Name If Changed
- Spiders +300
- Naps +400
- Guardians +500
- Buckeyes +600
- Dobys +700
- Wild Things +800
- Blue Sox +900
- Rocks +1000
- Cuyahogas +1500
- Crows +2000
- Rockers +2000
- Unions +2500
- Fellers +3300
- Great Lakers +4000
While the above betting lines are limited to only two current pro sports teams, more are sure to follow, especially once the first club succumbs to the small but loud public pressure to alter its image.
One of the first teams on that expanded roster, of course, will be the Kansas City Chiefs.
And fans will not be happy.
After all, what’s wrong with “Chiefs”? It’s a nod to the most powerful of Native American leaders, to their history of tenacity and fearlessness in the face of overwhelming odds. It’s a strong name, projects a strong image, and is – in a rational world – inoffensive.
The wokest jokesters might go after the MLB’s Cleveland Indians on the basis that “Indian” itself was a misapplied label by the Spanish, diminishing individual tribes on those grounds.
Still tenuous, but in the modern logic, workable.
But “Chief” is a term of endearment and power that was self-applied by said tribes, not foisted on them by conquerors. So there is a palpable difference there.
Nevertheless, Kansas City sees the writing on the wall, and the team knows that its fans will not be happy with the change. They will have boycotts and protests. They will have lifers turn away from the team and the league itself. They will have to spend massive money to change the team name, the stadium name, their associated logos, their mascot, their identity.
Rebranding is expensive. It’s even more expensive when your fan base doesn’t want you to do it. That is the position that Kansas City is in right now.
And the best insurance for all the fallout – the best enticement to keep fans in the stadium seats or tuning in every Sunday from home and in area sports bars – is to lock up the poster boy for his entire career.
Mahomes is by far the biggest star in the NFL. By keeping the wunderkind under center for the next 12 years, the calculus is that otherwise irate fans will stick around after the impending name change (and potential coronavirus shutdown of the 2020-2021 season) out of the sheer interest that’s generated by historic talent in its prime.
Essentially, the Chiefs are killing two birds with one arrowhead – while they can still use arrowheads: They’re paying their star a star’s wage (which is no a trivial thing in the NFL), and they’re trying to buy insurance against a major projected upheaval. It’s a savvy move.
I vote for “Kansas City Homies.”
Mahomes’ Homies. That works on several levels.
Just for fun, let’s move on to the theme of “problematic” teams in general, and which other clubs could be on the public protest block in the months to come. Again, once one club falls to the crowd, many more are sure to follow.
We’ll stick with teams among the four major US leagues that are most likely to “address” their nicknames, mascots, and slogans going forward:
Problematic NFL Team Names
- Cleveland Browns
- Dallas Cowboys
- Houston Texans
- Minnesota Vikings
- New England Patriots
- New Orleans Saints
- San Francisco 49ers
- Washington Redskins
Problematic NBA Team Names
- Cleveland Cavaliers
- Dallas Mavericks
- Denver Nuggets
- Miami Heat
- Philadelphia 76ers
- Portland Trail Blazers
- San Antonio Spurs
Problematic MLB Team Names
- Atlanta Braves
- Chicago White Sox
- Cincinnati Reds
- Cleveland Indians
- New York Yankees
- San Diego Padres
- Texas Rangers
- Washington Nationals
Problematic NHL Team Names
- Buffalo Sabres
- Chicago Blackhawks
- Edmonton Oilers
- New York Rangers
- Ottawa Senators
- Vancouver Canucks
- Washington Capitals
At a bare minimum, you should expect to see half or more of these teams – at some point – show up on the odds boards at the best Vegas election betting sites.
History, we hardly knew ye!