Chiefs Chiefs right to pass on DeSean Jackson - Page 6

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

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

I think they view him as one of the biggest foundational pieces they have now.

Actually I'm pretty sure they do, or at least the players do. They're pretty high on th guy

I view him that way too.

But you can't then simultaneously go on and on and on and on and on about building through the draft when they acquired their centerpiece QB in EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE WAY.

O.city · 03-31-2014, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Well by all means, at least the true fans are happy.

Giving up 2 picks for Smith runs completely counter to building through the draft. That's just simple math. They gave up two 2nd rounders for him, making building through the draft that much harder. That's not a criticism, it's just a fact.

That's highly debatable.

At this point, I don't know that it's really that debatable.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

At this point, I don't know that it's really that debatable.

There were other free agents available that might have been able to scrap together a 9 or 10-win season with the guys we have...

O.city · 03-31-2014, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I view him that way too.

But you can't then simultaneously go on and on and on and on and on about building through the draft when they acquired their centerpiece QB in EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE WAY.

Does it really matter though?

They got their franchise quarterback, who they feel is someone who can shoulder the load for the next 5 years.

I don't really want them say some of that stuff, but I also don really care about how they go acquiring players

O.city · 03-31-2014, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

There were other free agents available that might have been able to scrap together a 9 or 10-win season with the guys we have...

There weren't any free agents available that could/can be what they think they have in Alex Smith though

**The Franchise** · 03-31-2014, 09:54 AM

How would Jackson have cost us a top player and maybe more? Flowers and Hali are more than likely gone next season....whether we sign Jackson or not. If signing Jackson causes us to not sign Smith, Houston or Berry....it's because they don't feel that either of the three are worth the money that they want. Don't try and force feed us a bunch of bullshit.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

There weren't any free agents available that could/can be what they think they have in Alex Smith though

Of course not.

It comes down to reconciling last year's approach with the stated "build through the draft" plan.

It can't be done.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

Does it really matter though?

Absolutely. After what we just went through with Pioli, treating the fans like mindless sheep is inexcusable.

Don't tell us to be patient and wait for the draft and then give away 2 high draft picks for Alex Smith.

Don't win 11 games and come within an inch of winning a playoff game in 20 years and then tell us to be patient and wait for the draft.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 03-31-2014, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

And the question you have to continue to ask is if this franchise could have afforded another 2 - 12 season. I get that we don't want to constantly be 8 - 8 but the fans would have shit all over Reid and Dorsey if they were terrible last year.

So I guess it's better to be shit on when you excite the fans going 11-5, then win 6-7 games the following season?

They could have shown ANY improvement and this fanbase would have been on board. And they could have shown improvement without surrendering two R2 picks and going against their own "plan" of building through the draft.

If anything, the organization made it harder on themselves.

chiefzilla1501 · 03-31-2014, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Well by all means, at least the true fans are happy.

Giving up 2 picks for Smith runs completely counter to building through the draft. That's just simple math. They gave up two 2nd rounders for him, making building through the draft that much harder. That's not a criticism, it's just a fact.

That's highly debatable.

And not winning games makes it that much harder for Andy Reid to be Andy Reid, arrowhead to be a home field advantage, and for the Chiefs to keep their own let alone convince players to come to a place where careers die.

I don't know how you can possibly sell in another losing season. I think people have forgotten that we were the most dysfunctional team in the league just a year ago. If Alex Smith helped bring fans back and helped Reid get his mojo back and made players like Bowe, Houston, and berry more likely to stay, then there is value there. I think they gave up too much. But I get why they did it and I get why they don't feel obligated to think that that trade suddenly takes drafting or responsible cap management off the table.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

So I guess it's better to be shit on when you excite the fans going 11-5, then win 6-7 games the following season?

They could have shown ANY improvement and this fanbase would have been on board. And they could have shown improvement without surrendering two R2 picks and going against their own "plan" of building through the draft.

If anything, the organization made it harder on themselves.

Yep, they set the expectations from Day 1.

**The Franchise** · 03-31-2014, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

And not winning games makes it that much harder for Andy Reid to be Andy Reid, arrowhead to be a home field advantage, and for the Chiefs to keep their own let alone convince players to come to a place where careers die.

I don't know how you can possibly sell in another losing season. I think people have forgotten that we were the most dysfunctional team in the league just a year ago. If Alex Smith helped bring fans back and helped Reid get his mojo back and made players like Bowe, Houston, and berry more likely to stay, then there is value there. I think they gave up too much. But I get why they did it and I get why they don't feel obligated to think that that trade suddenly takes drafting or responsible cap management off the table.

So what happens when they win 6 games this season? We get the excuse of "it's a process" and "let the young guys develop"? Chiefs fans have been dealing with the same bullshit show for ****ing ever.

chiefzilla1501 · 03-31-2014, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

So I guess it's better to be shit on when you excite the fans going 11-5, then win 6-7 games the following season?

They could have shown ANY improvement and this fanbase would have been on board. And they could have shown improvement without surrendering two R2 picks and going against their own "plan" of building through the draft.

If anything, the organization made it harder on themselves.

That is total bullshit. This fan base would have destroyed the team, coaches, and Dorsey if we were no good. Especially given how bad things were left with pioli. The chiefs did a massive amount of PR to win the fans back.

Discuss Thrower · 03-31-2014, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

And not winning games makes it that much harder for Andy Reid to be Andy Reid, arrowhead to be a home field advantage, and for the Chiefs to keep their own let alone convince players to come to a place where careers die.

I don't know how you can possibly sell in another losing season. I think people have forgotten that we were the most dysfunctional team in the league just a year ago. If Alex Smith helped bring fans back and helped Reid get his mojo back and made players like Bowe, Houston, and berry more likely to stay, then there is value there. I think they gave up too much. But I get why they did it and I get why they don't feel obligated to think that that trade suddenly takes drafting or responsible cap management off the table.

Home field advantage?

Stop trolling.

The fact is the team had —and still has— to be rebuilt. The only way to rebuild is to endure a few losing seasons to stock up on picks and make common sense FA acquisitions.

htismaqe · 03-31-2014, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

That is total bullshit. This fan base would have destroyed the team, coaches, and Dorsey if we were no good. Especially given how bad things were left with pioli. The chiefs did a massive amount of PR to win the fans back.

And they're going to undo it all in year 2.

What do you think is going to happen if they win 6 games this season after doing literally NOTHING in free agency?

Because you know who gauges free agency activity the most? TRUE FANS.

03-31-2014, 07:10 AM
Stryker In Mahomes I trust! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Casino cash: $2554636	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: 5,952

03-31-2014, 09:54 AM	#81
The Franchise Most Valuable Villain Join Date: Dec 2006 Casino cash: $3135047	How would Jackson have cost us a top player and maybe more? Flowers and Hali are more than likely gone next season....whether we sign Jackson or not. If signing Jackson causes us to not sign Smith, Houston or Berry....it's because they don't feel that either of the three are worth the money that they want. Don't try and force feed us a bunch of bullshit.
Posts: 91,989