Brett Veach should be fired

[reesebobby 5,662]

Just now, sith13 said:

Definitely, and we might have actually stepped it up from last year as well. However we only do those by not being content with where we are by accepting our problems but rather upgrading wherever possible. If Veach is the problem as Sutton was then upgrading at GM will only make us better. 

And what if he's a young GM with a lot of upside and promise that they like?  What if he has a great relationship with Andy and they are happy and Reid likes him?  We are gonna fire him because Fisher, Hill and Watkins got hurt and a complete rebuild of the defense, including scheme change and coordinator change, is still a work in progress after 5 games?  Because the running game has been hurt by Hunt punching some lady?  Or are we mad because he traded up 5 spots to get Hardman when Hill was potentially in trouble and Watkins was injured.  Where would we have been Sunday without Hardman?  This team is one of the very best in the NFL. 

[azchief21 5,278]

1 minute ago, dksww said:

There's no facts here.  It's a ridiculous opinion.  lol, "facts".

The defense giving up 524 yards and us only rushing for 41 is an opinion?

[dksww 484]

1 minute ago, azchief21 said:

The defense giving up 524 yards and us only rushing for 41 is an opinion?

Mahomes is being wasted opinion.

[dksww 484]

8 minutes ago, Iluvhouse24 said:

Yeah that 2018 draft looks awful. No one is arguing it. But I have someone arguing that Veach is no better with the cap than Dorsey. That's basically looking at a stop sign and deciding it doesnt say stop. It's not an opinion. Veach IS better with the cap than Dorsey. The numbers are right there.

No, there's no debate there.  The cap situation and contract handling is much better.

This next draft I just want to see the Chiefs stand pat and let the draft fall to them and if anything, trade down and pick up more chances at getting good players.

[sith13 1,746]

12 minutes ago, Iluvhouse24 said:

Yeah that 2018 draft looks awful. No one is arguing it. But I have someone arguing that Veach is no better with the cap than Dorsey. That's basically looking at a stop sign and deciding it doesnt say stop. It's not an opinion. Veach IS better with the cap than Dorsey. The numbers are right there.

How so? We can't get out of Hitchens deal until 2022 (the last year) and that's with 1/3rd of his deal going to dead money. In case of Clark we cannot get out until his last year with 1/5th going to dead money. How is his contracts any better than Dorsey's?

In the mean time we paid Watkins top 5 WR money as well as HB being a top 5 Safety in FA. BTW I love Okafor signing and the Ogbah trade. However I don't see any improvement in Veach over Dorsey in terms of contracts. We might actually be in worse situation as the players don't seem to be the right ones. 

[Chiefmanzada 466]

40 minutes ago, dksww said:

You had never heard of Frank Clark?  🤔   How is that Veach's fault that you don't know of a good player?  🙄

Nope never heard of him. From the looks of his play so far, looks to be fairly justified. 

Glad he had success in Seattle, but this is the AFC West. Much tougher opponents in our division than the past Cardinals and 49ers. 

[Chiefmanzada 466]

The Patriots Consistently make it to the AFC Championship if not the Superbowl.

Have we ever seen them commit such an outrageous trade such as the one Veach made with Clark? A 1st and 2nd rounder with a whopping 100 million dollar contract to go with it. 

We know what we have in Mahomes. So why are we breaking the bank for a pass rusher, when last year we had a dominant pass rush and still didn't accomplish the mission. 

[sith13 1,746]

6 minutes ago, reesebobby said:

And what if he's a young GM with a lot of upside and promise that they like?  What if he has a great relationship with Andy and they are happy and Reid likes him?  We are gonna fire him because Fisher, Hill and Watkins got hurt and a complete rebuild of the defense, including scheme change and coordinator change, is still a work in progress after 5 games?  Because the running game has been hurt by Hunt punching some lady?  Or are we mad because he traded up 5 spots to get Hardman when Hill was potentially in trouble and Watkins was injured.  Where would we have been Sunday without Hardman?  This team is one of the very best in the NFL. 

Actually we probably lost Saturday because of Hardman and could have lost in Detroit again because of Hardman. We had glaring holes at LG and OC entering the draft (assuming everyone stays healthy all over). Then we go ahead and pick a WR. Hill is out yet Hardman is still our #3 or #4 WR. The reality of football is that WRs are dime a dozen, you can find similar guys in late rounds or even undrafted ones. Now we have a line that can't protect Mahomes yet we should be happy because we have a guy who gets 4-5 targets a game if a few guys ahead of him are injured?

