PDA

View Full Version : Should Priest do us a favor and retire?


siberian khatru
11-15-2004, 09:21 AM
I honestly don't think the guy will last much more than 2 years if we keep having to rely on him so much. He's already breaking down at midseason.

Will we be Super Bowl contenders next year? Can we import enough new talent on D and still keep the O fresh enough and productive enough to turn it around in one season?

If Priest is here next year, it appears safe to assume that Blaylock is GONE. Carl won't be able/willing to match competing offers for his services, and DB probably wouldn't stick around as a No. 2 anyway. So we're potentially looking at losing our two best RBs in the next 2 years, leaving us with Larry Johnson as the future.

Now, maybe Larry really is the real deal, and all that talent is just itching to come out with regular play. But I seriously can't believe he's capable of making those quick cuts and bursts for extra yards that Priest and Blaylock can. Maybe he will succeed as a different kind of back; one can only hope.

So IF you think we won't be SB competitors next year, and IF you think Blaylock gives us a better chance of winning in the future than LJ, would it be better for the franchise if Priest hangs it up after this season? Or would it be possible to trade him and open a spot for Blaylock while potentially improving the D? In other words, is it possible that Priest is (gasp) an impediment to the long-term success of the franchise given his age and mileage?

And I don't ask that in a malicious way. I'm trying to be as realistic and practical as possible. Yeah, it's cold and cutthroat, but that's the NFL. It just seems to me that circumstances may be converging on us in the worst possible way -- we have a great RB whose clock is ticking, his replacement is about to leave via FA, and the "RBotF" that we're forced to keep may very well be a bust. All of this is happening at the same time the D has finally and convincingly been exposed as needing a complete personnel overhaul and the offense needs some upgrades to stay productive as well.

In short, we appear screwed. :mad:

BigRedChief
11-15-2004, 09:28 AM
There was a thread last night saying that we should trade him.

Rick
11-15-2004, 09:30 AM
This predicament simply emphasizes how bad a judge of talent this organization is. Blaylock is better than Johnson. They'll let Blaylock go and keep Johnson because they have no idea. I DON'T WANT JOHNSON PERIOD. Blaylock stays!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

TEX
11-15-2004, 09:35 AM
Why should Priest retire? He's the one of the best, if not the best all round RB in football. He certainly has the best vision ans is the best at scoring TD's. As good a sBlaylock was yesterday, he wasn't near the force that Priest is near the goal line.

Next year, the Offense can be better than this year if we get a legit #1 WR and develop a legit RT.

On _efense, we need a legit MLB, CB and Safety tandum. Course, maybe we can get better Safety play from some players currently on the roster. I certainly doesn't seem like it would be that difficult as Woods is just a body out there.

Having said that, it's going to be tough to get everything we need. That's why you fall behind when you stand pat because you simply need too much to make up for what you didn't acquire... :shake:

Straight, No Chaser
11-15-2004, 10:29 AM
I honestly don't think the guy will last much more than 2 years if we keep having to rely on him so much. He's already breaking down at midseason.

I wouldn't call Priest "broke down." He's had an incredible few years at being able to take care of himself physically. How can you forget the hip recovery and the discipline he demonstrated. HE'S A RUNNING BACK. HE WILL GET NICKED UP IN SIXTEEN GAME SEASON.
Maybe he could have gone yesterday, but why not rest him? I agree that Priest's own words on the subject of his future are somewhat cryptic, but he's still the "man." I'm betting there's some good reasons for him to continue to play:

according to warpath.com
Priest Holmes' Salary
2004 -660,000
2005 -2,415,000
2006 -3,250,000
2007 -4,000,000
2008 -5,000,000
2009 -6,500,000


---->

Mr. Kotter
11-15-2004, 10:30 AM
In a word, yes.

He will be 32. I'd prefer Blaylock and LJ to battle it out next year.

Rain Man
11-15-2004, 10:38 AM
You hope to make the team better by having its best player retire? That does not compute.

Mr. Kotter
11-15-2004, 10:41 AM
You hope to make the team better by having its best player retire? That does not compute.

I know it sounds wacky, but look at the record of 32 yr old players.....who've had as many touches as Priest has gotten. If he stays, we probably lose both Blaylock and Johnson. And we start over at RB. Not good.

On the other hand, Priest has defied all logic and odds every step of his impressive career. So, I'll leave it to him...

