PDA

View Full Version : Teicher: Kennison prepared to hold out, may leave camp


Pages : 1 [2] 3

KCBOSS1
07-27-2006, 12:08 PM
OK, I've read as many pages as I can and don't have time to read the rest so if this has been mentioned...overlook it. But Let's trade for Porter. He's unhappy in Oakland, right? I know it's a reach, but hey.

ct
07-27-2006, 12:09 PM
Just catching on here. My 1st thought is "Um, Eddie, you are a #2 receiver. Deal with it."

Der Flöprer
07-27-2006, 12:11 PM
OK, I've read as many pages as I can and don't have time to read the rest so if this has been mentioned...overlook it. But Let's trade for Porter. He's unhappy in Oakland, right? I know it's a reach, but hey.



I think the majority of this board would jump all over that deal. Unfortunately Oakland would want the 2 1st round picks they've been asking for Porter as well.

vailpass
07-27-2006, 12:11 PM
I don't know about anyone else, but this is total news to me.

Donks fans will be here any moment now to say things like "We told you so" and shit

Not this Donk fan. Eddie was Quitterson with Denver but has avoided repeating his mistake and given his all for KC. IMHO Eddie would be a fool and his agent would be negligent if they did not act now to get more money from KC.

*KC's SB window is still cracked open but there are several key players who are very probably in their last year or nearing their last year

*Carl just went out and got Ty Law in order to maximize SB chances before the window closes

*Kennison is 45th on NFL WR salary. It is true he would be a 2 or 3 for most teams but he is the 1 for KC and paid like a 3.

*IMO what Kennison would command on the open market is not the key question. The key question is who can KC get to replace him at this late date that knows the O and is familiar to Trent? KC has to have a WR in place now because, again, the window is closing and everything needs to be in place at the start of the year for KC.

It appears Kennison is holding most of the good cards. I'm interested to see whether Carl knows when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

Der Flöprer
07-27-2006, 12:14 PM
It appears Kennison is holding most of the good cards. I'm interested to see whether Carl knows when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.


We're doomed.

SNR
07-27-2006, 12:14 PM
Just because Porter gets 80% of his TDs and yards for the season against us in 2 games doesn't mean he's a good WR.

I'd much rather have Eddie than that asshole.

Mr. Laz
07-27-2006, 12:14 PM
ROFL

Gotta have that scapegoat.

Hell, we're gonna suck even with Kennison. Jesus lives in Washington now. :thumb:

all hail washington's offense :wayne: :hail:

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 12:15 PM
Not this Donk fan. Eddie was Quitterson with Denver but has avoided repeating his mistake and given his all for KC. IMHO Eddie would be a fool and his agent would be negligent if they did not act now to get more money from KC.

*KC's SB window is still cracked open but there are several key players who are very probably in their last year or nearing their last year

*Carl just went out and got Ty Law in order to maximize SB chances before the window closes

*Kennison is 45th on NFL WR salary. It is true he would be a 2 or 3 for most teams but he is the 1 for KC and paid like a 3.

*IMO what Kennison would command on the open market is not the key question. The key question is who can KC get to replace him at this late date that knows the O and is familiar to Trent? KC has to have a WR in place now because, again, the window is closing and everything needs to be in place at the start of the year for KC.

It appears Kennison is holding most of the good cards. I'm interested to see whether Carl knows when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

One point of clarification:

Simple math says he's not paid like a 3.

32 teams * 2 starting WR's per team = 64 1's and 2's

Eddie is paid like a #2 and in the top half of #2's at that.

MahiMike
07-27-2006, 12:15 PM
If we let Kennison muscle his way in to a new contract this close to the season starting, we'd be setting a precedent. What's to stop 5 other guys saying the same thing. Tell him to shut up and play or be hit with the new $14K per DAY fine!

vailpass
07-27-2006, 12:19 PM
One point of clarification:

Simple math says he's not paid like a 3.

32 teams * 2 starting WR's per team = 64 1's and 2's

Eddie is paid like a #2 and in the top half of #2's at that.

Thanks. I admit to shooting from the hip when I said he was paid like a 3. Lazy is not always a good thing.
Still, being the 1 that gets paid like a 2 on an O that has been at or near the top of the league for the last 3 years makes EK's poition understandable. At least from the outside looking in.

Wile_E_Coyote
07-27-2006, 12:22 PM
Quote: <HR SIZE=1>Originally Posted by Wile_E_Coyote
before Eddie showed up this offense sucked ass. Priest didn't shine until Kennison took some pressure off him & Gonzo

ROFL

I'm not kidding

el borracho
07-27-2006, 12:23 PM
ROFL ROFL ROFL

List 'em. You'd struggle to find 7 or 8 teams, which is not even a quarter of the NFL.

Arizona, St. Louis (maybe), Dallas (maybe)....

I'd only buy that if you were to include teams like Oakland which are just overhyped. For example, he WOULD start over Jerry "no 1000-yard seasons" Porter.
Cinncinatti
Denver
Arizona
St. Louis
Giants
Eagles
Detroit
Carolina
New Orleans
Houston
Indianapolis

I would say Eddie is a #3 on Miami and Oakland, too, but I guess that is arguable. Anyway, on none of those teams would Eddie be considered a #1.

Whatever, I wouldn't be pissed to see Eddie get a little more money- it's not my money and it's certainly not as dumb as re-signing Eric Hicks was- but I don't see where Eddie deserves a whole lot more. Certainly not millions more.

KCTitus
07-27-2006, 12:24 PM
I'm not kidding

Of course, that's what makes it so funny.

Mr. Laz
07-27-2006, 12:25 PM
"Mr. Kennison is under contract and we fully expect him to honor that contract."

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/3883/image01091503tv3gn6.jpg

Wile_E_Coyote
07-27-2006, 12:25 PM
well the day hasn't been a total loss then

cdcox
07-27-2006, 12:29 PM
I'll say it again, Gonzo is our #1 receiver and gets the #1 money. Kennison edged out Gonzo in yrds and TDs in 2005, but that is the first year he has done that.

SNR
07-27-2006, 12:29 PM
Cinncinatti
Denver
Arizona
St. Louis
Giants
Eagles
Detroit
Carolina
New Orleans
Houston
Indianapolis

I would say Eddie is a #3 on Miami and Oakland, too, but I guess that is arguable. Anyway, on none of those teams would Eddie be considered a #1.

Whatever, I wouldn't be pissed to see Eddie get a little more money- it's not my money and it's certainly not as dumb as re-signing Eric Hicks was- but I don't see where Eddie deserves a whole lot more. Certainly not millions more.Denver? Yes, Kennison is that much worse than Ashley Nash ROFL

Eagles? No TO. He'd be a freakin #1

Detroit's WRs are all busts. They've got some asshole named Vines catching lots of passes now.

He'd be a #2 in Houston. Corey Bradford as 3 good games per year and then disappears.

Teams like New Orleans and the Giants are questionable too, if that

Sure-Oz
07-27-2006, 12:31 PM
They need to boost him with some money, he has earned it, but yeah this is pretty shitty timing, but perfect for him personally. We really need this guy or our passing game will suffer with a bunch of rookies and practice squad players at WR.

gcbroncos
07-27-2006, 12:33 PM
Denver? Yes, Kennison is that much worse than Ashley Nash ROFL

Eagles? No TO. He'd be a freakin #1

Detroit's WRs are all busts. They've got some asshole named Vines catching lots of passes now.

He'd be a #2 in Houston. Corey Bradford as 3 good games per year and then disappears.

Teams like New Orleans and the Giants are questionable too, if that


kennison would be #3 in denver.....

Lzen
07-27-2006, 12:33 PM
So you are comfortable with paying Kennison his current contract to sit at home while starting Samie Parker and um Craphonso Thorpe?

I haven't looked through this whole thread, so if this has already been addressed, my mistake.

The way I understand it is that if Kennison is sitting at home, he will not be receiving a paycheck. ;)

greg63
07-27-2006, 12:34 PM
So $4.8 million over the next two seasons and $8.2 million over the next three isn't good enough for a 33-year-old wide receiver wide receiver. :shake:

SNR
07-27-2006, 12:35 PM
kennison would be #3 in denver.....Thank you so much for your blind opinion.

Care to back it up with some reasoning?

vailpass
07-27-2006, 12:35 PM
Thank you so much for your blind opinion.

Care to back it up with some reasoning?

Rod Smith
Javon Walker

Questions?

SNR
07-27-2006, 12:36 PM
Rod Smith
Javon Walker

Questions?Forgot about Walker

hypersensitiveZO6
07-27-2006, 12:36 PM
Obviously EK doesn't care about fan support.

He loses most of it with shit like this.

WilliamTheIrish
07-27-2006, 12:37 PM
Ugh.

This stuff doesn't sit well with me. I know Eddie has been the best receiver we've had in a while. BUt even so, the organization has still needed to upgrade the position.
Wait till Eddie drops his first pass that hits him in the hands. Or get the ball stripped. He's going to hear it big time.

If he wants to sit, fine. I had no SB aspirations for this squad anyway. We'll just keep giving it to LJ.

vailpass
07-27-2006, 12:37 PM
Forgot about Walker

In all fairness the guy hasn't played a down in Orange & Blue yet and reports that his knee is good to go are only that: reports.

cdcox
07-27-2006, 12:38 PM
In 2005 Kennison was 32th in receptions, 14th in yards, and tied for 35 in TDs.

In 2004 he was 35th in receptions, 19th in yards, and 17th in TDs.

He might be a top 20 receiver, but at his age, its really questionable how well he'll be able to keep that going. He should be paid better than #45, but should not expect a huge pay day.

He may be slightly underpaid

StcChief
07-27-2006, 12:39 PM
Kennison and Hamilton first contacted the Chiefs in the spring. Talks have been ongoing but fruitless. NOT LIKE THE CHIEFS haven't known about this...

Give your #1 WR a raise. bonus. Lamar has money.
He's not holding them up. He REPLACED their #1 receiver.

