PDA

View Full Version : Here we go...... T.O. time!!!!


vckcchiefs04
03-14-2006, 01:38 PM
http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9300482

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 01:39 PM
Me wondering whether the Donkeys are involved to push up the price, or whether we are, or whether Rosenhole is using both of us to make him cost the Cowboys more.

Garcia Bronco
03-14-2006, 01:41 PM
Word is...TO is in Denver right now. That's a rumor though

ROYC75
03-14-2006, 01:45 PM
Yep, Philly just went Chemo, cancer free now !

chief4life
03-14-2006, 01:45 PM
Word is...TO is in Denver right now. That's a rumor though

Word is that you are an idiot but that is to remain unseen

CoMoChief
03-14-2006, 01:47 PM
Word is that you are an idiot but that is to remain unseen


Hey man no hate no hate. We here at the planet show class. Dont stoop to Orange Mane's level.

Count Zarth
03-14-2006, 01:47 PM
LET'S DO THIS! MAKE IT HAPPEN!

morphius
03-14-2006, 01:48 PM
Me wondering whether the Donkeys are involved to push up the price, or whether we are, or whether Rosenhole is using both of us to make him cost the Cowboys more.
I think we are in just to bump up the price. Denver may be legit, though I don't know that TO could put up with Plummer and more then he could the other streak of QB's he has had to play with. Though I don't know that Dallas is any better of there either.

Wile_E_Coyote
03-14-2006, 01:49 PM
were's the Cancer Warfare Headquarters?

Mile High Mania
03-14-2006, 01:50 PM
I don't know if there is a QB on planet earth that would make TO happy...

CoMoChief
03-14-2006, 01:51 PM
I think we are in just to bump up the price. Denver may be legit, though I don't know that TO could put up with Plummer and more then he could the other streak of QB's he has had to play with. Though I don't know that Dallas is any better of there either.


So we are just in it to bump up the price on a division rival just so it can effect them down the road while they kick our ass this season and next? I think it's pretty clear we need help at the WR position. Kennison has been solid as hell, but he's more of a #2WR.

phxchief
03-14-2006, 01:54 PM
Worth a shot; what is there to lose? Another run-n-gun, one-n-done, fun-but-unsuccessful year?

Plenty of those in the books already. Might as well take a chance.

CoMoChief
03-14-2006, 01:56 PM
Worth a shot; what is there to lose? Another run-n-gun, one-n-done, fun-but-unsuccessful year?

Plenty of those in the books already. Might as well take a chance.


True. I cant even remember the last playoff win we had. Was it Houston in 93??? Then we sucked it up in Buffalo in the AFC Champiionship game. Thats 13 seasons without a playoff WIN. It's time to do something. We really got nothing to lose. But if theres a choice between Rocky Benard or TO, I want Rocky Benard. We need help on the Dline like 50+ year old males need the little blue pill.

Amnorix
03-14-2006, 01:58 PM
Honestly, I have no idea why anyone wants him. If Reid and McNabb, who are both VERY damn good, can't keep him happy, who can?

Mile High Mania
03-14-2006, 01:59 PM
NE needs a WR now that Givens is gone...

CoMoChief
03-14-2006, 02:00 PM
Honestly, I have no idea why anyone wants him. If Reid and McNabb, who are both VERY damn good, can't keep him happy, who can?


Just because theyre good doesnt mean anything about keeping him happy. Reid isnt the players coach Herman Edwards is.

ROYC75
03-14-2006, 02:00 PM
Honestly, I have no idea why anyone wants him. If Reid and McNabb, who are both VERY damn good, can't keep him happy, who can?


Agreed...... whoever gets him, it's a small window before the cancer spreads and death follows. Unless you do chemo like Philly just did.

KC Dan
03-14-2006, 02:02 PM
KC will not land TO. He wants multi-year deal, Carl said one year incentive laden deal only. I hope that I am NOT wrong but he will sign elsewhere probably cowpokes or donkeys.

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:02 PM
Oh no, we might catch cancer and turn from a perennial playoff team into a...

Oh. Wait. Yeah.

Amnorix
03-14-2006, 02:02 PM
NE needs a WR now that Givens is gone...


Actually, we need like 3. The only signed WRs we have are Deion Branch, who is superb, and Bethel Johnson, who isn't. Troy Brown will either re-sign with us or retire.

