Yes 55 47.41%

No 61 52.59%

When you're talking about handing a guy the biggest bag, then yeah, he should be in the type of conversation that evokes "one of the top few tackles in the NFL." Brown simply isn't.


There is a lot to be said about durability, I'll definitely give credence to that. It's kind of like the Trent Williams and Tyron Smiths of the world. Sure, they ARE among the top few tackles in the NFL, but they aren't always available.

I think this makes it more worth paying the guy than any other argument brought up yet. He's simply nowhere near good enough to deserve the biggest bag but he's there every day and that's valuable on its own.

For me, availability and other needs are what makes it hard to not pay him. If it's only about talent, then no I wouldn't, or at least not yet. I think the Chiefs should play him on the tag and see what the returns are. If he won't play on it, then I guess you see what Geron Christian brings. He did have a solid start through 7 games or so for Washington a couple of years ago before an injury derailed him. You're not risking much from the Chiefs' standpoint by playing Brown on the tag. In actuality, it's probably better to have that first-year discount of a long-term deal next season than it is this one. I doubt he's suddenly going from 25 per to 30 per a season, so I wouldn't be overly concerned there.

As for the risk of replacing him, yes, I do think there are a handful of very solid LT prospects next year if the Juniors declare that should. If I'm hand-picking a LT for Mahomes, it's probably Zion Nelson from Miami. That said, I really don't think KC is going to let him go in any facet.
[Reply]

I hope he does sit out and the chiefs ball out to prove you dont need to sign him. That'd be great
[Reply]

What’s wrong with some of you?
[Reply]

Shit John Dorsey woulda signed him for 250M. Lets go down that road
[Reply]

Hes the 17th ranked T on PFF.

He's not going to get the contract he wants after being the 8-14th best LT in the league AND taking a year off.
[Reply]

They're worrying too much about $2-3M a year in AAV and not being realistic about the cost and risk associated with trying to find an alternative.
[Reply]

He's good, but not all that good.Certainly not worthy of bring paid as the top LT. What's wrong with some of you?
[Reply]

It’s just wild that there are still people out there wanting to toss a top 10 (with upside) LT in the trash heap over such a small amount…but are totally ok trading multiple premium picks to trade from the end of the first to the top 10 to replace him with an unknown.

This year and next are the last years with smaller increases to the cap. In 2024, it’s skyrocketing.

The best answer is to pay him top 5 (or even top of market) AAV over a 6 year deal. In 2 years (when the bigger cap hits kick in) his salary will barely be top 10.
[Reply]

Sorry, Tex. But you are being completely unrealistic.

Your stance (and others) is based in a fantasy world where elite LTs just fall from the sky.

Orlando improved tons over the course of the season and has seemingly lost 15-20 pounds of fat so far this offseason and has been working non stop on his technique. He’s only 26 and his best ball is in the future.

There are only 2 quality LTs in this next draft.

If we don’t pay Orlando and he sits out…you should take a second and look at the pass rushers we face this year and realize without Orlando, just that position would likely derail our whole season.
[Reply]

Welcome to the N F fucking L.

Players who are not at the best at their position get paid like the best.

EVERY TEAM has those guys.

The only reason why people are bitching about paying OBJ is because we traded Tyreek and they foolishly cling to this narrative of "Veach chose OBJ over Tyreek" while completely fucking ignoring the compensation we received for trading Tyreek. We didn't just take two players, decide that we could only pay one of them, and then told the other to leave without getting anything in return.
[Reply]

It's not your money, who gives a shit if he's overpaid?

If it doesn't screw up the cap I guess you're just going to have to find a way to live with it. Y'all are really doubling down on some dumb positions.
[Reply]

I am opposed to making him the highest paid for sure but I definitely don't want him sitting out.
[Reply]

How would him being overpaid not affect the cap? If he's being paid like a top 3 LT but is playing like the 12th best LT, that's going to affect the cap because we're getting negative value. If he does play like a top 3 LT, then yeah we would be getting great value.

But to act like overpaying a player doesn't affect the cap is weird. Or that only reason you shouldn't worry about it is because it's not our money.
[Reply]

For the most part it's you guys bringing up Tyreek for some reason. I've already said that while I hate the trade, I understand the logic of it.

And again, do you think he's going to actually sit out? If we're not willing to give him the deal he wants this year unless he proves himself, how would his negotiating stance improve by sitting out a year?
[Reply]

Here’s how:

If he is given the biggest contract for a LT ever (which I expect) with the most guaranteed (which I expect) with a balloon year or two at the end that drive up the overall value but which are clearly cut or extend points (which I expect) he can both be the highest paid LT (technically) while also being a very reasonable cap hit, relative to a player of his skill set for the next 3-4 years, especially once the cap starts to drastically increase in a few years.

That’s the type of deal we’re going to see, IMO. Initial details (years and total value) will look crazy, maybe. Then we’ll see the structure and it will look better. Then a few years will pass and it will look even better.
[Reply]