PDA

View Full Version : Peter Warrick could be on the market.


Goapics1
08-10-2005, 11:18 AM
Warrick faced with pay cut or being cut

By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

Unless he agrees to a pay cut, one that reduces his 2005 salary cap number and his scheduled base salary of $2.2 million for this season, Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver Peter Warrick could be cut by the team.

Warrick, who has not practiced in training camp as he continued his rehabilitation from a leg injury that limited him to four games in 2004, visited with Dr. James Andrews, the renowned Birmingham, Ala.-based orthopedics specialist earlier this week and was told he could return to the field. But the Bengals, wary of the injury and suddenly deeper at wide receiver than in recent years, might not clear Warrick to practice unless he agrees to rework his contract.


The decision for Warrick could come down to acquiescing to the Bengals wishes or being released and hoping there is interest in him as a free agent. It is also possible Cincinnati might trade Warrick if any potential suitors stepped forward.


The fourth overall selection in the 2000 draft, Warrick enjoyed a career season in 2003, with 79 receptions for 819 yards and seven touchdowns while working principally out of the slot. But the leg injury scuttled his '04 campaign and the former Florida State star had only 11 catches for 127 yards in four appearances.


Cincinnati coaches have privately questioned Warrick's diligence in rehabilitation and indicated in training camp that they were prepared to play without him. Even Warrick said this week that he did not "know my role in Cincinnati [anymore]."


Certainly the wide receiver landscape has changed in Cincinnati, where the Bengals have become young, talented and deep at the position. T.J. Houshmandzadeh, who replaced Warrick as the starter opposite Pro Bowl performer Chad Johnson in 2004, is coming off a career year and this spring signed a new four-year contract to stay with the club.


In what is a make-or-break season for third-year pro Kelley Washington, the former Tennessee standout is having a solid camp. And the coaches are high on rookie Chris Henry, a third-round choice from West Virginia.


Coach Marvin Lewis said two weeks ago in camp that the team "has moved on" in regard to Warrick, meaning the coaches were preparing as if he would not be available. "Once we did that last season," Lewis said, "we became a better team."


Warrick has appeared in 66 games, and started 55, in five seasons. He has 264 receptions for 2,811 yards and 18 touchdowns.

ct
08-10-2005, 11:20 AM
no thanks

Demonpenz
08-10-2005, 11:21 AM
he'll have to steal some clothes now

Goapics1
08-10-2005, 11:22 AM
no thanks
Perfect fit for you guys. C'mon.

chagrin
08-10-2005, 11:24 AM
yeah, and then maybe we can get Albert Connell to sign also

Halfcan
08-10-2005, 12:15 PM
We have better receivers than that on third string. Warrick is so overrated-maybe he can go to the Jets-they are paying big money for has-beens. Halfcan

Goapics1
08-10-2005, 12:17 PM
We have better receivers than that on third string. Warrick is so overrated-maybe he can go to the Jets-they are paying big money for has-beens. Halfcan
I thought you were a Jets fan?

Mr. Kotter
08-10-2005, 12:22 PM
At the right price, he'd be worth a look....but I was very pleased with what I saw from our WRs at TC....Kennison, Parker, Boerigter, Thorpe were very impressive; and it's gonna be tough to choose between Smith, McIntyre, Booth and Horn....they will all be on somebody's roster this year, IMO.

Halfcan
08-10-2005, 12:25 PM
F#ck No! I hate the Jets-and can't wait to beat their azz on opening day.

Goapics1
08-10-2005, 12:26 PM
F#ck No! I hate the Jets-and can't wait to beat their azz on opening day.
What?

My bad, you were arguing with Pat fans the other day. My fault.

Carry on.

Tribal Warfare
08-10-2005, 12:29 PM
I'd take him the guy has too much damn talent to be wasted on a shitty offense.

Goapics1
08-10-2005, 12:32 PM
shitty offense.

?

Are you talking about the Bengals? This isn't your daddy's Bengals. Believe it or not, they're pretty damn good. Chad Johnson, Rudi Johnson, Carson Palmer and T.J. Houshmandzadeh. Marvin Lewis has them boys playin'.

ChiefsCountry
08-10-2005, 12:35 PM
Peter Warrick=Desmond Howard

Told all my friends that when he came out of college he would be a bust. Other than his big game against the Chiefs, he hasn't done squat.

