Mikie2times

https://fb.watch/CbhmgJBHLT/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Safety wasn’t the correct narrative to discuss with this play. Yes, it looks dangerous and somebody will likely get rolled up and hurt bad eventually but officiating is a way bigger issue as far as game integrity. The AFC championship should have been the catalyst. Poor officiating on that play could have cost us a Super Bowl birth. Not sure how that didn’t become bigger news in the push to get this play banned. You just can’t see the ball to even spot it. Then this Offside crap. It’s microseconds as far as the movement. This is starting to feel Patriot like in some ways. Then you say, how big is it to the Eagles success? It’s pretty damn big. I think we will be just fine. But that teams is basically playing 1st down and 9 to everybody elses 10 and ya, it adds up. If the play can’t be officiated correctly it has no place.

I can say from my perspective, I don't attempt to categorize the Diggs trade into a draft pick discussion because I can't track down all the rest of the draft pick trade for players and input that information. Same for Kincaid. I understand he is a receiving TE, but I'm not going to try and categorize all of those types and put some sort of value to weight that as a WR investment. Logical sure, hard to do with analytics and not introduce my opinion. I will also add this look is from 2021 on, so it is outside the Diggs window. But also likely impacted 2021/2022 etc, as we acquired him reducing the need for higher investment. So if one wants to go down the discussion of us actually investing a lot more than what the pure draft picks show, certainly a conversation you could have.

Thought I would add this chart I did in the offseason. I posted it before, but maybe it helps establish in some consistent way the level of draft investment made at each position. Mind you, it does not account of pick for player trades like Diggs. All of us are familiar with the draft trade value chart. Each pick is assigned a value. So I all I did was add the the value of every teams drafts since 2019. Then I looked at how many points were allocated to each position. So this isn't saying who spent the most, it's saying who spent the most of what they had as a %. We rank low as you would expect. KC is fairly high, as you would expect. I also included DL for context. I found the largest correlations with win % being DL, CB, and WR investment. Teams that invest the highest in those three areas seem to have the best performance over this time frame. That's not to say that is the reason, it could be many reasons, I'm just describing the behavior of the teams that have won the most. Here is the composite of WR/DL/DB investment since that time. We are about middle of the pack. Last edit to this post and last call out. Notice the point totals. That goes to show how little draft capitol we have had relative to the rest of the league. 2nd to only KC as far as lowest value. Again, put in context just how late we draft. The Raiders are so low because the two city abbreviations screwed up my formulas and I got lazy.

They can award a TD, they nearly did in the playoffs last year

I'm surprised that was your take here. The point is the Chiefs have invested at a high level in the WR position, as most would like to see us do. It hasn't worked, to the extent that our lack of investment has shown better returns. Which might be part of why we choose not to invest, as Beane has called out it being a high miss position. We seem more content with depth here, making sure the floor is high, and that Allen has baseline targets that can be functional. KC is swinging for the fences, largely missing. We have emulated them in so many ways, but not this one. Which seems to get the most criticism, but when you look closer, even for a critic like myself, it hasn't gone very well for them.

But the reality is they have still fielded one of the worst units in the NFL for a very large % of games over the last two seasons. Which I understand is in large part do to circumstances. But at the same time, this is a rather boom or bust position. Teams build around a stud WR, they don't often pursue depth, then it's a huge rug pull when that guy goes out. WR busts don't end up like AJ Epenesa, it tends to be fairly black and white. Many aren't even in the league in short order. The post wasn't to say I agree with what we have done. Especially considering guys that we could have gotten much later like Troy Franklin and Tory Horton. It's just to say the Chiefs have done what I think most people on here (largely myself included)wanted to do and yet have fielded a total cesspool of WR's for the majority of games these last two years. I think in some ways it reflects our hesitancy to invest heavily here even if its still not something you or I agree with.

I don't believe I have seen this topic circle back. It doesn't seem like this play can be officiated, can't spot the ball, can't see the ball. This might be lights out. Thoughts on the offside? I imagine the Eagles will lose a pinch of effectiveness knowing the refs are going to hawking this.

This is like the Game of Throne stadium remake. These are totally bad ass. The NFL would never allow that much of the field to be occupied by anything but seats and luxury boxes.

Thats right, my bad

Since 2021 (have to start somewhere, the Bills also invested picks in 2020) The Chiefs have drafted a WR for 5 consecutive years. 1st rounder, (2) 2nd rounders, 4th rounder, and 5th rounder. So fairly high value assets. The results of those drafts are below. Jalen Royals, Xavier Worthy, Rashee Rice, Sky Moore, and Cornell Powell. The Bills have drafted a WR for 5 consecutive years as well. 1st rounder, 2 (5th's), and 6th rounder, and a 7th rounder. So fairly low value assets outside of Coleman. The results of those drafts are below. Keon Coleman, Kaden Prather, Justin Shorter, Khalil Shakir, and Marquez Stevenson. What interests me about this question is for largely two consecutive years when I have watched Chiefs games I have said to myself this has to be the worst WR group in football. I mean, we complain about our WR's, but last week it was Hollywood Brown, Taquan Thornton, and Ju Ju. Last year it was largely the same. Mind you, Worthy could very well be something, and Rice is something, but neither looks to be the most durable. Maybe that is dumb bad luck, maybe not, but the fact remains KC is consistently fielding a horrific WR core the last two years. Meanwhile back in Buffalo, we have been a bit more hesitant to invest high value here. I think it's been stated by Beane that WR is a very hard position to judge in the draft. Perhaps that is what leads to apprehensiveness. Which I largely don't agree with, however, our approach seems pretty clear. We focus this position on depth and an elevated floor vs a high ceiling, specifically with budget friendly FA acquisitions. Now one thing is for sure. We will never be running a Taquan Thornton on the field. We have good depth here. When Elijah Moore is one of your last in, that is a problem the Chiefs would love to have. But beyond the depth, you could very well argue that the returns of Coleman and Shakir rival the returns of Worthy and Rice. Rice could very well be the best of the group, but you need to play to be in the conversation. So as much as I have historically disliked our approach at WR, I think what has happened to the Chiefs is sort the reason we have that approach. I think we care more about depth and ensuring it's not a position that kills us vs reaching for the stars and missing. Further, I would argue for as much crap as we give the front office over the WR position and I still feel somewhat justifiably so, KC has done a much worse job. They have reached a critical point in talent erosion multiple years. They invested more in the draft for the same or even worse returns. Yes, a lot of bad injury luck, but nobody cares about the recipe they want to know how it tastes.

Allen was a green prospect. HE needed to develop, which he largely did on his own. Your credit for culture and environment is only apparent after it was largely given a chance to develop based on Allen being elite. No QB, no culture, no time for process. All this stuff can matter with a B talent. Give a B QB a great system and talent and it can make a difference vs a team who likely just picked top 5. It just doesn't matter when you're dealing with a Josh Allen level talent. Somebody who is that determined, that intelligent, and that self aware. The game has never failed a Josh Allen level player because the situation was just so bad it ruined the player. Yes, we can agree to disagree

Who was the QB that these franchises ruined? Who did we ruin during the drought? Somebody that would have done something if McD was around 15 years ag with our culture? The comment about coaches makes no sense. Every position on earth has a leadership role people report to that provides basic structure and strategy. Every sport has a coach and even if you're elite in that role in Football, you quickly show your worth without your star QB. Meanwhile that QB leaves and just keeps on going. Calling out Fields or Lawrence as an example of guys to justify your point makes no sense. You have to have mental make up to be successful. By your definition we can blame the Raiders for ruining Jamarcus Russell or maybe Russell is the one that couldn't hack it. This run starts and ends with Allen. It is that simple. Once his time is done we will go back to the same pool of mediocre franchises searching for a QB that we can one day credit our coach for "grooming".

This is beyond speculation and its just plan bad speculation. Both players entered the league with historically losing franchises. Both had low talent levels and roster support. Both had poor QB rooms. Dabs might be your shiny star, but that sort of fades given what Daniel Jones is doing. While also acknowledging the fact that Dabs did nothing prior. Your pushing the warm and fuzzies into the narrative years later, when Josh himself is the largest reason for the narrative. I'm sick of this mass credit to coaches for largely player driven, QB driven outcomes. Its the biggest farce in the NFL. You have 4-5 guys who are really good coaches and help the roster. You have a whole bunch who are average. Then you have 4-5 who likely hurt the teams they coach. Without that QB1 nobody is consistently over .500, if I'm wrong, show me the consistent playoff coach who isn't directly tied to a high output QB. Which you will likely say "because of coaching". Except when said QB leaves, the coach somehow never establishes the same level of success. It's a story as old as time yet people here actually think McD or Belichick or Reid are the glue. Even if they're top 5 guys, even of All Time, it falls apart without an MVP QB. 9 Super Bowls between them with the same two QB's.