A 2 year deal with incentives
His numbers are there. Show him some love don't F up the season or training camp.....over 0.5M-1M .

Mr. Laz
07-27-2006, 12:39 PM
I'll say it again, Gonzo is our #1 receiver and gets the #1 money..

gonzo is overpaid as #1 receiver

Sure-Oz
07-27-2006, 12:41 PM
gonzo is overpaid as #1 receiver
Yeah lately...i don't know if it's a combination of age and the foot injury but he hasn't been the dominant TE he once was, but still a very solid receiving threat. He needs more TDs this year.

cdcox
07-27-2006, 12:42 PM
gonzo is overpaid as #1 receiver

Carl should tell Kennison that is the reason we have to under pay our #2.

gcbroncos
07-27-2006, 12:42 PM
Thank you so much for your blind opinion.

Care to back it up with some reasoning?


i thought it was obvious...but okay...

rod smith is our guy...and we acquired javon walker to be our next franchise guy...



so there you have it....


edit: okay...i see you forgot to mention walker...

Lzen
07-27-2006, 12:43 PM
He probably thinks he's surpassed the expectations that a team has for a guy when they pay him to be the #2 WR behind Johnnie Morton. And he's right. Eddie's been getting #2 money as the most reliable WR the team has seen in years, while Johnnie "#1" Morton did the worm a few times and dropped balls that were thrown right at his hands in the playoffs.

Eddie not only outperformed Morton, he made him expendable. He's more than earned the money. There's not a person alive who wouldn't be upset if they went into work one day and their boss said "Hey, you know the guy who makes more money than you, even though you do better work? Well, we're getting rid of him and giving you his job. But don't think you're getting a raise."

They should have taken care of Eddie after they cut Morton. Give him some money, Carl.


Sure, they should pay him more. But someone should ask Eddie if his play declines, is he gonna give back some of that money.

Coach
07-27-2006, 12:44 PM
I just wonder if everyone is going to talk about what a great guy Kennison is and how he really turned his life around now......

Agreed. Hey, I remember an article of him and his wife awhile back, and how he changed his life and found God. That's great and dandy, but what he is doing right now, he's being selfish. He's like actin that he wants to get paid, as if he doesn't make enough already. Jesus, if I went to the public and said that I'll keep working until say September since I deserve a pay raise, my boss would go ape-shit and would fire me w/o any questions asked.

Hey Eddie, 6 million > 20,000 a yr.

Shaddup and play football, numbnuts.

Yes, I know how he produced and all, and thats fantastic, but let me remind him that he is not a #1 receiver, that belongs to Tony G. If it wasn't for Gonzo, picking up most of the double teams, Kennison wouldn't have solid numbers.

It's that damned agent that is f**king things up. :shake:

Mr. Laz
07-27-2006, 12:45 PM
Yeah lately...i don't know if it's a combination of age and the foot injury but he hasn't been the dominant TE he once was, but still a very solid receiving threat. He needs more TDs this year.
agreed

Mr. Laz
07-27-2006, 12:48 PM
Carl should tell Kennison that is the reason we have to under pay our #2.
somehow i don't think Kennison's agent is going to give a crap about that excuse.


it is, what it is


currently we are paying our TE like a #1 receiver and a RG like a left tackle [/edit] and a backup RB like a pro bowl RB.


salary at one position effects the others.... its just not as easy as saying "just pay the man"

the Talking Can
07-27-2006, 12:48 PM
kennison would be #3 in denver.....

*edit

I too forgot about walker...

cdcox
07-27-2006, 12:49 PM
NOT LIKE THE CHIEFS haven't known about this...

Give your #1 WR a raise. bonus. Lamar has money.
He's not holding them up. He REPLACED their #1 receiver.

A 2 year deal with incentives
His numbers are there. Show him some love don't F up the season or training camp.....over 0.5M-1M .

Kennison has a 3yr deal right now. Carl won't tear up a contract and write a new one. He will only extend an existing contract. So we would be talking at least a 4yr deal.

Maybe guarantee 3 mil this year with 3 mil in salary next then who cares the last 2 years cause he'll be 35 then and past his prime. This would be easily do-able under the cap and would only cost Lamar $1M in cash over what he was planning on paying Kennison anyway. Seems like a good comprimise, but I wouldn't pay a penny more.

greg63
07-27-2006, 12:53 PM
Obviously EK doesn't care about fan support.

He loses most of it with shit like this.

Yup! I have lost all respect for the guy...not that it's any great loss.

Lzen
07-27-2006, 12:53 PM
i thought it was obvious...but okay...

rod smith is our guy...and we acquired javon walker to be our next franchise guy...



so there you have it....


edit: okay...i see you forgot to mention walker...

I don't think you can assume that Walker is going to be better than Kennison. Especially considering he's coming off that serious injury. Sure, he had a nice year in 2004. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's going to be able to do that again. IMO, he's still a question mark.

Eddie has averaged nearly 1,000 yards a season over the past 4 years for the Chiefs. That's consistency. He may prove to be better than Walker this year. Especially since Walker won't have Favre throwing to him. ROFL

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 12:54 PM
Pay him. Eddie deserves it.

greg63
07-27-2006, 12:57 PM
Pay him. Eddie deserves it.

With what? Didn't we spend our cap money?

greg63
07-27-2006, 12:58 PM
The guy waits until we sign Law and the day before Training camp to pull this! :banghead:

gcbroncos
07-27-2006, 12:59 PM
I don't think you can assume that Walker is going to be better than Kennison. Especially considering he's coming off that serious injury. Sure, he had a nice year in 2004. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's going to be able to do that again. IMO, he's still a question mark.

Eddie has averaged nearly 1,000 yards a season over the past 4 years for the Chiefs. That's consistency. He may prove to be better than Walker this year. Especially since Walker won't have Favre throwing to him. ROFL


it doesn't matter if you think kennison is better...

walker wasn't brought in here to be a #3.....

if kennison were here....by default he's already #3 receiver before even lacing up...

Wile_E_Coyote
07-27-2006, 01:00 PM
I still think this has more to do with the disrespect Chiefs' WRs get. Two 1000 yard back to back season & all the guys on ESPN say KC needs WRs. Eddie needs to take the attitude of LJ & get pissed off & show off

Lzen
07-27-2006, 01:00 PM
it doesn't matter if you think kennison is better...

walker wasn't brought in here to be a #3.....

if kennison were here....by default he's already #3 receiver before even lacing up...

I see. So, you're telling me that if they brought in Kennison and Kennison outperformed Walker in preseason, Walker would still be the #2? That's brilliant.

Lzen
07-27-2006, 01:03 PM
I still think this has more to do with the disrespect Chiefs' WRs get. Two 1000 yard back to back season & all the guys on ESPN say KC needs WRs. Eddie needs to take the attitude of LJ & get pissed off & show off

Yup. People are always saying the Chiefs WRs aren't any good. And I just have to chuckle. First, Kennison has been a very good WR for us. Second, Parker started to look like a decent receiver last year. Yeah, I know he had his dropsies, but I'm still holding out hope that he'll become a very good receiver for years to come.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 01:04 PM
With what? Didn't we spend our cap money?

I'm sure we can get creative and do something. Everyone does it nowadays in the NFL.

Isn't Ryan Sims being paid more?

cdcox
07-27-2006, 01:04 PM
With what? Didn't we spend our cap money?

The deal I outlined in post 289 could have a smaller cap hit in '06 than his current deal if most of the $3M guaranteed were paid in a bonus and he played for vet min in salary. The cap hit in '07 would be about $0.5M more than his current deal, but we should be able to manage that.

Ultra Peanut
07-27-2006, 01:06 PM
I just wonder if everyone is going to talk about what a great guy Kennison is and how he really turned his life around now......GRRRRRRRRR QUITTERSON GRRRRRRRRR

Rausch
07-27-2006, 01:08 PM
With what? Didn't we spend our cap money?

No.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 01:10 PM
Also, I noticed someone said something about Dick Vermeil and Kennison not doing this if he was still here.

My feeling is that Kennison would have talked to Dick privately, and Dick would have given him the new contract.

And we wouldn't have Ty Law. So screw Vermeil.

el borracho
07-27-2006, 01:16 PM
Denver? Yes, Kennison is that much worse than Ashley Nash ROFL

Eagles? No TO. He'd be a freakin #1

Detroit's WRs are all busts. They've got some asshole named Vines catching lots of passes now.

He'd be a #2 in Houston. Corey Bradford as 3 good games per year and then disappears.

Teams like New Orleans and the Giants are questionable too, if that
*Denver has Rod Smith and Javon Walker. No way would Eddie be higher than #3.

*New Orleans has Joe Horn and Donte Stallworth. No way would Eddie start over those guys.

*Houston has Andre Johnson and Eric Moulds. I guess you could argue that Eddie would start over Moulds but I doubt it.

*Detroit has three 1st round WRs. Really think Mike Martz will sit them to play Eddie Kennison? I don't.

*The Giants have Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer. I guess Eddie might start over Toomer. Maybe. Flip a coin.

I concede your point on the Eagles.

In any case the point stands that Eddie would be #3 on a lot of teams. I won't care if Carl gives him some change but it would be absolutely stupid to give Eddie millions more than he already makes.

RedThat
07-27-2006, 01:18 PM
#1 receiver on our team doesn't mean much. Eddie would be the #3 receiver on a lot of teams.

Plus, I don't see that Eddie's job description changed following Morton's release. He was supposed to catch footballs and score touchdowns then and he is supposed to catch footballs and score touchdowns now. What is the difference?

I guess it is possible that some other team would pay him more than he is making now but, really, how much more? How much do you think Eddie Kennison is worth?

Eddie wants to complain that Ty Law gets more money than him? Try making the Pro Bowl, Eddie. Then ask for more money.

Eddie Kennison a NUMBER 3 receiver? Please.

