PDA

View Full Version : The Plan (as I see it)...


Chris Meck
05-01-2007, 02:22 PM
Rather than post this one several different places, I thought I'd just put it all here.

I think that the deterioration of the offensive line is pretty obviously what completely killed us last year. Starting with the retirement of Roaf.

And let's be honest: We will NOT be able to replace Willie Roaf. There are no other OT's that I've ever seen that could get outside and lead into the second level like Big Willie. The 2002-2005 Chiefs offense did what it did largely because of the absurd ability of our big guys up front to really move. The retirement of Shields leaves only Wiegmann in the mold of our really quick, dominant O-line guys. Waters is more of a mauler type, and fits the power running game well.

Trading up for anyone in this draft wouldn't have replaced Roaf. I believe that Welbourne was brought in a couple of years ago because Shields was year-to-year. MacIntosh was brought in this off-season because Black wasn't acceptable.(frankly, because he's out of position in the NFL. As a guard, he'd probably be fine.)

This leads me to the plan: It would seem to me that the plan this offseason was to upgrade key positions (and by key, I mean obvious deficient positions)in the first round of FA so that in the draft we could concentrate on taking the BPA. No reaches.

Sure we have questions on the offensive line. That happens when you lose two hall of famers in 12 months. We also had serious problems in our WR corps (dropped passes were just as much an issue as poor O-line play in the play-off loss). Kennison, our one serviceable pro, is 34. This was a good draft for WR's by everone's account. We got one, and we got a big, physical, tough one. Who is NOT slow, dummies. 4.4-4.5 is still plenty fast, especially when you're 220 lbs. because the pad/helmet weight is less drag on a more powerful body. We're getting younger here, and better.

Our front 7 should be vastly improved defensively. I trust Herm to spot defensive talent. We should be much better at pressuring the QB, collapsing the pocket, and covering middle and seam routes with Harris and Edwards over Mitchell and Bell.

We couldn't fix everything this offseason, so we 'finished' the front 7 build. You need to be dominant somewhere, and it appears that KC has decided the front four (and LB corps as well) is job #1.

We plugged holes on the o-line with MacIntosh and hopefully Terry. Welbourne should be serviceable at G. Still not what we'd like to have, but we should be better than last year.

We got a potential #1 WR. We improved our kicking game. What the hell do people want in one offseason?

We've gotten dramatically younger at every level. Our front four should finally be dominant. Our LB corps is now ideally suited for a cover 2 defense. Out with the older safeties, in with the younger, fast, meaner Pollard/Page.

Croyle (I really think the job is his to lose with the AFCW being the division of young QB's) still has Gonzales and has been given a new WR to play with. The line should be somewhat better.

What helps a young QB most? Certainly a great offensive line. However, that just wasn't likely to happen this offseason. a great TE? you bet that helps. A good WR? undoubtedly. A great runner? For sure.

How about a potentially top 5 defense?


Chris

pikesome
05-01-2007, 02:27 PM
I like everything your putting down. Whole-heartily agree.

keg in kc
05-01-2007, 02:29 PM
Top-5 may be a stretch, but hopefully top-10 is in reach.

If the offense is still in the mid-range (@top 15) it won't be nearly as bad a year as people think.

siberian khatru
05-01-2007, 02:29 PM
I don't know if it will all pan out, but I approve of the direction and philosophy.

Braincase
05-01-2007, 02:30 PM
There will always be some serviceable linemen released after June 1. That will be interesting to watch.

Chris Meck
05-01-2007, 02:43 PM
I think top 5 IS in reach. Look-

Page played well and was nearly a starter as a rookie. Conventional wisdom would be that he is an ascending player and that we could expect him to play better and more consistently than last year.

Wesley was the most frustrating player on the team. Constantly out of position. Pollard didn't play much straight defense, but is a big hitter and made some serious plays on ST. If he's even a LITTLE more disciplined than Wesley, that would be a huge improvement.

Bell is a horrible fit for a cover 2 linebacker. Donnie Edwards is very nearly the prototype. Bell couldn't cover anybody, Edwards is among the very best coverage backers in the NFL. Intangibles too. You can still use Bell in short yardage situations and as a situational pass rusher-the two areas of Edwards' game that are not his strengths.

