PDA

View Full Version : If Ambrose = Battle, why not add Law too?


John_Wayne
07-02-2005, 06:20 PM
Many are saying now that the Chiefs have signed Ambrose, they aren't going to sign Law. Now I don't know their level of interest in Law nor their salary cap situation. My point is that the signing of Ambrose doesn't change anything in regards to Law.

Ambrose was signed to replace Battle. Before Battle was injured, the Chiefs were keeping tabs on Law and still showed some interest in him. Speculation was that the Chiefs were one of the few teams in the running for Law. Now that Battle is gone for the season and Ambrose has been signed to replace him, why does this change anything in regards to Law? To me, it seems that nothing is really that different. I'm not saying we were going to sign Law or that we are going to sign him, just that nothing has really changed.

Also, I don't see why many think losing Battle is such a big deal. He's been terrible for two years. He was a 3rd or 4th option at CB, at best. Losing a player to injury is always bad, but in this case, it's not devestating.

Also, many are complaining that Ambrose is old and he's a bad choice. To me, Battle wasn't that good, so Ambrose is probably a comperable replacement.

Even though the Chiefs don't have a ton of cap space, I've heard, more than once, on the radio that the Chiefs could rework some contracts like Gonzo, Priest, Trent, etc. to get the cap space needed to sign Law. Personally, I don't think our cap situation is as much of a stumbling block as others do. I think if the Chiefs want him, they'll get him. But, I don't know what kind of interest the Chiefs have ever had in him.

Discuss.........

Ultra Peanut
07-02-2005, 06:21 PM
Scott, you just... don't get it, do ya?

jspchief
07-02-2005, 06:23 PM
Holmes has already said he won't restructure. Gonzo is a selfish prick, so I doubt he would.

But here's the important thing. Law won't sign a one year deal. That means we will have to tie up a lot of money on the CB position. That will hurt us down the road at other positions. It's too many eggs in one basket.

Mr. Laz
07-02-2005, 06:34 PM
Holmes has already said he won't restructure.

link?

jspchief
07-02-2005, 06:41 PM
link?Honestly, I don't feel like looking it up. I don't remember if it was this year or last, but he basically said, "I had to wait to get mine, I'm not doing anything"

You can belive me or not. It's not important to me.

John_Wayne
07-02-2005, 10:01 PM
Clarification:
Since the Chiefs signed Ambrose to replace Battle, aren't they in the same position they were in before Battle got injured? Therefore, the chances of them signing Law is the same now as it was before Battle got injured, right?

tk13
07-02-2005, 10:04 PM
link?
He said that in a radio interview way before FA even started. I think it was on Sirius radio or one of the big radio talk shows, I can't remember which. They were talking about defensive FA's out there and whether Priest would be willing to restructure to help get more defenders and he said he's not giving up anything, the team can come up with the money themselves.

Phobia
07-02-2005, 10:07 PM
Ambrose probably won't even make the team. I don't know why everybody keeps talking about the guy. He's training camp fodder.

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 10:29 PM
The Chiefs already made Law an offer. Law turned it down because it wasn't what he wanted as far as the money goes. He said something to the effect of the way the contract was structured that he would "only" make about $10,000,000 before the Chiefs cut him.

Law is damaged goods. Why anyone thinks we would spend any serious amount of cash on him is beyond me.

I'm half tempted to start giving out neg rep for every damn Law thread I see. I sick of looking at them because they are meaningless.

TRR
07-02-2005, 10:35 PM
Ambrose probably won't even make the team. I don't know why everybody keeps talking about the guy. He's training camp fodder.

Are you serious? I'll bet you whatever you want that Ambrose makes the team. Ashley Ambrose has been a solid CB in the NFL for years. He's two times the CB Battle is, and Battle was being considered as a starter.

Ambrose makes the team easily.

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 10:36 PM
Are you serious? I'll bet you whatever you want that Ambrose makes the team. Ashley Ambrose has been a solid CB in the NFL for years. He's two times the CB Battle is, and Battle was being considered as a starter.

Ambrose makes the team easily.
He's also old.

Miles
07-02-2005, 10:41 PM
Clarification:
Since the Chiefs signed Ambrose to replace Battle, aren't they in the same position they were in before Battle got injured? Therefore, the chances of them signing Law is the same now as it was before Battle got injured, right?

