Sacrificing one year of Kelce vs. three years of Mahomes
The answer is obvious.
That is my math, yes. Well more accurately, 1 year of Kelce, 1 year of Mahomes, 1 year of Hill vs. 3 years of Mahomes and 1-2 years of Hill.
And then there's just basic combined probabilities at work. I think you're better served with more bites at the apple than you are a couple larger ones in the beginning. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
As well they should.
While I hate burning one of Kelces last remaining premier seasons, the Chiefs may be wise to treat this season as a re-set and get back on the same 'team building' footing as those squads.
We've just been pushing awfully hard every year and when you spend that much time at/near the redline, things start to shake apart. We can either blow the motor or take a beat and have the thing serviced.
If ending up back in the pack WITH those teams (which, make no mistake, is still where we'd be even with nominal FA additions) helps us get back AHEAD of those teams by 2023, it's worth doing.
I think if you are Veach you keep doing what you’re doing, except get bargain FA’s instead of Clark’s and Matheiu’s.
The draft will always be key and he’s done a great job there recently. We just need to avoid 2018 drafts that yield little to no return [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
No, we have a team that can win it all now. You can't play for 2025 when with a few right moves now we can win the next 2.
Last year should have been ours but we just didn't have enough juice.
You won't have Kelce Hill playing at this level 3 years from now. Time is now. If we win 1 or 2 more championships now we can reset after.
You act like he wants to gut the team or something. [Reply]
The Chiefs are working on a restructured deal for DE Frank Clark, per sources. Sides are uncertain whether they'll be able to get it done, but they're at least trying to find a way to keep Clark in the fold.