Sources: The #Seahawks and #Chiefs are deep in talks on a trade to send star Frank Clark to KC. The compensation would include a 1st rounder, a 2020 2nd rounder and a swap of mid-rounders. To complete it, the franchise tagged player and Chiefs must hammer out a deal.
The amount of mental gymnastics cp has done to validate this trades existence :-)
I'm willing to wager that in an alternate universe where the recipients of both trades were switched, most of CP would be saying the Chiefs took the Seahawks to the cleaners.
Clark is not Macks equivalent. Please stop touting cherry picked stats of 3 seasons. Frank has had 2 seasons of 10 or more sacks, Mack has had 4 straight seasons of it while being the focal point for most offenses. I'm not even going to dive deeper into stats because I shouldn't even have to argue such a stupid ****ing point.
Clark is not bad. He is good, probably in the second tier of rushers in the league. But no matter what you homers say it doesn't change the fact this was a bad negotiation where, when factoring in everything, we get less and they got more. We will lose Hill because of this, a first, and a second. Frank Clark will never be as good as all those things combined, no matter how much bullshit you guys want to feed yourselves. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
You are allowed that concern but he has 4 years with a spotless record and for some odd reason I think they looked into this heavily.
He punched a bitch during training camp as well in that time span :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by Iconic:
The amount of mental gymnastics cp has done to validate this trades existence :-)
I'm willing to wager that in an alternate universe where the recipients of both trades were switched, most of CP would be saying the Chiefs took the Seahawks to the cleaners.
Clark is not Macks equivalent. Please stop touting cherry picked stats of 3 seasons. Frank has had 2 seasons of 10 or more sacks, Mack has had 4 straight seasons of it while being the focal point for most offenses. I'm not even going to dive deeper into stats because I shouldn't even have to argue such a stupid ****ing point.
Clark is not bad. He is good, probably in the second tier of rushers in the league. But no matter what you homers say it doesn't change the fact this was a bad negotiation where, when factoring in everything, we get less and they got more. We will lose Hill because of this, a first, and a second. Frank Clark will never be as good as all those things combined, no matter how much bullshit you guys want to feed yourselves.
The mental gymnastics people are attempting to shit allover it is pretty pathetic.
"Why not keep Dee Ford"
"We should have just kept the guy that couldn't fucking line up properly and cost the entire team a Super Bowl, so we can keep that first round pick and draft a center" [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
The mental gymnastics people are attempting to shit allover it is pretty pathetic.
"Why not keep Dee Ford"
"We should have just kept the guy that couldn't ****ing line up properly and cost the entire team a Super Bowl, so we can keep that first round pick and draft a center"
There is an argument to be made regarding Clark but this absolutely isn't it. Anyone using this is retarded. Frank is a clear upgrade over Ford. No question. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Iconic:
The amount of mental gymnastics cp has done to validate this trades existence :-)
I'm willing to wager that in an alternate universe where the recipients of both trades were switched, most of CP would be saying the Chiefs took the Seahawks to the cleaners.
Clark is not Macks equivalent. Please stop touting cherry picked stats of 3 seasons. Frank has had 2 seasons of 10 or more sacks, Mack has had 4 straight seasons of it while being the focal point for most offenses. I'm not even going to dive deeper into stats because I shouldn't even have to argue such a stupid ****ing point.
Clark is not bad. He is good, probably in the second tier of rushers in the league. But no matter what you homers say it doesn't change the fact this was a bad negotiation where, when factoring in everything, we get less and they got more. We will lose Hill because of this, a first, and a second. Frank Clark will never be as good as all those things combined, no matter how much bullshit you guys want to feed yourselves.
So you said stop cherry pick stats...then cherry pick stats-lol
Watch his highlights- it is Not about stats- it is about the relentless, violent way he plays. He slams QB's to the ground, smashes RB's and rides guys five yards out of bounds into the bench. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Iconic:
The amount of mental gymnastics cp has done to validate this trades existence :-)
I'm willing to wager that in an alternate universe where the recipients of both trades were switched, most of CP would be saying the Chiefs took the Seahawks to the cleaners.
Clark is not Macks equivalent. Please stop touting cherry picked stats of 3 seasons. Frank has had 2 seasons of 10 or more sacks, Mack has had 4 straight seasons of it while being the focal point for most offenses. I'm not even going to dive deeper into stats because I shouldn't even have to argue such a stupid ****ing point.
Clark is not bad. He is good, probably in the second tier of rushers in the league. But no matter what you homers say it doesn't change the fact this was a bad negotiation where, when factoring in everything, we get less and they got more. We will lose Hill because of this, a first, and a second. Frank Clark will never be as good as all those things combined, no matter how much bullshit you guys want to feed yourselves.
:-) We won't 'lose Hill because of this'. If Hill isn't here for the long haul, that decision was made long before this trade ever happened. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
The mental gymnastics people are attempting to shit allover it is pretty pathetic.
"Why not keep Dee Ford"
"We should have just kept the guy that couldn't ****ing line up properly and cost the entire team a Super Bowl, so we can keep that first round pick and draft a center"