Its hard to reduce the probability of us signing him much lower than it was before Ambrose. We can afford an expensive injured player as well now as before. So sure yeah the chances havent changed.

TRR
07-02-2005, 10:42 PM
He's also old.

And?

Phobia
07-02-2005, 10:45 PM
Are you serious? I'll bet you whatever you want that Ambrose makes the team. Ashley Ambrose has been a solid CB in the NFL for years. He's two times the CB Battle is, and Battle was being considered as a starter.

Ambrose makes the team easily.

See also: Ronnie Lott

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 10:45 PM
And?
If I have to explain that too you, then there's really no point in me wasting my breath. You won't recognize the logic behind those rose colored glasses you're wearing.

TRR
07-02-2005, 10:46 PM
See also: Ronnie Lott

Alright then let's put some money on if he makes the team or not.

TRR
07-02-2005, 10:47 PM
If I have to explain that too you, then there's really no point in me wasting my breath. You won't recognize the logic behind those rose colored glasses you're wearing.

Alright? I just don't know what age has to do with Ambrose being able to contribute. There are CB's all over the NFL that are contributing at or around Ambrose' age. KC isn't asking him to be a Pro Bowler. They are asking him to be a role player.

BTW, I don't know why your coming off like a prick. Just answer the question.

Phobia
07-02-2005, 10:49 PM
Alright then let's put some money on if he makes the team or not.

Give me a week to think about it and then I'll determine how much I'm willing to put up. Do you have any thoughts?

TRR
07-02-2005, 10:50 PM
Give me a week to think about it and then I'll determine how much I'm willing to put up. Do you have any thoughts?

I'll put up $1,000 dollars. It makes no difference to me. It's a guaranteed win.

Miles
07-02-2005, 10:56 PM
See also: Ronnie Lott

Or ray crockett.

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 10:57 PM
Alright? I just don't know what age has to do with Ambrose being able to contribute. There are CB's all over the NFL that are contributing at or around Ambrose' age. KC isn't asking him to be a Pro Bowler. They are asking him to be a role player.
Old equates to losing a few steps and becoming more injury prone as the years go on. It's a simple fact of life that cannot be denied.
BTW, I don't know why your coming off like a prick. Just answer the question.
Prick? No sir. That's not my intention at all. Being a prick would involve somethig along the lines of unwarented name calling, such as calling someone a prick who has never said an unkind word about you. THAT would be a prick.

TRR
07-02-2005, 11:02 PM
Old equates to losing a few steps and becoming more injury prone as the years go on. It's a simple fact of life that cannot be denied.

Prick? No sir. That's not my intention at all. Being a prick would involve somethig along the lines of unwarented name calling, such as calling someone a prick who has never said an unkind word about you. THAT would be a prick.

You just came off a little short to me, that's all. If your going to have a discussion, then discuss. Don't tell me you don't have time to explain yourself.

Secondly, Ambrose may have lost a few steps since his Pro Bowl season. However, he will be very solid in spot duty. I have no clue what would make you think otherwise. He has hardly missed a game in his career until last season. He is old, your right. But he can still play.

TRR
07-02-2005, 11:07 PM
If you want to bet something Phobia, we could be a CP t-shirt.

Let's put some stipulations on the bet though. Injury to Ambrose would obviously make the bet null and void, and we should also put a stipulation on if KC brings in another CB. My sources tell me they are still looking to add Ty Law at the right price, and may be even looking at a player like DeWayne Washington still...

beavis
07-02-2005, 11:12 PM
Therefore, the chances of them signing Law is the same now as it was before Battle got injured, right?
Yes, zero.

Wile_E_Coyote
07-02-2005, 11:14 PM
still got'em fighting over him
:Poke:

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:14 PM
If you want to bet something Phobia, we could be a CP t-shirt.

Let's put some stipulations on the bet though. Injury to Ambrose would obviously make the bet null and void, and we should also put a stipulation on if KC brings in another CB. My sources tell me they are still looking to add Ty Law at the right price, and may be even looking at a player like DeWayne Washington still...

Yeah - $1000 is a little too rich for me. I think a CP tee is fair, but since I already have one, how 'bout $20 from you and a CP tee from me ($5 shipping voided if we're able to hand the loss to the other party).

