Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752012)

you're not going to put world beaters on your team at every single position.

Here's the way I see it. As a running offense, we are already awesome.

As an overall defense, we have potential to be great.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752012)

Like I said, you can use that argument for anyone. The fact is, you're not going to put world beaters on your team at every single position. And as milkman has pointed out, and it's true, we're going to have a TON of people we have to re-sign in the next few years. If that's the case, you have to prioritize who you want to spend your money on. A slot receiver is a role playing position. David Harris, on the other hand, is a shutdown run-stopper. Even if we struggle at Nose Tackle, he's going to plug up the interior run. And he's a good blitzing LB. How many times last season did our interior run defense completely disappear?

Here's the way I see it. As a running offense, we are already awesome. As an overall defense, we have potential to be great. If we get good play from a NT and LOLB, we can be every bit as good as the Steelers on D. Our pass offense? No matter how much we stack the deck, we still have a QB who could limit the Chiefs from being great.

If we bring in Breaston, we are essentially asking Cassel to be the guy who wins games for us. If we bring in Harris, we're on our way to becoming a scary overall defense. Add that to a terrific running game and now all of a sudden, you only ask Cassel to manage games to victory.

If the Chiefs had Drew Brees, no question you go after Breaston. But with Cassel, I'd rather choose to be great and whenever possible, not ask him to put up over 20 points a game.

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 7752026)

Our salary cap situation should be outstanding because we've been spending under the cap for years.

Cap Room + little dead money = we should be able to keep our guys AND sign anyone we want.

I'm not sure Pioli 'will want' but the option is there.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752033)

I'm not trying to be the guy who condones huge spending, but with the new cap system, we have a LOT of money we need to spend. Almost 46 million. Even after we resign the guys we want to keep, and our rookies, we will still have a ****-load of cash we need to spend.

I suggest we then be proactive and sign guys we wish to keep who are nearing the end of their contracts to new ones and lock them up.

Guess what, still money to spend.


Our positions of NEED at starter are: Slot receiver, NT

Positions of WANT at starter are: ILB, RB, RT, LT, QB

Depth Needs are: ILB, safety, RB, QB, OL,

Who's to say with all the money that needs to be spent the Chiefs couldn't get one of the top slot receivers available, and a ILB to push Belcher to solid depth?

The money has to be spent. HAS to.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7751873)

I don't see Cassel throwing for more than 3,500 yards in any given season. You'd expect Bowe, Baldwin, and Moeaki to account for about 2,500 of those. The RBs to account for probably 500. How much is there really leftover for a slot?

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7752049)

Amen to this. You say you want a starter at ILB do you think Belcher is a backup?

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7751958)

Found this VERY tasty nugget from ESPN. Apparently, the Chiefs cap number for 2011 right now, for only players under contract(not including RFA, FA's, and Rookies) is only 74.4 MILLION!!! That means the need to spend close to 45.6 MILLION DOLLARS in order to be compliant with the 2011 salary cap floor.

Numbers per this link.

note - Not sure if this includes bonuses and escalators...

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 7752058)

Well your numbers are off. The new cap is supposidly only 120 mil not 130 mil
With a floor around 108 mil. So you can figure the Chiefs not to spend more than around 110 mil by thier history. So then you are talking about 35 mil to spend not 45 mil to spend.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752043)

The figure pulled a bit ago says without resignings and rookie signings, we're at 74.4 million. Also, I thought I read somewhere that dead money would no longer count against the cap...

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7752060)

I thought teams had to spend 90% of the new 123 million dollar cap?

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 7752058)

Well your numbers are off. The new cap is supposidly only 120 mil not 130 mil
With a floor around 108 mil. So you can figure the Chiefs not to spend more than around 110 mil by thier history. So then you are talking about 35 mil to spend not 45 mil to spend.

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752042)

Our trailer is hitched to Cassel, like it or not.

