Originally Posted by O.city:
What does "he's not in high demand elsewhere" have to do with anything?
No shit, there's a reason these guys are available. But as we've seen with Hunt and JJSS, Maybe Andy and company are better than anyone at getting things out of them?
Uh, maybe the reality check that he is not a good player. Followed by the reality check that given our circumstances he can still help. Both things can be true at the same time.
And miss me with the hunt and jjss shit. I was very high on those coming back to kc. But in the future when we have actual options, we’re not going down this dumb path again of asking mahomes and Reid to work around unrosterable talent [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Uh, maybe the reality check that he is not a good player. Followed by the reality check that given our circumstances he can still help. Both things can be true at the same time.
And miss me with the hunt and jjss shit. I was very high on those coming back to kc. But in the future when we have actual options, we’re not going down this dumb path again of asking mahomes and Reid to work around unrosterable talent
If they can get this kind of production out of "unrosterable talent" maybe....I dunno maybe they're not bad players?
MVS would cost less than a million bucks, knows the offense and seems to make plays for us when it matters.
Originally Posted by O.city:
If they can get this kind of production out of "unrosterable talent" maybe....I dunno maybe they're not bad players?
MVS would cost less than a million bucks, knows the offense and seems to make plays for us when it matters.
I dunno.....could be worse things.
He is rosterable on the chiefs because he’d be replacing a guy who is completely unrosterable. I get why this move makes sense when midseason options are limited. I get how he can bandaid us until we can find someone better and maybe that’s not until next season. I can put my feelings aside and recognize that in a bad situation he can be of help. He is not a good player but he is better than what we have. [Reply]