Chiefs Chiefs right to pass on DeSean Jackson - Page 3

Stryker · 03-31-2014, 07:10 AM

From a purely football standpoint, the Kansas City Chiefs couldn't have found a better wide receiver for their balky passing game than DeSean Jackson. He definitely would have provided life to a group of wide receivers that was last in the NFL in 2013 in targets, catches and yardage.

Since 2008 Jackson has 21 touchdowns of 30 or more yards and was third in average yards per catch at 17.2 for the Philadelphia Eagles, who released him last week. Add in the fact Jackson thrived for the first five seasons of his NFL career playing for Andy Reid, now coaching the Chiefs, and Jackson coming to Kansas City seemed to make a lot of sense. But the Chiefs will look elsewhere, probably to the draft, for that receiving help. After making some initial inquiries into Jackson's availability, the Chiefs backed off, reportedly because of cost concerns.

The Chiefs, who have about $4.5 million of remaining cap space, could have found a way to squeeze Jackson's salary under their limit. But at what cost? The Chiefs would like to re-sign quarterback Alex Smith and linebacker Justin Houston before they can become free agents next year. Neither will come at a favorable price. Safety Eric Berry is among the players who could become an unrestricted free agent in 2016 and he too will be expensive.

Signing Jackson at top dollar would have cost them one of those players and perhaps more. But there's something else at work here. Adding Jackson would have smelled of panic. It would have been a sign the Chiefs were veering away from their plan, making it up on the fly. You can argue the merits of their plan, but Reid and general manager John Dorsey prefer to find their stars, the players they build the foundation around, through the draft and not as free agents.

Listen closely to what Reid said recently about free agency.

"Listen, I'm not a huge free-agency guy," Reid said last week at the NFL meetings in Orlando, Fla. "I don't think you build a team that way. I think you build it through a draft. There are so many elements that go into a player actually fitting into your program and being successful, that if you get them right when they're peaking in that system and then you disrupt that and move them on to another system, that can be tough. So, the percentage has dropped, the success rate has dropped. I think you spot a guy here or there.

"Then you have the other element that it has the chance to disrupt your locker room. This guy has been with me for 10 years and is making X amount and then all of the sudden you bring in a free agent who might be as good, but maybe not as good, and you're paying him way up here and all of the sudden you have this rift that goes on in the locker room. I think you have to be real, real careful on who you bring in and how you do it.”

Adding Jackson at something less than a premium price might have made sense. The Chiefs wouldn't need to guess about projecting how Jackson might do in Reid's system. They could look at his production from those five seasons they were together with the Eagles.

But the Chiefs made their decision, for better or for worse, about a high-priced wide receiver last year when they re-signed Dwayne Bowe for five years and $56 million. That's about all a team can reasonably afford without gutting another part of the roster.

That's not to say a move of this nature would always be a bad move for the Chiefs. When their salary cap is in better shape and the signing of a big-money player like Jackson might reasonably put the Chiefs in the Super Bowl, they should go for it, by all means.

And there will be a time and place. But this wasn't it.

http://espn.go.com/blog/kansas-city-...ass-on-jackson

Marcellus · 03-31-2014, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It's the mantra until it comes time to trade away picks for Alex Smith and then it's suddenly swept under the rug...

You only have the options available to you at the time.

We should have drafted who?

Give me favorite CP line please. Its up on a tee for you.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 03-31-2014, 08:45 AM

Teicher must read CP.

The rationalization here started 36 hours ago.

Marcellus · 03-31-2014, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

First of all, you didn't even bother to read my post.

Second of all, it's hilariously stupid that you continue to call it complaining. Everything I say is matter-of-fact.

I get it, you have an emotional attachment to the team. That's why you have to vehemently defend every ****ing stupid move they make.

I don't care. I'm just saying it like I see it. Get over it.

I am not vehemently defending anything and am in fact am much less emotional and matter of fact in my post than you are.

Laugh away, the proof is all over CP in every Chiefs related thread.

Marcellus · 03-31-2014, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Teicher must read CP.

The rationalization here started 36 hours ago.

Well he couldn't be right could he? That would just destroy all the hand wringers here all the work they put in stressing about it.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 03-31-2014, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I'm not a masochist because the Chiefs don't make me feel pain. I don't really feel anything at all actually, until the games come on. And even then, when they lose, I can laugh about it...

I was that way, then they suckered me in at the end of last season.

Between the dumpster fire in Indy and the lack of urgency this offseason, I won't be making that mistake again. Likely done with fantasy football and Sunday Ticket as well.

Will be nice to play golf on Sundays.

WakkaWakka · 03-31-2014, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

First of all, you didn't even bother to read my post.

Second of all, it's hilariously stupid that you continue to call it complaining. Everything I say is matter-of-fact.

I get it, you have an emotional attachment to the team. That's why you have to vehemently defend every ****ing stupid move they make.

I don't care. I'm just saying it like I see it. Get over it.

I've been pretty numb to this team and anything they do since going to Indy just to watch them lose a 28 pt lead.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 03-31-2014, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Well he couldn't be right could he? That would just destroy all the hand wringers here all the work they put in stressing about it.

Yeah, it would have been terrible to add a 27 year old elite talent at a position of desperate need.

Now that we've passed, almost everyone changes their tune.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 03-31-2014, 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WakkaWakka

This. I've been pretty numb to this team and anything they do since going to Indy just to watch them lose a 28 pt lead.

