Believe it or not, Veach isn’t don’t yet.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Thanks to reputable reporting, I do have some idea. It’s not ironclad but I rely on reputable reporting to give me some idea of what’s coming down the pipeline.

Where was the "reputable reporting" when it came to Mahomes contract?

There's been NO reporting on Chris Jones because there's been nothing to report, yet it doesn't stop you from constantly speculating.

Originally Posted by Direckshun

You do the same — you cited reporting that the Raiders offered the most to Clowney. (By the way, the reputable reporting I’ve read disputes that and cites Cleveland as the highest bidder, and that teams as of now have largely rescinded their offers as they’ve grown tired of Clowney’s intransigence.)

That's because multiple news outlets have run stories on Clowney's situation, including the Browns, Seattle and Raiders offers.

No one has said anything about Jones other than there's nothing to report.

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Just throwing out a name that could be an equitable player ina player-for-player trade. Sub another name in as you please.

And it makes zero sense to do so.

The Chiefs aren't looking to replace Jones with another player who's worth $20 million per year. If they're not going to extend Jones, they'll want draft pick compensation, i.e., cheap labor, in return. They're not looking to add another player that's going to max out their cap and flexibility.

Originally Posted by Direckshun

There has been some ballyhooing since Spags arrival that Jones is an imperfect fit in the scheme. I agree that he is, but he’s so damn talented it doesn’t matter, which is why I’d pay him.

But we know Spags is a stickler for what players on his DL should look and how they should play. And if he thinks $20m could be better spent on a player that “fits” versus a player that imperfectly fits, who knows.

Complete and utter nonsense.

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Any deal the Chiefs ostensibly sign Clowney to would be a one-year, in my mind. I could go on but I’d only reiterate what Duncan has said throughout the thread.

And as I've said, there's no way Clowney signs for $10 million at age 27 when he's passed on $18.5 million per from Seattle, another team that was a few plays away last season from the Super Bowl.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Where was the "reputable reporting" when it came to Mahomes contract?

There's been NO reporting on Chris Jones because there's been nothing to report, yet it doesn't stop you from constantly speculating.

There are so many head scratching ideas in this contradictory pair of sentences that it deserves it own post for dismantling.

Alright, so:

1a. The reporting on the contract situation surrounding Mahomes has no bearing on the contract situation surrounding Chris Jones.

1b. You seem to be implying there was no reputable reporting surrounding the Mahomes contract situation? NFLN reported the negotiations would begin after the draft (they did). The KC Star reported the talks had begun in earnest in May (they had). There was plenty of reporting, though none of it to my knowledge hit the incredible contract extension on the head. But, so it goes with highly sensitive negotiations behind closed doors.

1c. You seem to be implying that because there was no reputable reporting on the Mahomes contract ahead of time (there was), that we can't take a lack of Jones contract reporting too seriously. But even the best reporting isn't ironclad; it's intended to be used as a signpost for news followers to use in their own educated guesses.

1d. You know all of this! You literally cited reporting in this very thread on Clowney's contract offers from teams to help you draw conclusions about Clowney's future. Which is what normal humans do.

2a. There has been reporting on Jones. NFLN has reported the Chiefs have talked to him about contracts. NFLN and other sources have repeatedly reported that he has received no contract offers from us at any time. Louis Reddick said a couple days back that they're talking to Jones now. There has been some reporting that Covid19 kept us from making any negotiations with him -- which is reporting I don't buy, by the way (just to show that I don't take reporting mindlessly at face value).

2b. How do you know "there's nothing to report"? You literally told me we have no idea what's going on. There could be tons to report.

2c. You're of course saying there's nothing to report because you believe the reporting that we've seen (that you're now saying doesn't exist?): talks have been minimal, no contracts (at the very least prior to Pat's deal) have been offered. Jones is demanding $20m+ and the Chiefs probably want to keep him but they're struggling to square that circle.

2d. If you're arguing there's been nothing to report on Jones anyway, then you're agreeing with the initial premise I started with (that you had disagreed with) that there had been inaction with the Chiefs and Jones.

I think in your rush to keep hope alive and/or throw shade at me may have gotten your ideas all jumbled up, because these two sentences don't make a lot of logical sense, and they are factually incorrect.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I think in your rush to keep hope alive and/or throw shade at me may have gotten your ideas all jumbled up, because these two sentences don't make a lot of logical sense, and they are factually incorrect.

JFC, this is a ridiculous post.

First off, the Chiefs didn't reveal anything about Mahomes deal. Sure, there were people speculating that a deal would get done (Duh!) but there was no concrete evidence of anything until the deal was announced.

Clowney has refused every offer to date, whether it's a $12 million dollar base salary from the Browns to the Seahawks offer of more than $17 million so there is very, very little chance that Clowney would sign with the Chiefs or any other team for $10 million, even if it's just for one season.

It was reported in the past week that the Chiefs have had NO discussions with Jones or his agent. So anything that you put out there is pure speculation, with none of it based in reality.

--------

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl-rumors-...022408397.html

From June 8th:

The three-time Pro Bowl selection has turned down multiple free-agent contract offers worth at least $15 million per year this season, Pro Football Talk's Mike Florio reported Monday.

"My understanding is the Seahawks have been in the range of $15 million on a one-year deal for Jadeveon Clowney," Florio said on 106.7 The Fan's Chad Dukes vs. The World (h/t 247Sports.com). "The Seahawks have been led to believe that the Browns offered 18 (million), and he has yet to take that."

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Thanks to reputable reporting, I do have some idea

You're a ****ing dipshit, Voyager. JFC. Just as I said earlier in this thread:

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2020/...-franchise-tag

Appearing on the network's flagship “SportsCenter” telecast on Saturday, ESPN's Jeremy Fowler said that the Kansas City Chiefs are talking with their defensive tackle Chris Jones.