[Iluvhouse24 1,808]

4 minutes ago, sith13 said:

How so? We can't get out of Hitchens deal until 2022 (the last year) and that's with 1/3rd of his deal going to dead money. In case of Clark we cannot get out until his last year with 1/5th going to dead money. How is his contracts any better than Dorsey's?

In the mean time we paid Watkins top 5 WR money as well as HB being a top 5 Safety in FA. BTW I love Okafor signing and the Ogbah trade. However I don't see any improvement in Veach over Dorsey in terms of contracts. We might actually be in worse situation as the players don't seem to be the right ones. 

You see what you want to see. You can cherry pick all you want and point to the bad ones. If you are somehow unaware of the fact that we are in better cap shape than when Dorsey left, then you are really bad at math or just being obtuse on purpose.

Watkins contract was given to a 24 year old and structured to be able to get out of it after 3 seasons. Same way Mathieu's iss structured. After 2021 we can release him and save 17 million dollars and he would still only be 29 at that time.

Dorsey was giving big money to 3rd contract players on their last legs, and he never built deals the way Veach has with early outs.

[Mloe68 1,521]

1 hour ago, dksww said:

Mahomes is being wasted opinion.

That's not really a valid opinion in my opinion. LOL  How many 24 year olds have won the MVP, a division title, gotten a number 1 seed, broken a long home playoff drought, gotten within 1 play of the Super Bowl and currently sit in first place at 4-1 with a horribly banged up team? And they are being wasted? That's just absolutely disrepectful to Andy Reid and a lot of offensive guys around him that help him put up those guady stats including one of the top 3 WRs in football Tyreek Hill. The best TE in football Travis Kelce. Two bookend tackles. And a slew of others who've had huge games. The defense is being reworked completely. It takes time. 

[azchief21 5,278]

37 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

That's not really a valid opinion in my opinion. LOL  How many 24 year olds have won the MVP, a division title, gotten a number 1 seed, broken a long home playoff drought, gotten within 1 play of the Super Bowl and currently sit in first place at 4-1 with a horribly banged up team? And they are being wasted? That's just absolutely disrepectful to Andy Reid and a lot of offensive guys around him that help him put up those guady stats including one of the top 3 WRs in football Tyreek Hill. The best TE in football Travis Kelce. Two bookend tackles. And a slew of others who've had huge games. The defense is being reworked completely. It takes time. 

Do think Mahomes played well enough to win the Super Bowl last year?

[sith13 1,746]

15 hours ago, Iluvhouse24 said:

You see what you want to see. You can cherry pick all you want and point to the bad ones. If you are somehow unaware of the fact that we are in better cap shape than when Dorsey left, then you are really bad at math or just being obtuse on purpose.

Watkins contract was given to a 24 year old and structured to be able to get out of it after 3 seasons. Same way Mathieu's iss structured. After 2021 we can release him and save 17 million dollars and he would still only be 29 at that time.

Dorsey was giving big money to 3rd contract players on their last legs, and he never built deals the way Veach has with early outs.

It's no different to give bad contracts to guys in their first big deals than those in their third ones. If the players are bad the contracts simply keep hurting with limited cap. Tell me one considerable contract in Veach era that actually didn't hurt the Chiefs (not even neutral)?

Right now the only difference is that we had to pay a QB in Dorsey's era and don't have to yet in Veach's era. Other than that it's literally the same cap management. Neither guy paid CBs and both loved paying pass rushers. Both guys kept drafting project players early on. Veach is simply a younger version of Dorsey. The only difference I see is that Dorsey actually drafted a few solid guys in mid & late rounds but Veach will probably get there over time as well, too many similarities.

[FANATIC 852]

5 hours ago, sith13 said:

It's no different to give bad contracts to guys in their first big deals than those in their third ones. If the players are bad the contracts simply keep hurting with limited cap. Tell me one considerable contract in Veach era that actually didn't hurt the Chiefs (not even neutral)?

Right now the only difference is that we had to pay a QB in Dorsey's era and don't have to yet in Veach's era. Other than that it's literally the same cap management. Neither guy paid CBs and both loved paying pass rushers. Both guys kept drafting project players early on. Veach is simply a younger version of Dorsey. The only difference I see is that Dorsey actually drafted a few solid guys in mid & late rounds but Veach will probably get there over time as well, too many similarities.