Harris is much more in the mold of a cover 2 MLB; he's quicker, better in coverage, and is still young. Mitchell will probably do well as a downhill guy, but just wasn't quick enough in coverage. Harris is.

Sims...well, he's gone, isn't he. Tank and Turk are both physical, aggressive, high motor guys. Everything Sims never was. Turk can play inside or outside, so he can cover some for Allen while he's suspended. When we get Allen back, the rotation inside should be excellent. We should be better against the run (better overall talent inside, deeper rotation) and better against the pass (better coverage skills from the LB's, more talented front 4 with a deeper rotation, ascending players at S rather than descending). I really feel that poor coverage skills in our LB corps was perhaps 2nd only to poor interior pass rush last year in our defensive deficiencies.

Seems we've addressed both.

58-4ever
05-01-2007, 02:51 PM
With Tank, Turk, Edwards, Reed, Wilkerson, Hali, and Allen, we should have the bodies to be fresh throughout the game. It is one of the deepest lines in the league. Not to mention that our defense looks young and exciting.

patteeu
05-01-2007, 02:54 PM
Sounds like a good plan (and a reasonable stab at what the real plan is). I hope it comes together as designed. I think they still need to find some kind of CB for nickle duties and in case of injury, but our starting defensive lineup sure looks improved to me.

Calcountry
05-01-2007, 02:58 PM
Rather than post this one several different places, I thought I'd just put it all here.

I think that the deterioration of the offensive line is pretty obviously what completely killed us last year. Starting with the retirement of Roaf.

And let's be honest: We will NOT be able to replace Willie Roaf. There are no other OT's that I've ever seen that could get outside and lead into the second level like Big Willie. The 2002-2005 Chiefs offense did what it did largely because of the absurd ability of our big guys up front to really move. The retirement of Shields leaves only Wiegmann in the mold of our really quick, dominant O-line guys. Waters is more of a mauler type, and fits the power running game well.

Trading up for anyone in this draft wouldn't have replaced Roaf. I believe that Welbourne was brought in a couple of years ago because Shields was year-to-year. MacIntosh was brought in this off-season because Black wasn't acceptable.(frankly, because he's out of position in the NFL. As a guard, he'd probably be fine.)

This leads me to the plan: It would seem to me that the plan this offseason was to upgrade key positions (and by key, I mean obvious deficient positions)in the first round of FA so that in the draft we could concentrate on taking the BPA. No reaches.

Sure we have questions on the offensive line. That happens when you lose two hall of famers in 12 months. We also had serious problems in our WR corps (dropped passes were just as much an issue as poor O-line play in the play-off loss). Kennison, our one serviceable pro, is 34. This was a good draft for WR's by everone's account. We got one, and we got a big, physical, tough one. Who is NOT slow, dummies. 4.4-4.5 is still plenty fast, especially when you're 220 lbs. because the pad/helmet weight is less drag on a more powerful body. We're getting younger here, and better.

Our front 7 should be vastly improved defensively. I trust Herm to spot defensive talent. We should be much better at pressuring the QB, collapsing the pocket, and covering middle and seam routes with Harris and Edwards over Mitchell and Bell.

We couldn't fix everything this offseason, so we 'finished' the front 7 build. You need to be dominant somewhere, and it appears that KC has decided the front four (and LB corps as well) is job #1.

We plugged holes on the o-line with MacIntosh and hopefully Terry. Welbourne should be serviceable at G. Still not what we'd like to have, but we should be better than last year.

We got a potential #1 WR. We improved our kicking game. What the hell do people want in one offseason?

We've gotten dramatically younger at every level. Our front four should finally be dominant. Our LB corps is now ideally suited for a cover 2 defense. Out with the older safeties, in with the younger, fast, meaner Pollard/Page.

Croyle (I really think the job is his to lose with the AFCW being the division of young QB's) still has Gonzales and has been given a new WR to play with. The line should be somewhat better.

What helps a young QB most? Certainly a great offensive line. However, that just wasn't likely to happen this offseason. a great TE? you bet that helps. A good WR? undoubtedly. A great runner? For sure.

How about a potentially top 5 defense?


ChrisThe most important thing of all is, we got Tony G back!!11

We can build the whole team arround him, our franchise player.

