We don't really have one of these yet, so figured we could use this as a place to discuss potential free agent acquisitions and what we would like to look for them to bring in.
If any of you guys are interested, heres a good place to do some research.
Originally Posted by O.city:
Well, maybe that says more about what everyone else thought about Ford and Peters?
The only thing it 'says' is that this fool can't negotiate for shit. Gives out hilarious contracts for guys like Watkins, Hitchens, and Mathieu, only manages to get middling returns on talented players like Peters and Ford, and this rumored haul for Clark on top of it all? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
The only thing it 'says' is that this fool can't negotiate for shit. Gives out hilarious contracts for guys like Watkins, Hitchens, and Mathieu, only manages to get middling returns on talented players like Peters and Ford, and this rumored haul for Clark on top of it all?
Why do you think he couldn't get better returns on Ford or Peters? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
The only thing it 'says' is that this fool can't negotiate for shit. Gives out hilarious contracts for guys like Watkins, Hitchens, and Mathieu, only manages to get middling returns on talented players like Peters and Ford, and this rumored haul for Clark on top of it all?
The Chiefs have 4 picks in the top 100 of this year's draft — 29, 61, 63 & 92 — to get a deal completed for Frank Clark, possibly before Thursday night. The trade would include the 29th pick. https://t.co/PDXRRny0a6
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
Best Veach can do is a 2nd in next year's draft for guys like Peters and Ford. To turn around and give a haul for Frank Clark just screams incompetence that deserves immediate termination.
We could only get a 2nd for Dee Ford bc he is a walking injury waiting to happen. Marcus Peters is a goddamn lunatic who got his asshole roasted in coverage and less than a handful of teams even wanted to trade for him in the first place.
Frank Clark has no durability issues and has done the following as a starter/significant role player for Seattle the last 3 seasons:
32 sacks
66 QB hits
7 forced fumbles
4 passes defended
31 tackles for loss
1 INT
Go ahead and tell the class what draft pick is going to give us that production bc that is elite. In fact, go ahead and tell me how many pass rushers have been better than him the last 3 years. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
We could only get a 2nd for Dee Ford bc he is a walking injury waiting to happen. Marcus Peters is a goddamn lunatic who got his asshole roasted in coverage and less than a handful of teams even wanted to trade for him in the first place.
Frank Clark has no durability issues and has done the following as a starter/significant role player for Seattle the last 3 seasons:
32 sacks
66 QB hits
7 forced fumbles
4 passes defended
31 tackles for loss
1 INT
Go ahead and tell the class what draft pickis going to give us that production bc that is elite. In fact, go ahead and tell me how many pass rushers have been better than him the last 3 years.
It's not just the draft picks we'd have to give up.....it's the $90 million that we would have to turn around and give to him after we gave up said draft picks. It's the off the field issues that he had in the past. It's the combination of fucking everything together. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
We could only get a 2nd for Dee Ford bc he is a walking injury waiting to happen. Marcus Peters is a goddamn lunatic who got his asshole roasted in coverage and less than a handful of teams even wanted to trade for him in the first place.
Frank Clark has no durability issues and has done the following as a starter/significant role player for Seattle the last 3 seasons:
32 sacks
66 QB hits
7 forced fumbles
4 passes defended
31 tackles for loss
1 INT
Go ahead and tell the class what draft pick is going to give us that production bc that is elite. In fact, go ahead and tell me how many pass rushers have been better than him the last 3 years.
Frank Clark as a player isn't the problem. It's his bad history of character concerns combined with our quite frankly horrendous recent history with guys like Peters, Hunt, and possibly Hill. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
It's not just the draft picks we'd have to give up.....it's the $90 million that we would have to turn around and give to him after we gave up said draft picks. It's the off the field issues that he had in the past. It's the combination of ****ing everything together.
So should they not pay Tyreek? If the off field issues are a problem I don't see how you can say not to pay one but are ok with the other.
I'm skeptical they'll end up having to pay him that much anyway. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Superturtle:
The only thing it 'says' is that this fool can't negotiate for shit. Gives out hilarious contracts for guys like Watkins, Hitchens, and Mathieu, only manages to get middling returns on talented players like Peters and Ford, and this rumored haul for Clark on top of it all?
Originally Posted by O.city:
So should they not pay Tyreek? If the off field issues are a problem I don't see how you can say not to pay one but are ok with the other.
I'm skeptical they'll end up having to pay him that much anyway.
Hill cost us a 5th round pick. It's the combination of ALL THREE. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Looking at the history of players picked at the back end of the first, it's not great.
I'm not exactly excited for Clark, because of the cost, but you gotta pay for shit like that.
If they traded #29 for Clark......I wouldn't be excited....but I could understand it. If they trade #29 plus a 2nd this year....then I'm pissed. If they trade #29, a 2nd this year and a pick next year....this front office is retarded. [Reply]