Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
Yep, I'm sick of hearing how we can't afford to keep all our guys while the Eagles and Ravens manage to build freaking dream teams around their QBs while Mahomes runs for his goddamn life because we're playing a guard at left tackle in the goddamn Super Bowl.
Enough is enough with the penny pinching bullshit. We are not light years ahead of the rest of the league anymore, and that should be obvious to everyone. Hopefully, this will be the wake up call they need. Mahomes is amazing, but the league has changed in a big way.
We need a dynmaic RB and a good LT, along with a refreshing of our scheme, or this team is going to fade quickly.
During basically all of Lamar's helm they had off and on years for spending, the Chiefs very obviously have a budget for spending. And yes I'm pretty sure they feel like because of the money Mahomes makes it's up to him to cover some of those warts because they are paying him like he's multiple players. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
because of the money Mahomes makes it's up to him to cover some of those warts because they are paying him like he's multiple players.
That excuse is out the window now, the Ravens and Eagles are paying their QBs just as much and still manage to put absolutely loaded rosters around them. They can keep being cheap if they want, they will stop going to Super Bowls if they decide to be.
They don't change their approach, they'll keep falling behind even more. Denver and LA are going to be out there spending like freaking lunatics. If we don't watch ourselves, we are going to be battling to maintain our own division again very quickly. [Reply]
Trading to Pick 16 with the Arizona Cardinals is my sweet spot. Last year, that same pick was my sweet spot and it turned out to be pretty accurate.
The Cardinals have a GM that will trade down and I think that's about where you can get a guy like Conerly. I think Simmons and Banks go before that. I don't know if Campbell is a LT in the league. We'll see if his arms end up long enough but legit concerns they are around 32".
Trade value guesses would be 31, 95, and 2026 1st for 16 and 153 or 31, 63, and 2026 2nd for 16. I might be more inclined for the latter given we have pick #66 this year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
That excuse is out the window now, the Ravens and Eagles are paying their QBs just as much and still manage to put absolutely loaded rosters around them. They can keep being cheap if they want, they will stop going to Super Bowls if they decide to be.
They don't change their approach, they'll keep falling behind even more. Denver and LA are going to be out there spending like freaking lunatics. If we don't watch ourselves, we are going to be battling to maintain our own division again very quickly.
I don't know what to tell you, some owners care more about winning than profits, some care more about profits, some try to split the difference.
I mean shit Lurie is worth 5.3 billion while the Chiefs are listed as being owned by the Hunt family which is worth 24.3 billion.
Also apparently last year the Eagles made 598 million dollars in revenue while the Chiefs are at 540. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
That excuse is out the window now, the Ravens and Eagles are paying their QBs just as much and still manage to put absolutely loaded rosters around them. They can keep being cheap if they want, they will stop going to Super Bowls if they decide to be.
They don't change their approach, they'll keep falling behind even more. Denver and LA are going to be out there spending like freaking lunatics. If we don't watch ourselves, we are going to be battling to maintain our own division again very quickly.
I don't think we're being cheap, we're just spending our money in different spots or more concentrated. We have a $35m DT, a $27m RT, a $26m LG, a $20m TE, and a $10m OC next year. They have their money spread to $17.5m WR, $17.5m RT, $16m DE, $15m LT, $14m CB, and $11m TE. They have a TON of void money on their books. It won't all hit for a couple of years but when it does it's going to be a bunch at once and it's going to hurt them some. If it's being cheap not to do that so much, I'm not sure I agree with it. Plus, we're coming to a point in the near future where our distribution will change substantially, the next two seasons probably. [Reply]
Everyone wants to blame the line and specifically LT, but God damn Andy makes it really hard on those guys when the defense can just run at the QB as fast as they can.
We needed to run the ball more. Looking at the snap counts is eye opening.
Kareem Hunt thoroughly put himself in the position to be the starting RB. He got 11 snaps. Perine had 22 and Pacheco had 23.
We had 7 fucking runs all game and no I'm not counting any of Pats.
You can go ahead and say that they "stopped" the run game, but that's completely false.
Games over at this point, so I won't continue with it, but the Eagles didn't stop the run game. The Chiefs just didn't try to fucking run it. This team cannot do a fucking thing when they become one dimensional. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
That excuse is out the window now, the Ravens and Eagles are paying their QBs just as much and still manage to put absolutely loaded rosters around them. They can keep being cheap if they want, they will stop going to Super Bowls if they decide to be.
They don't change their approach, they'll keep falling behind even more. Denver and LA are going to be out there spending like freaking lunatics. If we don't watch ourselves, we are going to be battling to maintain our own division again very quickly.
