Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43

Thread: What we should do before the beginning of the 2009 season?

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default What we should do before the beginning of the 2009 season?


    0 Not allowed!
    Well, it's post-draft. While we could all argue for the next few years whether the Chiefs draft was bad or good (and I thought it was great), I think everyone agree we have work still to do to present a competitive team on the field in 2009. Here are my suggestions:

    1. Trade our 2nd rounder to the Cards for Anquan Boldin.

    The Boldin/Haley spat last season has been massively overrported. Boldin has already said that he would play for Haley again. Trade our second rounder and immediately upgrade our WR spot. Bowe/Boldin/Bradley/Engram would be the best WR corps in the AFC West. And it would be fairly young. This seems like a no-brainer.

    BTW, I said our 2nd rounder, not the 2nd rounder for TG, because that it the pick I think Arizona would want.

    2. Sign Travis LaBoy to a two-year $3M contract.

    A no-brainer. He would be a cheap reserve at OLB (in the 3-4) and DE (in the 4-3). He's familiar with the 3-4. He averages 13 games a season, which isn't great, but he isn't as fragile as people think either.

    3. Sign Larry Foote to a two-year $8M contract.

    Another no-brainer. He would be starting for us from Game 1 at ILB. Foote is a fantastic ILB who's started for two SB Pittsburgh teams. He hasn't missed a game since his rookie year.

    This would give us a LB corps of DJ/Foote/Thomas/Vrabel. Beisel and Laboy would be our main reserves. Hali would be our project at the position. Our LB corps, which was so putrid in 2008, would actually be the strength of the defense.

    4. Sign Mark Tauscher or Levi Jones to a one-year contract

    Both are coming off injuries. Both are also better than any player we currently have at RT. A one-year contract will be insurance if they get injured again. It will also give the Chiefs time to bring Richardson and/or Brown along.

    5. Entertain trade offers for Thigpen and Hali

    I like Thigpen. I don't think any player in the NFL could have done much better than he did last season given our OL. He is a good backup. But as we get closer to the beginning of the season, teams like Seattle, Carolina, Tennesse, and Jacksonville with old starting QBs, no legitimate backups, and playoff aspirations might look at Thigpen as an excellent insurance policy. If we get offered a 3rd rounder or above, it might be in our best interest to take it.

    As for Hali, he no longer fits our defense. He's a project to be a 3-4 OLB, and he won't even start at DE if we're in a 4-3. If we can get any value for him, let's do so.

    6. Get our picks signed and in camp on time

    I don't think anyone disagrees.

    7. Don't trade LJ or Dorsey

    Not only for the cap hit, but because their changed circumstances (LJ's no longer guarenteed and Dorsey's moving to DE) gives them more value than we'd ever get back in a trade.

    8. Sign Cassel to a long term contract.

    Just do it. Having your potential QBOTF spend a whole year auditioning is only going to lead to holdouts and hurt feelings. We don't need a Cutler situation here.

    9. Don't sign Jason Taylor.

    Not because he's too old, but because I don't see him having a great place in our defense, and because he doesn't play well in the cold.

    Well, those are nine things I think could help the Chiefs in 2009 and beyond. The signings I listed (LaBoy, Foote, and a RT) would total about $9M, Boldin would be about $9M, so we would still have tons of cap room to sign our rookies, even before signing Cassel long term.

    Feel free to agree/disagree, or to add your own.

  2. #31
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,148
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 31
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    Really? Over Cottam?

    It's funny. Where's the outcry for OL NOT taken in this draft? Not hypocritical AT ALL. Was there just not a starting OL to be had with the 3rd pick in the third round this year?

    I guess Magee was better than Caldwell, Urbik, Brewster, Vasquez?

    ...or, since we needed a TE so bad, was it not worth trading up to take Coffman?

    Literally, Jackson, Dorsey, Edwards, T.J. Jackson, and Turk McBride were already here before the Magee pick. Did we REALLY need more depth at that spot? Is he REALLY going to be THAT big of a difference maker that you pass on any of the 4 or 5 I listed above?

    Guess I just need to re-evaluate what the word "need" means. If a player leaves the team with ABSOLUTELY NOBODY behind him, that to me constitutes as a "need." Taking a player who will "provide competition" at the DE spot where there are already at least 5 guys competing, (including 2 top 5 picks and a 2nd rd pick) just doesn't seem like a "need" to me.

    But hey. Maybe that's just me.
    The sentiment is still there. The cry is slightly contained by the fact that we did get Mike Goff as a FA.

    But I am extremely disappointed that we passed on Eugene Monroe for a reach.

    Even more disappointed that we took another DE with our second pick, and waited until thew fifth round to get an O-lineman.

    But, with the addition of Goff, the pain is a little less than it would have been.

