Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
If I were betting I'd say that they started working with the agent, got the impression that he was EXTREMELY confident that the market to pay him $23+ million was very robust and figured "well hell, we might as well tag him anyway as the AAV isn't going to be that bad in relation to his market number and if the market is as robust as the agent says, perhaps we'll get an offer for a 2nd rounder..."
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
It's me speculating.
If they're working on a long-term deal, did they need to tag him right now? Maybe.
I don't think anybody has much other than the Chiefs deciding to place the tag on him. Maybe it means they're going to get the long-term deal done. Maybe it means they're going to try to get him to play on the tag. Maybe it means what I suggested.
I don't think we can say with a great deal of certainty WHAT it means right now.
Seems alot like....you guys making things up in your head so you don't have to accept the reality here....:-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Seems alot like....you guys making things up in your head so you don't have to accept the reality here....:-)
I mean, I said I'm speculating.
The only thing I would say FOR SURE is that anyone who thinks they know FOR SURE what the tag means in this case is acting more confident than they should. [Reply]
Except it doesn't. We literally saw in real time this year that an OT providing even average to below average play next to a camp fodder G is much more desirable comparatively to even an All Pro G playing next to bad OT play, which seems to be exactly where we're headed again. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
Except it doesn't. We literally saw in real time this year that an OT providing even average to below average play next to a camp fodder G is much more desirable comparatively to even an All Pro G playing next to bad OT play, which seems to be exactly where we're headed again.
I don't know that the play was even THAT much better, but the QB trusted the new OT more... [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Remember a few years ago when the Chiefs wanted to pay Trent Williams and couldn’t get him, so they pivoted to paying Joe Thuney?
I think this is a very similar situation and from what we know, it makes sense. The Tackle market is terrible and they want to keep the OL as strong as they can.
So keeping the same OL that got utterly destroyed in the SB
and got Mahomes hit and sacked the most in his career, except this time they’re almost assuredly the highest paid OL in the NFL, is a good idea?
For the record, Philly is paying roughly half what we do for our OL for a group that is infinitely better. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
So keeping the same OL that got utterly destroyed in the SB
and got Mahomes hit and sacked the most in his career, except this time they’re almost assuredly the highest paid OL in the NFL, is a good idea?
For the record, Philly is paying roughly half what we do for our OL for a group that is infinitely better.
I mean, we managed to negotiate the regular season well enough, albeit on a razor's edge at times.
And they seemed to do fine in the playoffs against the Texans and Bills for the most part.
So maybe the plan is just hope we don't meet up with Philly in the Super Bowl again if we get there? [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Remember a few years ago when the Chiefs wanted to pay Trent Williams and couldn’t get him, so they pivoted to paying Joe Thuney?
I think this is a very similar situation and from what we know, it makes sense. The Tackle market is terrible and they want to keep the OL as strong as they can.
This is what I've been screaming for the last 2 days. It's obvious. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
So keeping the same OL that got utterly destroyed in the SB
and got Mahomes hit and sacked the most in his career, except this time they’re almost assuredly the highest paid OL in the NFL, is a good idea?
For the record, Philly is paying roughly half what we do for our OL for a group that is infinitely better.
If the Chiefs let Smith walk and the OL suffered because of it, you'd 100% be the first to bitch. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
So keeping the same OL that got utterly destroyed in the SB
and got Mahomes hit and sacked the most in his career, except this time they’re almost assuredly the highest paid OL in the NFL, is a good idea?
For the record, Philly is paying roughly half what we do for our OL for a group that is infinitely better.
Mailata, Johnson and Dickerson are all paid top 5 contracts each $20+ million.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Mailata, Johnson and Dickerson are all paid top 5 contracts each $20+ million.
Wtf are you talking about?
Everyone knows overspending on the OL is the quickest way to kill a team, it's why almost every team drafting in the top 10 this year is desperate to do it. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
I don't know that the play was even THAT much better, but the QB trusted the new OT more...
Until he didn't.
Oh, and the Browns game where he did but the offense was still terrible.
Paying a RG $22+ million/yr is stupid and paying him because you don't have a LT is even MORE stupid.
It's like paying a 2nd RB because your QB sucks. And you're not even getting a great one at that.
"Well we have Jamaal Charles and a real problem at QB....lets go sign Arian Foster!"
Nobody would understand this signing if he weren't already a Chief. This is just inertia. It's is absolutely asinine that we're going to have 3 of the highest paid interior lineman in NFL history. Who were all here LAST season and played for on an offensive line that every mother's son on this board blamed for every fucking problem this offense had.
Originally Posted by O.city:
Seems alot like....you guys making things up in your head so you don't have to accept the reality here....:-)
Shit.
Honestly, I didn't even know if I'd posted that. I lost interest in the thought halfway through because I knew it was probably bullshit. The server was being ornery, I was irritable anyway and just thought "ah fuck it..."
I thought I'd read somewhere that we could clear close to $20M on Jones and close to $40M on Patrick if we needed it. Must be another move on top of converting the bonuses.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Mailata, Johnson and Dickerson are all paid top 5 contracts each $20+ million.
Wtf are you talking about?
Well I guess that's where the deferred money and contract structure comes in, none of them are making that in 2025. Their cap numbers are around $45 million combined for those 3 and their center. [Reply]