Oh man. I disagree with you there. Eddie Kennison would be a #2 on most teams, and maybe a #1 on some teams. I don't think it is fair to call the guy a #3 receiver on a lot teams. Do you know what his statistics were last year? He caught 68 balls, for 1,100 yards, and 5 touchdowns. Is that a #3 receiver to you?

If anything, he does deserve a raise. I agree with Philfree. He has the stats to back it up. He is the only Chiefs WR since Carlos Carson to produce back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons. And he has gotten better with age. I don't blame Kennison. He has a point. Frankly, Im upset at the market because guys like David Givens shouldn't be getting paid what they're getting. That does create a problem, and sets a standard for the other guys. Eddie is just an example of what Im talking about. And I think Kennison is better than David Givens.

Rausch
07-27-2006, 01:20 PM
Why don't we just sign these ****ers to incentive heavy contracts and when they play they get paid?...

el borracho
07-27-2006, 01:21 PM
Also, I noticed someone said something about Dick Vermeil and Kennison not doing this if he was still here.

My feeling is that Kennison would have talked to Dick privately, and Dick would have given him the new contract.

And we wouldn't have Ty Law. So screw Vermeil.
Come on, you know better than that. When did Dick Vermeil ever give anyone a contract? That is the general manager's job- not the head coach!

tk13
07-27-2006, 01:23 PM
Also, I noticed someone said something about Dick Vermeil and Kennison not doing this if he was still here.

My feeling is that Kennison would have talked to Dick privately, and Dick would have given him the new contract.

And we wouldn't have Ty Law. So screw Vermeil.
I don't buy that. I think we would've signed Law last year had he not been hurt. That made more sense than giving up a draft pick for Surtain. Vermeil was always more gung-ho about adding defense through the draft/FA than Carl was.

RedThat
07-27-2006, 01:26 PM
*Denver has Rod Smith and Javon Walker. No way would Eddie be higher than #3.

*New Orleans has Joe Horn and Donte Stallworth. No way would Eddie start over those guys.

*Houston has Andre Johnson and Eric Moulds. I guess you could argue that Eddie would start over Moulds but I doubt it.

*Detroit has three 1st round WRs. Really think Mike Martz will sit them to play Eddie Kennison? I don't.

*The Giants have Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer. I guess Eddie might start over Toomer. Maybe. Flip a coin.

I concede your point on the Eagles.

In any case the point stands that Eddie would be #3 on a lot of teams. I won't care if Carl gives him some change but it would be absolutely stupid to give Eddie millions more than he already makes.

Denver is an exception. I agree with you there. Fine. But Rod Smith, and Javon Walker are stout talent at the WR position.

Stallworth has been a bit of a disapointment in New Orleans. eddie could beat him out for a starting job.

Detroit has 1 GOOD receiver, Roy Williams. Charles Rogers and Mike Williams have been big disappointments. Eddie has produced a LOT better than those guys.

I think Kennison is probably just as good as Toomer.

Moulds has been on the decline of late. Was a disappointment in Buffalo. They traded him for a 5th round pick that says a lot. I wouldn't consider him as good as he once was. But yeah he is maybe slighly better than Eddie. Still a tough call.

Rausch
07-27-2006, 01:28 PM
You guys are arguing what he could be and not what he is.

He IS our no 2 WR, and he's a damned good one.

Pay him like a good no 2...

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 01:29 PM
Why don't we just sign these ****ers to incentive heavy contracts and when they play they get paid?...

The players won't sign them.

el borracho
07-27-2006, 01:30 PM
Eddie Kennison a NUMBER 3 receiver? Please.

Oh man. I disagree with you there. Eddie Kennison would be a #2 on most teams, and maybe a #1 on some teams. I don't think it is fair to call the guy a #3 receiver on a lot teams. Do you know what his statistics were last year? He caught 68 balls, for 1,100 yards, and 5 touchdowns. Is that a #3 receiver to you?

If anything, he does deserve a raise. I agree with Philfree. He has the stats to back it up. He is the only Chiefs WR since Carlos Carson to produce back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons. And he has gotten better with age. I don't blame Kennison. He has a point. Frankly, Im upset at the market because guys like David Givens shouldn't be getting paid what they're getting. That does create a problem, and sets a standard for the other guys. Eddie is just an example of what Im talking about. And I think Kennison is better than David Givens.
Eddie is pretty average. He would be a #2 on a lot of teams but he would be a #3 on quite a few teams (I listed them somewhere in this thread). If he deserves a raise, it shouldn't be much of one, IMO.

Rausch
07-27-2006, 01:31 PM
The players won't sign them.

Don't complain about being underpaid then.

gcbroncos
07-27-2006, 01:31 PM
I see. So, you're telling me that if they brought in Kennison and Kennison outperformed Walker in preseason, Walker would still be the #2? That's brilliant.


what i'm telling you is that so as long as walker's knee holds up....eddie quitterson could never outperform javon walker.....

Frankie
07-27-2006, 01:33 PM
How's bout a Kennison for Porter trade? :hmmm:

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 01:34 PM
I wonder what Trent Green will have to say about this.

el borracho
07-27-2006, 01:36 PM
You guys are arguing what he could be and not what he is.

He IS our no 2 WR, and he's a damned good one.

Pay him like a good no 2...
Sounds good, but... I thought that was what the Chiefs had been doing. :shrug:

RedThat
07-27-2006, 01:38 PM
Eddie is pretty average. He would be a #2 on a lot of teams but he would be a #3 on quite a few teams (I listed them somewhere in this thread). If he deserves a raise, it shouldn't be much of one, IMO.

I wouldn't say he is average. He is solid. Very dependable.

If you want to talk about a team like Denver? yes, I agree Eddie would be a number 3. If you want to talk about a team like Dallas? He would be a #3 there also. But those are teams have elite talent at the WR postion.

He has shown consistency the last 2 years. Back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons. I give the man some love. I hope that trend will continue with Herm here.

I hope this doesn't lead to a distraction, and a huge problem for the Chiefs. Givens got a nice contract, and he produced nowhere near what Eddie had done for us.

el borracho
07-27-2006, 01:39 PM
Denver is an exception. I agree with you there. Fine. But Rod Smith, and Javon Walker are stout talent at the WR position.

Stallworth has been a bit of a disapointment in New Orleans. eddie could beat him out for a starting job.

Detroit has 1 GOOD receiver, Roy Williams. Charles Rogers and Mike Williams have been big disappointments. Eddie has produced a LOT better than those guys.

I think Kennison is probably just as good as Toomer.

Moulds has been on the decline of late. Was a disappointment in Buffalo. They traded him for a 5th round pick that says a lot. I wouldn't consider him as good as he once was. But yeah he is maybe slighly better than Eddie. Still a tough call.
Stallworth had more receptions for almost the same yards and more touchdowns last year. And he is young and ascending. I doubt Eddie woud take his job.

And Denver is not the only place where Eddie would be a #3. Did you see my original list or just this short list?

Mecca
07-27-2006, 01:47 PM
Yep I agree totally. Though if the Chiefs just would have signed TO and then Eddie couldn't complain about being paid like a #2. :)

Kennison sure seems to be asshurt this offseason. Remember the article of him flipping out and being pissed that the Chiefs were interested in Owens?

greg63
07-27-2006, 01:52 PM
Don't complain about being underpaid then.


Yup!

Halfcan
07-27-2006, 01:52 PM
Don't worry guys I will post an update on this as soon as I hear soemthing-lol

greg63
07-27-2006, 01:52 PM
I wonder what Trent Green will have to say about this.

Would it matter?

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 01:54 PM
Yeah. Trent and Eddie are close.

noa
07-27-2006, 01:56 PM
I'm sure I'm repeating what someone else has already said, but I didn't feel like reading all 22 pages of this thread. I'm just pissed that Kennison did this publicly. I'll bet that was his agent's call and his attempt to show Peterson he means business. I'm sure they could have resolved this quietly, because Kennison does deserve to be paid well. He said Carl already knew about this and was considering it, so why tell the public about your dispute? Screw agents. I hate those greedy bastards.

greg63
07-27-2006, 01:58 PM
Yeah. Trent and Eddie are close.

Well Trent might have a little infleunce over Kennison, but I don't see him influencing Edwards or Peterson.

Inspector
07-27-2006, 02:03 PM
I like Eddie.

He pissed off the Bronco's.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:03 PM
Denver? Yes, Kennison is that much worse than Ashley Nash ROFL

Eagles? No TO. He'd be a freakin #1

Detroit's WRs are all busts. They've got some asshole named Vines catching lots of passes now.

He'd be a #2 in Houston. Corey Bradford as 3 good games per year and then disappears.

Teams like New Orleans and the Giants are questionable too, if that

.......What you said about Denver has been addressed already. In Houston he's a 3.....you seem to forget they have Eric Moulds and Andre Johnson.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:08 PM
I still think this has more to do with the disrespect Chiefs' WRs get. Two 1000 yard back to back season & all the guys on ESPN say KC needs WRs. Eddie needs to take the attitude of LJ & get pissed off & show off

Our WR's get disrespected because as a group they are one of the bottoms in the league. Start rolling through other teams, this team ranks in the bottom 3rd for the talent they have at the position. Kennison by himself is a decent reciever but outside of him there isn't much here. I know we have hopes for guys like Parker and Thorpe but they're 4th round picks that have never done enough to get noticed by anyone....

noa
07-27-2006, 02:12 PM
Our WR's get disrespected because as a group they are one of the bottoms in the league. Start rolling through other teams, this team ranks in the bottom 3rd for the talent they have at the position. Kennison by himself is a decent reciever but outside of him there isn't much here. I know we have hopes for guys like Parker and Thorpe but they're 4th round picks that have never done enough to get noticed by anyone....


We don't need a great receiving corps. We have Kris Wilson.

ChiTown
07-27-2006, 02:14 PM
We don't need a great receiving corps. We have Kris Wilson.

You've spotted Big Foot?

:eek:

Mr. Laz
07-27-2006, 02:18 PM
How's bout a Kennison for Porter trade? :hmmm:
repost!