Eagles aren't paying Hurts more than $50 million against the cap until like 2029. Mahomes is making in excess of $65 million each of the next 3 years, Hurts is making $21 million, $31 million, and $41 million against the cap those years. Howie Roseman is running circles around Veach. Also, look at how much their superior OL is getting paid compared to our OL. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
The cap isn't the problem, it's the cash. For example in just pure cash spending I believe the Eagles team on the field last night had 60 million more allocated dollars than the Chiefs did.
95% of people here don't know the difference. Your argument falls on deaf ears. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I don't think we're being cheap, we're just spending our money in different spots or more concentrated. We have a $35m DT, a $27m RT, a $26m LG, a $20m TE, and a $10m OC next year. They have their money spread to $17.5m WR, $17.5m RT, $16m DE, $15m LT, $14m CB, and $11m TE. They have a TON of void money on their books. It won't all hit for a couple of years but when it does it's going to be a bunch at once and it's going to hurt them some. If it's being cheap not to do that so much, I'm not sure I agree with it. Plus, we're coming to a point in the near future where our distribution will change substantially, the next two seasons probably.
Little slow on the uptake here... what is the pro and con of doing it their way with void money on the books vs..? [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
Eagles aren't paying Hurts more than $50 million against the cap until like 2029. Mahomes is making in excess of $65 million each of the next 3 years, Hurts is making $21 million, $31 million, and $41 million against the cap those years. Howie Roseman is running circles around Veach. Also, look at how much their superior OL is getting paid compared to our OL.
It's not so much that Roseman is running circles around Veach, it's just clear he has much more financial flexibility. This whole concern about adding void years and kicking the can is understandable, but after what we just witnessed it should be quite obvious to this organization that they're going to have to bite the bullet and push some money out to land a good LT and I would argue a dynamic RB as well.
And no, I don't mean Humphries or Armstead or some other half dead broke dick who's about to start taking Geritol. If the Rams don't tag Jackson, and all indications are they won't, you do whatever the living hell you need to do to get him to sign here. I don't care how much money you have to push off, you just ****ing do it. Same with Stanley if he happens to get to the market. I don't care what you have to move around, one of those guys is a Chief or you're not that serious about winning more titles.
Basically, we've been counting on Pat, Andy and Spags to essentially fill the gaps of our team being pretty much outmanned in every big game we play. Those days need to come to an end, and we need to get some more top flight talent in here. It's really that simple. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
The Chiefs are currently paying 3 players on the OL.
Joe Thuney - excellent and worth the money. Got exposed and worked last night (there's a reason he is not a LT and it showed in the way he got dominated by a long DE).
Creed Humphrey - excellent and worth the money. Best C in football.
Jawan Taylor - had some struggles last night but was good in pass protection during the Super Bowl run last year and in the run to the Super Bowl this year.
The other two spots have been cheap bandaids.
There's space between "Veach sucks" and "dang it, that didn't quite work out." Which is where we should all be living.
I have a hard time accepting "Veach failed" when the approach since Fisher went down has been to take swing after swing.
He traded a 1st for an established, younger vet and then tried to sign him long-term. Didn't work for the player, he moved on, and honestly it was for the best. (That was also an atrocious T draft, so the 1st they shipped out for him can't be squabbled over too much, especially considering the Chiefs got a pick back that was used to take a 4-year starter in Nick Bolton).
When that T walked, the Chiefs pivoted to replacing him by giving that money to the best available pass-blocking T on the market. He hasn't performed to expectations, primarily in the penalties area. Getting targeted on national TV by Cris Collinsworth put a target on his back that he hasn't shaken.
I would not say Creed is worth the money.
In fact, I would argue that paying a center market setting money when you’re up against the cap and need to replace the tackles is pretty stupid.
You can get a replacement center in the middle rounds that usually at least turns out serviceable.
Would have preferred saving money on Creed and putting it towards the tackles. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
This is gonna not sound great but I wouldn't expect this...
The Chiefs aren't exactly a team that goes above and beyond to spend a ton of cash to get around the cap. It's one of the reason's every time we go to the SB we get to hear about how the other team is more talented. We're facing teams that are way more willing to use void years and big time cash to circumvent the cap.
Yep, void years are the cheat code to really load up the roster. If KC refuses to use the aggressive void year approach like other teams, the Chiefs will always be at a disadvantage in roster construction. [Reply]
Originally Posted by comochiefsfan:
I would not say Creed is worth the money.
In fact, I would argue that paying a center market setting money when you’re up against the cap and need to replace the tackles is pretty stupid.
You can get a replacement center in the middle rounds that usually at least turns out serviceable.
Would have preferred saving money on Creed and putting it towards the tackles.
Id guess the plan is to have Creed stabilize the middle. Now that guards are getting paid like tackles you might as well pay the tackles and let guards fill in as needed. If you can shore up both spots and have a good center your line should be fairly stable. [Reply]