EXACTLY

[Mloe68 1,521]

22 hours ago, Chiefmanzada said:

The Patriots Consistently make it to the AFC Championship if not the Superbowl.

Have we ever seen them commit such an outrageous trade such as the one Veach made with Clark? A 1st and 2nd rounder with a whopping 100 million dollar contract to go with it. 

We know what we have in Mahomes. So why are we breaking the bank for a pass rusher, when last year we had a dominant pass rush and still didn't accomplish the mission. 

We essentially traded Dee Ford And the 30th pick for Frank Clark. The contracts the two got are very similar.  It’s hardly outrageous for the player Veach thinks he got.  A all around very good player (not just a pass rusher), consistently productive, leader off the field and tone setter on it.  Now reality is for whatever reason we’ve only seen flashes of it thru 5 games.  Too early though to evaluate this correctly. 
 

[kkuenn 3,597]

3 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

We essentially traded Dee Ford And the 30th pick for Frank Clark. The contracts the two got are very similar.  It’s hardly outrageous for the player Veach thinks he got.  A all around very good player (not just a pass rusher), consistently productive, leader off the field and tone setter on it.  Now reality is for whatever reason we’ve only seen flashes of it thru 5 games.  Too early though to evaluate this correctly. 
 

Yep and see what Ford has done too. We all would have said we called it with his injuries and bitch about giving him a contract

 Never ending.....

[Mloe68 1,521]

7 hours ago, sith13 said:

It's no different to give bad contracts to guys in their first big deals than those in their third ones. If the players are bad the contracts simply keep hurting with limited cap. Tell me one considerable contract in Veach era that actually didn't hurt the Chiefs (not even neutral)?

Right now the only difference is that we had to pay a QB in Dorsey's era and don't have to yet in Veach's era. Other than that it's literally the same cap management. Neither guy paid CBs and both loved paying pass rushers. Both guys kept drafting project players early on. Veach is simply a younger version of Dorsey. The only difference I see is that Dorsey actually drafted a few solid guys in mid & late rounds but Veach will probably get there over time as well, too many similarities.

I disagree in that signing younger emerging players based on what they can do is a MUCH better plan than third contract players based on what they have done. You do indeed have to scrutinize the scouting within that plan though. It’s way to early to judge Frank Clark. But Hitchens looks like a horrible signing.  But even there much like Watkins, Veach built in outs after years 2-3.  Meanwhile we have 15 million in Dorsey’s bad contracts still on our books and yet Veach has still created 27 million in CAP space.  We are in very good shape CAP wise from numerous angles. 
All that said Dorsey is one of his mentors and good or bad some of those traits will come with him.  

[Mloe68 1,521]

8 minutes ago, kkuenn said:

Yep and see what Ford has done too. We all would have said we called it with his injuries and bitch about giving him a contract

 Never ending.....

Dee was an inconstant, incomplete player who spent more time off the field with injury than on it.  I understand the logic of not paying either. But the trade wasn’t crazy at all.  

[Mloe68 1,521]

I really like Veachs overall plan. Look for value with underperforming players, target players on draft day instead of hoping they fall, sign younger players to the large contracts but leave flexibility to cut or trade within 2-3 years and move on from declining expensive older veterans.  
 

Within that his scouting of such players has been lacking so far. At least in how they look to date. And this should be a strength. So let’s give it time to see if he adapts some things accordingly. 

[FANATIC 852]

Colts DE Justin Houston was named AFC Defensive Player of the Week for Week 5.

Making his return to Kansas City after spending the first eight years of his career there, Houston was a big part of the Colts' 19-13 upset win over the Chiefs. He recorded one sack and a couple tackles for loss along with three QB hurries.

Oct 9, 2019, 8:52 AM ET

[sith13 1,746]

48 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

I disagree in that signing younger emerging players based on what they can do is a MUCH better plan than third contract players based on what they have done. You do indeed have to scrutinize the scouting within that plan though. It’s way to early to judge Frank Clark. But Hitchens looks like a horrible signing.  But even there much like Watkins, Veach built in outs after years 2-3.  Meanwhile we have 15 million in Dorsey’s bad contracts still on our books and yet Veach has still created 27 million in CAP space.  We are in very good shape CAP wise from numerous angles. 

Not sure we signed any emerging players though. Hitchens didn't emerge in the national stage until we paid him (looks like for the wrong reasons) and Watkins had a history of injuries followed by an average season in LA. I expected Clark to be much better than what he is now but doesn't look like he was scouted very well. HB is probably the best performer among signings and he's not really worth the money so far either. I'm against paying guys over 30 but that's not really what Dorsey did though, most of the guys he paid were on their second deals with Hali probably being the exception. That being said proven guys with a lame third contract are not a bad way to go (aka Michael Bennett type guys). So far we have basically overpaid everyone in FA and since these are short term contracts with high percentage in guarantees we are not saving any money in the long run either. 

Right now we have 23 million in cap space but guys like Mahomes, Jones, etc will eat up that space and some of the signings like Clark and HB don't really have considerable cap hits yet. In fact we have 190 million tied up for next season. If we had a QB on the roster that actually had a QB contract we wouldn't have that cap space and that may actually be as early as next year, hence why I think Dorsey = Veach in contracts.

The big problem IMO is that we are wasting money and picks with Veach as we seem to be spending those at low priority positions that don't bring in enough added value. 

 

[FANATIC 852]

6 minutes ago, sith13 said:

Not sure we signed any emerging players though. Hitchens didn't emerge in the national stage until we paid him (looks like for the wrong reasons) and Watkins had a history of injuries followed by an average season in LA. I expected Clark to be much better than what he is now but doesn't look like he was scouted very well. HB is probably the best performer among signings and he's not really worth the money so far either. I'm against paying guys over 30 but that's not really what Dorsey did though, most of the guys he paid were on their second deals with Hali probably being the exception. That being said proven guys with a lame third contract are not a bad way to go (aka Michael Bennett type guys). So far we have basically overpaid everyone in FA and since these are short term contracts with high percentage in guarantees we are not saving any money in the long run either. 

Right now we have 23 million in cap space but guys like Mahomes, Jones, etc will eat up that space and some of the signings like Clark and HB don't really have considerable cap hits yet. In fact we have 190 million tied up for next season. If we had a QB on the roster that actually had a QB contract we wouldn't have that cap space and that may actually be as early as next year, hence why I think Dorsey = Veach in contracts.

The big problem IMO is that we are wasting money and picks with Veach as we seem to be spending those at low priority positions that don't bring in enough added value. 

 

YEP

[Mloe68 1,521]

21 minutes ago, sith13 said:

Not sure we signed any emerging players though. Hitchens didn't emerge in the national stage until we paid him (looks like for the wrong reasons) and Watkins had a history of injuries followed by an average season in LA. I expected Clark to be much better than what he is now but doesn't look like he was scouted very well. HB is probably the best performer among signings and he's not really worth the money so far either.

The big problem IMO is that we are wasting money and picks with Veach as we seem to be spending those at low priority positions that don't bring in enough added value. 

 

Hitchens, Clark, HB and Watkins average 25 years old when we signed them. Clark was arleady performing at a high level in the NFL so I'm not sure why you think he wasn't scouted well. He and HB were not only young but already proven. And again that 190 million tied up next season doesn't account for the reality we can move Watkins, Sorenson and Erving alone and save another 20 million! Heck go look at all those contracts. There's only about 6 players we are actually tied too. 

Wasting money on low priority positions? Pass rusher, safety, MLB and WR? Moreover we have all these guys AND tons of CAP space. The contracts are just fine and not impeding us in any way. It's the actual players not delivering yet that is. But again its not reasonable to evaluate HB and Clark after 5 games. HItchens and Watkins you bet. Watkins has been a really good player when healthy. But that hasn't been nearly enough. Hitchens has never delivered at any time. 

[FANATIC 852]

3 minutes ago, Mloe68 said:

Hitchens, Clark, HB and Watkins average 25 years old when we signed them. Clark was arleady performing at a high level in the NFL so I'm not sure why you think he wasn't scouted well. He and HB were not only young but already proven. And again that 190 million tied up next season doesn't account for the reality we can move Watkins, Sorenson and Erving alone and save another 20 million! 

Wasting money on low priority positions? Pass rusher, safety, MLB and WR? Moreover we have all these guys AND tons of CAP space. The contracts are just fine and not impeding us in any way. It's the actual players not delivering yet that is. 

Dream On. That Clark deal is a nightmare that will haunt KC for years. Two players could have been added or kept for the 20 million per year, see Houston , and KC would still have their #1 & #2 draft picks. Any GM can acquire players if you are willing to completely overpay...see Hitchens & Watkins. Chiefs were bidding against themselves.