    Now, if you read around some, I think you'll see that I am far from thrilled about this draft too.

    But the rest of the off-season makes it far better than what I have been seeing in the past few seasons.

  3. #32
    Member Since
    Jun 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,768
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 183
    Given: 51

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by DT14PRIEST View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Turk not being groomed as a 34 DE this year, TJ Jackson a small DT and Ron Edwards a projected NT along with Tank?

    So by my count we'd only have 1 'true' 34 end in Tyson Jackson and 1 'question' mark end in Dorsey. Still need some depth and Magee went at the pre draft round projected (top of the 3rd).
    Didn't I say Turk would be a 3-4 DE? Maybe i have Boone and Edwards switched in my mind, but either way, that's still at least 4. Jackson is 6'0, 304. If Jackson is a small DT, why in the hell was Dorsey so highly thought of at 5'11, 295? If Dorsey is being considered, so is the bigger T.J. Jackson.

    MaGee is in the same boat as Dorsey. He's great inside, but after being moved to DE against COLLEGE LEVEL talent, he was able to net a whopping 28 tkls, only 6 of which were for a loss to go with 3.5 sacks. Granted, we're not necessarily looking for a sack leader at that spot, but SOME penetration would've been nice against college level talent.
    Last edited by texaschief; 05-01-2009 at 04:15 AM.

  4. #33
    Member Since
    Jun 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,768
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 183
    Given: 51

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    The sentiment is still there. The cry is slightly contained by the fact that we did get Mike Goff as a FA.

    But I am extremely disappointed that we passed on Eugene Monroe for a reach.

    Even more disappointed that we took another DE with our second pick, and waited until thew fifth round to get an O-lineman.

    But, with the addition of Goff, the pain is a little less than it would have been.

    Now, if you read around some, I think you'll see that I am far from thrilled about this draft too.

    But the rest of the off-season makes it far better than what I have been seeing in the past few seasons.
    I agree. It's nice to see some free agents coming in this season. If Goff can stay healthy at 33 yo, the line SHOULD be upgraded at the OG spot for sure.

    That doesn't nullify the fact that TE was a need last year and Cottam is as good of a TE as we could've wanted that late. It's not like we're talking about the Cowboys spending a 2nd round pick on a "depth" guy with Bennett. We NEEDED that TE just to complete the double TE sets the Chiefs loved to run.

  5. #34
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    I agree. It's nice to see some free agents coming in this season. If Goff can stay healthy at 33 yo, the line SHOULD be upgraded at the OG spot for sure.

    That doesn't nullify the fact that TE was a need last year and Cottam is as good of a TE as we could've wanted that late. It's not like we're talking about the Cowboys spending a 2nd round pick on a "depth" guy with Bennett. We NEEDED that TE just to complete the double TE sets the Chiefs loved to run.
    1. I've never posted anything but disappointment that we didn't draft OG/OT in the later rounds. Spending the 4th on Washington instead of Herman Johnson or Duke Robinson was crazy.

    2. Cottam has every measurable off the field. He has not impressed me on the field. At all. Any one of the folks chief31 mentioned would have been the better pick. A 2TE is a very nice thing to have. But folks like a RT are more important. Much more important.

    Cottam (except for the Jets game) was a non-factor for most of last year, both as a blocker and as a pass-catcher. Could he be more involved this year? Sure. But I'll believe it when I see it.

    3. We didn't draft Jackson and Magee to be pass rushers. We dedicated this draft to getting some legitimate big men on the DL so that we could stop the run. We've finished 32nd and 30th the last couple years against the run. We're never going win anything until we fix that particular sieve. Herm Edwards decimated our DL with bad picks and bad FA. Pioli is fixing it the best he can.

  6. #35
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    As for Cassel, no way. Wait until you get a peak.

    Teams that attempt to sign a high draft pick QB for one season never get that done. It doesn't happen.

    We have the luxury of already having this one signed for one season. They can't get that luxury.

    We have the luxury of having Cassel feeling very good about his GM making the deal to bring him along to a new team. That already shows alot of loyalty to the player.

    Then we have the luxury of Cassel knowing that he must play well, or be nothing to the entire league, with the end of his contract coming up.

    All of those luxuries are ours, rather he can play here, or not.

    If we give him the money now, then all of those luxuries are diminished.

    And we have to consider the huge risk that will be added if he can't play.

    If he can't play, then we have thrown away the luxury of signing him as a back-up, or being rid of a bad player.

    If he can play here, then we will know what we are paying for, instead of guessing.

    If he has a big year for us, then he will re-sign. Pioli showed faith in him by trading more for him than anyone else offered. And he will be happy to stay with the team that already took a chance on him.