But, lets exclude injury and all other BS. Make the criteria on the KC 53 man roster for 16 regular season games. Lott supposedly didn't make the team due to injury. Let's insure a payoff from either party.

Either way, smart money is on you.

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 11:15 PM
Yes, zero.
See also slim and none, and slim isnt answering the phone.

Rausch
07-02-2005, 11:18 PM
I wouldn't want Holmes to restructure. He, Shields, and Gonzo are probably the only players on the team who've earned their paycheck the last three years.

Pushing him further towards retirement by trying to **** him on his well-earned contract would piss me off...

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:20 PM
You just came off a little short to me, that's all. If your going to have a discussion, then discuss. Don't tell me you don't have time to explain yourself.

Hey - I meant to post this earlier today - during a similar disagreement during which both "contestants" quickly determined they weren't interested in an internet pissing contest.....

I'm incredibly impressed with the way the regular members of this board are able to back off and come to a gentlemen's agreement to disagree. You don't see that everywhere - especially on a site where (nearly) anything goes. Kudos to you two jackasses for being decent human beings.

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:22 PM
I wouldn't want Holmes to restructure. He, Shields, and Gonzo are probably the only players on the team who've earned their paycheck the last three years.

Pushing him further towards retirement by trying to **** him on his well-earned contract would piss me off...

Restructuring doesn't "****" anybody. It shifts money around to benefit the cap. Maybe it has some interest benefits towards the player, but it generally doesn't impact the cap. The media doesn't generally mix words regarding a salary reduction (see Jerome Bettis) vs. contract restructure.

Smed1065
07-02-2005, 11:23 PM
Holmes has already said he won't restructure. Gonzo is a selfish prick, so I doubt he would.

But here's the important thing. Law won't sign a one year deal. That means we will have to tie up a lot of money on the CB position. That will hurt us down the road at other positions. It's too many eggs in one basket.

You are wrong, the top 3 players ha said they will resturture, because they all want a RING! Can you quote your sources? Because you must be in Denver-LOL


Super Bowl Bound!

Chiefs Pantalones
07-02-2005, 11:24 PM
Whatever happen to the old days when players were more than willing to restructure to get some more talent for their team? In 97, John Elway welcomed to restructure his deal so they could fit Neil Smith under the cap. Maybe it's worth more to the players that haven't won the ring and who are older. John would've probably gave his left nut to get the right talent to get to the SB because he was old and ringless. Nobody wants to end up like Dan, lol.

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 11:24 PM
Hey - I meant to post this earlier today - during a similar disagreement during which both "contestants" quickly determined they weren't interested in an internet pissing contest.....

I'm incredibly impressed with the way the regular members of this board are able to back off and come to a gentlemen's agreement to disagree. You don't see that everywhere - especially on a site where (nearly) anything goes. Kudos to you two jackasses for being decent human beings.
<strike>F*ck you very much.</strike>
Thank you very much.

:p

Seriously, arguing for the sake of arguing on a BB is insane and not my cup of tea.

4th and Long
07-02-2005, 11:25 PM
Whatever happen to the old days when players were more than willing to restructure to get some more talent for their team? In 97, John Elway welcomed to restructure his deal so they could fit Neil Smith under the cap. Maybe it's worth more to the players that haven't won the ring and who are older. John would've probably gave his left nut to get the right talent to get to the SB because he was old and ringless. Nobody wants to end up like Dan, lol.
Restructing during that period was not needed for the Donks. They just cheated the salary cap instead.

Smed1065
07-02-2005, 11:26 PM
Honestly, I don't feel like looking it up. I don't remember if it was this year or last, but he basically said, "I had to wait to get mine, I'm not doing anything"

You can belive me or not. It's not important to me.

Yeah, hes just an azz with no facts, hoping we do not. His team already Sucks and no match!

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:28 PM
Yeah, hes just an azz with no facts, hoping we do not. His team already Sucks and no match!

Uh - dude. I know the guy - personally. This isn't a battle you want to fight.

Anybody who drives 4 hours for a Chiefs PRACTICE and flies a 20' Chiefs flag in the parking lot should not have their fandom questioned.

Rausch
07-02-2005, 11:28 PM
Restructuring doesn't "****" anybody. It shifts money around to benefit the cap. Maybe it has some interest benefits towards the player, but it generally doesn't impact the cap. The media doesn't generally mix words regarding a salary reduction (see Jerome Bettis) vs. contract restructure.