But honestly, I'd give a 0.000000000001% chance to TO coming to the Patriots. That's basically the chance of Belichick, Pioli, Kraft and his whole family dying within the next few days or however long it takes before someone else signs him, and the new management being in place, and getting him.... :D

ROYC75
03-14-2006, 02:03 PM
NE needs a WR now that Givens is gone...


ROFL

tk13
03-14-2006, 02:04 PM
Honestly, I have no idea why anyone wants him. If Reid and McNabb, who are both VERY damn good, can't keep him happy, who can?
People tend to block out the negative when the positives are so outstanding. Trent would put up some numbers if we could keep TO on the field. Actually more than his attitude I think it just might be overkill. I think we should look into a WR but there's still only one ball, I'm not sure having star players all over the field will allow us to score any more than 30 points a game. It might be better to spend the money on defense.

KC Dan
03-14-2006, 02:06 PM
People tend to block out the negative when the positives are so outstanding. Trent would put up some numbers if we could keep TO on the field. Actually more than his attitude I think it just might be overkill. I think we should look into a WR but there's still only one ball, I'm not sure having star players all over the field will allow us to score any more than 30 points a game.
That thar is wisdom. We need defense.

HolmeZz
03-14-2006, 02:08 PM
LET'S DO THIS! MAKE IT HAPPEN!

TO looks ripped in Chris Horn's jersey.

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:08 PM
I think we should look into a WR but there's still only one ball, I'm not sure having star players all over the field will allow us to score any more than 30 points a game.I think it could have an impact on the game-to-game consistency of the offense, helping reduce the chance of the sort of losses we've had the last few years where the offense was uncharacteristically bad. And in an offense where the idea is to create misdirection and mismatches, more targets is never a bad thing.

The question is whether the reward outweighs the risk.

Amnorix
03-14-2006, 02:09 PM
People tend to block out the negative when the positives are so outstanding. Trent would put up some numbers if we could keep TO on the field. Actually more than his attitude I think it just might be overkill. I think we should look into a WR but there's still only one ball, I'm not sure having star players all over the field will allow us to score any more than 30 points a game. It would definitely be better to spend the money on defense.

Fixed your post for ya. :D

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:10 PM
Pragmatically speaking, who on defense would be worth spending money on? I look at the free agent list and I see mediocre starters and role players. We have a roster full of those already. Spending money for the sake of spending money and switching mediocre names on the backs of jerseys probably isn't going to be all that conducive to succes. I've said it before and I'll say it all year: our improvement on defense will come from guys already on the roster. Hopefully we can add a piece or two, maybe a CB and a DT, but I don't think there's any magical cure-all floating out there in the free agent waters.

tk13
03-14-2006, 02:14 PM
I think it could have an impact on the game-to-game consistency of the offense, helping reduce the chance of the sort of losses we've had the last few years where the offense was uncharacteristically bad. And in an offense where the idea is to create misdirection and mismatches, more targets is never a bad thing.

The question is whether the reward outweighs the risk.
You could certainly make that argument. I think the biggest thing is he'd help open things up in the redzone a little more. I'm not saying I'm against signing him but I don't know if we'd get as much out of him as some other teams. Say a team that scores 24 points a game that wants to get up to 30 ppg and be elite. I don't think him coming here is going to lift us from a 30 ppg offense to a 36 ppg offense. And even if we were a 35+ ppg offensive team, that still wouldn't win us many playoff games. And plus I'm not sure what our veteran players think about him.

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:18 PM
I'm under the assumption that if he comes here, it would be with the blessing of both the coaching staff and a number of the veteran players. I haven't seen anything in my time here that would make me believe CP would simply dump a problem on the squad with consulting anybody else, no matter how much of an ogre people make him out to be. Which is why I'm not going to go apeshit if it happens, because it would be a calculated risk.

'course, I'm also not going apeshit if it doesn't happen. I'm not "in favor of" the move per se, I just think people overestimate the whole cancer angle. The front office and coaching staff are as aware of that as we are, and if they don't think they can handle him or his personality, he won't be here...

FAX
03-14-2006, 02:19 PM
From the utterly baseless opinion file: A healthy, on-the-field TO is probably worth at least 6 additional points per game on average. Whether he makes the touchdown or not.