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:24 PM
My comments are this.........If he didn't suck so much ass early in his career he would've of gotten paid. There is no market for 33 year old WR's who think they should get paid. Most 33 year old WR's who are in the league are happy they can still play.

He's old, especially for that position. Just shutup and be happy your still in the damn league. I seem to recall the Chiefs giving him a shot when no one else in the league wanted his shitty ass at the time.

Simple as this if he was 25-27 and doing this I'd have no problem paying him, at 33 it's a problem. The best part is how he points out his stats are better than Givens and Randle El's yet they get more money. Hey Eddie newsflash, those guys are 7-8 years younger than you. They are ascending players you are no longer that you are an old player who will either stay the same or decline.

If Eddie Kennison would have got his shit together when he first got in the league he could have gotten paid. It's not the Chiefs fault he didn't and it doesn't give him a right to get a contract a 33 year old WR that's never been to a Pro Bowl or been a legit #1 should get.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 02:29 PM
repost!

ROFL

vailpass
07-27-2006, 02:29 PM
My comments are this.........If he didn't suck so much ass early in his career he would've of gotten paid. There is no market for 33 year old WR's who think they should get paid. Most 33 year old WR's who are in the league are happy they can still play.

He's old, especially for that position. Just shutup and be happy your still in the damn league. I seem to recall the Chiefs giving him a shot when no one else in the league wanted his shitty ass at the time.

Simple as this if he was 25-27 and doing this I'd have no problem paying him, at 33 it's a problem. The best part is how he points out his stats are better than Givens and Randle El's yet they get more money. Hey Eddie newsflash, those guys are 7-8 years younger than you. They are ascending players you are no longer that you are an old player who will either stay the same or decline.

If Eddie Kennison would have got his shit together when he first got in the league he could have gotten paid. It's not the Chiefs fault he didn't and it doesn't give him a right to get a contract a 33 year old WR that's never been to a Pro Bowl or been a legit #1 should get.

Given that everything you say here is true, and IMHO you are spot-on: do you think KC can afford to go into the season without EK? Do you see a replacement out there that can come in and duplicate the rapport EK has with Trent?
You give plenty of reasons to tell EK to fo guck himself. If you remove the emotion from it would it be more prudent to try to get EK a few more bucks and not rock the boat on a season that represents perhaps KCs best shot at a SB for years to come?

dirk digler
07-27-2006, 02:32 PM
Given that everything you say here is true, and IMHO you are spot-on: do you think KC can afford to go into the season without EK? Do you see a replacement out there that can come in and duplicate the rapport EK has with Trent?
You give plenty of reasons to tell EK to fo guck himself but if you remove the emotion from it would it be more prudent to try to get EK a few more bucks and not rock the boat on a season that represents perhaps KCs best shot at a SB for years to come?

I hate it when a Donkey's fan is right

:sulk:

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:36 PM
Given that everything you say here is true, and IMHO you are spot-on: do you think KC can afford to go into the season without EK? Do you see a replacement out there that can come in and duplicate the rapport EK has with Trent?
You give plenty of reasons to tell EK to fo guck himself. If you remove the emotion from it would it be more prudent to try to get EK a few more bucks and not rock the boat on a season that represents perhaps KCs best shot at a SB for years to come?

It needs to be something very very smartly done if they're going to give him more money. They have other, younger players who are going to need new contracts pretty soon. Giving a player like Kennison a contract that isn't done well. Will do 2 things, it will put us in cap hell when he's gone in 2-3 years not to mention have an impact on our ability to resign some players who are a part of our future.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 02:38 PM
Given that everything you say here is true, and IMHO you are spot-on: do you think KC can afford to go into the season without EK? Do you see a replacement out there that can come in and duplicate the rapport EK has with Trent?
You give plenty of reasons to tell EK to fo guck himself. If you remove the emotion from it would it be more prudent to try to get EK a few more bucks and not rock the boat on a season that represents perhaps KCs best shot at a SB for years to come?

Like I said before, I think we could go into the season with the WR's we have now, minus Kennison and be just fine.

Kennison just isn't THAT good.

jynni
07-27-2006, 02:38 PM
I'd say just give him some incentive bonuses and whatnot...

That said, his agent pulled the wrong time to break the story - even if they have been trying to talk things out with King Carl since the spring. From the article, it sounds like EK was happy until his agent said "hey - you're not making as much as some of these other guys" - apparently what EK was making was enough until then.

Fans are high on the signing of Ty Law and don't look too kindly on the 33yr old WR bitching about his contract a few days before camp starts. It just makes him look like a greedy asshole - even if he does deserve to be paid a little more.

Not that it matters much, but EK had a gleaming reputation with KC fans and he's just done quite a bit to tarnish it, IMHO.

B_Ambuehl
07-27-2006, 02:40 PM
He has nothing. No leverage whatsoever. If he were to get released no team would pay him more than he's earning now. His only other option is to quit which he won't do since he wants money.

booger
07-27-2006, 02:45 PM
[QUOTE=EK said
“I would hope the Chiefs would put me on waivers if they don’t want to step to the plate.””[/QUOTE]

I've got no problem with most of this thing except the above line.

What a dumbass. They would let him walk out and sit before they cut him. I think he and his agent are smart enough to know that it would be hard to get anything more than his current deal on the open market.

The timing of this obviously sucks. And i agree he would never have done this under Vermeil. He wouldn't have to. DV gets his own taken care of. And while EK says the guys who have been there need to be taken care of first he is full of it. The current crop alone hasn't been enough to get it done.

Hopefully DV stops by camp and they can both have a good cry and we can all get past this.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:46 PM
He has nothing. No leverage whatsoever. If he were to get released no team would pay him more than he's earning now. His only other option is to quit which he won't do since he wants money.

That's pretty much dead on. He think's he has leverage because of the WR's on this team.......but then he fails to realize he has no leverage because there is no market for him.

vailpass
07-27-2006, 02:50 PM
Like I said before, I think we could go into the season with the WR's we have now, minus Kennison and be just fine.Kennison just isn't THAT good.

Really? I know EK isn't the integral part of the KC O that most 1WRs are but still...wow. I didn't realize he was that replaceable.

Iowanian
07-27-2006, 02:50 PM
Eric Moulds has been much more productive over his career.....what did he just sign with Houston for?....not alot. Moulds has a couple of thousand more yards than Kennison, and should be the numbers Kennison is looking for IMO.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1296
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1196

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:51 PM
Really? I know EK isn't the integral part of the KC O that most 1WRs are but still...wow. I didn't realize he was that replaceable.

No WR's on our team are unreplaceable.....have you taken a look at the WR crop on this team?

Mecca
07-27-2006, 02:54 PM
Eric Moulds has been much more productive over his career.....what did he just sign with Houston for?....not alot. Moulds has a couple of thousand more yards than Kennison, and should be the numbers Kennison is looking for IMO.

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1296
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1196

Add in that Moulds has spent his entire career playing with absolute ass for QB's. He still put up numbers and was a top level WR in the AFC at one point despite having no one to throw him the ball.

I still don't think Kennison is as good as Moulds, Kennison has just been playing with a better QB than Moulds has ever had. Eric Moulds would kill to play with a QB like Trent Green after what he's gone through. Hell he might have HOF stats if he ever had a QB.

Of course after reading what Kennison had to say for this he'd probably say "Moulds went to Houston to be a #2 WR, I'm not a #2!".

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 02:54 PM
Really? I know EK isn't the integral part of the KC O that most 1WRs are but still...wow. I didn't realize he was that replaceable.

It's not about Eddie Kennison himself.

It's about how large the delta is between Eddie's talent and the talent of the guys below him on the depth chart.

That delta isn't large.

vailpass
07-27-2006, 02:58 PM
It's not about Eddie Kennison himself.

It's about how large the delta is between Eddie's talent and the talent of the guys below him on the depth chart.

That delta isn't large.

Huh. I thought there was a larger drop off between EK and the rest. Who is there beside Parker?

NewChief
07-27-2006, 03:04 PM
Like I said before, I think we could go into the season with the WR's we have now, minus Kennison and be just fine.

Kennison just isn't THAT good.


Not sure that I agree. I agree that Kennison is FoS for pulling this, and he's asking more than he's worth. That being said, this is the price we pay for the FO not addressing our wide receiver needs for the last 2 years. If there was a legitimate receiver that could step up to the plate and put Eddie in the number 2 spot where he belongs, we'd be alright and Eddie wouldn't be pulling this. As is, he has an inflated sense of his talent level.

I liked our WR corps last year with Bo and Horn better than I like it now. Craphonso has done zilch, and I've heard nothing good about his performance in practice, during the season, or during the offseason (speaking of inflated senses of self worth and talent). Samie may have a break out. If he does, we're set. Otherwise, we better pay EK the money.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:06 PM
Huh. I thought there was a larger drop off between EK and the rest. Who is there beside Parker?

It isn't that Eddie sucks, don't get me wrong.

It's that if he's gonna threaten to sit out, let him sit out. We don't NEED him.

Parker's only problem is that he can't stay healthy. If he could stay on the field, he'd be fine. He was our number 1 WR over the last 7 games. He had 27 catches to Eddie's 23. Both of them had 1 TD.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 03:07 PM
I don't wanna ever hear about Kennison being a team guy again now. Because this is blatantly him screaming "me,me,me" and he's been doing it all offseason.

He got ass hurt when we were interested in Owens. Now we give Law some money to come in here and he gets all ass hurt again "they should pay me instead of him".

Yea he's a real team guy......

Der Flöprer
07-27-2006, 03:07 PM
Of course after reading what Kennison had to say for this he'd probably say "Moulds went to Houston to be a #2 WR, I'm not a #2!".


To which the response would be "Just be lucky he didn't come here to be a #1."

chop
07-27-2006, 03:09 PM
Craphonso has done zilch, and I've heard nothing good about his performance in practice, during the season, or during the offseason (speaking of inflated senses of self worth and talent). Samie may have a break out. If he does, we're set. Otherwise, we better pay EK the money.


