I know that's a dirty phrase to utter, but it's important to keep things in perspective here.
We *barely* lost the game, and unfortunately there were some critical rookie mistakes, horrendous misses from an off-the-street kicker. We also had Gay & McDuffie out. A very weak personal foul call was a fatal blow. It sucks, but sometimes it be that way.
Looking ahead
Taking a big-picture view, we have one of the strongest rosters in the league, one of the youngest rosters in the league, with the best QB in the league, and multiple key starters locked up for at least the next 2 years. We also have a top-2 coach in the league, with a top-5 GM in the league armed with a talent evaluation staff that is top-notch. Our medical and training staff is among the best in the league as well.
We will have more than par picks next year. We have no reason to believe that our young defensive players will not continue to ascend, similar to Gay/Bolton. We should have cash to spend next year as well, should we choose to.
While we should absolutely be competing for a Super Bowl every year that we have Mahomes, and we likely will this year, it's crazy to think that we are this good and well set up for the future on a year where we are overhauling our entire receiving corps and have a fresh-out-the-womb defense.
We are going to rip butts wide open for the next 3-5 years if we see this thing through, and likely get a few rings because of it. Games like yesterday are part of the growth, as grumpy as that makes us on a week-to-week level.
Update - 2/15/23
Brett Veach lifts up the Lombardi Trophy, as he says, "This is what a rebuilding year looks like in Kansas City."
Please provide the exact plan you would've executed to support this position.
If Williams or Olave or London or Wilson had slipped, we would've drafted them (and may we have even traded up had they been available in the middle of the 1st). Should we have spent one of our first two picks on Dotson or Burks? Would that be the investment you would've made that would've obviously moved the needle while ignoring our DL or our CB deficiency?
So then is it Watson at the beginning of the second? Or what are we talking about versus taking Moore later that round?
I dunno why people do this "WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE!" stuff? But sure I dunno, we could've kept the original picks and taken Pickens at 30? Could've had Moore at 62 as well perhaps if you wanted to go nuts. I'm really not bitching about this draft.
You're absolutely right that the top picks went early, and actually earlier than I expected. It would've taken a lot to go up and get them and we had lots of holes to fill. My argument is just that this is indeed the reality. If you want top WR talent as the Chiefs who, realistically, are not picking early, you're going to have to trade, go up and get it, or take your early pick and probably swing again later in the draft.
The alternative is to keep scratching our heads at why Veach isn't nailing the WR pick in R2. That's not impossible, but it's much, much harder. There were plenty of people who lost their minds at the prospect of moving up for a WR or double-dipping. That's fine, they might be right, maybe it was too rich this year, maybe we did have too many other holes to fill to try again later in the draft, and maybe this current group is enough in the end.
If you don't think we need elite options for Mahomes, again, that's fine, you could be right. If you do, then at some point you're going to have to accept you're burning through some draft capital. [Reply]
Originally Posted by scho63:
Trading Tyreek Hill does not constitute a "rebuilding" year.
What about starting a bunch of new rookies on defense? One could argue last year was year one with the Oline, this year the secondary got revamped. [Reply]
Originally Posted by JPH83:
I dunno why people do this "WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE!" stuff? But sure I dunno, we could've kept the original picks and taken Pickens at 30? Could've had Moore at 62 as well perhaps if you wanted to go nuts. I'm really not bitching about this draft.
You're absolutely right that the top picks went early, and actually earlier than I expected. It would've taken a lot to go up and get them and we had lots of holes to fill. My argument is just that this is indeed the reality. If you want top WR talent as the Chiefs who, realistically, are not picking early, you're going to have to trade, go up and get it, or take your early pick and probably swing again later in the draft.
The alternative is to keep scratching our heads at why Veach isn't nailing the WR pick in R2. That's not impossible, but it's much, much harder. There were plenty of people who lost their minds at the prospect of moving up for a WR or double-dipping. That's fine, they might be right, maybe it was too rich this year, maybe we did have too many other holes to fill to try again later in the draft, and maybe this current group is enough in the end.
If you don't think we need elite options for Mahomes, again, that's fine, you could be right. If you do, then at some point you're going to have to accept you're burning through some draft capital.