I have said since before the trade that he is a guy that requires a great team around him to look good (like he had in NE) rather than being a guy that raises the level of Play of those around him...therefore, our best chance at winning on the biggest stages is to acquire the services of players around him that can win the individual matchups.

Like Breaston.

Also, like I said earlier, what happens if we dont sign a guy like him ( with experience as a starter and slot guy) and Bowe or Baldwin goes down for an extended period?

We would be right back to square one, if we have a guy like Breaston we could continue to run the offense at full speed.

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini;775------2060

I thought teams had to spend 90% of the new 123 million dollar cap?

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752062)

I'm not sure that number is totally accurate though.

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752005)

"Chiefs forced to spend 60 million on pile of shit"

Oh, never mind.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752053)

Cassel threw for almost 3700 yds. coming off the bench as a backup for the Patriots. He threw for over 3,100 with only Bowe and Moeaki as targets. Throw in a few hundred for Charles. He also did that with the 17th most attempts. I think there is plenty of room for a slot receiver to come in and help elevate Cassel's numbers.

I'm not trying to get away from the running game, b/c I know how much you love traditional hard-nosed football. I would actually love to see the Chiefs ADD a RB in place of Jones to make the running game more potent.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 7752065)

Did you read the OP? It says 120. If you want to say 123 ok. Do a little math and you will find that you are left with 111 mil. So there might be 1 mil difference.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7751873)

I'm definitely going to push back on the slot receiver part. I think this team is best built to win by a power running game and a dominating defense, and a passing game good enough to not lose games. Until Cassel proves otherwise, that's my feeling. If that's the case, I don't agree with loading the field with options our QB has no idea what to do with. Breaston would still be #4 behind Bowe, Baldwin, Moeaki, and often times even Charles. I don't see Cassel throwing for more than 3,500 yards in any given season. You'd expect Bowe, Baldwin, and Moeaki to account for about 2,500 of those. The RBs to account for probably 500. How much is there really leftover for a slot?

I'd be fine with a guy like Breaston if we had a Brees type QB who can put up over 4,000 yards. But given that Cassel + our love of running the ball is probably going to limit Cassel to about 200 yards a game, I think overspending on a slot is a waste.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752083)

I just don't see it. I think the Chiefs rely on a totally different kind of attack. They want to control the ball and keep the defense off the field. That's why you have a lot of big boys like Bowe and Baldwin who are threats to go deep, but much bigger threats in a possession type attack. The Chiefs don't mind dinking and dunking and running time off the clock. Different from the Pats, who didn't mind at all chucking the ball downfield.

As the Chiefs get better on defense, the Chiefs are going to run teh ball even more. That's not a knock on Cassel. Big Ben has had a lot of sub 3500 yard seasons too.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752115)

I disagree. When Cassel put up those numbers with the Patriots, he almost never connected downfield. A LOT of those yards came after the catch. Which, if you ask me, is what the Chiefs are trying to build their passing game to be. They already have 4 guys who can run after the catch, in Bowe, Baldwin, Moeaki and Charles. A good slot excels at racking up RAC yards.

Originally Posted by PGM (Post 7752087)

Anybody can throw for 3500 plus in this league. If Haley gets a bug up his ass, he'll hit it easily. It's all about efficiency though. Hell, that POS Orton was on pace for about 5 grand at one point. Mostly "empty" yards though, so...

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752135)

No way teams even think of defending us the same way if we have Breaston and Baldwin in the huddle.

Nobody would dare putting 8 in the box against that lineup.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752012)

Like I said, you can use that argument for anyone. The fact is, you're not going to put world beaters on your team at every single position. And as milkman has pointed out, and it's true, we're going to have a TON of people we have to re-sign in the next few years. If that's the case, you have to prioritize who you want to spend your money on. A slot receiver is a role playing position. David Harris, on the other hand, is a shutdown run-stopper. Even if we struggle at Nose Tackle, he's going to plug up the interior run. And he's a good blitzing LB. How many times last season did our interior run defense completely disappear?