I've heard several good reports about how good Thorpe has looked in practice. Trent Green has said it, and recently, so has CP. Carl Peterson may have made the comments knowing what EK's demands were at the time.

Inspector
07-27-2006, 03:13 PM
Why don't we just sign these ****ers to incentive heavy contracts and when they play they get paid?...

Ya know, that makes a lot of sense to me.

I've wondered why they don't do that more often.

vailpass
07-27-2006, 03:17 PM
Ya know, that makes a lot of sense to me.

I've wondered why they don't do that more often.

Because the only way to make that work would be for EVERY team to get together and agree to offer only this type of contract.
The term for that is collusion and it would be a very bad thing for the league to get caught doing.

Plus it would never happen. Team A offers a FA a hard-line, incentive based contract. Team B wants to scoop team A so offers a friendlier contract with some gauranteed money.

You are the FA who knows that every play in the NFL could be your last. Which do you sign?

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:23 PM
Not sure that I agree. I agree that Kennison is FoS for pulling this, and he's asking more than he's worth. That being said, this is the price we pay for the FO not addressing our wide receiver needs for the last 2 years. If there was a legitimate receiver that could step up to the plate and put Eddie in the number 2 spot where he belongs, we'd be alright and Eddie wouldn't be pulling this. As is, he has an inflated sense of his talent level.

I liked our WR corps last year with Bo and Horn better than I like it now. Craphonso has done zilch, and I've heard nothing good about his performance in practice, during the season, or during the offseason (speaking of inflated senses of self worth and talent). Samie may have a break out. If he does, we're set. Otherwise, we better pay EK the money.

Bo and Horn? ROFL

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:23 PM
Like I said before, I think we could go into the season with the WR's we have now, minus Kennison and be just fine.

Kennison just isn't THAT good.

I don't. None of them have the experience or the knowledge of this offense that he does. Or the chemistry with Green.

Inspector
07-27-2006, 03:23 PM
Well then, maybe we could trade him for Porter.

NewChief
07-27-2006, 03:26 PM
I've heard several good reports about how good Thorpe has looked in practice. Trent Green has said it, and recently, so has CP. Carl Peterson may have made the comments knowing what EK's demands were at the time.

I haven't heard much about him this year. If he's matured some from last year, there may be hope. I know that last year Trent told all the receivers during the Spring that the field was wide open. They needed someone to step up to the plate and be ready come training camp, and that it could be any receiver that could step up and make the squad. From what I heard, Craphonso showed up at training camp and still didn't really know any of the plays, thinking he'd get the job based on talent alone without putting in the work. The good thing is that he does have talent, he just has to apply that talent and work at it instead of thinking he can just get by on skills.

Jim Jones
07-27-2006, 03:26 PM
I totally agree that we could go into the season without Kennison and be fine. I like Kennison, he's been a productive receiver for us, but I'd be foolish not to think that most of his success here has been because of the players around him.

During Kennison's tenure here we've had the most dominant O-Line in the league, the best TE in the league, two of the best RB's in the league, and a pro bowl caliber QB. If we let Kennison walk, we still have all those things in tact. Kennison's numbers are a product of the offense more than they are a product of his talent.

NewChief
07-27-2006, 03:27 PM
Bo and Horn? ROFL

At least they knew the plays and ran the right routes, without having to be constantly told where to line up on the field which is more than can be said for some of our current WRS on the depth chart.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:28 PM
I really don't think any of our other receivers is capable of putting up 70 catches and 1,200 yards.

Parker's ceiling this year is about 1,000 yards IMO.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:31 PM
I don't. None of them have the experience or the knowledge of this offense that he does. Or the chemistry with Green.

I'm sure his "**** the team, I wanna get paid" attitude will do wonders for his chemistry with Green.

This is a timing offense. You're mistaking route running for chemistry.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:33 PM
I really don't think any of our other receivers is capable of putting up 70 catches and 1,200 yards.

Parker's ceiling this year is about 1,000 yards IMO.

In the games he played, Parker caught more balls than Kennison did. The only concern is health.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:34 PM
At least they knew the plays and ran the right routes, without having to be constantly told where to line up on the field which is more than can be said for some of our current WRS on the depth chart.

If you're gonna pull stuff outta your ass, at least make it believable...

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:34 PM
I've seen the play break down and Kennison is the only wide receiver that knows what the hell to do out there.

We need him. I don't think he's going to miss any games because of this, but if he does, we're in trouble. Mark my words.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:35 PM
In the game he played, Parker caught more balls than Kennison did. The only concern is health.

That's true, but Parker wasn't facing #1 cornerbacks all of the time.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:36 PM
I've seen the play break down and Kennison is the only wide receiver that knows what the hell to do out there.

We need him. I don't think he's going to miss any games because of this, but if he does, we're in trouble. Mark my words.

I've seen many times where Kennison needed to come back for the ball and didn't...

tk13
07-27-2006, 03:36 PM
If you're gonna pull stuff outta your ass, at least make it believable...
You're going to question his sources? Haha... yeaaah.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 03:36 PM
Every WR in our offense faces 1-1 coverage due to Gonzalez and our run game.......WR's in the NFL should be able to get open 1-1. That's the main reason Eddie Kennison was a complete scrub till he came here.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:38 PM
That's true, but Parker wasn't facing #1 cornerbacks all of the time.

Keep rolling out the excuses, because there's only one thing that matters.

Dude put himself before the team.

If he doesn't want to be here, he can get the **** out.

NewChief
07-27-2006, 03:39 PM
If you're gonna pull stuff outta your ass, at least make it believable...

Believe what you want to believe, dude.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:39 PM
You're going to question his sources? Haha... yeaaah.

What are his "sources"? Have you ever seen one of the other WR's on this team line up in the wrong place and have to be told what to do?

I'm guessing that's not the point, though. You're taking a dig at my sources, as if there's anything to nitpick there...

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:40 PM
Priest did the same thing. Did you want him to get the **** out at the time?

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:41 PM
Believe what you want to believe, dude.

I believe what I SEE.

And I don't see anything that resembles this absurd statement:

At least they knew the plays and ran the right routes, without having to be constantly told where to line up on the field which is more than can be said for some of our current WRS on the depth chart.

That's complete fabrication and you know it.

tk13
07-27-2006, 03:42 PM
I think assuming that someone will step up and take Kennison's numbers is a huge assumption. And a massive mistake. Nobody assumed that role in 2001, and Priest still ran wild. But we had no passing game, and we didn't play well. Then Kennison came aboard and gave us a WR threat and we finished strong that year.

Then at the beginning of 2004, we had WR injuries, Tony G. had a great year, Priest still ran wild, and we still started 0-3. The only evidence we have with 3rd and 4th string WR's is that this team really struggled.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 03:43 PM
Priest did the same thing. Did you want him to get the **** out at the time?

Completely different situation......When Eddie Kennison is the catalyst of our offense and leads the NFL in yards from scrimmage back to back years, get back to me.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:43 PM
Priest did the same thing. Did you want him to get the **** out at the time?

I think my feelings on the subject are well known. Hence all the "you shouldn't be rooting against Priest" threads.

That being said, we weren't talking about Priest Holmes, a man who has set multiple team records and held the NFL record for TD's in a season. We're talking about Eddie Kennison, a journeyman WR who's never lived up to his potential.

tk13
07-27-2006, 03:44 PM
I believe what I SEE.

And I don't see anything that resembles this absurd statement:

At least they knew the plays and ran the right routes, without having to be constantly told where to line up on the field which is more than can be said for some of our current WRS on the depth chart.

That's complete fabrication and you know it.
Are you serious? How many timeouts has Trent had to call right before the snap over the past several years? We've all griped about our constant pattern of wasting timeouts. Why do you think that is?

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:46 PM
I think assuming that someone will step up and take Kennison's numbers is a huge assumption. And a massive mistake. Nobody assumed that role in 2001, and Priest still ran wild. But we had no passing game, and we didn't play well. Then Kennison came aboard and gave us a WR threat and we finished strong that year.

Then at the beginning of 2004, we had WR injuries, Tony G. had a great year, Priest still ran wild, and we still started 0-3. The only evidence we have with 3rd and 4th string WR's is that this team really struggled.

In 2001, we had no Willie Roaf.

And in the 1st 3 games of 2004, our defense STUNK. I was at the Carolina game, and trust me, not having our full compliment of WR's wasn't the difference in that game AT ALL.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:47 PM
Really? Our offense was putrid in that Carolina game. They scored 10 points.

We need Kennison.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 03:48 PM
Alright guys, let's pay Eddie Kennison what he wants. When it puts us in cap hell and we can't keep Jared Allen it will look brilliant.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 03:48 PM
I know that I feel completely confident heading into the season with our WR corps. consisting of Samie Parker as the #1, Dante Hall as the #2, and a bunch of people nobody has ever heard of duking it out the rest of the way.

Just looked at the KCChiefs.com roster again, and the lack of WR talent and experience is just shocking. Without Eddie Kennison, this team would be lucky to gain 200 yards through the air per game.

Alright guys, let's pay Eddie Kennison what he wants. When it puts us in cap hell and we can't keep Jared Allen it will look brilliant.

You're right. Because it's a hell of a lot smarter to enter the season with NO threat whatsoever at wideout.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:49 PM
Are you serious? How many timeouts has Trent had to call right before the snap over the past several years? We've all griped about wasting timeouts. Why do you think that is?

Are you serious?

How many of those timeouts were due to the fact that Al Saunders' offense doesn't allow him to adjust to the defense?

Not to mention that there's other guys on the field that can line-up in the wrong place, namely Dante Hall and Tony Gonzales, who I've seen do it on several occassions.

His statement is absurd for yet another reason - it's IMPOSSIBLE for Craphonso Thorpe, Jeff Webb, or any of our current backup WR's to "constantly" line up in the wrong place because they HAVEN'T PLAYED.

If anything, the guys lining up in the wrong place were MARC BOERIGTER AND CHRIS HORN.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:51 PM
Really? Our offense was putrid in that Carolina game. They scored 10 points.

