Boy it really feels like they're gearing up for a SB run this year.

[Direckshun]

I know, technically they're doing it every year. But this year really seems different.

They've got Mahomes on the horizon. They've got cuts in a year in which Alex Smith, Tamba Hali, and Derrick Johnson probably won't be on this team. They know they're on the verge of a mini-rebuild around Mahomes.

As a result, they've padded the back end of the roster with some trades, and it really does seem the team is going all in on 2017 as Alex Smith's final push for a SB berth. It seems like they're all in for 2017.

If it doesn't work out, which with Brady in the AFC, it probably won't, they'll retool, sell some used parts, and start to build around Mahomes.

[Bowser]

IMO, it all hinges on Justin Houston. If he can be his dominant 22 sack self, then watch out. If he can't, we're likely a 10-6 team with "possibly" a wild card win.

[Buckweath]

Originally Posted by Modser

IMO, it all hinges on Justin Houston. If he can be his dominant 22 sack self, then watch out. If he can't, we're likely a 10-6 team with "possibly" a wild card win.

The Chiefs need Houston to be Houston, strong or at least decent CB play behind Peters and a strong year from Smith for his standards. If they can get two out of three of these elements for the whole season and playoffs, I would think they have a good chance of going deep into the playoffs.

[JakeF]

Originally Posted by Modser

IMO, it all hinges on Justin Houston. If he can be his dominant 22 sack self, then watch out. If he can't, we're likely a 10-6 team with "possibly" a wild card win.

This year we are spending 33.1m on pass rushers compared to 9.4m on cornerbacks. The pass rush just has to get there.

Chiefs are 7th in league spending on defense and 26th for offense. The defense needs to carry the team.

[Kiimo]

We'll know a lot more by Friday. Here's hoping Houston and Berry not only play but play well.

[Discuss Thrower]

Oh yeah. They're really going all out with Kelce and Hill as the only two credible receiving threats.

[Mile High Mania]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Oh yeah. They're really going all out with Kelce and Hill as the only two credible receiving threats.

[Coochie liquor]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Oh yeah. They're really going all out with Kelce and Hill as the only two credible receiving threats.

This!!

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Oh yeah. They're really going all out with Kelce and Hill as the only two credible receiving threats.

Every receiver ever needs that first season, right?

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Oh yeah. They're really going all out with Kelce and Hill as the only two credible receiving threats.

Don't underestimate DAT13

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Oh yeah. They're really going all out with Kelce and Hill as the only two credible receiving threats.

Oh, so that's why the Pats, Seahawks, Broncos, and Ravens won it in recent years!

[Discuss Thrower]

Originally Posted by staylor26

Oh, so that's why the Pats, Seahawks, Broncos, and Ravens won it in recent years!

You have a point with the Ravens, but not with the other three. The Pats have Brady; it doesn't seem to matter what slapdick they trot out as a WR. The Broncos had Thomas and Sanders which still made a punchless Manning effective, the Hawks had one SB appearance with Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin and had the other with Baldwin and Kearse.

Conley and Hill aren't on the level of four of the five receivers mentioned above. Hill has a decent likelihood of proving better than Kearse in the short term (this season and the next; Kearse became a 500 yard type of guy in his third season) and the others in the longer run.

Conley might look like a bonafide #2 receiver that starts on a dozen or more other teams, but I think it's homerism to immediately assume this is the case.

[mdchiefsfan]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

You have a point with the Ravens, but not with the other three. The Pats have Brady; it doesn't seem to matter what slapdick they trot out as a WR. The Broncos had Thomas and Sanders which still made a punchless Manning effective, the Hawks had one SB appearance with Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin and had the other with Baldwin and Kearse.

Conley and Hill aren't on the level of four of the five receivers mentioned above. Hill has a decent likelihood of proving better than Kearse in the short term (this season and the next; Kearse became a 500 yard type of guy in his third season) and the others in the longer run.

Conley might look like a bonafide #2 receiver that starts on a dozen or more other teams, but I think it's homerism to immediately assume this is the case.

So, with two viable receiving threats? Isn't that what your bagging on the Chiefs for?

[Mile High Mania]

Originally Posted by mdchiefsfan

So, with two viable receiving threats? Isn't that what your bagging on the Chiefs for?

DT and Sanders > Kelce and Hill

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

Conley might look like a bonafide #2 receiver that starts on a dozen or more other teams, but I think it's homerism to immediately assume this is the case.

I still believe that Conley is the one player on offense that would benefit the most from Mahomes.

He's tall, has great hands, has an elite vertical and elite caliber straight line speed.

That's a perfect fit for Mahomes.