PastorMikH
11-15-2004, 10:42 AM
No Priest should not retire. However, Carl should be talking with Blaylock's agent RIGHT NOW trying to get an extension worked out.


BTW, at this point in the season, if we sign our players right now to extensions, does the bonus get added to this years cap or next years?

2bikemike
11-15-2004, 10:42 AM
I am really hoping that CP or who ever decides to keep Blaylock. (get a deal done now) I think LJ is ruined already. The chip on his shoulder will never be knocked off.

Priest is such an enigma that nobody knows what he is going to do. I would love to see him play a few more years but I think family is starting to look mighty important to him and quality of life is definately on his mind.

He is such a planner and goal oriented guy he got his payday and can live comfortably so who knows what he will do.

Mr. Kotter
11-15-2004, 10:46 AM
BTW, at this point in the season, if we sign our players right now to extensions, does the bonus get added to this years cap or next years?

Great question; since we got $7 million SITTIN' there, might as well put it to good use.... :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

:shake:

BigRedChief
11-15-2004, 10:46 AM
No Priest should not retire. However, Carl should be talking with Blaylock's agent RIGHT NOW trying to get an extension worked out.


BTW, at this point in the season, if we sign our players right now to extensions, does the bonus get added to this years cap or next years?

We could use some of that $6 million that they have under the cap to resign blaylock.

BigChiefFan
11-15-2004, 10:47 AM
You hope to make the team better by having its best player retire? That does not compute.
Agreed.

KCWolfman
11-15-2004, 10:48 AM
Why should Priest retire? He's the one of the best, if not the best all round RB in football. He certainly has the best vision ans is the best at scoring TD's. As good a sBlaylock was yesterday, he wasn't near the force that Priest is near the goal line.

Next year, the Offense can be better than this year if we get a legit #1 WR and develop a legit RT.

On _efense, we need a legit MLB, CB and Safety tandum. Course, maybe we can get better Safety play from some players currently on the roster. I certainly doesn't seem like it would be that difficult as Woods is just a body out there.

Having said that, it's going to be tough to get everything we need. That's why you fall behind when you stand pat because you simply need too much to make up for what you didn't acquire... :shake:
You are also assuming the OLine will be successful next year. I see a very good line, but I see one that is aging rapidly. Look at them toward the end of a game. Last year, 3 men would have never gotten to Green in the 4th quarter as they did last week.

shaneo69
11-15-2004, 10:49 AM
I don't think Priest should retire, but if Blaylock can handle more of the load, I would definitely limit Priest's carries and keep him healthy for the redzone plays.

jspchief
11-15-2004, 10:50 AM
I'm sorry but it's crazy to be thinking about getting rid of Holmes. Has his production dropped off?

If you think he has too many injuries, take a look at the other top RBs in the league. I guess the Ravens should dump Jamal Lewis, and the Titans should get rid of Chris Brown. Edgerrin James is a liability too.

There aren't many RBs that are healthy every game of every year. Shaun Alexanader is the only one with significant carries that I know of that hasn't missed a game.

We need to ride this horse until it drops. You're talking about losing the most prolific scorer in the last 3 1/2 years to retain a guy that's scored 7 TDs in his career. A guy that could only score once against a pathetic Saints D.

I know it'll sting if we lose Blaylock, but we've already got one of the best RBs in the game. Why address a position that we're set at when we have so many spots that we have no talent at? Blaylock will get offers, but he's not going to get payed like a top tier RB off of a few games running behind our line. Hopefully we can make him a respectable offer and keep him to slowly work into the spot as Holmes declines.

It just adds another twist to the LJ debacle. Had we not drafted him, we likely would have signed DB to more than a one year tender as a RFA this year. Now we may face a bidding war, along with the prospect of LJ being our RBotF.

jAZ
11-15-2004, 10:57 AM
There was a thread last night saying that we should trade him.
I wouldn't have ever agreed with that, but I am now open to the idea.

jAZ
11-15-2004, 11:00 AM
I'm sorry but it's crazy to be thinking about getting rid of Holmes. Has his production dropped off?
Ask New Orleans if they would rather have Ricky back? Then ask Miami if they'd rather have those #1 draft picks back.

I'm not seeing Priest's contract as tradable, but if it were, I'd consider a Ricky-type deal. No doubt.

siberian khatru
11-15-2004, 11:04 AM
It's not just injuries. It's Priest's age, combined with the possibility it will take more than one season to rebuild the defense to respectability.

