PDA

View Full Version : Ashley Ambrose: What would you rate this move?


RedThat
07-02-2005, 11:02 AM
Comments?

cmh6476
07-02-2005, 11:04 AM
you don't think there's another thread already on this? :doh!:

not that I care, it's not my site :(

It's Just I havent even looked, but I bet I can find at least one thread on the first couple pages! :|

RedThat
07-02-2005, 11:08 AM
you don't think there's another thread already on this? :doh!:

not that I care, it's not my site :(

It's Just I havent even looked, but I bet I can find at least one thread on the first couple pages! :|

I am aware that there are other threads about Ashley Ambrose. However, not 1 of them specifically mentioned about the rating of the move. And that's what I'm asking, specifically.

cmh6476
07-02-2005, 11:10 AM
I am aware that there are other threads about Ashley Ambrose. However, not 1 of them specifically mentioned about the rating of the move. And that's what I'm asking, specifically.
my apologies.

I think it will help. I am not confident enough in McCleon while Warfield is out (if he is), and when he does come back (if Warfield is suspended) I like the competition at the Nickel position!

:thumb:


with the homer goggles: A+
takin the shades off prolly maybe a C- (not much talent really out there, or he'd already be with somebody)

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:10 AM
I ranked it a 6 out of 10 just out of necessity. The reason it's not an 8 or a 9 is Ambrose is past his prime. It could easily turn into a higher rank, though.

It's low risk.

RedThat
07-02-2005, 11:25 AM
my apologies.

I think it will help. I am not confident enough in McCleon while Warfield is out (if he is), and when he does come back (if Warfield is suspended) I like the competition at the Nickel position!

:thumb:


with the homer goggles: A+
takin the shades off prolly maybe a C- (not much talent really out there, or he'd already be with somebody)

cool

The competition at the nickel position is great. I give Ambrose the edge because of experience and better quality play than McCleon over the years.

But just think, one can't help to be positive when we hear our DB's are Surtain, Warfield, Ambrose, and McCleon

Oh and sorry...Prefer numbers man, numbers.

nychief
07-02-2005, 11:28 AM
this is redundant....

Mr. Laz
07-02-2005, 11:28 AM
1 year deal for the league minimum...

what's not to like


he's deal doesn't even count against the cap

CoMoChief
07-02-2005, 11:29 AM
5-10, 185 lbs. almost 35 years old, out much of last season due to injury, I dont like this move at all. Hes the same size as McBurnon and more than likely just as fast. These first 4 games are gonna put us in a deep hole.

beer bacon
07-02-2005, 11:31 AM
I gave a 7/10, but I almost gave a 6. I like this because of what Laz said above. I also understand that this is mostly for depth, and that their isn't a whole lot of talent left out there. The reason I did not give an 8 or higher is because I would have preferred Beasley or Washington.

Bowser
07-02-2005, 11:31 AM
5-10, 185 lbs. almost 35 years old, out much of last season due to injury, I dont like this move at all. Hes the same size as McBurnon and more than likely just as fast. These first 4 games are gonna put us in a deep hole.

Bookmarked.

beer bacon
07-02-2005, 11:32 AM
5-10, 185 lbs. almost 35 years old, out much of last season due to injury, I dont like this move at all. Hes the same size as McBurnon and more than likely just as fast. These first 4 games are gonna put us in a deep hole.

From what I have read Ambrose is supposed to "excell" as a coverage corner, while McCleon is more of a zone CB. Take that for what it is worth.

RedThat
07-02-2005, 11:34 AM
5-10, 185 lbs. almost 35 years old, out much of last season due to injury, I dont like this move at all. Hes the same size as McBurnon and more than likely just as fast. These first 4 games are gonna put us in a deep hole.

C'mon dude this isn't the end of the world here
:rolleyes:

Ambrose should at least be decent enough to cover teams #2 WR's. Relax, he's not a starter, just here to provide depth, and at least provide service when Warfield serves his suspension.

RedThat
07-02-2005, 11:37 AM
he's deal doesn't even count against the cap

really?
:hmmm:

interesting

so does that mean we still have 900k under the cap as of right now?

Rudy lost the toss
07-02-2005, 11:42 AM
who is Ashley Ambrose? She sounds like a pornstar so I'll give her a 7.

Wallcrawler
07-02-2005, 02:47 PM
7/10

People, he was brought in for DEPTH. Replacing JULIAN BATTLE.

