PDA

View Full Version : Would P Burress fit in KC


cowboy_big_rich
03-09-2005, 06:40 PM
It would be fun to have a receiver that could actually catch the balls thrown his way

HemiEd
03-09-2005, 06:42 PM
It would be fun to have a receiver that could actually catch the balls thrown his way

I would say no, he does not fit the profile, he is too selfish. Wants the ball too much. It has been elaborated on quite a bit lately on the Planet. Chiefs spread the ball around and have too many weapons.

Deberg_1990
03-09-2005, 06:43 PM
Hes talented, but its telling that not many teams have much interest in him right now. IMO, hes not worth nearly the money he thinks he is. Hes lazy and unmotived at times.

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 06:44 PM
Probably wouldn't fit in KC because we aren't used to having a WR that is talented #1WR type...We prefer a bunch of #3 WR types that are beyond their prime.

That said all comments sound as if he is going much cheaper than I would expect and would sure love to see the Chiefs go get him.

keg in kc
03-09-2005, 06:45 PM
Our QB completed 66% of his passes, we had one starting receiver with 62 catches for 1000 yards and another with 55 for just under 800, and you're asking if we need to grab a free agent WR when we could use an upgrade for virtually any player who started on defense for us last year.

Big Chief Homer
03-09-2005, 06:46 PM
it would be nice to have a defense who could tackle opposing players once in a while.

offense is not a priority right now,especially with the money he wants.

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 06:46 PM
Our QB completed 66% of his passes, we had one starting receiver with 62 catches for 1000 yards and another with 55 for just under 800, and you're asking if we need to grab a free agent WR when we could use an upgrade for virtually any player who started on defense for us last year.


I read those stats and the first thing that comes to my mind is just think what those numbers would be if we had a WR with talent...

Woodrow Call
03-09-2005, 06:47 PM
We prefer a bunch of #3 WR types that are beyond their prime.

Sounds like Troy Brown would be a candidate then.

DTLB58
03-09-2005, 06:51 PM
Let me see, how can I say this tactfully...... ALL OF OUR FA SIGNINGS, DRAFT PICKS AND $ NEED TO BE ON THE DEFENSIVE SIDE OF THE BALL!

Kennison is good enough, Hopefully the coaches will let Samie Parker on the field this year. We have the best TE in the league, hopefully Bo will be back.

With all the complaining we have done about our WR's the last few years we still set numerous team, indiviual and league offensive records and where has it gotten us? WE NEED DEFENSE!

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 06:53 PM
Sounds like Troy Brown would be a candidate then.


He would be except he is too good a CB to be on the Chiefs.

keg in kc
03-09-2005, 06:53 PM
I read those stats and the first thing that comes to my mind is just think what those numbers would be if we had a WR with talent...I think you might have a higher individual total at the #1 spot, but I don't think the overall output of the offense would be noticably different. Realistically, there's only so many yards and so many points to go around. Not that it wouldn't be nice to have a greater threat on the outside, it would give us some flexibility and add some wrinkles, but I think, when I look at the big picture, we have (far) greater needs to address with our FA dollars. We don't really have the luxury to take money away from fixing the _efense to upgrade the already elite offense.

Now, if we want to grab a WR in the first couple of rounds of the draft, that's something else.

Delano
03-09-2005, 06:53 PM
Kennison is good enough, Hopefully the coaches will let Samie Parker on the field this year. We have the best TE in the league, hopefully Bo will be back.

When Morton is released that will leave the coaching staff no choice but to play Samie quite a bit.

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 06:54 PM
when I look at the big picture, we have (far) greater needs to address with our FA dollars. We don't really have the luxury to take money away from fixing the _efense to upgrade the already elite offense.

Now, if we want to grab a WR in the first couple of rounds of the draft, that's something else.



I would have agreed with that when the free agency pool was full but now that it has been picked over by all the good teams that know how to get deals done it may no longer be the case.

cowboy_big_rich
03-09-2005, 07:01 PM
I read those stats and the first thing that comes to my mind is just think what those numbers would be if we had a WR with talent...

my point exactly

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 07:01 PM
I would rather get fair value on Burress then in some desparate move for defense after all the good talent is gone grossly overpay for a middle of the road player because supply and demand got out of whack.

That said, if Fujita doesn't get resigned and Warfield is suspended for 4 games then this team is in a major world of hurt without spending money on another LB and a good FA CB....

brent102fire
03-09-2005, 07:08 PM
Not if he won't play for free or play CB. CP needs to save money and also sign a few more safeties... :shake:

keg in kc
03-09-2005, 07:08 PM
That said, if Fujita doesn't get resigned and Warfield is suspended for 4 games then this team is in a major world of hurt without spending money on another LB and a good FA CB....I think a good FA corner is the biggest need, and I also think we need an OLB regardless of what happens to Fujita. Hell, for that matter, we could justify replacing virtually anyone from last year's _efense.

