Page 9 of 27

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sun February 07, 2021 9:26 pm
by epilogue
96583UP wrote:KC is super dynamic but just so good it’s almost boring to watch

kinda like the 90s Bulls - you get sick of them constantly winning
Does

Not

Compute

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Wed February 10, 2021 7:02 pm
by epilogue
First Tampa Bay murders the Chiefs' offense. Then Marty Schottenheimer passed. Now Terez Paylor...

Fuck...

Rough few days for KC fans.

RIP :peace:

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Wed February 10, 2021 7:48 pm
by epilogue
Good content right here.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Thu March 11, 2021 4:46 pm
by epilogue
KC releases both Swartz and Fisher.

We have no starting tackles. Which, as we saw in the Super Bowl, is exactly how you win championships.

Awesome.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Thu March 11, 2021 11:43 pm
by lennytheweedwhacker
7-9

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Thu March 11, 2021 11:49 pm
by E.H. Ruddock
Image

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 12:51 am
by 96583UP
haha saw this thread and just knew that was coming

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 3:22 am
by elliseamos
This seems to be playing out exactly like Seattle where they won one year, lost the next year to Brady, then figured their qb would be fine with no online for the next 7 seasons until said qb demanded a trade.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 2:06 pm
by epilogue
elliseamos wrote:This seems to be playing out exactly like Seattle where they won one year, lost the next year to Brady, then figured their qb would be fine with no online for the next 7 seasons until said qb demanded a trade.
:lol:

I think this one plays out just a little differently. But I guess time will tell.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 8:21 pm
by elliseamos
epilogue wrote:
elliseamos wrote:This seems to be playing out exactly like Seattle where they won one year, lost the next year to Brady, then figured their qb would be fine with no online for the next 7 seasons until said qb demanded a trade.
:lol:

I think this one plays out just a little differently. But I guess time will tell.
Which one of Hill or Kelce will play the role of Beast Mode?

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 8:42 pm
by epilogue
elliseamos wrote:
epilogue wrote:
elliseamos wrote:This seems to be playing out exactly like Seattle where they won one year, lost the next year to Brady, then figured their qb would be fine with no online for the next 7 seasons until said qb demanded a trade.
:lol:

I think this one plays out just a little differently. But I guess time will tell.
Which one of Hill or Kelce will play the role of Beast Mode?
Ha!

Have to be Kelce.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 8:47 pm
by epilogue
Veach always has a plan.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Fri March 12, 2021 11:28 pm
by E.H. Ruddock
He’s just copying Brady.

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 12:16 am
by 96583UP
<checks if payton manning engaged in similar restructure first>

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 3:13 am
by E.H. Ruddock
<checks how many rings Peyton Manning has >

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 3:16 am
by Bammer
Does this impact the anount of money he is being paid? I don’t understand. Why wouldn’t everyone do this every chance they get?

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 3:27 am
by 96583UP
i think it has more to do with whether the club is willing to do it - i.e. pay the guy in a lump sum up front

cash flow

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 3:34 am
by Bammer
96583UP wrote:i think it has more to do with whether the club is willing to do it - i.e. pay the guy in a lump sum up front

cash flow
Ok yeah I think that makes sense. Risk paying now, non-refundable, guy gets hurt or whatever and keeps the money.

Why would the player ever resist doing this?

Why do they make it sound like the player is helping the team by doing this?

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 3:43 am
by 96583UP
Bammer wrote:
96583UP wrote:i think it has more to do with whether the club is willing to do it - i.e. pay the guy in a lump sum up front

cash flow
Ok yeah I think that makes sense. Risk paying now, non-refundable, guy gets hurt or whatever and keeps the money.

Why would the player ever resist doing this?

Why do they make it sound like the player is helping the team by doing this?
i don't know why a player would resist - maybe bc their agent gets a cut so it's a net loss after transaction fees

they are helping the team bc it allows them to manage the salary cap better

to hire more players to get injured right before the superbowl so pat mahomes can play with an injured toe behind britt reid at LT

Re: Kansas City Chiefs

Posted: Sat March 13, 2021 3:45 am
by Bammer
96583UP wrote:
Bammer wrote:
96583UP wrote:i think it has more to do with whether the club is willing to do it - i.e. pay the guy in a lump sum up front

cash flow
Ok yeah I think that makes sense. Risk paying now, non-refundable, guy gets hurt or whatever and keeps the money.

Why would the player ever resist doing this?

Why do they make it sound like the player is helping the team by doing this?
i don't know why a player would resist - maybe bc their agent gets a cut so it's a net loss after transaction fees

they are helping the team bc it allows them to manage the salary cap better

to hire more players to get injured right before the superbowl so pat mahomes can play with an injured toe behind britt reid at LT
I mean, they praise the player for doing it. Like he’s a martyr or something.

Sounds like a slam dunk for the player and absolutely no reason ever not to do it. Fuck the fkn agent.