Here's the way I see it. As a running offense, we are already awesome. As an overall defense, we have potential to be great. If we get good play from a NT and LOLB, we can be every bit as good as the Steelers on D. Our pass offense? No matter how much we stack the deck, we still have a QB who could limit the Chiefs from being great.

If we bring in Breaston, we are essentially asking Cassel to be the guy who wins games for us. If we bring in Harris, we're on our way to becoming a scary overall defense. Add that to a terrific running game and now all of a sudden, you only ask Cassel to manage games to victory.

If the Chiefs had Drew Brees, no question you go after Breaston. But with Cassel, I'd rather choose to be great and whenever possible, not ask him to put up over 20 points a game.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752078)

Our trailer is hitched to Cassel. Which is why I'd rather the Chiefs use a formula similar to the Jets. The Jets are so dominant a running team and a defense that they don't ask Sanchez to do much.

The Chiefs CAN be dominant on defense. And they CAN be and already are terrific on run offense. The pass offense is always going to be limited by Cassel. So yeah... I'd rather spend toward being awesome on defense and passable on pass offense, then to be solid but not dominant on defense and good not great on pass offense.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752149)

The problem is, this is a QB league.

I don't care how good our run game is, at some point the game will be put on Cassel's shoulders, and when that happens, I want him to have options.

The best way for him to succeed is to provide him enough weapons.
If you do that, and he fails, then you know with absolute certainty that he isn't the guy, and I want to know that as soon as possible.

Originally Posted by PGM (Post 7752155)

This theory? Your own words :D....


He's stepping it up, and I was wrong about him

Regardless of who and when we bring another QB prospect in, if he's a rook, he will have a phenomenal mentor to learn from in terms of preparation and the work side of things.

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752158)

Mother****er.:D

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752135)

No way teams even think of defending us the same way if we have Breaston and Baldwin in the huddle.

Nobody would dare putting 8 in the box against that lineup.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752149)

The problem is, this is a QB league.

I don't care how good our run game is, at some point the game will be put on Cassel's shoulders, and when that happens, I want him to have options.

The best way for him to succeed is to provide him enough weapons.
If you do that, and he fails, then you know with absolute certainty that he isn't the guy, and I want to know that as soon as possible.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752277)

Same would be true if you put Baldwin in and any slot receiver who is better than horrible.

You can upgrade to an average slot receiver at a fraction of the cost and tremendously upgrade your pass offense. Still, while it's nice to give Cassel another weapon, the fact is that the greatest weapon we can give to Cassel is to avoid asking him to consistently make big plays.

I know Breaston makes this team better. I'm saying that David Harris makes this team very close to terrific.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752286)

I think if you're a QB and you have two receivers who could be excellent, an excellent receiving tight end, and 1 or 2 backs out of the backfield who are very effective with screens, and you still claim you need an all-world receiver, you've got problems.

If the Chiefs field a top 5 defense, a top 5 running game, and the QB can't win games (even with 3 very good receivers), then we're doomed no matter what. I agree that without good QB play, we're fighting an uphill battle. The problem is, with your scenario, we're putting all our eggs in Cassel's basket. At least with my scenario, you can protect a bad or young QB (see Sanchez) if you choose to develop one, and you may even be able to protect an average QB into the Super Bowl. In my scenario, even if you lose Cassel, the Chiefs have a chance to quickly turn things around.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752298)

No, I am not putting all my eggs in one basket.

I believe that Belcher is going to continue to progress, and I'm talking about spending some money to upgrade the NT position in front of him.

And,once again, I also think a reliable slot receiver is more valuable to this offense and to Cassel than you do.

That's a guy that Cassel will utilize to move the chains, moreso than the two guys on the outside.