We need Kennison.

Our offense didn't even PLAY in the 3rd quarter. Carolina's offense had a nearly 10-minute drive...

Mecca
07-27-2006, 03:51 PM
Why is Eddie Kennison being treated like he's Marvin Harrison or Terrell Owens by some of the posters here? You'd think we had ourselves an elite WR with some of these posts.....

tk13
07-27-2006, 03:51 PM
Are you serious?

How many of those timeouts were due to the fact that Al Saunders' offense doesn't allow him to adjust to the defense?

Not to mention that there's other guys on the field that can line-up in the wrong place, namely Dante Hall and Tony Gonzales, who I've seen do it on several occassions.

His statement is absurd for yet another reason - it's IMPOSSIBLE for Craphonso Thorpe, Jeff Webb, or any of our current backup WR's to "constantly" line up in the wrong place because they HAVEN'T PLAYED.

If anything, the guys lining up in the wrong place were MARC BOERIGTER AND CHRIS HORN.
Well, sorry, I think you're a great poster, but I'd definitely take his word over anybody else on this board regarding what Trent thinks about the WR corps... :)

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 03:53 PM
Why is Eddie Kennison being treated like he's Marvin Harrison or Terrell Owens by some of the posters here?

Because relative to the rest of the WRs on our roster, he IS Marvin Harrison.

Is this really that hard to understand? Do you honestly not see a dropoff with Eddie Kennison leaving and Samie "It's Funny to Drop a Football" Parker as our #1?

tk13
07-27-2006, 03:54 PM
Why is Eddie Kennison being treated like he's Marvin Harrison or Terrell Owens by some of the posters here? You'd think we had ourselves an elite WR with some of these posts.....
I don't think he's Marvin Harrison.

Although, he does have more 40+ yard plays over the past 5 years than Marvin Harrison.

But... I do think the rest of WR corps isn't good enough to help carry their part of the offense. Yet anyway... Parker might turn into a good WR, but even you don't like him. After that it gets really thin. This offense doesn't focus on the WR's but it hasn't done very well with poor ones.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:54 PM
Well, sorry, I think you're a great poster, but I'd definitely take his word over anybody else on this board regarding what Trent thinks about the WR corps... :)

Sorry, but you're talking about something I have no knowledge of. I'm assuming he knows Trent Green personally.

Which doesn't change what I said.

A couple of the WR's that stand to make the roster this year weren't on the team last year. If anybody was lining up in the wrong place and having to be told where to line-up, it was Marc Boerigter and Chris Horn, both of whom he said he would prefer.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 03:55 PM
Because relative to the rest of the WRs on our roster, he IS Marvin Harrison.

Is this really that hard to understand? Do you honestly not see a dropoff with Eddie Kennison leaving and Samie "It's Funny to Drop a Football" Parker as our #1?

Do you not realize how insanely stupid it is to pay a 33 year old WR alot of money? Like I said if he was a young ascending player I have no problems but he's not. If giving him what he wants puts us in a cap hell situation and leads to us not being able to keep players like Jared Allen then it's not worth it.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 03:56 PM
Because relative to the rest of the WRs on our roster, he IS Marvin Harrison.

Is this really that hard to understand? Do you honestly not see a dropoff with Eddie Kennison leaving and Samie "It's Funny to Drop a Football" Parker as our #1?

Criticizing Parker for drops while praising Kennison in the same sentence...

ROFL

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 03:57 PM
I wonder just how much money he wants.

Bob Dole
07-27-2006, 03:57 PM
Kennison needs to STF down and STF up and honor the contract he signed when Vermeil and Peterson rescued his career from the quitter's trash heap.

tk13
07-27-2006, 03:58 PM
Do you not realize how insanely stupid it is to pay a 33 year old WR alot of money? Like I said if he was a young ascending player I have no problems but he's not. If giving him what he wants puts us in a cap hell situation and leads to us not being able to keep players like Jared Allen then it's not worth it.
No it doesn't make sense. Of course it doesn't.

It doesn't make sense to pay a 32 year old Ty Law decent money when you're not sure you have a decent pass rush either, but we did it. You have to avoid having gaping holes at a position. Eddie is more important to the WR corps than Ty Law is to the CB corps, because we already had some talent there... and Eddie knows that, that's his argument.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 03:59 PM
Do you not realize how insanely stupid it is to pay a 33 year old WR alot of money?

Dude, we are 2-3 years from a complete and total retooling on offense anyway. Are you going to deny Eddie Kennison, a receiver who has been incredibly dependable and productive for us for 2 seasons in a row now, the contract he deserves...because of his age? At the expense of what is probably our only chance in the forseeable future at contending for a Super Bowl?

Losing Eddie Kennison would flush this season completely down the drain. So it becomes a question of whether or not you want to bet on this year's sure thing or next year's possibilities.

I'm not ready to call this season a wash just yet.

NewChief
07-27-2006, 03:59 PM
I believe what I SEE.

And I don't see anything that resembles this absurd statement:

At least they knew the plays and ran the right routes, without having to be constantly told where to line up on the field which is more than can be said for some of our current WRS on the depth chart.

That's complete fabrication and you know it.

You're assuming that I'm talking only about during games, not practice and camp.

I'm not saying that our current WR corps doesn't have more talent than the one in the past with Boe and Horn, but Boe and Horn at least worked hard (though Boe's year after his marriage, was a pretty big letdown for whatever reason). I actually think Boe got screwed last year by Saunders for some reason. He never got in the freaking game.

I'm also not one of those Boe/Horn fanboys who think they're the great white hopes of our generation. I did believe that they were at least somewhat dependable and had an understanding of the offense we were running.

I'm also not saying that we're doomed if we don't sign EK. I just don't particularly like our WR depth chart without EK on it. It may completely surprise me, though. Craphonso may step up and rock it this year. Samie may come into his own. All I know is that I wish we had another WR that was a known factor beyond EK and Dante. Without EK on the depth chart, I like it even less.

But hell, Craphonso and Co. don't really need to know the plays now anyway. With the new AudiBling(TM) offense we're running these days, Trent will be drawing up all the plays in the dirt in the huddle sandlot style, and they'll know exactly where to go.

"Phonso. You do that little squiggle dance thing down the right side you do. Dante, streak down the other side. Tony, fall down on the ground, then jump up and drag the middle. Eddie, you just sit out there and look good. Ready? Break!"

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 04:01 PM
Criticizing Parker for drops while praising Kennison in the same sentence...

Eddie Kennison had 1100 yards receiving. Samie Parker had 530.

But yeah. Let's get rid of Kennison. Parker is clearly ready for #1.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 04:03 PM
I don't think Carl will cave to Kennison. How can you cave to a guy who is making more with the Chiefs than he'd make anywhere else?

This is a bad move by Kennison. Even if he gets more, it's just going to be a little more, at the expense of team and fan goodwill.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:03 PM
No it doesn't make sense. Of course it doesn't.

It doesn't make sense to pay a 32 year old Ty Law decent money when you're not sure you have a decent pass rush either, but we did it. You have to avoid having gaping holes at a position. Eddie is more important to the WR corps than Ty Law is to the CB corps, because we already had some talent there... and Eddie knows that, that's his argument.

What you say is true on the micro level.

However, Ty Law is MUCH more important to the overall defense than Eddie is to the overall offense.

Ty Law doesn't improve the overall CB talent level dramatically because we already had Surtain. But having Ty Law on that side of the field addresses our weakness at SAFETY.

Our WR's, no matter who they are, are going to see 1-on-1 coverage because of LJ and Gonzo.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:04 PM
Dude, we are 2-3 years from a complete and total retooling on offense anyway. Are you going to deny Eddie Kennison, a receiver who has been incredibly dependable and productive for us for 2 seasons in a row now, the contract he deserves...because of his age? At the expense of what is probably our only chance in the forseeable future at contending for a Super Bowl?

Losing Eddie Kennison would flush this season completely down the drain. So it becomes a question of whether or not you want to bet on this year's sure thing or next year's possibilities.

I'm not ready to call this season a wash just yet.

Eddie Kennison is a good WR.

But that bolded statement is BEYOND RIDICULOUS.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 04:06 PM
I know that I feel completely confident heading into the season with our WR corps. consisting of Samie Parker as the #1, Dante Hall as the #2, and a bunch of people nobody has ever heard of duking it out the rest of the way.

Just looked at the KCChiefs.com roster again, and the lack of WR talent and experience is just shocking. Without Eddie Kennison, this team would be lucky to gain 200 yards through the air per game.



You're right. Because it's a hell of a lot smarter to enter the season with NO threat whatsoever at wideout.

That first season with Green (2001), and with no Roaf, and absolutely nothing at WR, didn't Green put up close to 400 a few games?

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 04:09 PM
Mage:

Here's our current group of wide receivers -

Samie Parker
Dante Hall
Kyle Brown
Nate Curry
Chris Hannon
Scott McCready
Jeris McIntyre
Craphonso Thorpe
Jeff Webb

and of course, Eddie Kennison.

If you can, would you please point out to me which of these guys is likely to come even close to Kennison's production over the last two seasons, next year?

tk13
07-27-2006, 04:10 PM
What you say is true on the micro level.

However, Ty Law is MUCH more important to the overall defense than Eddie is to the overall offense.

Ty Law doesn't improve the overall CB talent level dramatically because we already had Surtain. But having Ty Law on that side of the field addresses our weakness at SAFETY.

Our WR's, no matter who they are, are going to see 1-on-1 coverage because of LJ and Gonzo.
Yeah but that doesn't matter if they can't do anything with it. I can't believe you'd be more comfortable with Parker, Thorpe, and Hall at WR more than Surtain, Walls, and Sapp at CB.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:10 PM
You're assuming that I'm talking only about during games, not practice and camp.


Um, that's what practice and camp is for. Where they line up ONLY matters during games.

I'm not saying that our current WR corps doesn't have more talent than the one in the past with Boe and Horn, but Boe and Horn at least worked hard (though Boe's year after his marriage, was a pretty big letdown for whatever reason). I actually think Boe got screwed last year by Saunders for some reason. He never got in the freaking game.

Are you suggesting that our current crop of WR's are lazy? Again, I have to assume you know Trent Green personally, because that's a pretty strong accusation.

By the way, the reason Bo couldn't get in the game is because his hands were suspect. There were rumors that he had problems with his eyes, but I heard him on the radio flatly deny that he had any eye problems.

I'm also not one of those Boe/Horn fanboys who think they're the great white hopes of our generation. I did believe that they were at least somewhat dependable and had an understanding of the offense we were running.

Again, it sounds like you're suggesting that our current WR's don't know the offense.

I'm also not saying that we're doomed if we don't sign EK. I just don't particularly like our WR depth chart without EK on it. It may completely surprise me, though. Craphonso may step up and rock it this year. Samie may come into his own. All I know is that I wish we had another WR that was a known factor beyond EK and Dante. Without EK on the depth chart, I like it even less.

Samie already came into his own. He just needs to stay healthy. Like I said, over the last half of last year, he outperformed Eddie Kennison. I too wish we had better options but we don't. And if Kennison doesn't want to be here, the damage his attitude does to the team far outweighs anything he produces on the field.

But hell, Craphonso and Co. don't really need to know the plays now anyway. With the new AudiBling(TM) offense we're running these days, Trent will be drawing up all the plays in the dirt in the huddle sandlot style, and they'll know exactly where to go.

"Phonso. You do that little squiggle dance thing down the right side you do. Dante, streak down the other side. Tony, fall down on the ground, then jump up and drag the middle. Eddie, you just sit out there and look good. Ready? Break!"

There you go with the hyperbole again. Nobody said anything that even resembles that.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:14 PM
Mage:

Here's our current group of wide receivers -

Samie Parker
Dante Hall
Kyle Brown
Nate Curry
Chris Hannon
Scott McCready
Jeris McIntyre
Craphonso Thorpe
Jeff Webb

and of course, Eddie Kennison.

If you can, would you please point out to me which of these guys is likely to come even close to Kennison's production over the last two seasons, next year?

Samie Parker. He's ALREADY done it. All he has to do is stay healthy. And he's the only one you need.

After that, you need one backup to match PARKER'S production, not Kennison's. 36 catches shouldn't be too hard.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 04:14 PM
No it doesn't make sense. Of course it doesn't.

It doesn't make sense to pay a 32 year old Ty Law decent money when you're not sure you have a decent pass rush either, but we did it. You have to avoid having gaping holes at a position. Eddie is more important to the WR corps than Ty Law is to the CB corps, because we already had some talent there... and Eddie knows that, that's his argument.

We paid Ty Law market, just as we are paying market for Kennison. Kennison would not get more elsewhere.

You simply cannot run a team with guys who realize they are integral start holding out, and get rewarded. We cave to Kennison, and guess what, LJ realizes the value to the team, and he holds out.

As I said, I'd have a lot more sympathy for Kennison if some other team was willing to pay him a lot more.

vailpass
07-27-2006, 04:14 PM
I don't think Carl will cave to Kennison. How can you cave to a guy who is making more with the Chiefs than he'd make anywhere else?

This is a bad move by Kennison. Even if he gets more, it's just going to be a little more, at the expense of team and fan goodwill.

If I only had a year or two left to make enough $ to last me the rest of my life I wouldn't give two shits what a bunch of strangers (fans) I will never meet or live by thought of me. Would you? Does the good will of some factory worker schmuck in the stands acrue interest quarterly?

As for his teamates you can be damn sure not one of them will say or think ill of him for doing what he has to do to get paid. That is the code and they all follow it; someday it could be any of them and they know it. It's only personal to the fans; to the players and crew it's just business.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:16 PM
Yeah but that doesn't matter if they can't do anything with it. I can't believe you'd be more comfortable with Parker, Thorpe, and Hall at WR more than Surtain, Walls, and Sapp at CB.

In reality, I'm not.

Then again, Surtain hasn't come out and said "**** the team, I wanna get paid."

Woodrow Call
07-27-2006, 04:16 PM
Are you serious?

How many of those timeouts were due to the fact that Al Saunders' offense doesn't allow him to adjust to the defense?


Zero of course. Saunders is the best OC in NFL history and the only reason the Chiefs offense amounted to anything. Throw in the potential loss of Kennison the Chiefs will be lucky to throw for 200 yrds a game.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 04:17 PM
Samie Parker. He's ALREADY done it.

In what universe has he "done it"?

Doesn't one have to stay healthy in order to match production? And on top of that, are you really arguing that Samie Parker is a guarantee to have as sure of hands as Kennison has had over the last two years?

Look, Eddie Kennison isn't perfect. On the teams with the best WR corps in the NFL, he's a #2. Even a #3 on a team like Indy, Cincy, or Pitt last year. But I can't believe that some people think this particular team wouldn't lose a beat without him.

That's just unbelievable to me.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 04:17 PM
That's because Surtain already got paid.

tk13
07-27-2006, 04:18 PM
That first season with Green (2001), and with no Roaf, and absolutely nothing at WR, didn't Green put up close to 400 a few games?
2001 stats

Green before Kennison: 54.5% completions, 232.5 yds/game, 10 TD, 17 INT

Green after Kennison: 61.7% completions, 245.2 yds/game, 7 TD, 7 INT

Trent had one 350 yard game early in the season against Arizona but that's the only time he came close to 400. We didn't have a real sharp passing attack that year.

Chiefnj
07-27-2006, 04:18 PM
Mage:

Here's our current group of wide receivers -

Samie Parker
Dante Hall
Kyle Brown
Nate Curry
Chris Hannon
Scott McCready
Jeris McIntyre
Craphonso Thorpe
Jeff Webb

and of course, Eddie Kennison.

If you can, would you please point out to me which of these guys is likely to come even close to Kennison's production over the last two seasons, next year?

IMHO, Parker, Hall and Thorpe certainly have the ability and athleticism to catch on average 3.7 passes per game.

tk13
07-27-2006, 04:20 PM
In reality, I'm not.

Then again, Surtain hasn't come out and said "**** the team, I wanna get paid."
Oh yes he did. We couldn't trade for him until him and Carl agreed to a long-term contract... and that took a while. We gave him 7 years, 50 million dollars.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:25 PM
That's because Surtain already got paid.

So did Kennison.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 04:26 PM
Surtain makes money equivalent to his worth.

Kennison doesn't.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:27 PM
In what universe has he "done it"?

Doesn't one have to stay healthy in order to match production? And on top of that, are you really arguing that Samie Parker is a guarantee to have as sure of hands as Kennison has had over the last two years?

Look, Eddie Kennison isn't perfect. On the teams with the best WR corps in the NFL, he's a #2. Even a #3 on a team like Indy, Cincy, or Pitt last year. But I can't believe that some people think this particular team wouldn't lose a beat without him.

That's just unbelievable to me.

In order to match long-term production, he certainly has to stay healthy.

But to suggest that he CANNOT do it, when he's already catching more passes per game than Kennison, is being deliberately stubborn.

Would we lose a beat? Probably. But that's the price you have to pay to kick a bad attitude to the curb...

As for Kennison's "sure hands"...ROFL

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:29 PM
Surtain makes money equivalent to his worth.

Kennison doesn't.

Kennison signed a long-term contract at a time when nobody else in the league wanted him.

THE CHIEFS defined his worth.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:30 PM
Oh yes he did. We couldn't trade for him until him and Carl agreed to a long-term contract... and that took a while. We gave him 7 years, 50 million dollars.

I must have missed where Surtain was a member of the Chiefs at the time we traded for him.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 04:30 PM
So you're saying Kennison isn't worth more money?

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:32 PM
So you're saying Kennison isn't worth more money?

I've already said that I think he is.

But he's not the only player on the team.

1) There's several players more important to the team that need extensions - namely Allen and LJ.

2) Giving in to him now (right before camp) and giving him more money is the WORST POSSIBLE precedent this team could set.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 04:34 PM
But to suggest that he CANNOT do it, when he's already catching more passes per game than Kennison, is being deliberately stubborn.

I'm not even talking long-term here. I'm talking over the course of a single season. Samie Parker may well have the ability to match Eddie Kennison's production, but I've watched the same number of Chiefs games that you have during Parker's tenure with the team. At this point, I think assuming that he will is a little more foolish than assuming that he won't.

But that's the price you have to pay to kick a bad attitude to the curb...

When your offensive line, your quarterback, and your entire defensive backfield are all practically ready to join the AARP, I think kicking your only credible threat at WR to the curb is probably a dumb move.

BigRock
07-27-2006, 04:37 PM
I don't wanna ever hear about Kennison being a team guy again now. Because this is blatantly him screaming "me,me,me" and he's been doing it all offseason.

Posts like this are right up there with the people who apparently can't read and are posting things like WHY WOULD EDDIE DO THIS RIGHT BEFORE CAMP or I BET HE WOULDN'T GIVE MONEY BACK IF HIS PRODUCTION DROPS, two things that are clearly covered in the article.

It bears repeating: there's not a person alive who wouldn't be upset if you went into work one day and found out that, on account of your good work, they're getting rid of a guy who makes more than you... except, gee, you won't be seeing any of that money. You've totally surpassed the expectations the company had when they hired you, and a lot more will be expected out of you now, but you're not going to see anything for it.

I guess anyone who wouldn't like that situation isn't being a "team guy". The team should take care of people who deserve it. Eddie Kenninson deserves it, and he deserves more than being jerked around by Carl all offseason.

And Eddie's agent is even offering to do an incentive based deal, to protect the team if Eddie's production drops off. They could just as easily be saying that Eddie deserves a raise for what he's already done the last few seasons as much as anything. And they'd be right! But they're willing to do something with the best interests of the team in mind, and people here are calling him selfish. Completely embarrassing.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:41 PM
I'm not even talking long-term here. I'm talking over the course of a single season. Samie Parker may well have the ability to match Eddie Kennison's production, but I've watched the same number of Chiefs games that you have during Parker's tenure with the team. At this point, I think assuming that he will is a little more foolish than assuming that he won't.