Peterson is infamous for trying to get higher salary players to take a pay cut or be cut. Now, no one is going to cut Holmes but I wouldn't put it past Peterson to ask him take less for the team.

He's got Johnson in place and Holmes has already talked about retirement, plus Peterson has a history with older players who've passed their peak (Saleamua, Hasty, Neil Smith, etc.)

Priest is one of the few stars we've had at HB in years and has earned a lot of respect in my book. I'd prefer to just leave him and his contract alone.

If anyone should take a pay cut it should be Warfield (call a cab dumbass), Woods, or Hicks...

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:29 PM
Restructing during that period was not needed for the Donks. They just cheated the salary cap instead.

No shit. Elway is still passing paychecks from Bowlen to Heizinga to circumvent the salary cap.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-02-2005, 11:32 PM
Why is it when I think of Dan Marino, I think of football hell?

hmmm...probably because he is really the only player that shows, physically, that he is upset that he never won a ring. Either that, or he kind of resembles a demon with that 365 day a year Miami tan.

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:34 PM
Peterson is infamous for trying to get higher salary players to take a pay cut or be cut. Now, no one is going to cut Holmes but I wouldn't put it past Peterson to ask him take less for the team.

He's got Johnson in place and Holmes has already talked about retirement, plus Peterson has a history with older players who've passed their peak (Saleamua, Hasty, Neil Smith, etc.)

Priest is one of the few stars we've had at HB in years and has earned a lot of respect in my book. I'd prefer to just leave him and his contract alone.

If anyone should take a pay cut it should be Warfield (call a cab dumbass), Woods, or Hicks...

I'm not familiar with the Saleamua story, but Hasty (if what he claims is true) would be the only legit "complaint" that is public. Smith was offered MORE than what he eventually settled for in Denver, but refused because he was expecting DT money.

I'm quite certain Peterson wouldn't screw Holmes because Priest has already prove he'll take his contract/salary concerns to the national media. Hell, you couldn't turn on a pre-season football game in 2003 without hearing PH whining about his compensation package.

I agree that Woods/Hicks should be reduced. I disagree that Warfield's compensation is as much as everybody has been claiming over the years....

Chiefs Pantalones
07-02-2005, 11:34 PM
No shit. Elway is still passing paychecks from Bowlen to Heizinga to circumvent the salary cap.

ROFL

Hey, if you're not cheating, you're not trying.

TRR
07-02-2005, 11:34 PM
Yeah - $1000 is a little too rich for me. I think a CP tee is fair, but since I already have one, how 'bout $20 from you and a CP tee from me ($5 shipping voided if we're able to hand the loss to the other party).

But, lets exclude injury and all other BS. Make the criteria on the KC 53 man roster for 16 regular season games. Lott supposedly didn't make the team due to injury. Let's insure a payoff from either party.

Either way, smart money is on you.

That bet is fine by me. However, I would rather have the bet hinge on opening day 53 man roster. You said Ambrose was just "camp fodder." So my bet is that he is not just camp fodder, and will make the active 53 man roster. If Ambrose lines up on opening day, I win. If he's cut during training camp like you say he will be, then you win.

Also, if Ambrose gets hurt and misses a bunch of workouts, then I don't see how the bet is still intact. There has to be a stip on what happens if Ambrose is injured and misses significant time. That's only fair.

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:36 PM
That bet is fine by me. However, I would rather have the bet hinge on opening day 53 man roster. You said Ambrose was just "camp fodder." So my bet is that he is not just camp fodder, and will make the active 53 man roster. If Ambrose lines up on opening day, I win. If he's cut during training camp like you say he will be, then you win.

Also, if Ambrose gets hurt and misses a bunch of workouts, then I don't see how the bet is still intact. There has to be a stip on what happens if Ambrose is injured and misses significant time. That's only fair.

That's a reasonable assessment, but the other provisions in my terms are my handicap. I think I'm allowed a small handicap.... in the interest of fairness.

TRR
07-02-2005, 11:39 PM
That's a reasonable assessment, but the other provisions in my terms are my handicap. I think I'm allowed a small handicap.... in the interest of fairness.

