So there's an article on NFL network saying that Orlando Brown is expected to sign for 6 years $145 mil.
That comes to $24.16 mil/yr and makes him the highest paid offensive lineman in football. It also would give him the 19th highest salary per year in the NFL
How would you feel if that is the contract he ended up signing?
I'm fine with it. He is a top 5 LT and he's only 26 next season. A young great LT is a guy you can't let leave. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ThaVirus:
Positionally, we have weaknesses at RB, RT, LE, DT2, and RE. We're also thin at CB, LB and TE2/TE3. Any injury to Bolton, Gay, Sneed, or Fenton and we're potentially in big trouble.
Overall, I'd consider the massive turnover a weakness. We're talking about seeing new starters possibly at WR1, WR2, WR3, RT, LE, SLB, CB1, and SS.
Also consider the fact that this defense has not been particularly good at stopping the run lately. With this trash pass rush and new, young secondary, there is a high possibility that this defense won't do anything well.
Whole time you're considering that, think about what happens if the impact of losing Hill is as massive as some people assume it'll be..
As far as "unknowns" then why is everyone so afraid of the schedule? Russel Wilson has an entirely new team. Khalil Mack coming off injury. Davante Adams went from Rodgers to Carr. Josh Allen lost his offensive coordinator. Colts have ANOTHER new QB.
Why is every Chiefs addition an unknown and every opposing addition a certainty?
It's ThaVirus.
Who's saying anything going on with those other teams is a 'certainty'?
But would you really try to argue that the Chiefs haven't undergone more turnover this year than most teams? Or that in trading away a HoF wide receiver they didn't have the most notable subtraction from their roster?
Or that the teams in question weren't more aggressive in addressing some of those 'unknowns' than we were? [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
He said 'weaknesses and unknowns' as a collective group.
I think you're splitting hairs here. Especially if you believe, pretty fairly, that some of those unknowns will become weaknesses or if even a 'known' quantity like the RB room is actually slotted in as a weakness, which would also be a pretty fair analysis given that there's a WHOLE lot of JAG at that position right now.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
It's ThaVirus.
Who's saying anything going on with those other teams is a 'certainty'?
But would you really try to argue that the teams haven't undergone more turnover this year than most teams? Or that in trading away a HoF wide receiver they didn't have the most notable subtraction from their roster?
Or that the teams in question weren't more aggressive in addressing some of those 'unknowns' than we were?
Been a lot of turnover and 'attitude changes' over the last several years that still led to a defense that, as often as not, didn't really do anything well.
And if you (as I do) consider a defense more than the sum of its parts, multiplying by zero anywhere (notably on the DL) can be a REAL problem.
It's more than fair to be extremely concerned about this defense. Do you really think it will be a top half of the league unit? top 20?
If they manage to stay at/near the top 20, I'd call that a win. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Been a lot of turnover and 'attitude changes' over the last several years that still led to a defense that, as often as not, didn't really do anything well.
And if you (as I do) consider a defense more than the sum of its parts, multiplying by zero anywhere (notably on the DL) can be a REAL problem.
It's more than fair to be extremely concerned about this defense. Do you really think it will be a top half of the league unit? top 20?
If they manage to stay at/near the top 20, I'd call that a win.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Been a lot of turnover and 'attitude changes' over the last several years that still led to a defense that, as often as not, didn't really do anything well.
And if you (as I do) consider a defense more than the sum of its parts, multiplying by zero anywhere (notably on the DL) can be a REAL problem.
It's more than fair to be extremely concerned about this defense. Do you really think it will be a top half of the league unit? top 20?
If they manage to stay at/near the top 20, I'd call that a win.
I don’t even think it’s accurate to say this defense “didn’t do anything well” with guys like Hitchens, Dirty Dan, Hughes, and Niemann playing significant roles and guys like Mathieu constantly making business decisions. At least not after the terrible start.
I have no doubt that this new look defense will do some things well, even with the expected growing pains.
They’re young, talented, and hungry and I suspect that they will surprise people like yourself. [Reply]
Remember the same talk with HB, you all are so enthusiastic about a run blocking LT on a pass happy offense. I would not pay this guy top LT money because he isn't. I will be very surprised if OBJr has trimmed down this offseason bet he comes in camp the same as before fat and slow feet. When OBjr sucks out loud against speed rushers and Patrick is again running from his blindside you all will deny you backed him. It's what the usual suspects do around here. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I do think the "we're going to be picking in the late 20s!" presumptions of years past should probably be shelved for a tick.
This division is ROUGH. There's an argument that the Chiefs are about to face the hardest schedule in league history.
They could have damn good team and a very good season and go 10-7. Not because they're a barely above .500 team, but they simply do not have many breaks in this schedule and that kind of slate grinds on you.
I've said it for years - I'm absolutely convinced that 'iron sharpens iron' is bullshit. I'll take the Patriots cake schedule and a gimme bye week every year. In fact, it's almost a pre-requisite for the kind of sustained success they had.
Why? Because it's a hard game and when you're playing quality teams every week, sometimes things just don't go your way.
I could see KC drafting in the 18-22 range this year.
True but that logic applies to every other team in our division. I think there are just a few games difference in schedule.
Win the division get in the playoffs and all bets are off. But yea its going to be a scramble. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
It's ThaVirus.
Who's saying anything going on with those other teams is a 'certainty'?
But would you really try to argue that the Chiefs haven't undergone more turnover this year than most teams? Or that in trading away a HoF wide receiver they didn't have the most notable subtraction from their roster?
Or that the teams in question weren't more aggressive in addressing some of those 'unknowns' than we were?
All great points. And yes, many are trying to argue just that. I think it makes them feel better about the off season. [Reply]
I’d rather just let him play on the tag this year and give him another season to show growth in pass protection. He simply doesn’t have the argument currently for what he’s trying to position for and that’s why it’s been so hard for him to find representation. If he comes out again and puts together noticeable improvement, fuck it pay the man. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefAshhole1056:
I’d rather just let him play on the tag this year and give him another season to show growth in pass protection. He simply doesn’t have the argument currently for what he’s trying to position for and that’s why it’s been so hard for him to find representation. If he comes out again and puts together noticeable improvement, **** it pay the man.
It would be significantly more expensive to do this and also he'd be a year older [Reply]
I think the writing is on the wall that they are going to invest heavily in Brown. He's not my favorite player at the position, but I suppose he is young enough to keep improving. [Reply]
