Um the 2nd contract is where you get paid....no one in their right mind would take significantly less on the contract where you make your money.

Honestly if they move him out of LT their only hope of keeping him is the franchise tag.

Worst case that could happen, but I really doubt it. Some players like staying with the same team and will take less money than what they would if they hit the open market. But that god for the Franchise tag.

You need to be realistic, a 27 year old player coming out of his 1st contract is not going to take significantly less money...that doesn't make him an ass that makes him smart.

He can be the ultimate team player but that doesn't mean he wants to be slighted in the amount of money he makes.

I'm sure a lot of OG's and RT's could make the argument they should be paid like a LT. Honestly I don't even care if hes paid like a LT unless its the highest paid LT in the NFL, but hes not going do ask for that.

i remember when John Tait took less money to stay a RT in KC....




wait, no i don't....he left for the big money, LT contract...like anyone would

but a LT will gladly be a RT for the rest of his career, and make less money, and garner less prestige, because KC fans say so....

The problem with it is, he played LT and was graded out as being able to do it when the draft happened...

He has leverage in this position because he can go "on the open market a team will pay me and play me as their LT, you gonna match that money?"

Simply put the Chiefs can keep both of them with one of them at RT we'll just have 2 LT contracts on the books, if you commit yourself to that are fine with it and budget it that way, fine.

They just better be prepared to do that if they're going to take another OT.

$$ for two premier T's looks fine now, since we don't have an elite QB or DE to pay for. Or a WR, or a pass rushing LB, or a...

why do you think he'll accept being a RT under any circumstances, when he's already proven he's a LT?

i've asked this 12 different ways and no one will answer....

paying 2 players on your OL like starting LTs is so obviously stu.....eh....


what's the point


this is zombie idea....it will never go away

Most guys don't care aslong as they feel they are compensated properly, if he's paid like a LT I doubt he'll be bitching.

And other than that there's always the franchise tag.

Simply put the Chiefs take Monroe they better be committed to paying both of them.

It's honestly not any worse than paying a ILB what Curry would get at the pick...there are no great options with staying with the pick.

You're wrong...Albert has shown that he can be an elite LT. After his first contract is up, he will demand LT money. If you say "We can't justify paying you like a LT, b/c you play RT". He'll say, "Then put me at LT, I proved I can play LT in this league" Then you say, "We can't, we already have a LT". He'll say, "Then I'll go somewhere else and play LT".

The money is a big difference. Not a little one. You are not going to give up millions of dollars just b/c someone tells you to.

You seem to think, just b/c he seems to be a good, smart, likable guy, that he'll stay here. Stop feeding you're own delusion. I'm sure John Tait was a nice guy too...

He'll stay and play RT aslong as you pay him like he expects to be paid...it's not the position thing that is a huge deal to the player it's the money.

If you tell him you'll pay him LT money at RT then he's likely to stay...like I said if they take another tackle they better be committed to paying alot of money for that position.

it's way worse....we're canceling out a pick with monroe....

i look forward to the day when KC tells Albert he's a career RT and he should just get over it....would love to be in the room for that