Well how can we come to terms. The 16 game thing seems a little much because you said Ambrose was going to be camp fodder. That's really the main thing I disagreed with.

Also, there has to be some type of injury clause. I'm willing to negotiate on that. If he misses a couple of practices, fine. But if the guy blows out a knee...The bet is null and void to me.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-02-2005, 11:46 PM
Well how can we come to terms. The 16 game thing seems a little much because you said Ambrose was going to be camp fodder. That's really the main thing I disagreed with.

Also, there has to be some type of injury clause. I'm willing to negotiate on that. If he misses a couple of practices, fine. But if the guy blows out a knee...The bet is null and void to me.

So which one of you is the tough SOB negotiator?

TRR
07-02-2005, 11:48 PM
So which one of you is the tough SOB negotiator?

LOL! Although I'm about ready to tell Phobia to sit the f*ck down and shut the f*ck up.

:p

Phobia
07-02-2005, 11:50 PM
Well how can we come to terms. The 16 game thing seems a little much because you said Ambrose was going to be camp fodder. That's really the main thing I disagreed with.

Also, there has to be some type of injury clause. I'm willing to negotiate on that. If he misses a couple of practices, fine. But if the guy blows out a knee...The bet is null and void to me.

53 man roster is not really asking that much. It's not like I excluded him for being inactive due to an injury or something.... Hell, he could suck and be our back up to the dime CB and still make the 53 man roster. It's not like Carl will cut him because he's getting a $200k cap break for employing a 8 year vet at minimum salary.

TRR
07-02-2005, 11:55 PM
53 man roster is not really asking that much. It's not like I excluded him for being inactive due to an injury or something.... Hell, he could suck and be our back up to the dime CB and still make the 53 man roster. It's not like Carl will cut him because he's getting a $200k cap break for employing a 8 year vet at minimum salary.

Well then maybe we don't have a bet? Camp Fodder to me is being cut during training camp, or being brought in as a training camp practice dummy. What does that term mean to you?

Chiefs Pantalones
07-02-2005, 11:59 PM
Tell him to STFD and STFU, TRR.

Smed1065
07-03-2005, 12:00 AM
Holmes has already said he won't restructure. Gonzo is a selfish prick, so I doubt he would.

But here's the important thing. Law won't sign a one year deal. That means we will have to tie up a lot of money on the CB position. That will hurt us down the road at other positions. It's too many eggs in one basket.

Nice reaserch cause he said he would. He wants a ring unlike you. I want a winning team! Code TEAM! You want to be right -LOL

TRR
07-03-2005, 12:01 AM
Tell him to STFD and STFU, TRR.

LOL. In my negotiations with Phobia, it has come to my attention that he may have a degenerative typing disorder. It may prevent me from completing this deal.

Rausch
07-03-2005, 12:11 AM
I'm not familiar with the Saleamua story, but Hasty (if what he claims is true) would be the only legit "complaint" that is public. Smith was offered MORE than what he eventually settled for in Denver, but refused because he was expecting DT money.

Smith ended up ****ing himself, that's no secret, but I don't think that was handled the way you should treat a guy who's played for you that long. More of a tact issue IMO.

I'm quite certain Peterson wouldn't screw Holmes because Priest has already prove he'll take his contract/salary concerns to the national media. Hell, you couldn't turn on a pre-season football game in 2003 without hearing PH whining about his compensation package.

The only player I think Peterson would never fug would have been DT.

I agree that Woods/Hicks should be reduced. I disagree that Warfield's compensation is as much as everybody has been claiming over the years....

Warfield's compensation still exceedes his production. Last year was his first really solid year as a starter...

Smed1065
07-03-2005, 01:06 AM
LOL. In my negotiations with Phobia, it has come to my attention that he may have a degenerative typing disorder. It may prevent me from completing this deal.


They are unreasonable from the fact and no sources!

Smed1065
07-03-2005, 01:07 AM
LOL. In my negotiations with Phobia, it has come to my attention that he may have a degenerative typing disorder. It may prevent me from completing this deal.

Maybe a female!

Phobia
07-03-2005, 01:21 AM
smed, are you the III of Georgia?