FAX

Count Zarth
03-14-2006, 02:21 PM
People forget that we only averaged 25 points a game last year.

TO will get us up to 32 or 33 per game IMO, as well as improving our third down percentage and lowering our turnovers.

FAX
03-14-2006, 02:22 PM
Both TO and LJ fart sparks of golden stars.

FAX

morphius
03-14-2006, 02:25 PM
People forget that we only averaged 25 points a game last year.

TO will get us up to 32 or 33 per game IMO, as well as improving our third down percentage and lowering our turnovers.
You mean he can play tackle when Roaf goes down? Flipping sweet!

tk13
03-14-2006, 02:26 PM
People forget that we only averaged 25 points a game last year.

TO will get us up to 32 or 33 per game IMO, as well as improving our third down percentage and lowering our turnovers.
If Roaf gets hurt again, we will more than likely average less than 30 points a game, TO or no TO.

KC Dan
03-14-2006, 02:26 PM
People forget that we only averaged 25 points a game last year.

TO will get us up to 32 or 33 per game IMO, as well as improving our third down percentage and lowering our turnovers.
I'll give that that is possible. These are the points we gave up in the losses this past year:
Denver - 30
Philly - 37
SD - 28
Buff - 14
Dal - 31
NYG - 27

With the exception of the Buffalo game, our defense lost those games (30.6 pts/game). That is unacceptable. need defense not TO.

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:26 PM
People forget that we only averaged 25 points a game last year.And they also forget that we were sqarely in the middle of the pack on defense, allowing 20 ppg.

This is the problem with basing "total offense/defense" rankings on yardage rather than the stat that matters.

So instead of points marking us as the #6 offense and #16 defense, yards say we're #1 and #25.

Not that we don't need to improve on defense, 17 ppg is where we need to be, but we were certainly not the doormats people make us out to be.

StcChief
03-14-2006, 02:27 PM
Hate to throw a wet blanket...

Still think TO is using Chiefs to get his salary up elsewhere.

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:30 PM
I'll give that that is possible. These are the points we gave up in the losses this past year:
Denver - 30
Philly - 37
SD - 28
Buff - 14
Dal - 31
NYG - 27

With the exception of the Buffalo game, our defense lost those games (30.6 pts/game). That is unacceptable. need defense not TO.Looking at raw stats don't always tell the tale. I seem to remember a certain QB fumbling on a sack in the red zone that turned that dallas game.

Most games aren't an either/or proposition. Generally when we lose, there are plays on both sides of the ball that got us there.

keg in kc
03-14-2006, 02:30 PM
Hate to throw a wet blanket...

Still think TO is using Chiefs to get his salary up elsewhere.Most probably.

Mr. Laz
03-14-2006, 02:31 PM
Hate to throw a wet blanket...

Still think TO is using Chiefs to get his salary up elsewhere.

prolly ... but we might as well enjoy the ride until we find out.

PBJ PBJ

MVChiefFan
03-14-2006, 02:37 PM
I'll give that that is possible. These are the points we gave up in the losses this past year:
Denver - 30
Philly - 37
SD - 28
Buff - 14
Dal - 31
NYG - 27

With the exception of the Buffalo game, our defense lost those games (30.6 pts/game). That is unacceptable. need defense not TO.

Philly scored 37 on us with T.O. - that proves we would score in the 30's if we had him!!!

Count Zarth
03-14-2006, 03:10 PM
I'll give that that is possible. These are the points we gave up in the losses this past year:
Denver - 30
Philly - 37
SD - 28
Buff - 14
Dal - 31
NYG - 27

With the exception of the Buffalo game, our defense lost those games (30.6 pts/game). That is unacceptable. need defense not TO.

The offense underperformed against Denver, Philly, SD, Buffalo and New York.

The defense was on the field quite a bit in several of those games because the offense stagnated.

penchief
03-14-2006, 03:19 PM
Honestly, I have no idea why anyone wants him. If Reid and McNabb, who are both VERY damn good, can't keep him happy, who can?

Basically, I agree with you. But, at this point it is put up or shut up for T.O.