Carl spared no expense making sure he is back in the Red and Gold!!11 Whoopee! I am so stoked for this year.

CoMoChief
05-01-2007, 02:59 PM
anyone have a list of OL players that could be around for FA?

Pitt Gorilla
05-01-2007, 03:01 PM
I think our O takes a step back into the 20's. The defense should remain in the top 15, if we can pressure the QB. So far, the off-season has been fine.

htismaqe
05-01-2007, 03:11 PM
I think our O takes a step back into the 20's.

Why?

Is Herm going to get more conservative?

Is McIntosh going to be worse than Black?

I honestly don't see any way either of those 2 are possible.

kc rush
05-01-2007, 03:18 PM
With Tank, Turk, Edwards, Reed, Wilkerson, Hali, and Allen, we should have the bodies to be fresh throughout the game. It is one of the deepest lines in the league. Not to mention that our defense looks young and exciting.

Don't forget Boone. That is a pretty nice rotation.

kc rush
05-01-2007, 03:21 PM
We plugged holes on the o-line with MacIntosh and hopefully Terry. Welbourne should be serviceable at G. Still not what we'd like to have, but we should be better than last year.


I wouldn't count on Terry being on the team.

I do hope it is an open competition for RT. I'd love to see if Svitek can take the job.

recxjake
05-01-2007, 03:24 PM
This team is heading in the right direction...

To me it all depends on how the following players end up...

Croyle
Parker
Bowe
O-Line
FB


The Defense should be awesome...

htismaqe
05-01-2007, 03:25 PM
I wouldn't count on Terry being on the team.

I do hope it is an open competition for RT. I'd love to see if Svitek can take the job.

I agree. I think Terry could be done. He's already been suspended before.

I know alot of us, myself included, were disappointed that Svitek was too gassed from NFLE to play last year, but it looks like a brilliant move now...

Eric
05-01-2007, 03:26 PM
We signed Ramero,the big Mexican.

Chris Meck
05-01-2007, 03:27 PM
I don't think the offense NEEDS to drop further; in fact, I don't think it will, even if the job is Croyle's.

Look, we had an awful lot of adversity last season. That had a LOT to do with how far we fell. Roaf retiring after saying he was going to play was the start, Trent getting decapitated really hurt for awhile.

And frankly, trying to run the offense like Roaf was still there and Shields was still on top of his game was a big mistake. We were still trying to do a lot of the perimeter stuff without the horses to do so for a lot of the season.

and the WR play was lousy too.

The thing to do with this offense at this point is to run a lot of play-action to loosen up the front seven and help your o-line in pass blocking. It's gonna help Croyle with his reads, too. It's gonna help Bowe, it's gonna help Kennison, and it's really gonna help Gonzales. you have to play to the strengths of the talent you've got, and a power running/play-action based offense is what you've got the people to run. We've done very little play-action the last few years because we had other strengths.

If I can see that, I imagine Solari can see it too. You can't do much about changing an offensive culture once the season is underway, but you can do it in the offseason.

The nice thing is that you can do a LOT of two TE one back stuff with TG/Dunn/Wilson that can really cause coverage problems for a defense off play-action, and if need be help out your OT's as well.

Chris

Pitt Gorilla
05-01-2007, 03:29 PM
Why?

Is Herm going to get more conservative?

Is McIntosh going to be worse than Black?

I honestly don't see any way either of those 2 are possible.I was anticipating a new QB (maybe), new o-linemen, and at least one new starting WR. Hopefully, LJ doesn't hold out, or that could be worse.

htismaqe
05-01-2007, 03:31 PM
I was anticipating a new QB (maybe), new o-linemen, and at least one new starting WR. Hopefully, LJ doesn't hold out, or that could be worse.

OK, just wanting to understand the thought process.

Pitt Gorilla
05-01-2007, 03:34 PM
OK, just wanting to understand the thought process.I would LOVE to be wrong. If either Croyle or Huard comes out and picks defenses apart, while Svitek and McIntosh lock down the ends of the line, and LJ puts up his numbers, I'll be thrilled.

htismaqe
05-01-2007, 03:39 PM
I would LOVE to be wrong. If either Croyle or Huard comes out and picks defenses apart, while Svitek and McIntosh lock down the ends of the line, and LJ puts up his numbers, I'll be thrilled.

