Kansas Crimson

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:59 pm Can we get Justin Houston back on a cheap deal?

No way. If he was gonna sign cheap he wouldn’t of been cut. I think he’s got enough people interested that he’s gonna make some decent money. Would be nice though for sure.

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:59 pm Can we get Justin Houston back on a cheap deal?

If there ends up being no market for him, it could be a possibility.

Highly unlikely, but not a 0% chance.

columbusdjkc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:28 pm

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:59 pm Can we get Justin Houston back on a cheap deal?

No way. If he was gonna sign cheap he wouldn’t of been cut. I think he’s got enough people interested that he’s gonna make some decent money. Would be nice though for sure.

It is a little strange that there have been no reported visits by Houston. Only by Berry to Dallas so far.

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:45 pm

columbusdjkc wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:28 pm

pdub wrote: ↑Tue Mar 19, 2019 1:59 pm Can we get Justin Houston back on a cheap deal?

No way. If he was gonna sign cheap he wouldn’t of been cut. I think he’s got enough people interested that he’s gonna make some decent money. Would be nice though for sure.

It is a little strange that there have been no reported visits by Houston. Only by Berry to Dallas so far.

I read an article earlier today that said Houston had narrowed his list to three teams. I think for whatever reason his recruitment is just a little more quiet.

Being reported this morning that Hill has been the subject of a lot of trade talks this offseason.

Even before this new incident. Interesting.

Justin Houston to Colts on a 2 year deal. 24 million.

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2019 12:52 pm Being reported this morning that Hill has been the subject of a lot of trade talks this offseason.

Even before this new incident. Interesting.

This can’t be true

Reported by multiple people. LaCanfora. Jay Glazer as well.

Apparently Chiefs were worried about the possibility of an incident happening.

You guys have quite a bit of wiggle room having Mahomes at QB. Enjoy him for as long as you can.

I definitely can understand why the Chiefs would have quietly shopped Tyreek a month ago. History says you don't need to give a franchise quarterback the highest paid receiver in the league. Just surround him with a lot of capable talent.

Now, you only trade him if you think a criminal hammer is coming down.

NewtonHawk11 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2019 5:22 pm Reported by multiple people. LaCanfora. Jay Glazer as well.

Apparently Chiefs were worried about the possibility of an incident happening.

Well - other than you always have to be worried about that with a guy with Hill's track record, I'm not sure this has to be true. Other than a no-shit franchise QB (which the Chiefs now have), there should be no such thing as untradeable in any professional sport. If someone wants to give you a king's ransom for Hill (or Kelce, or Jones)...you take it.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2019 7:48 pm I definitely can understand why the Chiefs would have quietly shopped Tyreek a month ago. History says you don't need to give a franchise quarterback the highest paid receiver in the league. Just surround him with a lot of capable talent.

Now, you only trade him if you think a criminal hammer is coming down.

Eh - I think he's radioactive at the moment.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:41 am

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Mar 21, 2019 7:48 pm I definitely can understand why the Chiefs would have quietly shopped Tyreek a month ago. History says you don't need to give a franchise quarterback the highest paid receiver in the league. Just surround him with a lot of capable talent.

Now, you only trade him if you think a criminal hammer is coming down.

Eh - I think he's radioactive at the moment.

I guess I'm speaking in terms of what his return is. Lowest trade value he's had in years.

Right. If nothing else, you're better off riding the worst of this out (rather than taking a 5th or something now).

Hill will play in the NFL again. If you don't want that to be for your team, that's fine and I can respect the principle. But you have an opportunity to dictate the terms of that exit (and the return for it).

Chefs probably started shopping him when he got back together with his baby momma.

Gronk retiring makes the Chiefs an even bigger favorite.

Agreed. Chiefs win that game if they stop just one pass to Gronk on a third down.

Gronk is not nearly the guy he once was, but he was still so damn tough to stop in key situations.

Also a great blocker - and used a lot this year for that purpose.
If Tyreek Hill's thing isn't as damning as it first seemed then I like our chances.

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Mar 25, 2019 8:33 am Also a great blocker - and used a lot this year for that purpose.
If Tyreek Hill's thing isn't as damning as it first seemed then I like our chances.

I say this from a football standpoint only: Hill's thing (not unlike Pooka's) happened at about the best time you could hope for it to happen. The NFL offseason is a hurricane of news, and for it to come out in the middle of a frenzied free agency period, and before the hype machine that is the draft...there's a decent chance it can just sort of be shuffled into the deck.

Good point. Other than the first flurry of news coming out it has been very quiet ever since. Sounds and seems like a lot of moving parts and a bunch of 'he said, she said' scenarios. As long as video evidence doesn't come up 'Reek will be with the Chiefs next year. The real question is what does this do for 'Reek's long term deal if there is even one at all...

What a sad moment that was watching EB and Gronk playing against each other. Two players who were shells of there former All Pro selves except that Gronk had just a little bit more left than EB.