Witnessing it in person certainly didn't help matters.

WakkaWakka · 03-31-2014, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Witnessing it in person certainly didn't help matters.

Definitely not falling for it again...my wife has repeatedly told me this team will never win anything of significance again and nothing changes. I'm starting to believe her.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

You only have the options available to you at the time.

We should have drafted who?

Give me favorite CP line please. Its up on a tee for you.

It's quite simple. Don't say you're building through the draft and then trade away picks. Just be honest about it. The fans aren't stupid.

Marcellus · 03-31-2014, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yeah, it would have been terrible to add a 27 year old elite talent at a position of desperate need.

Now that we've passed, almost everyone changes their tune.

Look at all the quality teams that have jumped to get such a talented 27 year old WR.

Call it justification all you want, the proof is right in front of your eyes. How you decide to see it is up to you.

L.A. Chieffan · 03-31-2014, 08:55 AM

They have a plan. Get over it.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

I am not vehemently defending anything and am in fact am much less emotional and matter of fact in my post than you are.

Laugh away, the proof is all over CP in every Chiefs related thread.

Proof of what?

You haven't established anything other than the fact that you can't handle anything resembling a criticism of your beloved Chiefs.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 03-31-2014, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Look at all the quality teams that have jumped to get such a talented 27 year old WR.

Call it justification all you want, the proof is right in front of your eyes. How you decide to see it is up to you.

There's NINE teams interested. He's making his first visit TODAY.

This was never going to happen instantly.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Now that we've passed, almost everyone changes their tune.

That's really what it boils down to, isn't it?

Chiefs reportedly in on DeSean Jackson? HE'S AWSOME! GOTTA HAVE HIM!

Chiefs reportedly not interested in Jackson? HEADCASE! DIDN'T WANT HIM ANYWAY!

03-31-2014, 07:10 AM
Stryker In Mahomes I trust! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Casino cash: $2094636	Chiefs right to pass on DeSean Jackson From a purely football standpoint, the Kansas City Chiefs couldn't have found a better wide receiver for their balky passing game than DeSean Jackson. He definitely would have provided life to a group of wide receivers that was last in the NFL in 2013 in targets, catches and yardage. Since 2008 Jackson has 21 touchdowns of 30 or more yards and was third in average yards per catch at 17.2 for the Philadelphia Eagles, who released him last week. Add in the fact Jackson thrived for the first five seasons of his NFL career playing for Andy Reid, now coaching the Chiefs, and Jackson coming to Kansas City seemed to make a lot of sense. But the Chiefs will look elsewhere, probably to the draft, for that receiving help. After making some initial inquiries into Jackson's availability, the Chiefs backed off, reportedly because of cost concerns. The Chiefs, who have about $4.5 million of remaining cap space, could have found a way to squeeze Jackson's salary under their limit. But at what cost? The Chiefs would like to re-sign quarterback Alex Smith and linebacker Justin Houston before they can become free agents next year. Neither will come at a favorable price. Safety Eric Berry is among the players who could become an unrestricted free agent in 2016 and he too will be expensive. Signing Jackson at top dollar would have cost them one of those players and perhaps more. But there's something else at work here. Adding Jackson would have smelled of panic. It would have been a sign the Chiefs were veering away from their plan, making it up on the fly. You can argue the merits of their plan, but Reid and general manager John Dorsey prefer to find their stars, the players they build the foundation around, through the draft and not as free agents. Listen closely to what Reid said recently about free agency. "Listen, I'm not a huge free-agency guy," Reid said last week at the NFL meetings in Orlando, Fla. "I don't think you build a team that way. I think you build it through a draft. There are so many elements that go into a player actually fitting into your program and being successful, that if you get them right when they're peaking in that system and then you disrupt that and move them on to another system, that can be tough. So, the percentage has dropped, the success rate has dropped. I think you spot a guy here or there. "Then you have the other element that it has the chance to disrupt your locker room. This guy has been with me for 10 years and is making X amount and then all of the sudden you bring in a free agent who might be as good, but maybe not as good, and you're paying him way up here and all of the sudden you have this rift that goes on in the locker room. I think you have to be real, real careful on who you bring in and how you do it.” Adding Jackson at something less than a premium price might have made sense. The Chiefs wouldn't need to guess about projecting how Jackson might do in Reid's system. They could look at his production from those five seasons they were together with the Eagles. But the Chiefs made their decision, for better or for worse, about a high-priced wide receiver last year when they re-signed Dwayne Bowe for five years and $56 million. That's about all a team can reasonably afford without gutting another part of the roster. That's not to say a move of this nature would always be a bad move for the Chiefs. When their salary cap is in better shape and the signing of a big-money player like Jackson might reasonably put the Chiefs in the Super Bowl, they should go for it, by all means. And there will be a time and place. But this wasn't it. http://espn.go.com/blog/kansas-city-...ass-on-jackson
Posts: 6,059

03-31-2014, 08:45 AM	#32
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $4651115	Teicher must read CP. The rationalization here started 36 hours ago.
Posts: 60,273

03-31-2014, 08:55 AM	#42
L.A. Chieffan PLAY GOOD FOOTBALL Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: American Gardens Building Casino cash: $3908654	They have a plan. Get over it.
Posts: 17,368