Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 17979194)

Yup this is happening. And I would take overpaying Trey Smith instead of Nick ****ing Bolton any day without blinking.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Chiefs GM Brett Veach says this is a deep running back class, but adds: &quot;In general, I think it&#39;s more of a defensive draft.&quot; Mentioned the defensive line and linebacker groups as deep.</p>&mdash; Charles Goldman (@goldmctNFL) <a href="https://twitter.com/goldmctNFL/status/1894436410863530492?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 25, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief (Post 17979426)

I don't think anyone is actually suggesting that, just trying to figure out what they could be thinking.

They can always keep Trey and the new LTs cap hits super low in year one and then move on from Taylor and Thuney next year instead, but it seems next to impossible any NFL team would have 5 starting lineman all making north of $15 million a year. I don't know how you would pull that off.

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 17979446)

Wasn't it in 2020 when the interior of the OL was such an issue and it was all "you can't evade interior pressure".

Originally Posted by kccrow (Post 17979444)

I think this would actually be the plan.

Thuney and Kelce's contracts run out after this year. They cost 44m this year that ends up freed up. Then you can cut Taylor to save another 20m next year at the expense of only 7.3m in dead money.

Both Jackson and Smith's hits in 2025 would be relatively low, if that's the direction they ended up and then when they are hitting 20m next year they have 64m to absorb it.

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 17979266)

You yourself have agreed that overpaying Nick Bolton is not a smart move.

There is no universe where people can really think that a decent functional G getting overpaid is worse than a 2 down LB getting overpaid, especially when you have Mahomes. That logic cannot add up here.

Bolton is very replaceable. We actually lost Bolton for half the year in 2023 and the defense didn’t fall apart. Tranquill did a fine job filling his spot.

Bolton is slow, he’s a liability in coverage and he’s not worth anywhere near what he’s asking for.

Also the “running game was shit this year” argument is bizarre. You’re telling me 29 year old Kareem Hunt who was as explosive as Derrick Nnadi didn’t have explosive runs? He was washed. There was no explosion there anymore. And of course Pacheco wasn’t this year bc he broke his leg. He wasn’t the same after that injury.

Just last year the running game was not this major problem. It was fine. Pacheco had many explosive runs and 4.6 YPC.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NRPznljLHmI?si=3r3ApYX2yMIKKGI9" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 17979416)

Most of Trey's "bad play" is directly tied to being next to Jawaan Taylor, they aren't a good pairing. Nick Boltons issues are directly tied to his athletic skills in coverage and if you think that's gonna get better as he ages...

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 17979458)

That's just not true at all. A lot of Smith's problems have nothing to do with Taylor and everything to do with him losing 1v1 matchups.

Originally Posted by BWillie (Post 17979443)

We are the type of team that should pay two tackles a shit ton of money and then literally not give any shits who we put at C and Guard.

But we made Creed the highest contract in history at center and apparently want to pay Trey Smith big money while already paying a bunch for Thuney.

Look if you want to pay one...ONE of your two guards and center. Fine. But if you want to pay THREE? What the **** are you doing unless you plan to become a running first power team which we arent...at all.

We dont run QB sneaks.

We pass more than any team in football. Imagine how much we would pass if we werent good and winning so many games.

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 17979416)

Most of Trey's "bad play" is directly tied to being next to Jawaan Taylor, they aren't a good pairing. Nick Boltons issues are directly tied to his athletic skills in coverage and if you think that's gonna get better as he ages...

Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief (Post 17979464)

This is the exact approach they were taking in Mahomes' early years, and it worked swimmingly. We had Fisher and Schwartz and then basically nothing but JAGs everywhere else. I mean, we won it all with Austin Reiter at center and a half dead Stefan Wisniewski at guard, so I'm not sure when or why that approach changed. I'm sure they have their reasons. They did pay LDT pretty well in the past at guard, though.

I guess the next best choice is to just have an entire o-line of dudes making $20 million. :)

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 17979471)

It "changed" because of the players they were able to get.

They wanted Trent Williams when that didn't happen they paid the next best OL on the market in Joe Thuney.

Creed Humphrey in no way should have fallen to the pick he did but he did so they took him. Trey Smith fell like a ****in rock so they said hey why not? This team had signed Austin Blythe that offseason they had no plan to bring in 4 new interior OL, it just fell that way.

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 17979461)

I would wager if I actually sat down and charted all of his plays, 75% of Trey's bad plays come from the constant stunts that side of the line sees because of the way Taylor setting creates a massive gap between them. So he can either grab the dude or let that dude run by him and light up Mahomes.

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 17979481)

I watched a lot of All 22 this year. I can assure you that 75% is way high. He struggled with guys getting underneath him in 1v1 matchups more often than not. He's supposed to be mean and nasty. He plays soft.