Croyle is the real wildcard, IMO.

I think the rest of it hinged on Jordan Black. He sucked so bad that the other linemen had to adjust to cover for him. In turn, that made them worse because they were stretched too thin. As the line play went downhill, so did the playcalling, because Herm and Solari got scared.

cdcox
05-01-2007, 04:24 PM
I think our defense is on the right track, but there are still more questions that answers. Many of the questions may have good answers, but some will have bad answers.

Front four (one long term starter identified with decent depth):

Hali: most certain. He played well in his rookie year, he's young and will be around for a while.

Allen: What was rock solid is now out for 1/4 of the season and a giant question mark beyond this season. We could very well need to replace this player next season.

Boone - Proven NFL ability above the next batch because he may have starter talent.

Reed, Edwards, Wilkerson these are proven rotational guys. Not guys you want starting. They are who they are, not much up side.

Tank and Turk: completely unknow. Could be in the mold of Freeman, Downing, Sims et al or could be solid starters. Completely unknown.

Linebackers (one very solid starter, a couple of acceptable guys and some acceptable depth):

Johnson: Young solid starter. Still has room to ascend, but will he?

Nap Harris: Relatively young, solid but not spectacular MLB. Some injury concerns. An upgrade to a real stud is probably needed for this defense to crack top 5.

Donnie Edwards: One or two year stop gap. Not a long term solution. Never was a great tackler. Speed his biggest asset. If age casues him to lose a step, he will show a huge decline in productivity.

Key Fox: When he subbed for Johnson last season had one good game agains the Donks. A big liability during the other games he was in. Adequate back-up.

Bell: probably shouldn't make the team; instead, it would be better to give a younger, ascending player his spot. Adequate situational backup.

Other guys just fill a spot.

Corners (two solid if aging starters, then nothing to speak of):

Law: Still a good player if he can keep his feet, but aging. Need a replacement soon.

Surtain: Good for now, but need a replacement soon.

Sapp: Oh, look Sapp is on the field! I bet it's going to be a corner blitz!

Maxey: Can he emerge as a legitimate nickle corner in his second year? I sure hope so, but he's a complete unkonwn.

Anyone else worth mentioning?

Safeties (One guy no one likes, then questions):

Wesley: Still our best [b] proven[\b] safety. Inconsistent. If Page and Pollard can push him to a backup status, I'll feel much better.

Page: Played well as a rookie, especially considering he was a 7th round draft pick. But he's not there yet. Pressure increases in year 2 as teams start game planning to exploit him. A bright spot, but not a confirmed long-term solution, yet.

Pollard: Proved he was a great athelete in special teams duty last year. Still a loooonnng way from being a proven NFL starter.

Anyone else worth mentioning?


In summary, there are only two players that we are relatively certain will be starting after this season (barring injury): Hali and Johnson. I don't consider the front seven to be anywhere near done. If everyone pans out perfectly and Allen re-signs with us, the front 4 would look pretty good. Age at corner and proven ability at safety are both concerns. Depth in the secondary is scary thin. We are moving in the right direction. We could improve this year only to see regression in the following year due to questions surrounding Allen, Edwards, Law and Surtain.

We have a long road to a top 5 defense (I'm looking toward '09). Let's not get too amped, just yet.

cdcox
05-01-2007, 04:33 PM
Croyle is the real wildcard, IMO.

I think the rest of it hinged on Jordan Black. He sucked so bad that the other linemen had to adjust to cover for him. In turn, that made them worse because they were stretched too thin. As the line play went downhill, so did the playcalling, because Herm and Solari got scared.

On offense, things could be worse due to QB play as you mention.

If the OL plays better than expected, if Croyle playes better than 90% of rookies, and if Bowe contributes in his first year, we could be somewhat better.

I think the probability of the first is greater than the probability of the second, realistically. I'm okay with that because we are trying to add young players to the roster that will make us better. With the QB position you might have to try 3 or 4 people before you find a long term solution.

Chris Meck
05-01-2007, 06:34 PM
Well, I think that accessment of the defense is a bit on the 'glass half empty' side than it is neccessarily realistic.