My point is simply that adding Burress isn't going to make a difference if we're giving up 27 points a game again. In the overall picture, I'd rate the issues at WR behind any position on _efense with the possible exception of DT, and that only because I don't think you can continue to add new guys at the same position year after year after year.

Now, Burress also sets off some red flags for me in terms of attitude and work ethic, but the larger issue to me is fixing the _. I don't think that the WR position is the cog that kept us from rolling into the playoffs last year, and I don't think adding any player to the O is a need, it's a luxury. One we can't afford.

BoroChief
03-09-2005, 07:10 PM
I think Morton is beyond his prime, but I don't think we need to go after a pricey FA WR in Burress. We need to get Dante, Marc B. and Samie the ball more. I really think we need to develop the young WR's we have and definitely get more defensive help that's what killed us the last couple of years anyway

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 07:11 PM
I think a good FA corner is the biggest need, and I also think we need an OLB regardless of what happens to Fujita. Hell, for that matter, we could justify replacing virtually anyone from last year's _efense.

My point is simply that adding Burress isn't going to make a difference if we're giving up 27 points a game again. In the overall picture, I'd rate the issues at WR behind any position on _efense with the possible exception of DT, and that only because I don't think you can continue to add new guys at the same position year after year after year.

Now, Burress also sets off some red flags for me in terms of attitude and work ethic, but the larger issue to me is fixing the _. I don't think that the WR position is the cog that kept us from rolling into the playoffs last year, and I don't think adding any player to the O is a need, it's a luxury. One we can't afford.


I don't disagree but the offense isn't made up of spring chickens and certainly is going to need to quality young talent inserted soon, if not this year definitely soon.

Woodrow Call
03-09-2005, 07:11 PM
My point is simply that adding Burress isn't going to make a difference if we're giving up 27 points a game again. In the overall picture, I'd rate the issues at WR behind any position on _efense with the possible exception of DT, and that only because I don't think you can continue to add new guys at the same position year after year after year.

:clap:

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 07:13 PM
I think Morton is beyond his prime, but I don't think we need to go after a pricey FA WR in Burress. We need to get Dante, Marc B. and Samie the ball more. I really think we need to develop the young WR's we have and definitely get more defensive help that's what killed us the last couple of years anyway


Dante has proven he isn't anything more than a situational WR...Morton is a dead man barely walking...Boe is anything but a sure thing coming back from the knee blow out and Vermeil has something against using players in their first year or two...

keg in kc
03-09-2005, 07:16 PM
I don't disagree but the offense isn't made up of spring chickens and certainly is going to need to quality young talent inserted soon, if not this year definitely soon.I think this year is it, which is why I'm fine with taking a chance on Ty Law. If the objective is to win a superbowl, then we need to focus on fixing the immediate problems, even if that means generating some tough times down the road. I'm not usually a win now kind of guy, but I think this is the time for that approach. In a reasonable sense.

I also think we're going to have a rough stretch either way, because we've drafted so poorly for so long. Actually, truth is, we've been on a rough stretch for the last 7 years. The 13-3 season was the aberration. We've been bad for a while now. Free agency isn't going to save us, it's going to take the development of drafted talent, and a core of players we can build on.

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 07:17 PM
And Parker probably will never be more than a #2 due to his size...Could be wrong but that would be my best guess....

Which takes us back to the fact we don't have a legit #1 on the roster. Not our biggest need considering the defense but still a need.

bringbackmarty
03-09-2005, 07:17 PM
Well I'll get on the hot seat and actually answer your question which was not should the chiefs actually sign burress, but would he fit our offense. I will say yes. He has come a long way in the past year in terms of his downfield blocking, and exhibiting a less selfish more team first attitude on and off the field. I notice when our man green is off, he throws high, and sometimes behind, a healthy plex could make 20 tough clutch catches a year like that, more than morton, bo, parker, or yes even kennison. More important than the amount of catches is I think he will be more reliable for us on third and long. He is not your typical Vermiel reciever (a little tall) but he is almost as fast as kennison, and definitely faster than pillowbiter. He also is willing to take a one year deal, which, I think we could do (possibly, am not a CAPOLOGIST) without having to sacrifice anyone on the defensive fa list to do it. We ought to get rid of somebody on the offense though to help balance this shit out. I say sign Law, draft defense first round, trade holmes for surtain and taylor. there's your superbowl, use the second on a backup to lj, rb is deep this year. Even if roaf and shields play hurt gaz could get 1,000 yds behind our line. I'll take our line with roaf and shields playing on one leg apiece over any team with those defensive players i mentioned on our side. draft oline depth starting in the fourth. seeya in the playoffs Priest.

all that said it'll never happen.