[Iluvhouse24 1,808]

11 minutes ago, sith13 said:

Not sure we signed any emerging players though. Hitchens didn't emerge in the national stage until we paid him (looks like for the wrong reasons) and Watkins had a history of injuries followed by an average season in LA. I expected Clark to be much better than what he is now but doesn't look like he was scouted very well. HB is probably the best performer among signings and he's not really worth the money so far either. I'm against paying guys over 30 but that's not really what Dorsey did though, most of the guys he paid were on their second deals with Hali probably being the exception. That being said proven guys with a lame third contract are not a bad way to go (aka Michael Bennett type guys). So far we have basically overpaid everyone in FA and since these are short term contracts with high percentage in guarantees we are not saving any money in the long run either. 

Right now we have 23 million in cap space but guys like Mahomes, Jones, etc will eat up that space and some of the signings like Clark and HB don't really have considerable cap hits yet. In fact we have 190 million tied up for next season. If we had a QB on the roster that actually had a QB contract we wouldn't have that cap space and that may actually be as early as next year, hence why I think Dorsey = Veach in contracts.

The big problem IMO is that we are wasting money and picks with Veach as we seem to be spending those at low priority positions that don't bring in enough added value. 

 

What are the high priority positions we should be spending money on? Are you saying we should have signed a CB instead of a safety? It was an awful free agent class for CB, and safety was deep. We got one of the best ones out there and Veach structured his deal so we can get out of it after 3 seasons. You know damn well safety was a priority after how bad ours were last season.

The Watkins contract? You are mad he went out and got his young QB a weapon of his caliber? Also structured the deal so we can get out after 3 years.

The Hitchens deal? After losing DJ it was imperative that we got a playmaking ILB. No one would have ever guessed he would be this bad. His game tape in Dallas was very impressive.

Are you saying we should have spent more on our offensive line? I agree with that, but our defense was atrocious and Veach has committed a lot of his resources to trying to fix that side of the ball. 

I mean if he spent a bunch of money on offensive lineman instead , or whatever positions you think are the priorities, and those players dont pan out then people would be bitching that he didnt address safety or WR. 

There isnt 1 player he has targeted that didnt make sense as an acquisition at the time. He has traded up for some head scratchers in the draft. Speaks. Nnadi, and Saunders all seem to be reaches for project players. And I have agreed with you that first draft looks really bad.

It's a mixed bag as far as results go with his personnel decisions. But overall the team has been really successful on his watch. If we were losing it would be different.

 

[sith13 1,746]

Just now, Mloe68 said:

Hitchens, Clark, HB and Watkins average 25 years old when we signed them. Clark was arleady performing at a high level in the NFL so I'm not sure why you think he wasn't scouted well. He and HB were not only young but already proven. And again that 190 million tied up next season doesn't account for the reality we can move Watkins, Sorenson and Erving alone and save another 20 million! 

Wasting money on low priority positions? Pass rusher, safety, MLB and WR? Moreover we have all these guys AND tons of CAP space. The contracts are just fine and not impeding us in any way. It's the actual players not delivering yet that is. 

I was actually very high on Clark. However it looks like he was a product of the system or the players around him making him look better. I think the same can be said of Hitchens but I haven't actually watched him prior to his arrival in KC. 

We are overpaying young guys hoping that they will actually get better once in KC. So far none of them has been worth their contracts and some were even crazy (like the walking injury Watkins). In the mean time while placing 2 WRs among the highest paid ones we let our line become an expressway to the QB and raised the bar to resign other impending FAs like Jones. 

Not all the positions we spent money/picks on are low priority but some of them are and I would argue that WRs are pointless in today's NFL as we have seen in Robinson and even Pringle situations. I believe the same to be true for pass rushers, when was the last time a team won the SB while paying a pass rusher top money? I literally don't know the dates of the whole thing but can't think of any team in this decade (may be I'm missing one?). I like the emphasis on Safety in both FA and draft but so far that seems to be the only position we actually made a good move (in draft, not FA yet). 

Dorsey was no different in contracts. He wasn't that high on FAs but extended his own guys with the hope that they will get better over time. Tell me do you actually like paying high guarantees over short term for questionable guys that earn more in 3 years (with the dead money) than most guys in similar positions earn over 5-6 year deals?