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7752310)

It's too bad you don't usually sign guys who will start off on PUP because what you described is Steve Smith. He's not as fast as Breaston but the guy is a master at moving the chains and making catches on 3rd downs. I can't stat it enough how much I would love to get him. It's a must we get a great slot guy because as good as Bowe is he's not always consistent and you can't rely on a rookie WR his first year.

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752312)

Defense is NOT the problem, FFS.

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy (Post 7752289)

So you want to give up draft picks and a huge contract to sign an inside backer?

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752286)

I think if you're a QB and you have two receivers who could be excellent, an excellent receiving tight end, and 1 or 2 backs out of the backfield who are very effective with screens, and you still claim you need an all-world receiver, you've got problems.

If the Chiefs field a top 5 defense, a top 5 running game, and the QB can't win games (even with 3 very good receivers), then we're doomed no matter what. I agree that without good QB play, we're fighting an uphill battle. The problem is, with your scenario, we're putting all our eggs in Cassel's basket. At least with my scenario, you can protect a bad or young QB (see Sanchez) if you choose to develop one, and you may even be able to protect an average QB into the Super Bowl. In my scenario, even if you lose Cassel, the Chiefs have a chance to quickly turn things around.

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752327)

Not only will he start on pup, he doesn't know the offense and cant do much on pup to learn it.

He also adds a similar weapon to what we already have, while Breaston would add a deep threat with consistent hands.

Breaston would be a better fit.

JMO

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752312)

Defense is NOT the problem, FFS.

Originally Posted by Brock (Post 7752346)

There's a lot of room for improvement there.

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752382)

Improvement yes, but it's not the glaring liability at this point.

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7752385)

Eh, I'd say if the defense has a liability, it's at NT.

Teams can run right up the gut on us. I'm not a huge fan of Belcher, and feel he could be upgraded, but NT and Vrabel's spot are much more important.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752387)

Think we've got Vrabel's spot covered.

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7752390)

With?

(please don't say Studebaker)

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7752385)

Eh, I'd say if the defense has a liability, it's at NT.

Teams can run right up the gut on us. I'm not a huge fan of Belcher, and feel he could be upgraded, but NT and Vrabel's spot are much more important.

Let's face it we won 4 games due to defense and/or special teams.

We had one other game where the defense played well and the offense did shit.

We had a playoff game where the defense held as long as they could while the offense kept turning the ball over.

Honestly, besides the soft schedule, the defense is the biggest reason this team went 10-6 last year.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752393)

Gabe Miller.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752393)

Gabe Miller.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752398)

NT is for sure the ultimate liability on defense. If addressed, it will improve the play of both Belcher and Johnson. I agree that Belcher could be replaced, but he will work for now, especially with the ILB class coming next year. I said it earlier, Belcher is a backup for the Steelers and Ravens, but he's good enough for us in 2011.

Fix the NT this year, grab a top ILB in round 1 next year and our defense is set. That is long as Houston/Studebaker situation pans out, and either Jackson steps up or Bailey or one of the other backups does.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752401)

Are we forgetting about Justin Houston?

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7752403)

Maybe in 2012 or 2013.

Shouldn't expect much this year considering the lockout. Same for Houston.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752398)

NT is for sure the ultimate liability on defense. If addressed, it will improve the play of both Belcher and Johnson. I agree that Belcher could be replaced, but he will work for now, especially with the ILB class coming next year. I said it earlier, Belcher is a backup for the Steelers and Ravens, but he's good enough for us in 2011.

Fix the NT this year, grab a top ILB in round 1 next year and our defense is set. That is long as Houston/Studebaker situation pans out, and either Jackson steps up or Bailey or one of the other backups does.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752409)

Harris was a beast minus a nt. Of course wed still.need a nt but harris would dramatically make a bad nt look better.

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752312)

Defense is NOT the problem, FFS.

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 7752403)

Maybe in 2012 or 2013.

Shouldn't expect much this year considering the lockout. Same for Houston.