Mine is perhaps more optimistic than realistic. Somewhere in between is probably right, but I think Boone makes a difference for sure (better than Sims without a doubt). Tyler was a potential 1st round talent that fell due to 'character issues' and given Herm's last draft I tend to think the ability to judge talent will win out. McBride helps at DE while Allen is suspended and would appear to be a good undertackle type player.

That's all going to help Hali, and Allen too, when he gets back.

Edwards biggest asset is his speed, that's true. At this point it's also know-how, as he's a pretty damned smart player who's seen about everything you could throw at him. I'd call that a BIG upgrade over Bell in that he's actually ABLE to cover. You can still use Bell in short yardage and as a situational rush backer, which is really all he ever excelled at. He was brought here with a different defense in mind. I think Harris is a pretty solid player and should thrive in this scheme. it suits his abilities well.

You're right about the corner situation, of course, and at least on Pollard in the safety department. I like what I saw of him athletically, and his reputation is of a headhunter, which I think would make him Wesley's replacement. Wesley plays dumb as a brick, so I don't think it'd take much to upgrade there. I thought Page looked pretty good back there, and I don't think it'd be wise to go after him, as he showed pretty good awareness and ball skills.


Chris

cdcox
05-01-2007, 08:09 PM
Well, I think that accessment of the defense is a bit on the 'glass half empty' side than it is neccessarily realistic.

Mine is perhaps more optimistic than realistic. Somewhere in between is probably right, but I think Boone makes a difference for sure (better than Sims without a doubt). Tyler was a potential 1st round talent that fell due to 'character issues' and given Herm's last draft I tend to think the ability to judge talent will win out. McBride helps at DE while Allen is suspended and would appear to be a good undertackle type player.

That's all going to help Hali, and Allen too, when he gets back.

Edwards biggest asset is his speed, that's true. At this point it's also know-how, as he's a pretty damned smart player who's seen about everything you could throw at him. I'd call that a BIG upgrade over Bell in that he's actually ABLE to cover. You can still use Bell in short yardage and as a situational rush backer, which is really all he ever excelled at. He was brought here with a different defense in mind. I think Harris is a pretty solid player and should thrive in this scheme. it suits his abilities well.

You're right about the corner situation, of course, and at least on Pollard in the safety department. I like what I saw of him athletically, and his reputation is of a headhunter, which I think would make him Wesley's replacement. Wesley plays dumb as a brick, so I don't think it'd take much to upgrade there. I thought Page looked pretty good back there, and I don't think it'd be wise to go after him, as he showed pretty good awareness and ball skills.


Chris

I always like to start with what we know. Things can turn out to be worse than "what we know". Take for example the 2004 Chiefs season (who'd a thunk?) or how Sims panned out as a draft choice. At the beginning of 2002, we thought we were set at that position for the next 10 years.


Best case on defense would mean we are set on the DL, we'd need another starter at the LB to replace Edwards within two years, and we'd need two starting corners to replace the aging Surtain and Law. And if everthing worked perfectly and we suffered no injuries, it is possible that for the first time in forever we would have a defence that has no obvious weak points (ala Lew Bush, Eric Hicks, Jerome Woods, Bartee, etc.) Again, I think it is possible, maybe even likely, that the defense could improve this year only to regress next year.

We still don't have our first probowler on defense. We'll need a couple to crack the top 5.

Direckshun
05-01-2007, 08:23 PM
Love this thread. Great to read everybody's in depth thoughts.

May I have you folks' thoughts to grabbing Keyshawn Johnson for a couple years?

pikesome
05-01-2007, 08:39 PM
Love this thread. Great to read everybody's in depth thoughts.

May I have you folks' thoughts to grabbing Keyshawn Johnson for a couple years?

Does he still have it? Are we going to throw enough to make him worth the money? How much money? Is he going to be a locker room problem? Do we have the cap space? Would having him stunt the growth of our other WRs? These are the things I'd think about. I, personally, wouldn't if I felt that Webb and/or Hannon or one of the other new guys could play. It would be nice to find out if we already have a good player waiting.

cdcox
05-01-2007, 08:42 PM
Love this thread. Great to read everybody's in depth thoughts.

May I have you folks' thoughts to grabbing Keyshawn Johnson for a couple years?

