Dwayne Bowe: Andy Reid's Arrival Will Convince WR to Stay with Chiefs
Advance to 2013 and the team’s top wideout has found himself in a familiar position. Could the Chiefs, again, use the franchise tag to keep him in Kansas City with a high-yielding, short-term deal?
They might not have to.
Kansas City and Bowe have reportedly begun long-term contract discussions, according to NFL Network’s Ian Rapoport (via Pro Football Talk).
Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio piggybacked Rapoport by adding that the Chiefs are very interested in retaining him. If keeping him around another year is what it comes to, they may. Although, a second franchise tag would garner Bowe $11.4 million to play for the Chiefs in 2013.
John Rieger-USA TODAY Sports
Beyond all of the interested parties and contract negotiations, there is now a deeper connection between the two sides that wasn’t there before. With Andy Reid in town, there is hope in an organization that has seen very little in decades.
Can Reid be the guy to finally tap into the vast potential analysts have seen in the Chiefs over the past few seasons? I’ve been one of them, predicting a turnaround in Kansas City, but continually feeling let down each season.
Without Bowe, things will be initially harder for Reid and his staff to do that. The receiver has had his share of problems, but there is no denying who he is capable of being on the gridiron when focused and at the top of his game.
Bowe’s best season came in 2010 when he earned a trip to Honolulu for the Pro Bowl after a 15-touchdown season.
Jamie Squire/Getty Images
The first and most important problem with the Chiefs starts at the quarterback position. Reid will undoubtedly make a change at the most important spot, whether through the draft or through free agency.
Change is good, especially for a potential star wide receiver who is deliberating whether or not to leave town for greener pastures.
Reid’s track record, the impending change at quarterback and the Chiefs’ need for a top wide receiver will keep Bowe in Kansas City for the foreseeable future.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?