IF he doesn't have a back issue and he doesn't try to price himself out of reach.. I agree.

I polled 10 of my very intelligent NFL friends though and they said we should replace Albert with Long.

Then leave. You're rather insufferable.

For someone with 4000+ posts you have a whole lot of stupid that I have somehow missed up to this point. Have you just not posted anything football related up until now?

well I dont usually talk to idiots that defend overrated LTs named Jake Long, so no

And again you go into troll mode. The point being, OUTSIDE OF KC FANS no one thinks Albert is anywhere near as good as you try to pass him off as. He is generally accepted to be above average... but not top tier.

As Hoover and Milkman point out, that could be because he protects shitty QBs... possibly.

He has never shown me anything to be excited over but he has only rarely shown me anything to get angry about either. There are 5 to 10 guys I'd rather have BUT it isn't a high priority upgrade for the team right now.

So because fans outside of KC don't think he's that good, we shouldn't re sign him?


Long is on the downside of his career, Albert is coming off his rookie deal. Unless we see that Albert's back is in that bad of shape, I see no reason not to sign him.

That isn't what he's saying.

I don't agree with him, but let's not argue a point that isn't being made.

No no no, I am just pointing out that people here have complete HOMERVISION regarding Albert. I have said we should sign him unless he wants crazy money. In that case, you make a play for someone like Long. (unless we stick to zone blocking)

As for the "downside" of his career... you do know that Long is a year YOUNGER right?

I'm just trying to get a grip on what he is saying.


Albert is coming off his rookie contract and is already, by his notions, a top 10 player at his position in the NFL.


Wouldn't that mean that he still has alot of time and ways to improve? I just don't think he can get past the Long/Michigan connection.

So we have homervision with Albert, but you don't with Long?


And Long is absolutely on the downside, he's had two injury riddled seasons. If a team is taht willing to part with a LT, who you say is a top 3 or 4 player at his position, shouldn't that raise a red flag?

Thank You.

It must KILL you that some of the people in this thread that have been vocally supporting Albert and therfore are technically on your side of the argument are such obvious morons. I've been trying to abuse them for ya but I don't really have the skills.

:D

He just cant accept that Brandon Albert is better than Jake Long, so every counter paints him in a corner as to why it is correct that Chiefs fans know their LT is a good NFL LT. Not top 15. Not top 8. But top 5. Easily.

I used to talk shit on Albert in 2010.

To say we just have homervision on him is false.

He has improved quite a bit, from an average player to a very good one, and other fans don't know shit because he's not a household name.

He'll get paid and you'll have to deal with it.

I have admitted many many times that I am completely 100% biased for Long. No question. I think he is easily a top 3 LT... but in reality he is probably between 4 and 8... but not in my mind.

You may be right regarding injuries.. I won't hazard a guess in that realm. It's a total crapshoot.

Again, Miami MIGHT be willing to part with him because Martin is a hell of a young LT with a massive upside who is a MUCH better fit for the blocking scheme they use AND is cheap cheap cheap.

I don't care how great a player is.. if he doesn't fit your scheme, he doesn't fit your scheme.. period.