If you think we can compete for the SB next year, fine. Count me as skeptical. I think it will take two offseasons -- SUCCESSFUL offseasons -- to replace all the crap we've got on D. Yes, Priest may very well be as productive. But at the end of that 2-year period, when we've got a decent enough D to compete for the SB, what are the odds that Priest is out of gas and suddenly we can't reach the SB because (shades of the 90s) we don't have a RB anymore? And Blaylock is performing well elsewhere because we didn't retain him after 2004.

Hell, maybe I'm making too much out of Blaylock. And maybe LJ will be OK. And maybe we CAN turn this D around sufficiently in this offseason.

Just to restate my point: I'm not writing off Priest for next season, or even necessarily the next. I'm looking three seasons down the road, when he's 34 years old and Blaylock is 28.

cash1000
11-15-2004, 11:04 AM
There were some idiots on the radio Sunday talking about the Chiefs should trade Tony Gonzalez and Priest. For What? Why would a guy gaining 1500 yards a year and scoring 20 plus TDs a season retire or be traded unless he has some totally debiletating career ending injury or wants to smoke with with Ricky Williams.

The Bad Guy
11-15-2004, 11:10 AM
We could use some of that $6 million that they have under the cap to resign blaylock.

No you can't.

The deadline to do that was a week ago.

Blaylock would have to be a fool not to at least test his market value.

jspchief
11-15-2004, 11:11 AM
Ask New Orleans if they would rather have Ricky back? Then ask Miami if they'd rather have those #1 draft picks back.

I'm not seeing Priest's contract as tradable, but if it were, I'd consider a Ricky-type deal. No doubt.

Yea, that's a good comparison. Let's put the biggest overpaid headcase in the NFL next to a guy with impeccable character and work ethic.

There's no comparison to the situation we're in. Maybe the closest would be when Indy traded away Faulk, but that doesn't even compare due to the fact that Faulk was so young. The Jets are in the same boat this year with Curtis Martin and Lamont Jordan, but at least the Jets could use the mileage excuse to get rid of Martin.

You guys are basically wanting to do the equivalent of trading away Gonzo so we can afford to keep Kris Wilson.

Blaylock has looked great in two games for us this year. One of those games was when our O-line put on one of the greatest displays of run-blocking in history. The other was against the worst run defense in the league. Yes, he's fast. Yes, he can make moves. But he stalled in the red zone a couple of times agaisnt the Saints. And he certainly hasn't shown enough to be mentioned in the same category as Holmes.

Let's address the RB problem when it actually becomes a problem. We need to fix the actual defincies before we start trading away pro-bowlers for a two-game wonder.

ChiefsOne
11-15-2004, 11:20 AM
Why in the hell would anyone want to trade a horse like Priest? Beyond me that it is even considered. Look at the last two games, if Priest wouldn't have sit it the second half of the Bucs game we probably would have won and if he would have been there yesterday we would have.

Baylock only got 185 yards and just 1 TD. Priest would have had at least 4 TD's and 300 yards!

Priest brings an attitude to the "O" as well.

ChiefsOne
11-15-2004, 11:21 AM
Even if we go two number one picks. We would probably get another Jenkins and Johnson!

Wichita Lineman
11-15-2004, 12:37 PM
The mood I'm in today I think we should sit all the starters for the rest of the season except the secondary and rest them for next year. This year is already screwed. I said earlier in the season on this board that I thought 10-6 would do it now I think they will be lucky to see 6-10. I bet Robinson is laughing his a$$ off right now.

splatbass
11-15-2004, 01:31 PM
Baylock only got 185 yards and just 1 TD. Priest would have had at least 4 TD's and 300 yards!



ONLY 185 yards? That is an excellent game, far above the league average. Priest would have had 300 yards? What are you smoking? No RB has ever gained 300 yards in a game.

PastorMikH
11-15-2004, 03:17 PM
No you can't.

The deadline to do that was a week ago.

Blaylock would have to be a fool not to at least test his market value.


Thanks for the info on that. I was wondering but was thinking that there would be a deadline somewhere during the season.


I agree too. Blaylock will get offers. And I agree. Blaylock should look around and see what he can get - and I am sure he will get at least 1 offer that Carl won't want to match. He's an up and coming RB that is showing a lot of promise and a fair bit of production - why wouldn't some of the teams desperate at RB not try to make a run for him?