Remind me again what Julian Battle has done for the Chiefs, because I cant seem to remember anything significant on the positive side.

I think KC did a good job in replacing Julian Battle, which was all the move was for. One year deal, vet minimum, with experience.

Im much more comfortable with Ashley Ambrose taking the field for the Chiefs, than Julian Battle.


As for you people still whining about how the Chiefs are going to be in a hole after the first four games, I wonder how many drugs are required to equal a ticket to the world that you live in.

I was not aware that without Eric Warfield, this team was doomed. No chance to win. Thats news to me. Remind me again how many Pro Bowls Warfield has been to? Zero? Yeah, thats what I remember too....

You think that despite the additions of Knight, Surtain, Bell, Johnson, and Hall, along with the KC Offense, the Chiefs are STILL going to be unable to answer the challenge of the first four games simply because Eric Warfield isnt on the field?

Gimme a break.

This is still a much better defensive unit than what was taking the field last season. You could field last season's defense in the first four weeks and the Chiefs would still have a shot at winning any of those four games.

I find it odd that Eric Warfield suddenly turned into the key to the team's ultimate success or failure in the first four weeks of the year. Thats pretty funny to me, considering that Eric Warfield is an average corner on his best day who has never broken the 4 interception mark in a season in his entire career. He's not irreplacable.

Not only that, but the offense has a lot of experience in trying to win the game in spite of a horrible defense. There will not be as much pressure on them this year, even with Warfield missing the first four games, because of the other players that have been added.

Rudy lost the toss
07-02-2005, 03:12 PM
Holy shit I just added everything up and between Warfield,Surtain,McCleon,Ambrose,Knight,Wesley, and Woods they have a combined 188 INTs. That is a lot of experience and probably the most combined INTs of any team. Of course Woods, Ambrose, and McCleon are probably washed up so it is probably like saying the broncos recievers have the most career catches, yards, and touchdowns

RedThat
07-02-2005, 03:27 PM
Holy shit I just added everything up and between Warfield,Surtain,McCleon,Ambrose,Knight,Wesley, and Woods they have a combined 188 INTs. That is a lot of experience and probably the most combined INTs of any team. Of course Woods, Ambrose, and McCleon are probably washed up so it is probably like saying the broncos recievers have the most career catches, yards, and touchdowns

Tell all that to a Bronco fan :p

chagrin
07-02-2005, 03:28 PM
The best move since JJ birden signed with Atlanta
This rivals Harvey Williams use as a TE in Raiders ville

jspchief
07-02-2005, 03:33 PM
Holy shit I just added everything up and between Warfield,Surtain,McCleon,Ambrose,Knight,Wesley, and Woods they have a combined 188 INTs. That is a lot of experience and probably the most combined INTs of any team. Of course Woods, Ambrose, and McCleon are probably washed up so it is probably like saying the broncos recievers have the most career catches, yards, and touchdownsAdd Bartee to that list and you get a truly amazing number.

Braincase
07-02-2005, 04:37 PM
Ashley Ambrose>Julain Battle
Ashley Ambrose>Dexter McCleon

Yeah, I think it's a positive.

jspchief
07-02-2005, 05:01 PM
I'll call it a 9.

It is exactly what the Chiefs were looking for. An affordable veteran to fill in for Warfield and provide experienced depth.

The only reason I'm not making it a 10 is because I thought Beasley was the better choice.

Mr. Laz
07-02-2005, 05:32 PM
really?
:hmmm:

interesting

so does that mean we still have 900k under the cap as of right now?
only the top 52 salaries count against the salary cap


Ambrose was signed for the veteran minimum which is 750k iirc.

due to a new rule the NFL started a few years back ... a veteran signed for the 750k minimum only counts against the cap for 450k.

they did it to try and encourage teams to keep more veterans.


i doubt Ambrose will count against the cap unless he makes the final roster.

milkman
07-02-2005, 07:19 PM
From what I have read Ambrose is supposed to "excell" as a coverage corner, while McCleon is more of a zone CB. Take that for what it is worth.

In spite of his size, Ambrose is more physical than McPassOn, which fits Gun's scheme in the #2 corner better.

McPassOn is better working in space, which is why he was better in Spinner's scheme, and makes him better suited for the nickel.

Because of their different strengths, when Warfiled returns, McPassOn will probably remain the nickel, with Ambrose as the dime.

KChiefs1
07-02-2005, 10:27 PM
Low risk, high reward move...what's not to like?