“I’m told the Chiefs and Jones have begun talking,” said Fowler, “which is a big victory because it’s been quiet for months on that front; they’ve really had no communication. They’ve at least started negotiating. The Chiefs got the Patrick Mahomes deal done. They’d like to move on to Jones, who is considered a top-three defensive tackle, but that’s going to cost them well over $20 million. It’s just unclear how far they’re willing to go at this point, but they want to keep one of their best players.”

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're a ****ing dipshit, Voyager. JFC.

Am... I missing something here?

This is what I said in the OP.

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Of course, Jones being traded still makes the most sense, given the Chiefs apparent inaction towards him.

To which you reply.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You have no idea where the Chiefs are with the Chris Jones negotiations.

I respond:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Thanks to reputable reporting, I do have some idea.

Then you post reputable reporting that there's been relative inaction regarding Chris Jones for months leading up to the Mahomes deal, and say:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're a ****ing dipshit, Voyager. JFC.

I mean, what the hell. What am I missing.

[Sassy Squatch]

Even when he's trying to be somewhat positive Direckshun still gets shit on.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

Even when he's trying to be somewhat positive Direckshun still gets shit on.

Well you know what them said. . . . 'sometimes when you would the whole thing.'

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Superturtle

Even when he's trying to be somewhat positive Direckshun still gets shit on.

[RealSNR]

I think we've been given enough time, and we can confidently say that the idiot tinfoil hatters who thought Veach was hired as a yes-man-only lackey GM to Andy Reid were entirely wrong.

I mean, why would the organization lie about something like that in the first place? What would they have been hiding? There are plenty of teams that have a powerful head coach with official assigned duties involving personnel in which they work alongside a GM. The Eagles straight up said, "Andy does this on the personnel side. Howie Roseman does the other stuff." These days it's not that way. Because Clark Hunt ****ing said so.

It was that way with Dorsey, too. Reid had INPUT, but all well-run organizations give their head coaches input on personnel. That's what they said. In a press conference. And that's what they said when Veach was hired. And that's what Reid continues to say.

Why does everything have to be a goddamn conspiracy theory with some of you morons?

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

I think we've been given enough time, and we can confidently say that the idiot tinfoil hatters who thought Veach was hired as a yes-man-only lackey GM to Andy Reid were entirely wrong.

Reid has spoken publicly many times about not wanting total control of which players play on his team. He said he had total control before and it didn't work out. Not just on the field but for him personally.

He just wanted to get back to coaching but have his opinion valued by the GM. He obviously listens to input. He also has said Mahomes being on this team is because of Veach. Veach bugging him. Leaving tapes/film of Mahomes in his office, giving them to his wife to give to Andy etc.

I think we got a helluva a player aquistion system in place. A potential GOAT QB. A Hall of Famer coach. It's a great time to be a Chiefs fan.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

I think we've been given enough time, and we can confidently say that the idiot tinfoil hatters who thought Veach was hired as a yes-man-only lackey GM to Andy Reid were entirely wrong.

I mean, why would the organization lie about something like that in the first place? What would they have been hiding? There are plenty of teams that have a powerful head coach with official assigned duties involving personnel in which they work alongside a GM. The Eagles straight up said, "Andy does this on the personnel side. Howie Roseman does the other stuff." These days it's not that way. Because Clark Hunt ****ing said so.

It was that way with Dorsey, too. Reid had INPUT, but all well-run organizations give their head coaches input on personnel. That's what they said. In a press conference. And that's what they said when Veach was hired. And that's what Reid continues to say.

Why does everything have to be a goddamn conspiracy theory with some of you morons?

I think, given Reid’s history, it was a valid concern that Veach would be his butt boy. Reid clashes with Dorsey on at least one key decision, and Dorsey was soon ousted.

Though his tenure was imperfect, Dorsey didn’t deserve to be ousted — he was probably the best GM we’ve had before Veach came along. It was reasonable to see this as a power struggle with Reid.

Fortunately, for whatever reasons the Chiefs dismissed Dorsey, they had an even better GM in the wings. What Veach has done the last two seasons has been truly extraordinary.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I think, given Reid’s history, it was a valid concern that Veach would be his butt boy. Reid clashes with Dorsey on at least one key decision, and Dorsey was soon ousted.

Though his tenure was imperfect, Dorsey didn’t deserve to be ousted — he was probably the best GM we’ve had before Veach came along. It was reasonable to see this as a power struggle with Reid.

Fortunately, for whatever reasons the Chiefs dismissed Dorsey, they had an even better GM in the wings. What Veach has done the last two seasons has been truly extraordinary.

For whatever reason? Really? How can you not see the difference here?

Veach has been amazing managing the cap. Dorsey was purely a scout...he just could not manage the cap competently.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by RunKC

For whatever reason? Really? How can you not see the difference here?

Veach has been amazing managing the cap. Dorsey was purely a scout...he just could not manage the cap competently.

I agree with the criticism. But let’s be honest: dude was a hell of a scout, and his maneuvering to land us Mahomes was the single greatest draft move in Chiefs (and maybe NFL) history.

I’d say Dorsey was the best GM we’ve had so far, other than Veach, who other than his disastrous 2018 offseason has asserted himself since as the GOAT.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by RunKC

For whatever reason? Really? How can you not see the difference here?

Veach has been amazing managing the cap. Dorsey was purely a scout...he just could not manage the cap competently.

Anthony Hitchens' contract called.

[VAGOMO 4 LIFE!]

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

Anthony Hitchens' contract called.

Hitchens was a lot better last year under Spags