Bob Dole
11-15-2004, 03:26 PM
As a leader on this team, Holmes should take whatever action necessary to force Vermeil's hand and ensure that Rich Scanlon is on the active roster.

Rain Man
11-15-2004, 03:28 PM
As good as Priest is, I would think he would still be somewhat threatened by Scanlon's presence. The team can only pay one superstar.

tk13
11-15-2004, 03:30 PM
I don't think it's wise to give up on next year and not take Priest with us, you just never know, things change so much from year to year, if anybody should know that it's Chiefs fans.... got to watch a team go from 13-3 to 9-7 back to 13-3... and then this year has been so far different from last year it's laughable... unless you're in a year like we had in 2001 where we had to purge a bunch of junk off the roster and start to rebuild, you should never count yourself out of thinking Super Bowl....

siberian khatru
11-15-2004, 03:32 PM
unless you're in a year like we had in 2001 where we had to purge a bunch of junk off the roster and start to rebuild

Seems like we're in that situation with the D. Plus, we need to upgrade the O at WR, and Roaf and Shields aren't getting younger (although we MAY have their replacements already on the roster ... BIG "may").

Chiefaholic
11-15-2004, 03:34 PM
Damn you guys always want to destroy the whole damn team every time we have a miserable season. YOU DON'T GET BETTER BY GETTING RID OF YOUR BEST PLAYER!!!!

Bob Dole
11-15-2004, 03:35 PM
Damn you guys always want to destroy the whole damn team every time we have a miserable season. YOU DON'T GET BETTER BY GETTING RID OF YOUR BEST PLAYER!!!!

Holmes isn't even close to being the best player on the team.

Rain Man
11-15-2004, 03:36 PM
Holmes isn't even close to being the best player on the team.

After Scanlon, then.

tk13
11-15-2004, 03:38 PM
Seems like we're in that situation with the D. Plus, we need to upgrade the O at WR, and Roaf and Shields aren't getting younger (although we MAY have their replacements already on the roster ... BIG "may").
I just don't think we have the cap room to be cutting a ton of guys, most of the guys except Fujita are signed through next year and beyond, Holliday will probably be gone, I don't know how the Barber situation will go down since he's hurt... that scares me because we're probably going to have to tank a year and gut the offense and watch Wild Al Martz do his thing as head coach if we decide to scrap this entire defense....

Demonpenz
11-15-2004, 03:39 PM
Damn you guys always want to destroy the whole damn team every time we have a miserable season. YOU DON'T GET BETTER BY GETTING RID OF YOUR BEST PLAYER!!!!


lawyer maloy ahem

BigChiefFan
11-15-2004, 03:40 PM
Holmes isn't even close to being the best player on the team.You must be talking about the Pro Bowl team. :p

ChiefsOne
11-15-2004, 04:00 PM
Splatbass ONLY 185 yards? That is an excellent game, far above the league average. Priest would have had 300 yards? What are you smoking? No RB has ever gained 300 yards in a game.

Sarcasm!

Bob Dole
11-15-2004, 05:34 PM
Seems like we're in that situation with the D. Plus, we need to upgrade the O at WR, and Roaf and Shields aren't getting younger (although we MAY have their replacements already on the roster ... BIG "may").

Bob Dole read a Rufus Dawes article a few months ago that indicated that Roaf and Shields <i>are</i>, in fact, getting younger.

You're a dipshit.

siberian khatru
11-15-2004, 05:38 PM
Bob Dole read a Rufus Dawes article a few months ago that indicated that Roaf and Shields <i>are</i>, in fact, getting younger.

You're a dipshit.

Maybe they can use that Wayback Machine to turn back the clock on the 2004 season.

Logical
11-15-2004, 05:39 PM
I guess I have missed how Priest retiring would be doing us a favor?

Logical
11-15-2004, 05:44 PM
No Priest should not retire. However, Carl should be talking with Blaylock's agent RIGHT NOW trying to get an extension worked out.


BTW, at this point in the season, if we sign our players right now to extensions, does the bonus get added to this years cap or next years?

I believe the pro-rated portion would get added to this years cap. Not a bad thing since we have about 6 mil sitting idle.

the Talking Can
11-15-2004, 05:46 PM
I guess I have missed how Priest retiring would be doing us a favor?

well, if we score fewer touchdowns then we wouldn't lose as much....

royr17
11-15-2004, 05:50 PM
SCREW LJ, DONT WANT HIM AS THE RBOTF ...

royr17
11-15-2004, 05:51 PM
I want BLAYLOCK, BLAYLOCK, BLAYLOCK, BLAYLOCK, BLAYLOCK ..........

Logical
11-15-2004, 05:51 PM
well, if we score fewer touchdowns then we wouldn't lose as much....

Obi Wan's wisdom it is

Bob Dole
11-15-2004, 05:52 PM
well, if we score fewer touchdowns then we wouldn't lose as much....


That makes a lot of sense in a potted meat sort of way.

You're a dipshit.

Skip Towne
11-15-2004, 05:53 PM
You hope to make the team better by having its best player retire? That does not compute.
Are you forgetting you are on Chiefs Planet?

ChiefsCountry
11-15-2004, 05:56 PM
Do you guys realize that we are going to be pretty tight under the cap next season. Some guys are in for big pay raises. Priest goes from 640,000 to 2million. Alot of the players that happens. It could be a long off-season fans.

TEX
11-15-2004, 07:43 PM
Do you guys realize that we are going to be pretty tight under the cap next season. Some guys are in for big pay raises. Priest goes from 640,000 to 2million. Alot of the players that happens. It could be a long off-season fans.


IMO it's much WORSE to HAVE $$$ and NOT do anything with it... :shake:

Sure-Oz
11-15-2004, 07:46 PM
I don't want priest to retire, yes we need more talent to take the load off on him but he don't deserve to be ousted like some of you want him, it's like you take his ass for granted, i want him to play as long as he can, we may never have a player like him ever again.

Cannibal
11-15-2004, 07:57 PM
Yea, that's a good comparison. Let's put the biggest overpaid headcase in the NFL next to a guy with impeccable character and work ethic.

There's no comparison to the situation we're in. Maybe the closest would be when Indy traded away Faulk, but that doesn't even compare due to the fact that Faulk was so young. The Jets are in the same boat this year with Curtis Martin and Lamont Jordan, but at least the Jets could use the mileage excuse to get rid of Martin.

You guys are basically wanting to do the equivalent of trading away Gonzo so we can afford to keep Kris Wilson.

Blaylock has looked great in two games for us this year. One of those games was when our O-line put on one of the greatest displays of run-blocking in history. The other was against the worst run defense in the league. Yes, he's fast. Yes, he can make moves. But he stalled in the red zone a couple of times agaisnt the Saints. And he certainly hasn't shown enough to be mentioned in the same category as Holmes.

Let's address the RB problem when it actually becomes a problem. We need to fix the actual defincies before we start trading away pro-bowlers for a two-game wonder.

I agree with this. Blaylock does look like a superstar in the making. But it's far too early to enshrine the guy in Canton. I want to keep him, but we just don't know enough yet. We'll see what he can do against a real D next Monday. Priest has the talent to grind out yards against a good defenses. We'll see if Blaylock has the same kind of talent. Getting off on the Saints is one thing, getting of on the Pats is another.

Cannibal
11-15-2004, 08:02 PM
I don't want priest to retire, yes we need more talent to take the load off on him but he don't deserve to be ousted like some of you want him, it's like you take his ass for granted, i want him to play as long as he can, we may never have a player like him ever again.

I want Priest to stay as well. He is one of the few bright spots on this team. However, I DON'T want the guy to hang on too long either. I don't want him on this team just because they're trying to be nice and appease the best RB in Chiefs history. He had better be productive while he's here. If he loses production, he needs to be cut, it's that simple. If he keeps his level of play from the last couple of years keep him on and let him keep breaking records.

Personally, I think he's only got 1 more truly productive season. The man looks like he's been in a car accident on some of those hits. He's been getting up slower and slower as his career has wore on in KC. I hope he has 2 or 3 more productive seasons by his standards, but I doubt it.

Sure-Oz
11-15-2004, 08:17 PM
I agree with you cannibal as long as he is productive and stays healthy. He hasn't shown any signs of losing anything except just getting nailed over and over, he is a tough SOB that is for sure.

Valiant
11-15-2004, 08:52 PM
You are also assuming the OLine will be successful next year. I see a very good line, but I see one that is aging rapidly. Look at them toward the end of a game. Last year, 3 men would have never gotten to Green in the 4th quarter as they did last week.


i think it is the scheme... we can dominate a 5-6man rush but lose focus with three... if i were some of the evil teams erm opponents i would send three nonstop..