Originally Posted by nychief:
While I agree with this in principle... isn't Hyde the RB equivalent of Allen? A vet who has been in the league and has a track - albeit a meh - record?
Not to make this a hyde thread.
To a degree other than at 1 point Hyde looks pretty good with the niners but for the last 3 years he's shown a lot of decline. But for essentially a backup role if you feel you can't rely on Darrell Williams to take a couple of carries and not guy a QB killed in pass pro then he isn't exactly worthy of a spot either for a position that is easily replaceable. [Reply]
Originally Posted by oldman:
I think both Clay and Mecca are on track. Or maybe we keep 10 OL. I can't remember if Allen stepped in at T when he was here, but Erving is not someone I want to rely on.
He did, though I can't remember which game (maybe the Seahawks?). Chiefs are probably looking at the shitshow they have at backup tackle right now and figure Allen is the best option available currently. [Reply]
I'm not the biggest fan of John Dorsey, but I'll give him credit for being able to add decent talent through the waiver wire. I can't say I'm a big fan of having to re-sign castoffs like Parker and Zombo last year and now Allen. Perhaps more due diligence should have been done a while ago to build the roster depth. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
I'm not the biggest fan of John Dorsey, but I'll give him credit for being able to add decent talent through the waiver wire. I can't say I'm a big fan of having to re-sign castoffs like Parker and Zombo last year and now Allen. Perhaps more due diligence should have been done a while ago to build the roster depth.
I believe Veach did address depth on the OL, they just haven't blossomed the way we hoped. I think we're OK at G and C, it's the backup T I'm worried about. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
We’re on the same page. I just want a different vet RB than Hyde
No reason to be pumped about Hyde really, I get that, but what veteran out there is better? If we cut him today he would be on a team by the end of the week.
Darrel Williams has done nothing that I can see to keep him over Hyde and since Hyde's contract is guaranteed it doesn't even save money to cut him so........... [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
No reason to be pumped about Hyde really, I get that, but what veteran out there is better? If we cut him today he would be on a team by the end of the week.
Darrel Williams has done nothing that I can see to keep him over Hyde and since Hyde's contract is guaranteed it doesn't even save money to cut him so...........
I doubt it.
That'd be what, 3 teams in 2 years he's been on? I dunno that there's much left if he gets cut. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
No reason to be pumped about Hyde really, I get that, but what veteran out there is better? If we cut him today he would be on a team by the end of the week.
Darrel Williams has done nothing that I can see to keep him over Hyde and since Hyde's contract is guaranteed it doesn't even save money to cut him so...........
Do you really think having veteran depth at RB is remotely the same or as important as having veteran depth at O-line? [Reply]