PDA

View Full Version : Plaxico Burris...


dtebbe
03-10-2005, 11:24 PM
I heard today on sports radio that the reason NY dropped him is that "he did not know how to handle himself". Apparently he wore a trendy T-shirt under his sportcoat, and then showed up at dinner in a 5 star restaurant in sweat pants. That didn't go over very good with Tom "Sgt. Carter" Coughlin. I'm starting to hope we sign him up. Lots of good places in KC to eat in sweat pants, my favorite being Aurthur Bryant's.

They also reported that he would be willing to sign a 1 year deal at the vet minimum with the "right team". I'm thinking Atlanta, KC, Minnesota, and maybe Baltimore may be his def of the "right team".

I don't know what the big deal is, I mean he's not in trouble with the cops right? He's a choir boy by NFL standards.

DT

Cochise
03-10-2005, 11:25 PM
Well I don't care for him but hell, for the vet minimum why the hell not. There was someone earlier who wanted to sign David Boston for the vet minimum for Eli's sake.

Pants
03-10-2005, 11:28 PM
Wait doesn't Burress play for the Steelers? I thought he was good too, and he's certainly not old.

jspchief
03-10-2005, 11:30 PM
Signing Burress is the equivalent of buying a Bentley while living in a trailer park...there are better uses for the money.

However, a one year "audition" contract may be justifiable. I would think our offense would be an appealing place for him to show his wares. Certainly more than Atlanta or Baltimore.

KCJake
03-10-2005, 11:37 PM
[QUOTE=jspchief]Signing Burress is the equivalent of buying a Bentley while living in a trailer park...there are better uses for the money.
QUOTE]
That was a trip :hmmm:

Count Zarth
03-10-2005, 11:43 PM
Man, I don't want Burress here, but not signing someone because of the attire they wear to a restaurant is moronic.

If Burress was applying for a job at corporate america, it would be one thing. But he's not.

jcroft
03-11-2005, 12:58 AM
Trendy tee under a sportcoat/blazer with jeans is basically the uniform for the modern man. What's the problem?

el borracho
03-11-2005, 01:00 AM
Why would Burress sign a 1 year, vet minimum contract?

Wallcrawler
03-11-2005, 01:03 AM
Adam Schefter was on Total Access, and he had another version.

He said that Burress went to dinner with the NYG brass, and just as he was biting into his steak, they hand him a contract offer with an 8 million dollar signing bonus.

Apparrently, Burress wasnt wanting to talk numbers over dinner, and was kinda ticked off. He just wanted to eat and talk about things other that his deal, and he was put off by them bringing the contract with them to the restaurant.


I dont know what his deal is.

Anyway, the Giants retracted their offer, and Schefter says that he is scheduled to show up in Minnesota for a visit, because he's been hanging out with Daunte Culpepper quite a bit.

The Philadelphia Eagles are also supposed to be faxing an offer to his agent as early as tomorrow as well.

Guess we will see what happens.

The Bad Guy
03-11-2005, 01:27 AM
The right team is the Vikings. He would catch at least 65 passes with Culpepper at QB.

That would drive his stock up huge for next off-season and he would get the payday he wanted.

Uncle_Ted
03-11-2005, 02:06 AM
He said that Burress went to dinner with the NYG brass, and just as he was biting into his steak, they hand him a contract offer with an 8 million dollar signing bonus.

Apparrently, Burress wasnt wanting to talk numbers over dinner, and was kinda ticked off. He just wanted to eat and talk about things other that his deal, and he was put off by them bringing the contract with them to the restaurant.

Wow, I can't think of anything worse than being offered $8 million while eating a steak. :shake:

Nightfyre
03-11-2005, 02:10 AM
**** him

Gaz
03-11-2005, 05:48 AM
The Chiefs Offense does not favor any single WR. It favors the RB & TE. Burress would not be happy in Red & Gold and history indicates he would not be shy about voicing his displeasure.

No to Burress, regardless of price.

xoxo~
Gaz
Happy to let some other team deal with a spoiled whiner.

the Talking Can
03-11-2005, 05:56 AM
What's wrong with a t-shirt under a sportscoat? I think they're racist..they loved it when Crockett did it:

http://eur.i1.yimg.com/eur.yimg.com/i/de/mov/kult10.jpg

Mile High Mania
03-11-2005, 06:32 AM
He will be a Viking... it's the perfect fit. I just wonder if they'd still take Edwards at #7 with Burress, Burleson, Robinson sitting at the top 3 spots.

They're set with a healthy corp of RBs... they have their QB, just resigned their TE. They have their corners... traded for a LB, signed a Dline guy... might get Sharper...

So, use that #7 pick on a potential phenom like Edwards or go for one of the O/Dline? Dunno... lots of potential with that friggin team if they get Plax.

vckcchiefs04
03-11-2005, 06:42 AM
I think it's one of those "if it happens, cool.... if it doesn't, who the hell cares" situations. If we could sign Plax for a small one year deal with a small signing bonus it would not hurt the Chiefs at all having a young fast tall WR for Trent to target. If he signs somewhere else, oh well. :p

Pants
03-11-2005, 06:44 AM
I don't want him, not even for free. I think he would actually be detrimental to our O.

Frankie
03-11-2005, 07:33 AM
I heard today on sports radio that the reason NY dropped him is that "he did not know how to handle himself". Apparently he wore a trendy T-shirt under his sportcoat, and then showed up at dinner in a 5 star restaurant in sweat pants.

Hell, Michael Jackson goes to COURT in his pajamas...

dtebbe
03-11-2005, 08:54 AM
The Chiefs Offense does not favor any single WR. It favors the RB & TE. Burress would not be happy in Red & Gold and history indicates he would not be shy about voicing his displeasure.

No to Burress, regardless of price.

xoxo~
Gaz
Happy to let some other team deal with a spoiled whiner.


I think he did very well last year. Not a peep about not getting the ball, and he was blocking his ass off, ala. Hines Ward. I'm not saying he's a great guy, but he is better than any receiver we have on the team right now.

DT

dtebbe
03-11-2005, 08:56 AM
Why would Burress sign a 1 year, vet minimum contract?

The angle I heard is he would basically go to a team that passes the ball and show off his skills and "new attidute" for a year, hoping to cash in on the big contract next year. Basically he has figured out that he's not getting big money this year from the sound of things.

Personally, I'm puzzled, I think he is one of the top 10 deep threats in the league.

DT

HC_Chief
03-11-2005, 08:59 AM
He would make this offense totally unstoppable.

Problem is he doesn't fit the crybaby's effing "profile".
I sure wish "the profile" was about performance, rather than how "nice" the person is. :grr:

Chan93lx50
03-11-2005, 09:01 AM
He will be a Viking... it's the perfect fit. I just wonder if they'd still take Edwards at #7 with Burress, Burleson, Robinson sitting at the top 3 spots.

They're set with a healthy corp of RBs... they have their QB, just resigned their TE. They have their corners... traded for a LB, signed a Dline guy... might get Sharper...

So, use that #7 pick on a potential phenom like Edwards or go for one of the O/Dline? Dunno... lots of potential with that friggin team if they get Plax.

I agree he will be a Viking, with the loss of Moss, they need another loud mouth prick to replace him!