    This isn't "playing around" with him. It's giving him an opportunity.

    Take a look at what he looks like during camp and pre-season, at the very least, before committing to him as the QBOTF.

    If it's me, I set a date right after the fourth game of the season to make an offer, unless he does extremely well.
    I think what you're writing is true from a theoretical perspective. I just don't think it takes into account the realities of the game.

    It would be ideal to pay each player year to year, with nothing guarenteed except to those players deemed elite. And once we become a powerhouse franchise again, we'll have that luxury. But I don't think we do right now.

    If Cassel comes out in training camp and tears his ACL and is done playing, then it was a good idea not to sign him long term. Or if he tosses 30 INTs and is benched for Thigpen, then it was a bad idea.

    If Cassel comes out and throws for 4,000 yards and goes to the Pro Bowl, then he'll be easy to resign to a long-term deal as an elite QB.

    If the most likely thing happens, and it is between those two poles, then what have we gained? If Cassel throws for 3,000 yards, 25 TDs, 15 INTs and 60% accuracy, what do you do? You don't want to let him go. You'd still be afraid to pay him like an elite QB. You don't want to pay him $15M in 2010 through a franchise tag. And you've angered your QBOTF by refusing to commit to him long term.

    I just don't see how, barring Cassel's either complete collapse or success (neither of which are likely), this works out well.

  7. #36
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    2,205
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    I think what you're writing is true from a theoretical perspective. I just don't think it takes into account the realities of the game.

    It would be ideal to pay each player year to year, with nothing guarenteed except to those players deemed elite. And once we become a powerhouse franchise again, we'll have that luxury. But I don't think we do right now.

    If Cassel comes out in training camp and tears his ACL and is done playing, then it was a good idea not to sign him long term. Or if he tosses 30 INTs and is benched for Thigpen, then it was a bad idea.

    If Cassel comes out and throws for 4,000 yards and goes to the Pro Bowl, then he'll be easy to resign to a long-term deal as an elite QB.

    If the most likely thing happens, and it is between those two poles, then what have we gained? If Cassel throws for 3,000 yards, 25 TDs, 15 INTs and 60% accuracy, what do you do? You don't want to let him go. You'd still be afraid to pay him like an elite QB. You don't want to pay him $15M in 2010 through a franchise tag. And you've angered your QBOTF by refusing to commit to him long term.

    I just don't see how, barring Cassel's either complete collapse or success (neither of which are likely), this works out well.
    If he throws 25 TDs 15 INTs and 60% on a new team in a new system, I'd unload the boat on him in an instant... but I know what you're saying.

    I don't think anyone wants to reach the end of the season before we make a decision and/or negotiate a new deal. chief31 says 4 games into the season. I said 6-7. Either way, I just want to see him on a football field against competition in a Chiefs jersey before we commit long term.

    I don't see why he would be so upset about that. It's basically just "try before you buy". Cassel should understand that he needs to prove himself outside of New England. There's also 14 million reasons why he would probably be OK with not negotiating a new contract immediately.

  8. #37
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,148
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 31
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    I think what you're writing is true from a theoretical perspective. I just don't think it takes into account the realities of the game.

    It would be ideal to pay each player year to year, with nothing guarenteed except to those players deemed elite. And once we become a powerhouse franchise again, we'll have that luxury. But I don't think we do right now.

    If Cassel comes out in training camp and tears his ACL and is done playing, then it was a good idea not to sign him long term. Or if he tosses 30 INTs and is benched for Thigpen, then it was a bad idea.

    If Cassel comes out and throws for 4,000 yards and goes to the Pro Bowl, then he'll be easy to resign to a long-term deal as an elite QB.

    If the most likely thing happens, and it is between those two poles, then what have we gained? If Cassel throws for 3,000 yards, 25 TDs, 15 INTs and 60% accuracy, what do you do? You don't want to let him go. You'd still be afraid to pay him like an elite QB. You don't want to pay him $15M in 2010 through a franchise tag. And you've angered your QBOTF by refusing to commit to him long term.

    I just don't see how, barring Cassel's either complete collapse or success (neither of which are likely), this works out well.
    Back up the truck if he can do that this season.

    But, aside from any numbers that come up, Just get an idea of rather or not he is even capable of handling an offense that doesn't include the Pats' O-line and WR corps.

    With four preseason games and four regular season games, you at least get a look at what he is/can be.

    If, at that point, he is looking very average, then that's what kind of contract you offer him.

    If he is looking like he can really do it, then offer a better contract.

    If he looks like there is no way he is going to be able to handle it, then offer backup pay, or nothing at all.

    Take a look at him, so you know what to offer him. Don't pay him based on what he did in one season with the best offense around.

    I felt the same way about LJ. We had seen him play the previous two seasons with Shields, one of which was with Roaf and T-Rich.