4th and Long
07-03-2005, 01:30 AM
In 2+ hours, Phil and TRR still cant reach an agreement on this bet. ROFL

Phobia
07-03-2005, 01:51 AM
Well then maybe we don't have a bet? Camp Fodder to me is being cut during training camp, or being brought in as a training camp practice dummy. What does that term mean to you?

I said Camp fodder, but the dude is a former pro-bowler and a 13 year vet. I need a handicap. Everybody expects him to make the team. If I'm going out on a limb to say he won't, I need some "points". You're wanting an injury clause and a opening day roster exemption. Come on - give me something here. I'd like to take the line, but it's set way, way too closely in your favor.

Rudy lost the toss
07-03-2005, 01:52 AM
Nice reaserch cause he said he would. He wants a ring unlike you. I want a winning team! Code TEAM! You want to be right -LOL
players don't want a ring, They want the...

4th and Long
07-03-2005, 01:53 AM
We may need to call the Poston brothers to work out this little contract between Phil and TRR.

TRR
07-03-2005, 03:59 AM
I said Camp fodder, but the dude is a former pro-bowler and a 13 year vet. I need a handicap. Everybody expects him to make the team. If I'm going out on a limb to say he won't, I need some "points". You're wanting an injury clause and a opening day roster exemption. Come on - give me something here. I'd like to take the line, but it's set way, way too closely in your favor.

Alright how about this. I'm not backing down on the 53 man roster thing. You said he was camp fodder, and that means he'll be cut during camp any way you spin it. Whether you meant that or not, that's what you said. However, I am willing to give you the injury thing. If Ambrose blows out a knee in camp, then the entire bet is off. However, anything other than a season ending injury, and the bet is still on.

I think that's pretty fair as (1) you stated he would be cut in camp...thus the camp fodder line...and (2) Ambrose missed 7 games last season. Neither you or I know how healthy he really is.

Sound alright?

jspchief
07-03-2005, 06:50 AM
Yeah, hes just an azz with no facts, hoping we do not. His team already Sucks and no match!Whatever noob.

Someone else already backed up my comments on this very thread. And as he stated, it may have been a radio interview. I know what I heard, and quite honestly I'm not a f*cking legal secretary so I don't feel inclined to pour over the internet in an attempt to make someone believe me.

By the way, are you TCF from Wild Bill's board? You appear to have his avatar, but I don't remember him being as much of a douche bag.

PS, Welcome to the board. Judging by your act so far, it's going to be fun having you here. 4321

Coogs
07-03-2005, 09:02 AM
I believe the Chiefs are still interested in Law. However, I believe they signed AA in case Law isn't signed. If Law is somehow signed, then AA is probably gone.

Kclee
07-03-2005, 10:57 AM
Someone else already backed up my comments on this very thread. And as he stated, it may have been a radio interview. I know what I heard, and quite honestly I'm not a f*cking legal secretary so I don't feel inclined to pour over the internet in an attempt to make someone believe me.


Here you go. Post 17.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=110749

Phobia
07-03-2005, 11:08 AM
Alright how about this. I'm not backing down on the 53 man roster thing. You said he was camp fodder, and that means he'll be cut during camp any way you spin it. Whether you meant that or not, that's what you said. However, I am willing to give you the injury thing. If Ambrose blows out a knee in camp, then the entire bet is off. However, anything other than a season ending injury, and the bet is still on.

I think that's pretty fair as (1) you stated he would be cut in camp...thus the camp fodder line...and (2) Ambrose missed 7 games last season. Neither you or I know how healthy he really is.

Sound alright?

You should have consumated the bet last night. Now that I'm completely sober, I'm going nowhere near that action. Heh heh. Even if you caved to my most stringent terms.

TRR
07-03-2005, 11:12 AM
You should have consumated the bet last night. Now that I'm completely sober, I'm going nowhere near that action. Heh heh. Even if you caved to my most stringent terms.

LOL! So you admit that Ambrose is more than camp fodder?

Phobia
07-03-2005, 11:47 AM
LOL! So you admit that Ambrose is more than camp fodder?

I think there's a pretty good chance he was signed to increase competition and provide some veteran leadership at camp. But I don't feel strongly enough either way to give you $20.

htismaqe
07-03-2005, 02:35 PM
I'm all for signing Law now. We brought in Ambrose, and he's basically insurance. Now there's absolutely no downside to bringing in Law, even if he can't play until week 4 or 5.