Yep.

I've said many times that comparisons between Smith and Cassel are absurd.

It's a terrible contract. So was Fasano and Daniel. But that has nothing to do with the argument that the chiefs are being cheap. They negotiated bad contracts. If you want to argue that you think they should structure the cap to load up now pay later, fine. But it's flat out wrong to claim a team can somehow make money come up out of thin air that never counts against the cap.

You keep talking about cap management. So far, they don't appear to be very good at it. A big reason they don't have money to spend now is because of the guys you mentioned.

Question these guys, fine. I've said before that I hated the Fisher pick and wasn't a fan of their big free agency signings last year. Have said that for a long time. What does that have to do with your claim that the chiefs or any team can cheat the cap, which is just plain false.

If we're not trying to take a serious run at "the now," why is Smith, given his cost and age, on this roster?

No one is sayin that. What they're saying, is hunt could have written a big signing bonus, and knocked said cap hit down to be able to fit it this year.

I didn't say anything about the cap.

No, they have not been good. And I have been very vocal about it (check out thread a few months ago when Dorsey won exec of the year). But that is about cap management, not about being cheap or not cheap.

Maybe they don't feel they need any free agents to make a run at the now.

Between in house options an further player development in their system, perhaps they feel enough is there.

As a fan, I don't, but I don't know their thinking

I don't know how they could possibly think that, but this is the only reasonable assumption that one can draw, assuming the team aspires to compete for the playoffs in 2014.

Yes, they are. They are saying the decision was made because we are cheap. It has nothing to do with it. If you restructure your cap, that only means you are deferring today's cap hit to tomorrow. The cap hit per year is the only measure of a teams cheapness. Saying otherwise implies that any nfl team can somehow pay money that never counts against the cap. That's untrue.

This...

I can certainly see it. 3 or 4 potential all pros on defense, with young depth they like.

Their own franchise qb, arguably the best running back in the league, wrs they apparently love etc.

Their own young bookend ots.

I can see it. Don't necessarily agree with it though

You said the chiefs were being cheap.

Give me one example of a single legal dollar paid to a player that doesn't one day count against the cap?

If you can't name a dollar, then every single dollar counts against the cap. That means if the chiefs are up against the cap in consecutive years, they are spending as much as they can. They badly manages the cap, but they're not being cheap.