Brock
08-10-2005, 12:36 PM
?

Are you talking about the Bengals? This isn't your daddy's Bengals. Believe it or not, they're pretty damn good. Chad Johnson, Rudi Johnson, Carson Palmer and T.J. Houshmandzadeh. Marvin Lewis has them boys playin'.

I don't think they're shitty. They're just mediocre.

Goapics1
08-10-2005, 12:48 PM
They're just mediocre.
So what do you consider the Colts and Chiefs offenses? Average?

Crush
08-10-2005, 12:52 PM
Only at the right price.

Brock
08-10-2005, 12:56 PM
So what do you consider the Colts and Chiefs offenses? Average?

Are you for real? Nothing personal, but the stats don't support your comparing the Bengals with the Chiefs or Colts.

Goapics1
08-10-2005, 01:03 PM
Are you for real? Nothing personal, but the stats don't support your comparing the Bengals with the Chiefs or Colts.
Hold on...............

What I was trying to get at was if the Bengals are mediocre, then Chiefs/Colts must be average.

I would classify Bengals as decent for now, and will only continue to improve. Mediocre to me is Raiders, Ravens, Cardinals, etc. IMHO.

Crush
08-10-2005, 01:08 PM
Bengals won't even make the playoffs. They're cursed by the ghost of Bo Jackson's career.

Kclee
08-10-2005, 01:10 PM
Hold on...............

What I was trying to get at was if the Bengals are mediocre, then Chiefs/Colts must be average.


Well, what's your def. of mediocre? Isn't that the same as average? So you are saying that the Bengals as a team are one of the best just like the O of the Chiefs/Colts are one of the best?


me·di·o·cre (mē'dē-ō'kər)
adj.
Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary. See synonyms average.

[French médiocre, from Latin mediocris : medius, middle + ocris, a rugged mountain.]

DaneMcCloud
08-10-2005, 01:28 PM
For veteran minimum, there's nothing to risk. The guy has played with 3 or 4 different QB's (and none of them were spectacular in any way, though Carson Palmer has the look of something special), is an experienced return man and had a great season in 2003. If he's healthy, I say definitely bring him in.

The Chiefs have so much INEXPERIENCE at the wide receiver position that they should do anything possible to upgrade since in most people's minds, it's Super Bowl or Bust. And I'm not convinced that Kennison will make it through the entire season and relying on young, inexperienced receivers scares me.

Dane

patteeu
08-10-2005, 03:23 PM
For veteran minimum, there's nothing to risk. The guy has played with 3 or 4 different QB's (and none of them were spectacular in any way, though Carson Palmer has the look of something special), is an experienced return man and had a great season in 2003. If he's healthy, I say definitely bring him in.

The Chiefs have so much INEXPERIENCE at the wide receiver position that they should do anything possible to upgrade since in most people's minds, it's Super Bowl or Bust. And I'm not convinced that Kennison will make it through the entire season and relying on young, inexperienced receivers scares me.

Dane

I agree.

chagrin
08-10-2005, 03:28 PM
Peter Warrick=Desmond Howard

Told all my friends that when he came out of college he would be a bust. Other than his big game against the Chiefs, he hasn't done squat.


Nailed it dude

Mr. Kotter
08-10-2005, 03:36 PM
For veteran minimum, there's nothing to risk. The guy has played with 3 or 4 different QB's (and none of them were spectacular in any way, though Carson Palmer has the look of something special), is an experienced return man and had a great season in 2003. If he's healthy, I say definitely bring him in.

The Chiefs have so much INEXPERIENCE at the wide receiver position that they should do anything possible to upgrade since in most people's minds, it's Super Bowl or Bust. And I'm not convinced that Kennison will make it through the entire season and relying on young, inexperienced receivers scares me.

Dane

Very well said.

milkman
08-10-2005, 03:46 PM
For veteran minimum, there's nothing to risk. The guy has played with 3 or 4 different QB's (and none of them were spectacular in any way, though Carson Palmer has the look of something special), is an experienced return man and had a great season in 2003. If he's healthy, I say definitely bring him in.

The Chiefs have so much INEXPERIENCE at the wide receiver position that they should do anything possible to upgrade since in most people's minds, it's Super Bowl or Bust. And I'm not convinced that Kennison will make it through the entire season and relying on young, inexperienced receivers scares me.