If I were Veach I'd be surrounding Mahomes with top talent and go scorched earth on teams offensively. I think that was the plan when they signed JuJu to pair with Hill. However, once they made the decision to trade Hill (Can't help but think that paying our turd of a LT had something to do with that :-)) Id have taken a page out of the Vikings playbook, when they traded Diggs. They went out and drafted Jefferson. I had hoped that we would have done the same thing and got a stud wide receiver. More, more, and more offense early when you have Mahomes. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Dunerdr:
What about starting a bunch of new rookies on defense? One could argue last year was year one with the Oline, this year the secondary got revamped.
This isn't a rebuilding year. The expectation is another AFC championship appareance and possible superbowl. We had some of the highest odds to win it all offseason and still have scooters going "duurrrrr it a rebuild" Ralph wiggum style nose picking [Reply]
Originally Posted by JPH83:
I dunno why people do this "WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE!" stuff?
It is alarmingly simple: because everything we do is a choice between different options while facing real world constraints. It's easy to say that we should draft WRs early and often, but at what expense? If we trade our 2 firsts and a fourth to get to 11 and draft Olave, what other meaningful holes become more difficult to fill? You have to answer that if you're going to criticize the team for sitting back until the second round and ending up with Moore. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
It is alarmingly simple: because everything we do is a choice between different options while facing real world constraints. It's easy to say that we should draft WRs early and often, but at what expense? If we trade our 2 firsts and a fourth to get to 11 and draft Olave, what other meaningful holes become more difficult to fill? You have to answer that if you're going to criticize the team for sitting back until the second round and ending up with Moore.
Exactly. You can't trade away your future every year.
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
No, but starting 8 rookies and having a new WR corps does suggest a transition year.
We're not "starting" 8 rookies. Karlaftis outplayed the other guys, Watson and McDuffie did, too. Let the Kemps, DRobs, etc. walk. It's not like they were doing us that much good. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
It is alarmingly simple: because everything we do is a choice between different options while facing real world constraints. It's easy to say that we should draft WRs early and often, but at what expense? If we trade our 2 firsts and a fourth to get to 11 and draft Olave, what other meaningful holes become more difficult to fill? You have to answer that if you're going to criticize the team for sitting back until the second round and ending up with Moore.
This is obviously true, there is a cost, and it's probably to the D. I'm saying I care less about that than I do giving Mahomes weapons. It's not a criticism of the team's approach per se it's to the people who didn't think there could be any cost to using R2 picks and cobbling together middling FA WRs. It could all absolutely work but perhaps good D isn't what makes a Mahomes team lethal.
Let me ask you, all things being equal, the talent looks fairly evenly spread, what positions are you taking early in the draft now? Do you double dip at any position? [Reply]
Originally Posted by JPH83:
This is obviously true, there is a cost, and it's probably to the D. I'm saying I care less about that than I do giving Mahomes weapons. It's not a criticism of the team's approach per se it's to the people who didn't think there could be any cost to using R2 picks and cobbling together middling FA WRs. It could all absolutely work but perhaps good D isn't what makes a Mahomes team lethal.
Let me ask you, all things being equal, the talent looks fairly evenly spread, what positions are you taking early in the draft now? Do you double dip at any position?
LT for one. Veach should be looking at whether he can retain some of our starters (Fenton, Thornhill, etc.) or if he has to go shopping. It doesn't matter if you have snazzy WRs if your QB doesn't have time to find them or your D gives up more points than you can put up. I'm old enough to remember DICK Vermin's time here in KC. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pasta Little Brother:
This isn't a rebuilding year. The expectation is another AFC championship appareance and possible superbowl. We had some of the highest odds to win it all offseason and still have scooters going "duurrrrr it a rebuild" Ralph wiggum style nose picking
Maybe we meet in the middle and call it a reloading year. A lot of bodies have walked, some talent. I expected the defense to struggle not the O, but i personally did not set the bar at super bowl or bust. [Reply]
Originally Posted by oldman:
LT for one. Veach should be looking at whether he can retain some of our starters (Fenton, Thornhill, etc.) or if he has to go shopping. It doesn't matter if you have snazzy WRs if your QB doesn't have time to find them or your D gives up more points than you can put up. I'm old enough to remember DICK Vermin's time here in KC.
Yep OT seems a fair bet. Give him more time and/or give him more options. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
The WR's on the roster aren't world beaters but they aren't straight ass, either. The protection issues are causing most of the problems.
Definitely reasonable for us to check in in a few weeks. I don't particularly like MVS or JJSS, I did like Moore in the draft. Could absolutely be the case it comes good and the protection is the main issue. We'll see. I'm still definitely drafting a couple of WRs next year. [Reply]
