Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
I don't think we DO have a glaring need at WR. We have a lack of proven production, but that's not the same thing at all. We went young, which you need to do periodically, but that's not the same thing as not having talent and being in need.
Let’s say TEs get 1,500 yards and RBs 800.
Skyy/MVS/Rice/Ross/James/Toney/Watson can clear 2.700 to 3,000 yards that easily.
Dumb fans want to return to the Tyreek FFL WR1 days. We’re clearly leaning into last year’s diversified attack. [Reply]
Originally Posted by MMXcalibur:
We have a glaring need at wide receiver, but nah, let's try and link the Chiefs to not one, but two high-priced running backs.
Fucking morons.
Except KC doesn’t have a glaring need at WR. [Reply]
At wide receiver, do you have to remember how New England kept a good enough passing attack despite no-name receivers because of Brady. And he made some of those no-name receivers household names. Mahomes will do the same, almost irrespective of who the chief wide receivers are. [Reply]
We've got loads of young talent at WR and RB. We don't need a high priced, big name signing. Come January, everyone is going to know their names. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
We've got loads of young talent at WR and RB. We don't need a high priced, big name signing. Come January, everyone is going to know their names.
This. I mean really? RB's in the league right now are pouting because they are not getting paid. RB's ARE EXPENDIBLE! You are NOT going to be paid what you want - end of story! [Reply]