If other teams were wanting to pay him a similar amount it would seem we didn’t overpay.

If nobody else was close, then we would have overpaid.

Cant produce if they are not getting you the ball. He will be good here.

Dallas and Chicago aren't teams I would want to be mentioned with when it comes to overpaying a player.

This is how I feel.

In the end, Veach knows Tyreek Hill, Pat Mahomes and Kareem Hunt are all on rookie contracts for the next 2 or more years so we could afford to do this.

We’ll see how it goes

Free agency = overpaying for players. Zero craps given. Deal will only look bad if he doesn’t produce.

The idea of a free market is too much for you I see.

One offer = overpaying. Multiple offers = market value.

I don't like having one guy that you feel needs the ball. His contract suggests that and it doesn't work. The best WRs in the game today have zero titles. Get the ball to the open man. We have other options that also need the ball. Thats why I wasn't a big fan of paying a high price for a WR. Whats done is done but we don't need Mahomes locking in too much to try a force feed our 48 mil WR.

Exactly. It is clear that the Chiefs overpaid but that is free agency for you. I actually thought we could get Watkins for something around 8M-9M per season because of the fact that he has been injured at times and did not produce much last year. I was dead wrong.

This being said, if Watkins reaches his full potential the next few years he will be easily worth all that money.

Right! Because contract numbers are what Mahomes uses to determine who to throw the ball to.:rolleyes:

Over pay? Not over pay? Who gives a shit?? 3 things:

1) Did we overpay for him a little? Maybe. But if we didn't, someone else would have.

2) Bottom line. He makes the CHiefs offense better and more dynamic, giving Mahomes more of an opportunity to be immediately successful. That's a good thing.

3) They can easily afford to pay Watkins what they're paying him, due to having Mahomes, Hunt & Hill on rookie contracts. You take advantage of that while you can. That's what the Chiefs are doing. They essentially gave him a 2 year deal. They can get out of year 3 very easily with minimal cap impact.


So, again, did they overpay a little? Probably. But who the **** cares? He makes the Chiefs better in the immediate, and if it doesn't work out, he's gone in 2 years anyway and his contract comes off the books. Also, it gives the CHiefs some flexibility to decide which receiver they wanna pay #1 money to in 2 years: Hill or Watkins? They both have a 2 year audition and then the CHiefs can make their decision.

Nobody will care how the team pays players and/or allots its cap space if it results in playoff wins and a Super Bowl appearance within the next 3 years.

It's smart to give Mahomes every single weapon possible to find out if he's the guy or not. It's also insurance in case an issue with injury happens again, when Kelce went down in the playoff game due to a BS hit, you saw this offense struggle mightily.

On the bad side, Watkins deal set the floor for what you're gonna have to pay Hill if he keeps improving and putting up numbers like he is.

i dont give a **** if someone thinks we over paid him or not. Our offense is now on an elite level. We have playmakers at every position. If Fisher gets his head out of his ass and we find a lg we're set. Its not my money, why the **** do i care what Veatch does with Hunts money? Give me good players and that will entertan me

Salaries are going up year to year, as each new deal is signed.

What the Chiefs didn't or did ultimately pay Watkins wasn't going to set the floor for Hill. Another WR simply would have.