The roster as it stands

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by -King-

Why did you have none of these thoughts until AFTER he was traded?

Someone wrote a long post about why he should be traded including the financial reasons and your response was an adamant


What changed? Break out the calculator again?

Everything I've posted since details my stance. But I'll put it here, in one post for you, and then I'm done talking about it, as it's a waste of time. What's done is done, and complaining ad nauseum about it is stupid.

I was against trading Hill. What? Why would you trade your second best player!? Hell no.

And yet they did. So I looked closer.

This team was in clear decline. Play-off caliber still, but the last two years showed it was not good enough. The other teams in the AFC were loading up with WR and Edge talent to beat KC. Even Denver would have a legit QB now. Cinci was attacking their OL situation; and we couldn't beat them in two tries as is. Raiders added Adams. Bills added Miller. Chargers loading up, too. All of these teams, going all in, to beat KC.

Could we pay Hill the top WR money and still keep him? Yeah, we could. Could we do that and add to the roster enough to stay/get ahead of these other contenders? No, probably not, but definitely not without pushing a lot of money forward. Thing about that is, the bill always comes due. So in a couple of seasons, With Mahomes at around 28 years old, we'd have to gut it all.

OR-what Veach did was just rip the band-aid off now. This team had shown it wasn't good enough as is for two seasons. We got spanked in that Super Bowl, and this past season Cinci beat us twice in what, 4 weeks? That's not good enough. And they're going to get better, along with The Bills, The Chargers, The Donkeys and even the damned Raiders.

So we could roll on for a couple of years, not getting significantly better, not able to make big changes, just maintaining status quo (treading water) with diminishing returns; and have to cut or trade guys like Hill in a couple of years, getting less or nothing in return for them.

OR what Veach did-sell high. Remake your roster on the fly FAST with 8 picks in the first four rounds, an influx of cap dollars not allocated to Hill, and try and get the team OVERALL in a better spot, with a healthier cap situation so that we can continue to contend even in the ridiculously loaded AFC.

No, I didn't want to trade Hill. I'm sure Veach didn't want to either. In hindsight, once I got over the shock, I understood. I get it. Too many holes, not enough talent, not enough cap dollars to spread it around without ****ing the future which you don't want to do with a 26 year old elite QB in the saddle. Moving Hill makes that possible. This is playing the long game. This is how you keep the SB window open for a decade or more.

So we won't have Hill, but the last two SB winners haven't had Tyreek Hill either, so it's not like it can't be done.

I was against it. Once it was done, I considered WHY and what the return was. And I embrace it. We weren't good enough the last two years. This is what The Patriots did for two decades of dominance. Sell high. Draft well. Build every year's team around your HOF QB and roll on.

You want to whine about it, whine on. It's pointless. It's done. What Veach and Andy do in this draft will mean everything going forward. Will we be The Patriots of 2000-2018? Or will we be Seattle?

I'm betting on Veach, Reid, and Mahomes.

It will be different going forward, but I think it can be BETTER overall.