Timing is wrong in my opinion. He would take playing time from Bowe and any other WR we are trying to develop. You bring in a guy like him to be competitive. If we were making a SB run this year it would make sense because good production out of the WR position would take priority over development. But our future is not now. I think we should focus less on being "competitive" and more on developing long term contributors.

stevieray
05-01-2007, 08:45 PM
Nice thread, Chris. Herm mentioned last night that the only two original Chiefs that were here when he arrived were Tony and Will.

Speaks volumes. We've been way overdue for this "buiding from the ground up" and establishing players who will be here fo the majority if not all of their careers.

Direckshun
05-01-2007, 08:52 PM
Timing is wrong in my opinion. He would take playing time from Bowe and any other WR we are trying to develop. You bring in a guy like him to be competitive. If we were making a SB run this year it would make sense because good production out of the WR position would take priority over development. But our future is not now. I think we should focus less on being "competitive" and more on developing long term contributors.
Sammy Knight didn't seem to stunt Pollard's development.

If the guy can play, the guy can play. KJ doesn't mess with what we've got in store with Bowe. Especially considering that Kennison has one, maaaaaybe two years left. There'll be plenty of room for Bowe.

If there is consistent growth on this team, there's no reason we're not competing for a Super Bowl in 2009, to say nothing of a dark horse in 2008.

Sign KJ for three years, I guarantee he'll have them. He doesn't rely on speed to be an effective WR and those kinds of guys always last longer.

Direckshun
05-01-2007, 08:57 PM
Does he still have it? Are we going to throw enough to make him worth the money? How much money? Is he going to be a locker room problem? Do we have the cap space? Would having him stunt the growth of our other WRs? These are the things I'd think about. I, personally, wouldn't if I felt that Webb and/or Hannon or one of the other new guys could play. It would be nice to find out if we already have a good player waiting.
He's still KJ. He's got three more strong-to good years ahead of him, because he's never relied on speed. He's still tall & strong, with great hands, and is an instant red zone threat.

We've definitely got the dough for him, but I doubt he'll cost much. There aren't a lot of teams whose WR position is in the shambles ours have been in so nobody's going to throw too much money at this guy.

KJ won't stunt the growth of Bowe. Bowe's here and he's ready. He'll be great for ten years. Webb & Hannon have roles unique from what KJ offers, so his presense will be irrelevant to how much we see the other two.

Thanks for the thoughts. I just happen to believe it would be a good move.

cdcox
05-01-2007, 09:14 PM
He's still KJ. He's got three more strong-to good years ahead of him, because he's never relied on speed. He's still tall & strong, with great hands, and is an instant red zone threat.

We've definitely got the dough for him, but I doubt he'll cost much. There aren't a lot of teams whose WR position is in the shambles ours have been in so nobody's going to throw too much money at this guy.

KJ won't stunt the growth of Bowe. Bowe's here and he's ready. He'll be great for ten years. Webb & Hannon have roles unique from what KJ offers, so his presense will be irrelevant to how much we see the other two.

Thanks for the thoughts. I just happen to believe it would be a good move.

In the Keyshawn thread you had Keyshawn pushing Bowe into the slot. The slot is where you put your WR that can't get off the line. I want
Bowe fighting to get off the line from day one. That is the only way he's going to learn. Moving Bowe to the slot would slow his development and that is exactly the reason I don't want Keyshawn. No room on the roster for two old receivers, and Kennsion is probably cheaper.

Fish
05-01-2007, 09:14 PM
Keyshawn is too old. And I do think he would take playing time away from Bowe. They are the same "style" receiver. KJ's talents = Bowe's talents.

Besides, Webb and Hannon deserve a legit chance... since we're pushing the youth movement.

I may be of the minority, but I'm no longer worried about WR at all...

I'm more concerned with who will be throwing to them.....

Direckshun
05-01-2007, 09:20 PM
In the Keyshawn thread you had Keyshawn pushing Bowe into the slot. The slot is where you put your WR that can't get off the line. I want
Bowe fighting to get off the line from day one. That is the only way he's going to learn. Moving Bowe to the slot would slow his development and that is exactly the reason I don't want Keyshawn. No room on the roster for two old receivers, and Kennsion is probably cheaper.
I distinctly put Webb in the slot, not Bowe.