    Paying him as if he were going to be able to do that without those guys was a bad idea.

  9. #38
    Member Since
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Kansas city, MO
    Posts
    2,242
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Personally I think we should get Jared Allen back to play the attack LB. Damn that would be assume, he might end up with 20 sacks.

  10. #39
    Member Since
    Feb 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    104
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    People miss that turk was quoted saying "if it comes down to it, I will play LB" at the first non manditory mini camp.

    Cottam as the reserve/3rd TE? cmon, his issue is not TALENT, its staying healthy, if he had been healthy in college, he has first round athletic ability, just was made of glass as a Vol.

    To me, this team is further along than people give them credit for, I also like the signings of Beisel/Copper in their respective positions.

    If Boldin keeps playing it the way he is, maybe a 2nd and 5th can get it done....and if you added Boldin, Cassel and this offense is at least a mid pack offense, and the D is a mid pack defense.

    It bothers me that people overlook how many turnovers were forced by the defense last year even with the low amount of sacks and pressures.

    Also, ill say it only one time, Lawrence Jackson is not a reach, plain and simple, I liked Curry, but drafting him third overall to play LB, is nuts, when a guy like Jackson is there to anchor at DE, he and Magee make the 3/4 switch possible, otherwise you are relying on Dorsey and Boone. Tank is the NT, get over it.

    Also, jackson had 18 sacks in Three years, 8 coming as a DT inside, Pioli is not kidding about potentially in the 4-3, using Jackson inside next to tank for matchup problems, Jackson has that kind of versatility.

    Magee stepped in when his team needed him to move to DE, and he did this unselfishly in his senior year, sure he needs lower body strength, but hes the 2nd best 5 tech in the draft...those who said you build from inside to out, are right....Pioli is just at an advantage, adding these lineman to Dorsey, teaming Jackson with dorsey, mcgee with pollard, and Flowers/Carr continuing their ball hawk ways...this is a much better d than advertised.

    This is also a MUCH MUCH better special teams unit.
    Last edited by SDChief09; 05-02-2009 at 04:19 PM.

  11. #40
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by SDChief09 View Post
    People miss that turk was quoted saying "if it comes down to it, I will play LB" at the first non manditory mini camp.

    Cottam as the reserve/3rd TE? cmon, his issue is not TALENT, its staying healthy, if he had been healthy in college, he has first round athletic ability, just was made of glass as a Vol.

    To me, this team is further along than people give them credit for, I also like the signings of Beisel/Copper in their respective positions.

    If Boldin keeps playing it the way he is, maybe a 2nd and 5th can get it done....and if you added Boldin, Cassel and this offense is at least a mid pack offense, and the D is a mid pack defense.

    It bothers me that people overlook how many turnovers were forced by the defense last year even with the low amount of sacks and pressures.

    Also, ill say it only one time, Lawrence Jackson is not a reach, plain and simple, I liked Curry, but drafting him third overall to play LB, is nuts, when a guy like Jackson is there to anchor at DE, he and Magee make the 3/4 switch possible, otherwise you are relying on Dorsey and Boone. Tank is the NT, get over it.

    Also, jackson had 18 sacks in Three years, 8 coming as a DT inside, Pioli is not kidding about potentially in the 4-3, using Jackson inside next to tank for matchup problems, Jackson has that kind of versatility.

    Magee stepped in when his team needed him to move to DE, and he did this unselfishly in his senior year, sure he needs lower body strength, but hes the 2nd best 5 tech in the draft...those who said you build from inside to out, are right....Pioli is just at an advantage, adding these lineman to Dorsey, teaming Jackson with dorsey, mcgee with pollard, and Flowers/Carr continuing their ball hawk ways...this is a much better d than advertised.

    This is also a MUCH MUCH better special teams unit.
    If Brodie Croyle was able to stay healthy, he'd have been our QBOTF. I'd love to be wrong about Cottam, but I'll believe it when I see it. I think Herm drafted a bunch of fragile guys with great measurables - i.e. the greatest flag football team in the history of the league. But I'm wary of how they perform when actually getting hit.

    I get why people wanted Curry, but I agree that Jackson is the immensely better pick. Teams that don't stop the run (except the inexplicable 2006 Colts team) don't do very well, especially in the playoffs. Curry couldn't do anything on this team with the DL being pushed five yards back every play, the way they have for the past couple years.

    We're a better team than we were in 2008. But that isn't saying a lot. If we get 6 or more wins, this season should be considered a success.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2008 v. 2009
    By jmlamerson in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 04-27-2009, 07:15 PM
  2. Ncaa 2009
    By bigpoppachief in forum The Locker Room
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-21-2008, 03:03 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •