The Breakout Live team debates whether the Chiefs can win it all without Kareem Hunt, who was released by the team after a video surfaced of him attacking a woman in a hotel hallway.
Senior News & Fantasy Editor
Yes. Thankfully, with the devaluation of the running back position, teams don’t need a star in the backfield to win the Super Bowl. Sadly for the Chiefs, they now don’t have a running back or a defense.
Yesterday, the Hunt-less Chiefs allowed the Raiders to hang around. I’d be more worried about the intangible aspect of Hunt’s departure as much as missing his actual contribution on it. Look at Tyreek Hill’s game yesterday: His 1 catch for 13 yard was his worst game receiving since Christmas day of his rookie season. Knowing Hunt lost his career over that video tape has to be messing with Hill’s head considering he punched his pregnant girlfriend in the stomach and anticipating the scrutiny Hunt’s actions bring back upon him. Why should he keep his career knowing he did worse? Ultimately, the Chiefs can still win it all; it just got harder minus Hunt and the circumstances and circus surrounding them in his absence.
George “Cannonball” West
Losing Kareem Hunt won’t cost Kansas City a Super Bowl Championship; having the 31st rated total defense in the NFL will do that. K.C. Gives up 433 yards per game, and they give up points in bushels as well: 27.3 point per game, which rates #27 in the NFL. This defense was exposed by other top-rated teams like the Patriots and Rams, as the Chiefs lost both games. And since Hunt does not play defense, losing him will not be the reason that Kansas City won’t lift the Vince Lombardi trophy.
Also, Kareem Hunt was not the head coach; Andy Reid is. And Reid has had two Chiefs teams blow 18-point halftime leads in playoff games and he also lost 4 of 5 NFC Championship games while he was head coach of the Eagles. Andy also lost the one Super Bowl he actually got to. In the postseason, Reid is a champion of only one thing: head-scratching postseason coaching decisions, and Hunt never could have fixed that.
Yes. Kareem Hunt was a good player, but he’s not among the very few position players (QBs excluded) who are irreplaceable. Last I checked, star RBs are no longer a prerequisite to win a Super Bowl, and KC still has Mahomes, Kelce, Watkins and do-it-all Tyreek Hill on offense. That’s enough firepower to take home the Lombardi Trophy.
So, can the Chiefs win it all without Hunt? Sure. Will they? Meh. To be honest, I don’t think the Chiefs would have won it all even with Hunt, but they would have had a great shot at it thanks to home field advantage at Arrowhead. Now, if they stumble in the last few weeks and let LA win the division, they’ll be looking at roadies throughout the playoffs. That’s the last thing this team can afford to have happen.
From a personnel standpoint, the Chiefs seem to have the talent to absorb the blow of the Hunt scandal. Patrick Mahomes is still the starting quarterback in KC, and he proved against the Raiders that he has plenty of weapons to step up in the absence of Hunt. Putting aside Mahomes’ passing prowess, the Chiefs still managed to hang 174 yards rushing against the Raiders without Hunt.
So the Chiefs are fine in terms of talent. The real question is, will the scandal itself affect the Chiefs’ ability to focus on football? And again, I think they resoundingly answered that question on Sunday. Mahomes was resolute in his response to the Hunt video, saying simply, “We don’t do those things.” It sure sounds like Mahomes and the Chiefs have moved on and will compete for the AFC Championship.