Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 9598853)

I was referring to the difference in Fisher's contract and Albert's. You save 9-10 million, but you can poo poo away the contract you have to pay his replacement. You save 4-5 million by making this move.

Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 9598861)

But you take the best draft pick in franchise history to plug a hole you CHOSE to create.

It's treading water (at best.)

There's no way in hell I'd dish Albert for only a 2...

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 9598812)

You can literally pull up 100 posts from any of the major contributors to this board that make them look foolish. It doesn't mean shit to be wrong a few times when your opinion is stamped to every move the team has made over the years. You can't win em all.

Making those kinds of comments about a poster with as many opinions on here as clay has is silly and makes you seem even more silly when you have your amount of posts over the course of over a decade.

It's like a guy going to batting practice for 20 minutes laughing at the guy that has been there all day because he swung and missed on a few pitches.

Chances are, if you were there all day you would swing and miss a whole lot more.

Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy (Post 9598867)

I agree. It's most likely a lateral move. I was just pointing out the lateral move only saves 4-5 million which doesn't buy much on the FA market, not the 9-10 million that he was suggested we would save.

Originally Posted by COchief (Post 9598844)

Hilarious that you, of all people, would rush in to his defense.

You are both the exact same when you zero in on one player, although GC is choosing negative, and you chose positive. You are both borderline insane and can not be reasoned with when it comes to that.

Here's exhibit A: Do you still think Ricky Stanzi could achieve being even a below average starting quarterback in the NFL? Or even a bottom type like Cassel, Fitz, Ponder etc? Basically could he lead a team to 10-6 with an average team against the easiest schedule like Cassel did in 2010?

Also you are liar and obviously have some mental problems as evidenced with the Dane drama.

And yes, being here and lurking a lot and seeing GCs antics does make me more qualified to comment on his behavior than someone who came 7 years after me and posted 20k times about how he just "knows Ricky can save this franchise, if only he can just get a chance..."

I am not cherry picking, I have only really focused on his behavior regarding DMC and Sean Smith, both of which he is locked on to RIGHT NOW. Admittedly with a small cheap shot about Cassel thrown in.

Originally Posted by Rausch (Post 9598894)

Since we CAN work it out I'd prefer to draft "Rookie LT" and play him at RT for a year while Albert is still franchised.

Yes, we can afford to do that.

If Albert couldn't be signed long term after that you have a guy with a year in him to move to LT (not a green rookie) and and you've played a season with both LT and RT zipped up.

Albert is traded/released (and if released giving us a high comp pick) and at worst we have a need at RT again that's easy to fill...

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 9598899)

Fact is, Clay has been right a whole lot more than he has been wrong the last couple years and it drives guys like you crazy.

It's funny to watch.

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 9598714)

Is it possible that they like Don Stephenson enough to start him at LT and start Geoff at RT?

I have a hard time believing they are gonna just burn that top pick, but that's obviously been the plan since the get go.

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 9598840)

You know, as little sense as this makes for the Chiefs, have we discussed how assinine this is from the Dolphins standpoint?

We're letting a guy go because he wants Top 5 LT money. And they're certainly going to replace him with a slam dunk tackle in the draft. I don't agree with that move, but at least it makes sense.

You know what doesn't make sense? Letting your 1.1 tackle go so you can replace him with a guy that will cost you at least a 2nd rounder to acquire and pay him more than the guy you just let go who's better.

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy (Post 9598913)

I don't believe this to be true- at all.

Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 9598910)

I'd rather trade Albert and a pick to the Packers for the 26th pick.

Packers Oline is alway banged up and Aaron Rogers needs to win now. Screw Miami

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 9598899)

I have talked with Clay for about 10 years on here and other sites. I know how he goes overboard at times, as I do. For years and years people said he was constantly flip flopping...now, it's bad that he sticks to his guns? Ok.

What I'm saying is that it's easy to focus on the takes of a couple situations and ignore the rest when you want to throw stones at a guy that posts a lot.

Perfect example is bringing up 2-3 year old posts of mine about Stanzi.

Shit, throw Studebaker in that conversation as well as I thought he had a nice ceiling after his proday.

Fact is, Clay has been right a whole lot more than he has been wrong the last couple years and it drives guys like you crazy.

It's funny to watch.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 9598381)

Thanks!

You know, I think this opinion will be unpopular, but if the Chiefs kept Albert, I think Austin would be the biggest immediate impact player at 1.1.