clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Should the Kansas City Chiefs have signed free agent Evan Mathis?

New, comments
Howard Smith-USA TODAY Sports

Andy Reid said earlier in the summer that the Kansas City Chiefs weren't signing Evan Mathis. The former Eagles guard himself then said last week that the Chiefs were not interested in him. So the Chiefs probably weren't involved in these discussions which led to him signing a contract with the Denver Broncos on Tuesday.

However ... should the Chiefs have been involved? Was this a player they needed to sign?

The contract, according to multiple reports. is worth $4 million total with incentives. It's a one-year contract.

The Chiefs have about $9.1 million in cap space. They are comfortable going into the season with that amount of cap space for anything that might come up. I'm not sure how comfortable they would've been if that number were slashed in half.

The real issue in my mind is that the Chiefs have three potential guards who are fairly young competing for one spot. It's almost as if they have a quantity issue at right guard while they have quality at left guard (Ben Grubbs). Zach Fulton started 16 games last year and they need to see what they have in Laurent Duvernay-Tardif so I'm not sure they cut either one of those players. And I continue to believe that the best spot for Jeff Allen is right tackle. So I think the quantity of Chiefs guards was considered here as well. I'm not saying that's right or wrong ... I'm just trying to look at this from the Chiefs perspective.

Vote in our poll below!