-- Marcus Peters trade - Chiefs Compensation disclosed - Ian Rap/tweet

[Fish]

Originally Posted by xxSnEaKyPxx

The Chiefs didn't really have a choice.

Completely wrong. For reasons that have already been stated.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Originally Posted by Fish

Completely wrong. For reasons that have already been stated.

So what would your plan have been?

Just force the guy, who hated being with the Chiefs and feuded with the organization, to stay?

I don't really see that having a positive impact, but to each their own.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by xxSnEaKyPxx

So what would your plan have been?

Just force the guy, who hated being with the Chiefs and feuded with the organization, to stay?

I don't really see that having a positive impact, but to each their own.

Uh, yeah. That's how NFL contracts work. You can't simply void that contract because you're unhappy. You think he's the first player to ever play under a contract they weren't 100% happy with.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Originally Posted by Fish

Uh, yeah. That's how NFL contracts work. You can't simply void that contract because you're unhappy. You think he's the first player to ever play under a contract they weren't 100% happy with.

Sure, but you don't think forcing a guy to be there against his will would have any kind of negative impact at all?

[notorious]

Originally Posted by xxSnEaKyPxx

Sure, but you don't think forcing a guy to be there against his will would have any kind of negative impact at all?

**** him in that case. Sit his ass on the sideline for 2 years and watch him rot. That’s worth a late 2nd and 4th to me.

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by notorious

**** him in that case. Sit his ass on the sideline for 2 years and watch him rot. That’s worth a late 2nd and 4th to me.

Sure, bench the guy, but keep him on the squad. Then when you have to play him because his replacement sucks or gets injured, he lights it up, and has you by the balls.

Look I'm sure the FO had solid reasons for wanting this guy hell and gone. I'm not happy about the peanuts we got for him, but I just have to believe there is more to the story for such a seemingly horrible deal to go through.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by xxSnEaKyPxx

Sure, but you don't think forcing a guy to be there against his will would have any kind of negative impact at all?

That's irrelevant. You do the same thing regardless. If he decides he'd rather destroy the rest of his career by sitting out, then that's his decision. He's not getting a big contract doing that.

[xxSnEaKyPxx]

Originally Posted by Fish

That's irrelevant. You do the same thing regardless. If he decides he'd rather destroy the rest of his career by sitting out, then that's his decision. He's not getting a big contract doing that.

Its not just sitting out that could be a problem, though its certainly part of it.

It could potentially divide the locker room, especially with him being one of the bigger names. You could have people who have his back based on friendship, or his skill level, vs people who don't like someone putting himself above the team.

Having Peters put himself above the team sets a bad precedent to me.

You aren't going to win a Championship without talent, but you also are not going to win a Championship without an entire organization working towards the same thing. One of the big things you heard all season is how close the Eagles team was.

Maybe the Chiefs could have worked it out with Peters....but clearly they didn't believe they could. They have a lot more knowledge on the situation than we do. Not to mention, its pretty telling that the Colts and Browns didn't even try to acquire Peters despite both teams having execs with ties to Peters, as well as a big need a CB.