Bowe will be playing less downs, to be sure, but this way it works out for everybody. Bowe doesn't have to adjust perfectly and carry the weight of the world on his shoulders because he's got KJ in his corner. KJ doesn't have to replicate his Buccaneers season because he's got a great young guy to assist.

Like I've said, if Bowe has what it takes, he has what it takes. Pollard's development wasn't slowed one bit simply because he played behind an aging Pro Bowler in Sammy Knight -- perhaps a perfect analogy to this situation.

Thanks again for the thoughts.

pikesome
05-01-2007, 09:21 PM
He's still KJ. He's got three more strong-to good years ahead of him, because he's never relied on speed. He's still tall & strong, with great hands, and is an instant red zone threat.

We've definitely got the dough for him, but I doubt he'll cost much. There aren't a lot of teams whose WR position is in the shambles ours have been in so nobody's going to throw too much money at this guy.

KJ won't stunt the growth of Bowe. Bowe's here and he's ready. He'll be great for ten years. Webb & Hannon have roles unique from what KJ offers, so his presense will be irrelevant to how much we see the other two.

Thanks for the thoughts. I just happen to believe it would be a good move.

I'm not wholly against the idea. Putting Bowe, Eddie and KJ on the field gives us one fairly quick, nimble guy (Eddie), one experienced possession type guy (KJ) and another possession type guy who seems to do well in run blocking (Bowe). That doesn't seem like a bad 3WR set. However, if you want someone to get behind guys, Eddie might not be the best choice. At least that's what I'm thinking. I can't see us doing 4WR often so I'm not sure where the other guys fit in. I guess you could swap out one of the three for another receiver but wouldn't that tip our hand? If KJ is willing to be a role player for acceptable money I'd take him. If one of the other WRs can play we could do without him though.

Direckshun
05-01-2007, 09:23 PM
That's fair.

pikesome
05-01-2007, 09:25 PM
I distinctly put Webb in the slot, not Bowe.

Bowe will be playing less downs, to be sure, but this way it works out for everybody. Bowe doesn't have to adjust perfectly and carry the weight of the world on his shoulders because he's got KJ in his corner. KJ doesn't have to replicate his Buccaneers season because he's got a great young guy to assist.

Like I've said, if Bowe has what it takes, he has what it takes. Pollard's development wasn't slowed one bit simply because he played behind an aging Pro Bowler in Sammy Knight -- perhaps a perfect analogy to this situation.

Thanks again for the thoughts.

I didn't see this before my other post. Giving Bowe a "crutch" (best way I can think to describe it) might not be bad but, like cdcox said, it could also slow his development. I'm not sure our WRs are going to carry the team anyway with the expected game plan. Bowe shouldn't be under huge pressure to preform from day 1.

cdcox
05-01-2007, 09:28 PM
I distinctly put Webb in the slot, not Bowe.

Bowe will be playing less downs, to be sure, but this way it works out for everybody. Bowe doesn't have to adjust perfectly and carry the weight of the world on his shoulders because he's got KJ in his corner. KJ doesn't have to replicate his Buccaneers season because he's got a great young guy to assist.

Like I've said, if Bowe has what it takes, he has what it takes. Pollard's development wasn't slowed one bit simply because he played behind an aging Pro Bowler in Sammy Knight -- perhaps a perfect analogy to this situation.

Thanks again for the thoughts.

As far as Bowe in the slot, you listed him as #3, and that is traditionally the slot position:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3943598&postcount=48

Sorry if I misunderstood you. I want Bowe to get as much experience as possible. If he doesn't develop, we'll have wasted another #1 draft pick and that is a problem that having an aging WR past his prime won't solve.

Direckshun
05-01-2007, 09:30 PM
As far as Bowe in the slot, you listed him as #3, and that is traditionally the slot position:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=3943598&postcount=48

Sorry if I misunderstood you. I want Bowe to get as much experience as possible. If he doesn't develop, we'll have wasted another #1 draft pick and that is a problem that having an aging WR past his prime won't solve.
I wasn't clear, my bad.

You make a fair point. I just believe that backing up KJ and EK could be just as valuable as throwing him in there day 1.

Shrug. Do it, Carl.

Halfcan
05-01-2007, 10:23 PM
I look forward to seeing Tank N Turk roll some mother ****ers!!