Dane

Yeah.
If we keep signing these career underachievers, we're bound to hit on one eventually.

I mean, we all know that young inexperienced guys just don't stand a chance of ever becoming quality NFL receivers.

Only career underachievers ever have a chance of doing that.

DaneMcCloud
08-10-2005, 03:55 PM
SideWinder,

Nice sarcasm but I disagree completely. Jeris McIntyre was a 6th round choice who didn't hit the field in 2004, John Booth was undrafted (after playing QB at Mid America Nazarene!) and didn't play, Ronnie Cruz (who?), Mr Injury in Marc Boerighter, Dante Hall (who shouldn't see the field as a WR for more than 5 plays a game IMO), Thorpe (who I feel has the most potential out of our young receivers) is coming off a severe injury versus Freddie Mitchell (former 1st rounder) and Peter Warrick (former #4 overall). The choice is obvious to me at Vet Minimum, especially if this is TRULY to be a Super Bowl year.

I shudder at the thought of Kennison, Parker, Hall, Boerigter and Thorpe. It sounds like an injury list waiting to happen.

Dane

milkman
08-10-2005, 04:03 PM
SideWinder,

Nice sarcasm but I disagree completely. Jeris McIntyre was a 6th round choice who didn't hit the field in 2004, John Booth was undrafted (after playing QB at Mid America Nazarene!) and didn't play, Ronnie Cruz (who?), Mr Injury in Marc Boerighter, Dante Hall (who shouldn't see the field as a WR for more than 5 plays a game IMO), Thorpe (who I feel has the most potential out of our young receivers) is coming off a severe injury versus Freddie Mitchell (former 1st rounder) and Peter Warrick (former #4 overall). The choice is obvious to me at Vet Minimum, especially if this is TRULY to be a Super Bowl year.

I shudder at the thought of Kennison, Parker, Hall, Boerigter and Thorpe. It sounds like an injury list waiting to happen.

Dane

And I say sometimes you have to play with the cards you have dealt to you.

Yeah, some of these guys are young and inexperienced, and some of them have had injury issues.

As far as the inexperience is concerned, they'll have a full year under their belt by the time the playoffs roll around.

And to the injury issue, isn't Warrick coming off his second injury as a pro?
So he is no less of a risk than what we already have.

Saul Good
08-10-2005, 04:31 PM
Yeah.
If we keep signing these career underachievers, we're bound to hit on one eventually.

I mean, we all know that young inexperienced guys just don't stand a chance of ever becoming quality NFL receivers.

Only career underachievers ever have a chance of doing that.


Last time I checked, our #1 WR was a career underachiever pulled off the scrap heap. It seems pretty strange me to say that "we're bound to hit on one eventually" sarcastically when your point is that you'd rather stick with guys like Eddie Kennison who have never caught more than 62 balls in a season.

I think Warrick could be great in our offense at the right price. He's had 4 productive seasons followed by one lost to injury, and he's still only 27. He's exactly what we're looking for as a third or fourth option on pass plays (Behind Tony, Eddie, and possibly the RB.)

milkman
08-10-2005, 04:39 PM
Last time I checked, our #1 WR was a career underachiever pulled off the scrap heap. It seems pretty strange me to say that "we're bound to hit on one eventually" sarcastically when your point is that you'd rather stick with guys like Eddie Kennison who have never caught more than 62 balls in a season.

I think Warrick could be great in our offense at the right price. He's had 4 productive seasons followed by one lost to injury, and he's still only 27. He's exactly what we're looking for as a third or fourth option on pass plays (Behind Tony, Eddie, and possibly the RB.)

He has been more productive than Freddie Mitchell, and I would like his chances of becoming a player in our offense more than I do Mitchell's, but he has never lived up to his draft status.

By signing Mitchell and Warrick, the Chiefs would be hoping to catch lightening in a bottle 3 times in 5 years, since they have already done it once with Kennison.

I don't like the odds of that happening.

WebGem
08-10-2005, 04:48 PM
The Chiefs own the paste.

Saul Good
08-10-2005, 04:52 PM
He has been more productive than Freddie Mitchell, and I would like his chances of becoming a player in our offense more than I do Mitchell's, but he has never lived up to his draft status.