In other words, the guy has everything to gain and nothing to lose. Our offense has leaders; Guys like TRich, Big Willie, Mr. Shields, and Trent Green. Those guys can function effectively with or without the presence of an immature brat.
If Owens wishes to rehabilitate his reputation and his agent wants redemption, then KC is the right place to do it. But even if he wants to continue with his shenanigans, then the Chiefs' offense will continue to function just fine while he sits on the sidelines and pouts.

Both sides could benefit greatly from T.O. coming to KC. The downside for us would be a net gain of zero. The downside for Owens would be the end of his career.

Sully
03-14-2006, 03:21 PM
Any news yet?

Sully
03-14-2006, 03:22 PM
How about now???



... by the way, I know there is no news, I just thought it was funny that the (at least) 3rd thread was started about this, with no actual news about it.

ferrarispider95
03-14-2006, 03:24 PM
Looking at raw stats don't always tell the tale. I seem to remember a certain QB fumbling on a sack in the red zone that turned that dallas game.

Most games aren't an either/or proposition. Generally when we lose, there are plays on both sides of the ball that got us there.

Right after that certain all pro bowl running back missed a block on the certain former chiefs player that layed out that certain qb that you most certainly referred too.

FAX
03-14-2006, 03:24 PM
If Owens and his agent wish to rehabilitate his reputation, KC is the right place to do it.

I totally agree with this statement, Mr. penchief. But, I think Denver would appeal to him more. They seem to have a high tolerance for low acting. Perhaps Dallas even moreso due to TO's familiarity with the NFC.

FAX

Bob Dole
03-14-2006, 03:28 PM
Can T.O. play cornerback?

JBucc
03-14-2006, 03:29 PM
Can T.O. play cornerback?Yes. DE too.

munkey
03-14-2006, 03:30 PM
I don't know if there is a QB on planet earth that would make TO happy...


He'd have Plummer in tears before the regular season started....

FAX
03-14-2006, 03:33 PM
He'd have Plummer in tears before the regular season started....

Thank you for reminding me, Mr. munkey.

I thought touchdown toothy had kaboshed the idea of TO coming to Denver.

FAX

Bootlegged
03-14-2006, 04:14 PM
Sweet. nAThan say he come to Kacee. Yay TOh!

bogie
03-14-2006, 04:33 PM
I don't necessarily want him here, but I don't want Denver to get him either. Maybe the weather and elevation could play in to where TO goes. Dallas is very warm and flat.

KC_John
03-14-2006, 04:42 PM
I hope we sign T.O. He will be the poster child of "team" player on and off the field...for atleast one season...Give him a incentive laden contract with lots of carrots dangling. Thoo we would prolly be better off getting another respected WR that doesnt hurt the cap so much and adding to the D. Anyways I would LOVE to see Owens in a KC uniform,sure as hell beats seeing him in Donkey land.

FAX
03-14-2006, 05:00 PM
There once was a fellow named Terrell
With an attitude gritty and feral
Then he put on the red
And called home "Arrowhead"
And the rest of the West was in peril.

FAX

Mile High Mania
03-14-2006, 06:14 PM
The one thing that gives me hope about TO not signing with Denver is his agent...

I would be shocked if TO jumps quickly at an offer. I have heard a number of folks talk about this and I agree. Drew is going to shop contracts to multiple teams and wind up screwing over some team with silly money.

I still say that Dallas signs him to a 2 or 3 year incentive crazy deal.

BigRock
03-14-2006, 06:33 PM
Mort just said on ESPN News that you can forget all the "incentives" talk, TO is all about the $$ now because he thinks teams will pay it... which should put Dallas as the front runner.

For whatever it's worth, he also said Denver cooled on TO after their meeting, as if TO's attitude had turned them off or something.

thepascalblaze
03-14-2006, 06:45 PM
It seems an incentive laden contract would be dangerous anyway. It would give him a reason to lose whatever cool he may front at the outset. Each pass to another receiver translates to lost oppurtunity for him and his wallet, unless, of course, all of the incentives were team oriented, ie., playoffs, superbowl, etc... I don't know what kind of incentives CP has in mind.

nychief
03-14-2006, 06:46 PM
Parcells has gotten old.

KCChiefsMan
03-14-2006, 07:01 PM
have you seen espn.com on the frontpage? the poll? it asks which team will sign T.O.
A) The Cowboys
B) The Broncos
C) The Chiefs
D) Nobody

we are only at 8%.............. :deevee: