Chiefs close to a deal with Tyrann Mathieu (now confirmed)

[Dante84]

The Chiefs are close to a deal with S Tyrann Mathieu, I’m told

— Terez A. Paylor (@TerezPaylor) March 11, 2019

Former Texans’ S Tyrann Mathieu intends to sign a three-year, $42 million deal with the Kansas City Chiefs, per a league source.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) March 11, 2019

[O.city]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

We shouldn't spend on another safety now. Go draft one in the first couple of rounds and then add him to Mathieu, Watts and Lucas.

I know it's sacrilegious to say around here, but if they're confident in Berry just roll with him and hope it works out.

I dunno. Frustrating

[IMG]

via GIPHY

[/IMG]

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

You look at the amount of !@#$ing dead weight that team carried last year and just call it another TYPE of failure.

If they didn't have the money to sign him, that's not any better of a justification. They left the season with about $3 million in cap space. They could've cleared $4 million but dumping Sorensen and there was no good reason not to have replaced Colquitt with Dickerson in the draft and saved yourself another million.

So you're at $8 million right there, without dicking with Hitchens or Watkins. You give him his $10 million AAV and move some cap around via the signing bonus and you could've easily gotten that done with him getting $10 million in year 1 but with a cap charge around $6 million.

They may have some excuse for it, but it's just another bad job from Brett Veach. If that's his justification, it's just him conceding a mistake and nothing else.

If he wasn't important enough to cut Daniel !@#$ing Sorensen over, why is he suddenly a $14 million player?

Can't really argue with a lot of this...Veach may not be the best GM...

Also why is this team so in love with Sorenson? Dude is a scrub.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

They may have some excuse for it, but it's just another bad job from Brett Veach. If that's his justification, it's just him conceding a mistake and nothing else.

If he wasn't important enough to cut Daniel !@#$ing Sorensen over, why is he suddenly a $14 million player?

This isn’t Veach. It’s Andy.

None of these moves are being made bc of Andy’s loyalty.

If anyone doesn’t believe that, I will happily point you to Eric Berry.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Iconic

That's the thing so why even get him if he struggled. I was warming up to him right up until GB got Amos for what they got him. It's just unreal they saw Mathieu and thought wow this guy is absolutely amazing he's definitely a whole 5m per year better than Amos lol.

Just looks like Veach panicked to me.

We don't know the structures of the deal yet.

All that really matters is the first year cap hit and the guaranteed money. It's entirely possible Amos' contract has more of both even though it's less yearly.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by RunKC

This isn’t Veach. It’s Andy.

None of these moves are being made bc of Andy’s loyalty.

If anyone doesn’t believe that, I will happily point you to Eric Berry.

What were they supposed to do with Eric Berry last year? They couldn't cut him.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Veach is clearly a Reid puppet. Berry aside, the Watkins deal has Andy Reid written all over it.

[New World Order]

Originally Posted by RunKC

This isn’t Veach. It’s Andy.

None of these moves are being made bc of Andy’s loyalty.

If anyone doesn’t believe that, I will happily point you to Eric Berry.

If Eric Berry stays, Clark may be behind it.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

If they know something we don’t about Berry regarding his health in a positive way, they may decide to keep him. And if he was able to stay healthy, you’d have the best set of safeties in football probably.

It’s a delicate situation not knowing the details.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19

If they know something we don’t about Berry regarding his health in a positive way, they may decide to keep him. And if he was able to stay healthy, you’d have the best set of safeties in football probably.

It’s a delicate situation not knowing the details.

They didn't know anything we didn't know last year.

They thought they did. But turns out they had no goddamn idea.

So whatever they think they know at this point is irrelevant because when it gets right down to it, they don't seem to actually know shit when it comes to the health of Eric Berry.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

They didn't know anything we didn't know last year.

They thought they did. But turns out they had no goddamn idea.

So whatever they think they know at this point is irrelevant because when it gets right down to it, they don't seem to actually know shit when it comes to the health of Eric Berry.

I just can't see them going thru another 2018 situation with him. So they either cut him or if they keep him have some kind of assurances that he's good to go.

right?

[pugsnotdrugs19]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

They didn't know anything we didn't know last year.

They thought they did. But turns out they had no goddamn idea.

So whatever they think they know at this point is irrelevant because when it gets right down to it, they don't seem to actually know shit when it comes to the health of Eric Berry.

Here’s my reason for pondering on it.

Berry said he wanted to play in the Colts game but basically was told he wasn’t going to. He acted like he was good to go for that game.

Then he practices a full week as a full participant before playing a full game against NE. Then, we find out that doctors have told him not to have the surgery, he’s better off without it.

So who knows really? There was definitely some major mishandling of the situation last year, but if they really are confident he’s going to be fine, keeping him could be your best option. Only people close to him would know these things, how he feels, how he felt throughout the final month of the season.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

I just can't see them going thru another 2018 situation with him. So they either cut him or if they keep him have some kind of assurances that he's good to go.

right?

What kind of 'assurances' can they possibly have?

The dude has a malformation in his friggen foot. And he's not having it surgically repaired. And anytime someone asks him about his health he gives these vague, cagey non-answers that make it sound like he's decided that acupuncture and 3 servings a day of Kombucha will fix it right up.

there's nothing on this planet or any other that Eric Berry could say, do or sign that would provide me any 'assurance' at all that the dude is remotely sound.

He's a complete flake at this point. He's on the wrong side of 30, he's had a history of major lower body injuries and cancer and he's going to have to learn a brand new system.

C'mon - there's no assurances here. It's a reckless gamble born of misplaced loyalty.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

What kind of 'assurances' can they possibly have?

The dude has a malformation in his friggen foot. And he's not having it surgically repaired. And anytime someone asks him about his health he gives these vague, cagey non-answers that make it sound like he's decided that acupuncture and 3 servings a day of Kombucha will fix it right up.

there's nothing on this planet or any other that Eric Berry could say, do or sign that would provide me any 'assurance' at all that the dude is remotely sound.

He's a complete flake at this point. He's on the wrong side of 30, he's had a history of major lower body injuries and cancer and he's going to have to learn a brand new system.

C'mon - there's no assurances here. It's a reckless gamble born of misplaced loyalty.

I mean, are we sure that's whats actually wrong with the heel? Did the Chiefs ever actually come out and say?

I think you're probably right but I just can't imagine they're that dumb

[pugsnotdrugs19]

We all have a right to our own opinions but here’s my view on the Chiefs and their FA approach.

Every team overspends on pretty much every player. They mostly all get more than they should in theory. So if I’m gonna overpay for a player, at least give me someone who can be a true difference maker, a legit talented playmaker.

Are Watkins and Mathieu overpaid on a per year basis? Probably. But at least those guys are the types who can win a game for you here and there. Most of the dudes who get these big deals aren’t that far from being JAG.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19

We all have a right to our own opinions but here’s my view on the Chiefs and their FA approach.

Every team overspends on pretty much every player. They mostly all get more than they should in theory. So if I’m gonna overpay for a player, at least give me someone who can be a true difference maker, a legit talented playmaker.

Are Watkins and Mathieu overpaid on a per year basis? Probably. But at least those guys are the types who can win a game for you here and there. Most of the dudes who get these big deals aren’t that far from being JAG.

Like Hitchens?

Though I do think that the 4-3 switch and another year here will make that deal damn palatable going forward. Especially now that off-ball linebackers are being paid like pass-rushers.

I'd be surprised if he doesn't play out his whole contract at this point. For as bad as that deal looked last season, deals being signed right now could make that look like a bargain as early as next year.

Which brings me back to my original question - why the hell didn't they try harder to get Matthieu done in an off-season where the money wasn't nearly as insane? Sure would be nice to have him locked in for 3 years and $30 remaining, which would've been pretty easy to put on the back of a deal last season...