By signing Mitchell and Warrick, the Chiefs would be hoping to catch lightening in a bottle 3 times in 5 years, since they have already done it once with Kennison.

I don't like the odds of that happening.


Warrick's draft status doesn't matter anymore. If he'd lived up to being the 3rd (I'm going off memory. I could be wrong) pick in the draft, he wouldn't be available to pick up. He's got 250 catches, 2700 yards and 18 TDs in 4 seasons not counting last year's injury. Before the injury he'd never played in fewer than 15 games in a season, so he's certainly not injury prone. We don't need lightning in a bottle, we've had kegs of it for 3 years now offensively. I think the guy's as good or probably better than Kennison is right now. I know he's proven himself more than any of our guys fighting for the #2 WR spot. There's no comparison.

It seems to me that he's a solid player with huge upside potential. Even if he never reaches his full potential, he can surely grab 50 balls for 600 yards and 5 TDs. That's a pretty good weapon for a 3rd or 4th option.

Scalper
08-10-2005, 06:07 PM
Who cares! Peter Warrick blows goat balls. He hasn't amounted to shit since dominating stats at FSU. He hurt his shin the second game last seaon, which shortend his season. What team would want a mediocre player worth premire dollars.

Saul Good
08-10-2005, 06:11 PM
Who cares! Peter Warrick blows goat balls. He hasn't amounted to shit since dominating stats at FSU. He hurt his shin the second game last seaon, which shortend his season. What team would want a mediocre player worth premire dollars.

Show me one WR on the Chiefs who has put up better numbers than Warrick has over the last 5 years, especially for the money. The guy's been good for 60 catches, 6 TDs, and 700 yards his entire career.

Scalper
08-10-2005, 06:17 PM
Freddie Mitchell

Scalper
08-10-2005, 06:30 PM
Ok, i give you that. But if he hasn't shown the Begals anything, worth the money ,then who can he impress.

milkman
08-10-2005, 06:35 PM
Warrick's draft status doesn't matter anymore. If he'd lived up to being the 3rd (I'm going off memory. I could be wrong) pick in the draft, he wouldn't be available to pick up. He's got 250 catches, 2700 yards and 18 TDs in 4 seasons not counting last year's injury. Before the injury he'd never played in fewer than 15 games in a season, so he's certainly not injury prone. We don't need lightning in a bottle, we've had kegs of it for 3 years now offensively. I think the guy's as good or probably better than Kennison is right now. I know he's proven himself more than any of our guys fighting for the #2 WR spot. There's no comparison.

It seems to me that he's a solid player with huge upside potential. Even if he never reaches his full potential, he can surely grab 50 balls for 600 yards and 5 TDs. That's a pretty good weapon for a 3rd or 4th option.

Actually, you do make a pretty good case for Warrick, and he at least can point to the less than stellar QBs he's had throwing to him throughout his career as a valid possible reason for never quite living up to expectations.

That at least has some credibility.
The Freddie Mitchell "QB didn't like him, and he was always wanting to run" argument doesn't hold up for me.

whoman69
08-10-2005, 07:10 PM
I can't really seem him helping our team. He was given every opportunity to succeed in Cincy and never had a 1000 yard season.

Thig Lyfe
08-10-2005, 07:39 PM
Every Dillard's in the KC area would be on lockdown.

Saul Good
08-10-2005, 08:02 PM
I can't really seem him helping our team. He was given every opportunity to succeed in Cincy and never had a 1000 yard season.

Kennison just had his first 1000 yard season last year, and he just barely did that. Besides, he's had John Kitna throwing him the ball for most of his career. Cincy hasn't exactly been a launching pad for stardom in the last decade.

WR is our only weakness on offense. That's why there's been so much talk about drafting one in recent years. A guy like Warrick would just create more matchup problems.

jspchief
08-10-2005, 08:05 PM
I can't really seem him helping our team. He was given every opportunity to succeed in Cincy and never had a 1000 yard season.Not sure I'd call Akili Smith, Scott Mitchell, and John Kitna at QB "every opportunity"....

Mr. Laz
08-10-2005, 08:18 PM
he's prolly better than mitchell :shrug:


but then again i don't think Mitchell is even gonna make the team.



depends on the money as usual i guess