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 07:18 PM
He'll fit in a lot better in two weeks when his price drops another 2 million dollars.

HemiEd
03-09-2005, 07:18 PM
I think Morton is beyond his prime, but I don't think we need to go after a pricey FA WR in Burress. We need to get Dante, Marc B. and Samie the ball more. I really think we need to develop the young WR's we have and definitely get more defensive help that's what killed us the last couple of years anyway


Welcome to the Planet. So do you think Dante will ever really make a WR?

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 07:19 PM
I think this year is it, which is why I'm fine with taking a chance on Ty Law. If the objective is to win a superbowl, then we need to focus on fixing the immediate problems, even if that means generating some tough times down the road. I'm not usually a win now kind of guy, but I think this is the time for that approach. In a reasonable sense.

I also think we're going to have a rough stretch either way, because we've drafted so poorly for so long. Actually, truth is, we've been on a rough stretch for the last 7 years. The 13-3 season was the aberration. We've been bad for a while now. Free agency isn't going to save us, it's going to take the development of drafted talent, and a core of players we can build on.


I must agree with pretty much all of that....When you get so little out of your top four rounds in the draft for so many years in a row you are in deep $hit.

BoroChief
03-09-2005, 07:33 PM
I think giving Dante the playing time he needs he'll be an excellent WR. His speed and moves alone make me shutter at the potential deep threat option he gives us. Let's face it, Morton and Kennison aren't spring chickens and I think Dante can step it up and make a major impact if he's allowed to grow as a player.

Lbedrock1
03-09-2005, 07:45 PM
It would be fun to have a receiver that could actually catch the balls thrown his way

You are absolutely right. Some of the stuff that is being said on this board like we don't have a need at reciever is garbage. We need two corners but a new receiver to replace Morton is also a pressing need and we may end up seeing it if all we concentrate on is our D. We will be ranked 9th on D but our O will slip. We need a reciever like plex to make this machine unstoppable. We need a receiver thats hard to jam and demands the opposing D to pull safety help to the side of that reciever and we don't have that right now. We can't continue to use priest as the only go to guy we need a vet receiver.

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 07:53 PM
Burress is really nothing more than an average possession receiver. His last 4 years (not inlcuding his rookie year) he averages 60 receptions a year and about 5 TDs a year. He's not that great, plus he drops a lot of balls. He's not a guy you want to break the bank over.

Big Chief Homer
03-09-2005, 08:01 PM
You are absolutely right. Some of the stuff that is being said on this board like we don't have a need at reciever is garbage. We need two corners but a new receiver to replace Morton is also a pressing need and we may end up seeing it if all we concentrate on is our D. We will be ranked 9th on D but our O will slip. We need a reciever like plex to make this machine unstoppable. We need a receiver thats hard to jam and demands the opposing D to pull safety help to the side of that reciever and we don't have that right now. We can't continue to use priest as the only go to guy we need a vet receiver.
Saying we dont need a wr now is NOT garbage.If we do not fix the defense and fix it now with quality players.It doesnt mean squat whoes catching the ball(IE SEE @ YEARS AGO).

The money thats available now needs to go towards quality defense.not spent on someone who bitches about the amount of balls thrown his way.What would he do in our offense with priest,kennison,dante,TG.

First of all he wont come here.second of all while i agree we need to replace morton witha true #1 receiver,its not an immediate need as of RIGHT NOW.june 1st cuts and the draft could very well provide us with a true #1.

The cap space needs to be spent on fixing the D thats held this team back for 3 years now(ie Corner,MLB).picking up a O player like burress would only revert this team back to FA's like Holliday,Mccleon and so forth.

HemiEd
03-09-2005, 08:01 PM
I think giving Dante the playing time he needs he'll be an excellent WR. His speed and moves alone make me shutter at the potential deep threat option he gives us. Let's face it, Morton and Kennison aren't spring chickens and I think Dante can step it up and make a major impact if he's allowed to grow as a player.


