Originally Posted by KCrockaholic (Post 14159546)

Where did this rumor come from?

Originally Posted by jonzie04 (Post 14159533)

Could we even afford to keep him if we traded for him? idk if the numbers pan out i'd be pretty stoked to have him. Clowney, Okafor, Darby, Honey Badger. That would be gaining 4 solid players while losing two.

Veach did just say yesterday that we have a 1st this year, next year, and 2 2nd rounders each year, and that will allow them to be aggressive throughout the offseason. So we definitely have the ammo to get him.

All that being said though is there actually any merit to this rumor?

Originally Posted by Red Dawg (Post 14159556)

I don't see this happening. We dumped expensive guys.

Originally Posted by Munson (Post 14159563)

Did we trade for this piece of shit yet?

Originally Posted by DeepSouth (Post 14159542)

The Chiefs free up franchise tag money by trading Dee Ford, an outside linebacker in a 3 - 4 because he doesn't have a place in the new scheme.

So, you thing the Chiefs will trade for an outside linebacker that plays in a 3 - 4 that has been franchised by Houston. Which means, money saved by trading Ford is eaten by by Clowney.

I don't think so.

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 14159565)

This doesn't seem to work. Matter of fact, it seems to have the opposite effect.

Originally Posted by jonzie04 (Post 14159568)

Clowney is much bigger

Originally Posted by Iconic (Post 14159564)

I think this is the first time I've seen a sensible Red Dawg take. Holy ****. Must mean we really are getting HIM!

CLOWNEY CONFIRMED!!!1111

Originally Posted by KC Hawks (Post 14159527)

CHIEFS WEAR RED AND YELLOW

RED AND YELLOW IS ALSO MCDONALD'S COLORS

MCDONALD'S MASCOT IS A CLOWN

THAT MEANS CLOWNEY IS GOING TO BE A CHIEF!

Originally Posted by Red Dawg (Post 14159582)

All my taakes are sensible. They just aren't popular.