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752421)

That's what Belcher helped do behind our pigs with lipstick we trotted out for the nose.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752409)

Harris was a beast minus a nt. Of course wed still.need a nt but harris would dramatically make a bad nt look better.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752435)

I like belcher. But there's also a.chance he's just adequate. We're talking about passimg on a stud because of potential.

Originally Posted by DarthCarlSatan (Post 7752382)

Improvement yes, but it's not the glaring liability at this point.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752458)

We've talked all season if good.enougj is fine. Its not. This defense has the potential to be top 5. Why settle.for."good enough not to.be a liability. "

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752458)

We've talked all season if good.enougj is fine. Its not. This defense has the potential to be top 5. Why settle.for."good enough not to.be a liability. "

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 7752448)

If my team has premier coaches, I'll take the young ascending player over the good vet all day.

Every day.

I'm also a big fan of Micah Johnson who may well earn some quality playing time next year if he is fully recovered.

Sleeper linebacker for us.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752458)

We've talked all season if good.enougj is fine. Its not. This defense has the potential to be top 5. Why settle.for."good enough not to.be a liability. "

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 7752484)

Because, for all of your "David Harris was a beast without a NT" talk, Sione Pouha was better than anyone that we had at NT last year.

We need a NT more than we need david Harris.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752508)

In my free agent list I have aubrayo franklin and david harris as my top 2. I think our defense could be top 5.

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752471)

You are not listening! There are TWO holes left to fill on defense. If we can fill the NT spot this year, we do it. No matter how we finish this year we stand to get a STUD ILB next year in the draft.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 7752508)

In my free agent list I have aubrayo franklin and david harris as my top 2. I think our defense could be top 5.

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy (Post 7752525)

What part of we are going to have to give up a #1 draft pick to get David Harris is so difficult to understand?

Ahh, another Franklin lover. Maybe I'd take the 2009 version of Franklin because the 2010 version was shit.

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7752532)

Yeah top 3 in tackles for nose tackles and a top 10 ranked team against the rush. Franklin ****ing sucks!

Originally Posted by aturnis (Post 7752543)

Who do you take?

Vontaze Burfict
Manti Te'o
Luke Kuechly
Dont'a Hightower
David Harris

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7752548)

And your source was your roomate. I watch just as many Niner games as you STFU.


I gave you answers you choose not to listen instead you come back with vague general responses.

"Franklin sucks"

"Willis is a beast"

"Why aren't the Niners re-signing him"

First of all the Niners aren't the model franchise organization.

Second of all 25% of the leagues players are going to be free agents. Do they suck too or is it just the guys you don't want that suck?

Third and I'll explain this again for you. They like Sopooga he's been there since 2003 they obviously think he can get the job done. Franklin is going to be asking alot they can get production from the one mentioned while re-signing other key guys because they do have a few others that need to be re-signed.

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini (Post 7752548)

Second of all 25% of the leagues players are going to be free agents. Do they suck too or is it just the guys you don't want that suck?

Third and I'll explain this again for you. They like Sopooga he's been there since 2003 they obviously think he can get the job done. Franklin is going to be asking alot they can get production from the one mentioned while re-signing other key guys because they do have a few others that need to be re-signed.

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy (Post 7752571)

No, you haven't watched as many 49er games as I have.

I watched 12 of their games last year, which is about 11 more than I wanted to. I have 3 TV's set up in my basement where my brother watched the 49ers every single weekend at my place. Their run defense have nice stats, but they played 3 legit rushing teams all year.

Sop has been there a long time but has never played the nose full time. They are taking a chance on the guy being a fit instead of paying this earth moving force like you want to paint him as. Regardless of if they haven't been a model franchise or not, fat bodied NT's never hit the open market if they are dominant.

Franklin is a guy who plays for money. When he gets the big contract, he's just going to be a guy.

I won't cry if they sign him because it's not my money and they have a cap to meet, but those expecting him to put this defense over the top are going to be dissapointed for the 5 or so years he's under contract.