I hope you are right, I am skeptical. Don't get me wrong, I am a Dante fan. I followed him in college. I really thought it was funny what he did with his parking in the Deans spot.
I think Dick Vermiel has cultivated him into overachieving and becoming the best return man in the NFL. A couple of the runs he has made have earned him the human joystick name. However, I have not seen the receiver skills yet, I hope they come.

whoman69
03-09-2005, 08:07 PM
Burress is not the kind of receiver for this offense. He is tall and gets catches that way. This kind of offense calls for a different type receiver. That said, I too don't believe that a true #1 receiver is going to make that much difference. The best thing about this offense is it spreads the ball around to many receivers, like the Colts offense.
Additionally, the need for defensive help cannot be reconsiled with going out and spending money on a receiver. IMO Morton is gone June 1 anyway and the other players we have need to step it up. We drafted 2 receivers last year, we have Boe coming back from injury and a good young receiver in Horn.

NaptownChief
03-09-2005, 08:13 PM
Burress is really nothing more than an average possession receiver. His last 4 years (not inlcuding his rookie year) he averages 60 receptions a year and about 5 TDs a year. He's not that great, plus he drops a lot of balls. He's not a guy you want to break the bank over.



He has had a rookie, a queer and an XFL QB throwing to him in a run first offense during those 4 years also....

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 08:51 PM
He has had a rookie, a queer and an XFL QB throwing to him in a run first offense during those 4 years also....

It didn't stop Hines Ward from putting up 95 receptions on average during those years. True #1 receiver numbers.

Douche Baggins
03-09-2005, 08:55 PM
I just hope Plastico gets out of the AFC. I'd rather not face him.

Dayze
03-09-2005, 09:03 PM
I certainly think he'd be a good fit. It's just unfortunate that this is THE year where the Chiefs need to focus soley on defense, and only defense in the off season. That said, if we pick up any offensive players in FA, I'll scream myself hoarse (sp?)

Wish he was a FA 3 years ago... :deevee:

Wallcrawler
03-09-2005, 11:32 PM
No.

The Chiefs dont have time to go over and take little Plaxico by the hand and comfort him when he isnt catching 10 passes a game and our offense is moving the ball anyway.

The guy was on a team that won 15 games, and was complaining. WTF is that? Thats a guy who is out for personal accolades, not team accomplishments.

He wouldnt care that he was drawing coverage off of Tony, or helping in the run game. If he wasnt getting 10 passes a game, he wouldnt be happy, he would go into his little mood and not give his full effort.

Let someone else pay him what he wants, and put up with his bullshit.


Johnnie Morton was our number two, and he sucks. There are plenty of candidates on the team that can come in and replace Johnnie Morton, and catch the 55 passes that went his way. Hell, they might even catch more, considering Morton quit on plays and dropped a lot of passes.

Dick Vermiel will find a number 2 receiver. Dick knows offense, and we will find a way to replace Johnnie Stonehands.

The defense is what needs the help. Our offense averaged 33 points per game. We have to get the defense to where we wont be losing games when we put up that many points.

33 points should be enough to win ANY football game. If you cant win a game where you scored 33 points, thats a huge problem. That problem has got to be addressed.

And because the problem was not addressed last offseason, it has to be addressed even more aggressively this offseason. We pretty much have to forego the offensive side of the ball to get this defense respectable.

Bell was a nice start, but its far from being done. We cant waste cap dollars on another offensive player when the D is this bad.

DenverChief
03-09-2005, 11:51 PM
YEA!

Over-Head
03-10-2005, 04:55 AM
Defense wins games, plain and simple.
And it's unfortunate that much like Oaktown, the Chiefs are in the same situation with quite a few offensive weapons, but a pizz poor defense.

Plexico is a medium receiver at best. And certainly not worth losing cash your team could be better off putting towards some new blood on the D line.

Gaz
03-10-2005, 06:42 AM
No.

The Chiefs Offense is not WR-intensive. We do not need Burress crying for the ball.

xoxo~
Gaz
Totally uninterested.

Manila-Chief
03-10-2005, 08:35 AM
I say he is not! If he is such a great WR then why are the Steelers making no effort to re-sign him?

Also, I thought D.V. likes quick twich W.R. Don't think he fits that mode.

Now, if we could get an impact C.B. and maybe Hartwell in F.A. .... and an impact W.R. were to fall to us at 15 then I would not complain if they went that route. That's the only way I see us going W.R.

But, I hope we draft D. Rogers would be my choice even if we sign an impact C.B. ... because he sounds like he will make an impact and would come in the draft and be around for a long time.

But, I will not hold my breath waiting for D.V. to start a rookie. That is why we need to get busy and get us an impact C.B. .... Surtain or Law ... not one of the 2nd. tier guys..

Brock
03-10-2005, 09:54 AM
We already have somebody to throw the jump ball to in the endzone, and he usually catches it. Unlike P Burress.

HC_Chief
03-10-2005, 09:58 AM
He would shred in this offense.

It won't happen. He doesn't fit "the profile" :rolleyes: