The thing is, this draft is the future and looks better than next year. You're going to be able to find players in this year's draft class from rounds 1 to 2 who will be better than those available next year in round 1 alone.

Players in round 3-4 of this draft class could possibly be better than those in round 2 of next years.

Essentially, the top 100 of this current draft class could be valued as highly as the top 50 next year. They weren't joking when they said this is the best draft class in over a decade.

If he's not here next year, i'ts because KC didn't want to keep him. I don't really know why that would be the case.

He's our best interior linemen. Our interior line really needs work, so I'd much rather he not be let go. Allen, Hudson, and Asomoah have all been pretty big disappointments.

I think people are saying it's not even close to a doomsday scenario. Kash gets brought up because Hudson isn't good. It's not like the bar is that high. Same with Watkins. And these two play positions that we've said over and over and over again carry extremely low positional value.

If you truly believe in the draft, nobody should be freaking out about giving two low draft picks a shot or continuing to try to plug away with lower round draft picks or scrap heap guys. These are interior linemen, folks. Not elite pass rushers or quarterbacks.

For anyone current on the rules, will we get a compensatory draft pick if Schwartz signs elsewhere?

It all depends on the contract he gets, his playing time and the FAs that we sign.

:spock: Last year was the 2nd year in his career that he started more than 3 games.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have him back, but let's not make him out to be something he's not.

The guy has started 26 games in the 6 years he's been in the league. In the one year he did start all 16 games, he gave up 6 sacks. Why are we acting like if we lose him he's irreplaceable?

Suck for Luck

we also changed back to ZBS

Fisher also came back in to play and the offense kept playing well

we also continued to play well without Albert at all

everyone here wants to keep Schwartz but it doesn't mean that we should overpay to get him to stay.

Yeah, I thought re-signing Schwartz would be a priority for the new regime, but hell, he didn't even play until there were injuries. I'm not going to panic if Reid and Dorsey don't think he's a key guy.

My thing about keeping him is so we stop this rotating door of offensive line bodies. For once I'd like to see us keep the same starting offensive line from one year to the next. I'd also like to see all the guys not be rookies or broke dick veterans.

I'm also sick and ****ing tired of pissing away draft picks on the offensive line.

The offensive line is one area where I hope we spend money to keep guys together and build it up to be a strong unit. If Schwartz goes and Asamoah goes (who wasn't all that valuable anyway) we've got Rishaw ****ing Johnson on the roster who would take the starting spot.

We could go out and get a free agent guy, but why spend money on him but not Schwartz, who has already played for us and is familiar with the team?

People always bitch about the lack of chemistry on the offensive line, and they seem to be shocked every year that they don't play well. Yet in the offseason there's all this championing for replacing dudes as much as possible and not spending money on (what they claim to be important) positions like LT.

He does post game interviews!

completely agree. Overpaying is what got the chiefs saddled with contracts like Bowe and Flowers, and to a lesser extent Hali (whose contract was backloaded).

Teams that are consistently successful are those that develop talent and not overpay in free agency.

Kind of hard to do that when just beginning Year 2 of that plan.

And I'm not even defending Scott Pioli, but what in the blue **** was HE supposed to do when Charles, Flowers, DJ, and Hali had their contracts up? Those guys WERE the team at the time, and the Chiefs were still young and relatively talent-depleted from the franchise-reset back in 2007. 2008 was a great draft, 2009 sucked, and he had ONE rookie class coming in. Pioli basically had the option of re-signing everybody or starting over again with more 2-14 shit. As it turns out that's what he did anyway, but that's beside the point.

It's cool and awesome to say, "Draft and develop your own guys and don't overpay in free agency" but it's a lot more complicated than that. What you see good teams do IN ADDITION to seemingly constantly having a supply of backups that come in at a moment's notice and play like the starters never left is the guys they keep are "glue" guys. They make smart free agent decisions, yes, but when they get a player who is a fulcrum to the balance of a particular position, they keep him on board longterm.

Maybe Schwartz is that guy. Maybe he isn't. This team has had guard problems ever since Will Shields retired, and the really sucky part is we had a solution on our roster at the time in Wade Smith. His contract was up, and we let him walk with no questions asked. Maybe he wanted more money than was offered. Wouldn't you rather have thrown a few extra million at him to keep him here longterm instead of suffering this turnstile bullshit of Adrian Jones, Jon Asamoah, Ryan Lilja, and Jeff Allen? If you could invest simple free agent dollars into a longterm solution and not had to worry about burning all those draft picks, wouldn't that be so much better?

Again, I'm not saying Geoff Schwartz is Wade Smith. But the circumstances are the same, and he definitely showed great chemistry towards the end of the season as a starter. Personally, I think free agent $$$ are way cheaper than the possible alternative solution.

You're forgetting Nduku Ikewugu or whatever it was. LMAO