I love his attitude but he was making way too much money for the production he was giving. For that kinda dough, you need to be available and be bringing it hard every week, regular season and post season. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lzen:
I love his attitude but he was making way too much money for the production he was giving. For that kinda dough, you need to be available and be bringing it hard every week, regular season and post season.
Everyone keeps saying this, and I just don't understand it. We won 2 Super Bowls and appeared in 3 in his time here, so who cares? It wasn't my money he was taking. Nobody here is broke because the Chiefs paid Frank Clark too much.
He showed up when it counted even more consistently than CJ. There's no such thing as overpaying for playoff production when you're a team chasing Super Bowls. I'll say the same thing about Sammy Watkins. Zero regrets and nothing but love for him too.
Now, he's going to make up for it by playing for peanuts, and you know damn well he's going to come up with at least 1-2 clutch sacks come playoff time, and it's going to be awesome. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
Everyone keeps saying this, and I just don't understand it. We won 2 Super Bowls and appeared in 3 in his time here, so who cares? It wasn't my money he was taking. Nobody here is broke because the Chiefs paid Frank Clark too much.
He showed up when it counted even more consistently than CJ. There's no such thing as overpaying for playoff production when you're a team chasing Super Bowls. I'll say the same thing about Sammy Watkins. Zero regrets and nothing but love for him too.
Now, he's going to make up for it by playing for peanuts, and you know damn well he's going to come up with at least 1-2 clutch sacks come playoff time, and it's going to be awesome.
Did you watch him last year? He was CONSTANTLY tied up by one man! He was useless 99% of the time. Like someone else said in here his Super Bowl sacks were more Hurts running into Clark than vice versa.
I can see him on the practice squad but I cannot see him replacing anybody on the 53. No way.... [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyreekthefreak:
Did you watch him last year? He was CONSTANTLY tied up by one man! He was useless 99% of the time. Like someone else said in here his Super Bowl sacks were more Hurts running into Clark than vice versa.
I can see him on the practice squad but I cannot see him replacing anybody on the 53. No way....
We shall see, practice squad might very well be the plan if Frank agrees to it. Herring has actually shown signs of life and we don't want to lose Thompson, so maybe that's what they're trying to work out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
Everyone keeps saying this, and I just don't understand it. We won 2 Super Bowls and appeared in 3 in his time here, so who cares? It wasn't my money he was taking. Nobody here is broke because the Chiefs paid Frank Clark too much.
He showed up when it counted even more consistently than CJ. There's no such thing as overpaying for playoff production when you're a team chasing Super Bowls. I'll say the same thing about Sammy Watkins. Zero regrets and nothing but love for him too.
Now, he's going to make up for it by playing for peanuts, and you know damn well he's going to come up with at least 1-2 clutch sacks come playoff time, and it's going to be awesome.
What if Kelce sluffed off during the regular season and just “made the plays when it matters the most”
Our OL? Any one of them gets a tummy ache in the regular season and Mahomes gets killed.
Or hell how about Mahomes himself?
If you’re depended on and paid to play to a high level consistently, it’s not just to look pretty in the regular season. It’s so the team can get to the goddamn fucking playoffs in the first place.
That’s why all this PLAYOFF FRANK nonsense needs to fucking die. Don’t praise him for being a leech. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RealSNR:
What if Kelce sluffed off during the regular season and just “made the plays when it matters the most”
Our OL? Any one of them gets a tummy ache in the regular season and Mahomes gets killed.
Or hell how about Mahomes himself?
If you’re depended on and paid to play to a high level consistently, it’s not just to look pretty in the regular season. It’s so the team can get to the goddamn ****ing playoffs in the first place.
That’s why all this PLAYOFF FRANK nonsense needs to ****ing die. Don’t praise him for being a leech.
Well, I obviously don't consider Frank a class act by any stretch, nor do I approve of him showing up only when he felt like it, but it's not his fault Veach overpaid him. There was clearly a reason Seattle had no problem getting rid of him, and Veach should have been more wary of that. He has serious character flaws that were well known when Veach made the move. Once he got paid, they came out even more.
I'm not saying if the Chiefs could go back in time that they should still make the trade. Obviously, they probably wouldn't. Just that I don't regret it since he performed when it counted, and I certainly think he's worth a spot on at least the practice squad because of what he means to the organization's legacy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
Everyone keeps saying this, and I just don't understand it. We won 2 Super Bowls and appeared in 3 in his time here, so who cares? It wasn't my money he was taking. Nobody here is broke because the Chiefs paid Frank Clark too much.
He showed up when it counted even more consistently than CJ. There's no such thing as overpaying for playoff production when you're a team chasing Super Bowls. I'll say the same thing about Sammy Watkins. Zero regrets and nothing but love for him too.
Now, he's going to make up for it by playing for peanuts, and you know damn well he's going to come up with at least 1-2 clutch sacks come playoff time, and it's going to be awesome.
I actually don't have a problem if he takes a small salary.
And the other side to that argument is that if the Chiefs weren't paying Clark so much money then perhaps they could have brought in another player (or a few other players) that might have been able to help the team get past Cincy (or NE or Tampa). [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyreekthefreak:
Did you watch him last year? He was CONSTANTLY tied up by one man! He was useless 99% of the time. Like someone else said in here his Super Bowl sacks were more Hurts running into Clark than vice versa.
I can see him on the practice squad but I cannot see him replacing anybody on the 53. No way....
Saunders/Chenal are the only one who sacked Hurts for minimal losses(1 yard losses each if I rememer right). We had pressures, but their oline is solid... At least no what your are talking about before you type it. Frank on a super skinny deal is a good rotational addition and a hedge against injuries, why fight it, its not that hard to see the value if it happens. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Lzen:
I actually don't have a problem if he takes a small salary.
And the other side to that argument is that if the Chiefs weren't paying Clark so much money then perhaps they could have brought in another player (or a few other players) that might have been able to help the team get past Cincy (or NE or Tampa).
Defense wasn't the issue vs. Cinci or TB... Cincy, Mahomes went AWOL, TB we had no Oline. [Reply]
Originally Posted by IowaHawkeyeChief:
Saunders/Chenal are the only one who sacked Hurts for minimal losses(1 yard losses each if I rememer right). We had pressures, but their oline is solid... At least no what your are talking about before you type it. Frank on a super skinny deal is a good rotational addition and a hedge against injuries, why fight it, its not that hard to see the value if it happens.
The fact is he cannot pressure the QB anymore! His SB sacks were more Hurts running his way than him overpowering anyone! You're going to cut an ascending player for the Frank Clark of today? Veach and Ried won't do it, no way! [Reply]