I'm not assuming he WILL. I'm assuming he CAN. In other words, I'm willing to go into the season with Parker replacing Kennison, in the event Kennison decides to hold out.

When your offensive line, your quarterback, and your entire defensive backfield are all practically ready to join the AARP, I think kicking your only credible threat at WR to the curb is probably a dumb move.

I'm sorry but the age of the o-line, QB, and defensive secondary have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with whether or not we should give Eddie Kennison a raise.

In fact, the fact that our offense is OLD is all the more reason we SHOULD NOT give a 33-year old WR a big pay raise. It's a perfect opportunity to get younger.

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 04:42 PM
Next year is the year to get younger.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:44 PM
Next year is the year to get younger.

In an ideal world, you're absolutely right.

Then again, in an ideal world Eddie Kennison wouldn't be threatening to hold out.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 04:48 PM
I'm sorry but the age of the o-line, QB, and defensive secondary have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with whether or not we should give Eddie Kennison a raise.

Then we simply see the near future very, very differently.

I think that this team has one, maybe two more shots at making a Super Bowl, before they simply collapse due to age. That being the case, I'd rather go into that last chance with my only proven commodity at wideout still on the team.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 04:51 PM
If I only had a year or two left to make enough $ to last me the rest of my life I wouldn't give two shits what a bunch of strangers (fans) I will never meet or live by thought of me. Would you? Does the good will of some factory worker schmuck in the stands acrue interest quarterly?

As for his teamates you can be damn sure not one of them will say or think ill of him for doing what he has to do to get paid. That is the code and they all follow it; someday it could be any of them and they know it. It's only personal to the fans; to the players and crew it's just business.

I dunno. Ex-jocks are often able to parlay their name into business success. Just look at Elway. If Kennison holds out, his name won't be worth jack shit.

HC_Chief
07-27-2006, 04:52 PM
Pay him. He has been very productive. Make him happy.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 04:53 PM
I think that John Elway might be a little more marketable than Eddie Kennison.

Maybe that's just me.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 04:53 PM
I've already said that I think he is.

But he's not the only player on the team.

1) There's several players more important to the team that need extensions - namely Allen and LJ.

2) Giving in to him now (right before camp) and giving him more money is the WORST POSSIBLE precedent this team could set.

Yep. That about sums it out.

htismaqe
07-27-2006, 04:54 PM
Then we simply see the near future very, very differently.

I think that this team has one, maybe two more shots at making a Super Bowl, before they simply collapse due to age. That being the case, I'd rather go into that last chance with my only proven commodity at wideout still on the team.

Well, of course. When you put it like that, I agree.

I would rather go into the season with Kennison too.

Then again, HE is the one who's choosing to hold out.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 04:58 PM
Pay him. He has been very productive. Make him happy.

Pay him how much? It's easy to say pay him. What if he wants top 15 WR at the age of 33? Do you pay him then? 33 year old WRs just don't sign big contracts.

noa
07-27-2006, 05:11 PM
Then we simply see the near future very, very differently.

I think that this team has one, maybe two more shots at making a Super Bowl, before they simply collapse due to age.

I disagree completely. Our offensive line will never again be what it is today, but we will be fine in that department, we have good prospects and we'll still have Waters. We have two potential QBOTFs, we added youth to our defensive line, our linebackers are already young, and if we can pick up a good CB within the next year or two, we can have a future secondary of Surtain, Pollard, our new CB, and Ty Law at safety if possible. Larry Johnson might want to leave, but we can always franchise tag him. Tony G seems set to sign a contract extension that will ensure he retires a Chief. We are also developing young talent at WR, and if none of that pans out, we'll continue to do so. We might not be a playoff caliber team during the QB transition, but we won't completely collapse to become the laughing stock of the league.
Losing Roaf last year showed how bad we can be and how our team might collapse, but I think we learned a lot from it and will be prepared for the future.

MyChiefConcern
07-27-2006, 05:15 PM
Well, I wish I shared your optimism, noa.

NewChief
07-27-2006, 05:18 PM
Are you suggesting that our current crop of WR's are lazy?

I don't know about lazy, but I do think that Craphonso, specifically, overestimated how far talent gets you in the NFL and underestimated the amount of study and work that goes into playing WR in this offense. Common youngster mistake that I hope will be corrected next year. I think Dante is too short to be a legit WR. I think Samie has a lot of potential and will be awesome, and I'm not accusing him of laziness.



By the way, the reason Bo couldn't get in the game is because his hands were suspect. There were rumors that he had problems with his eyes, but I heard him on the radio flatly deny that he had any eye problems.


Yeah, I don't know. I just know that he felt that Saunders wasn't really giving him a fair shot last season. He kept talking about how he wanted production out of him, but he never put him in in situations where he had the opportunity to get any production.


Again, it sounds like you're suggesting that our current WR's don't know the offense.

I do think that WR dependability from the QB's perspective has been an issue on this team, yes. Whether it's a matter of knowing the offense or not, I don't know.


There you go with the hyperbole again. Nobody said anything that even resembles that.

That last wasn't directed at you in any way. It was just a joke about the amount of importance lots of people on the board are placing on the fact that Trent can now audible, something that I don't think is going to make as huge of a difference as anyone believes, and will likely go undetected by the average fan for the most part.

I think we probably agree on most things about this situation, though I think this WR corps is better with EK on it than without him.

noa
07-27-2006, 05:18 PM
Posts like this are right up there with the people who apparently can't read and are posting things like WHY WOULD EDDIE DO THIS RIGHT BEFORE CAMP or I BET HE WOULDN'T GIVE MONEY BACK IF HIS PRODUCTION DROPS, two things that are clearly covered in the article.

It bears repeating: there's not a person alive who wouldn't be upset if you went into work one day and found out that, on account of your good work, they're getting rid of a guy who makes more than you... except, gee, you won't be seeing any of that money. You've totally surpassed the expectations the company had when they hired you, and a lot more will be expected out of you now, but you're not going to see anything for it.

I guess anyone who wouldn't like that situation isn't being a "team guy". The team should take care of people who deserve it. Eddie Kenninson deserves it, and he deserves more than being jerked around by Carl all offseason.

And Eddie's agent is even offering to do an incentive based deal, to protect the team if Eddie's production drops off. They could just as easily be saying that Eddie deserves a raise for what he's already done the last few seasons as much as anything. And they'd be right! But they're willing to do something with the best interests of the team in mind, and people here are calling him selfish. Completely embarrassing.

I can't speak for everyone, but I'm pissed about this because if you read the last quote of the article, you're led to believe that this could have been resolved silently and amicably. The news about the Chiefs has been so positive lately, and it just sucks to have a completely unexpected contract dispute become public when it was seemingly unnecessary.

|Zach|
07-27-2006, 05:23 PM
I can't speak for everyone, but I'm pissed about this because if you read the last quote of the article, you're led to believe that this could have been resolved silently and amicably. The news about the Chiefs has been so positive lately, and it just sucks to have a completely unexpected contract dispute become public when it was seemingly unnecessary.
He is posturing. He has more leverage now than he did...if this isnt it public its easy for Carl to rebuff him...

Now? Not so much.

I think if this could have taken place without this happening it would. He has to know this sheds him in a negative manner.

noa
07-27-2006, 05:29 PM
He is posturing. He has more leverage now than he did...if this isnt it public its easy for Carl to rebuff him...

Now? Not so much.

I think if this could have taken place without this happening it would. He has to know this sheds him in a negative manner.

I agree, it was definitely a strategic maneuver on his part, and in the end, I'm sure he'll get his money and nothing too bad will result from this. He's playing his part in this business to get money, which I would do too, but I still think its natural for fans to react negatively to this type of story because we can't relate and because we just want to hear how the Chiefs are going to the Super Bowl this year.

Bob Dole
07-27-2006, 05:29 PM
So we've been reading for the past 4 seasons that there isn't a #1 WR on the roster, but now we're supposed to pay Kennison like one.

Makes perfect sense.

|Zach|
07-27-2006, 05:32 PM
I agree, it was definitely a strategic maneuver on his part, and in the end, I'm sure he'll get his money and nothing too bad will result from this. He's playing his part in this business to get money, which I would do too, but I still think its natural for fans to react negatively to this type of story because we can't relate and because we just want to hear how the Chiefs are going to the Super Bowl this year.
I agree...I dont have a problem with how some are reacting...I was just responding to the idea that this could have happened behind closed doors...which doesnt seem to be the case.

I personally think he won't be asking for more than they would be willing to give him and that this will blow over...

KChiefs1
07-27-2006, 05:38 PM
It might not be the prudent thing to do but I'd let Eddie walkout of camp.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 05:40 PM
No it doesn't make sense. Of course it doesn't.

It doesn't make sense to pay a 32 year old Ty Law decent money when you're not sure you have a decent pass rush either, but we did it. You have to avoid having gaping holes at a position. Eddie is more important to the WR corps than Ty Law is to the CB corps, because we already had some talent there... and Eddie knows that, that's his argument.

Ty Law=multiple time Pro Bowler, still considered one of the best at his position by many people.....

Eddie Kennison=Uh he's the number 1 on a team that doesn't have great WR talent.....no one think he's an upper echeleon player.

Comparing them is a bit dumb because they aren't on the same planet as far as what type of players they are. Like I said you don't pay old players unless they are superstar multiple time Pro Bowlers...Ty Law is that, Eddie Kennison isn't.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 05:45 PM
Posts like this are right up there with the people who apparently can't read and are posting things like WHY WOULD EDDIE DO THIS RIGHT BEFORE CAMP or I BET HE WOULDN'T GIVE MONEY BACK IF HIS PRODUCTION DROPS, two things that are clearly covered in the article.

It bears repeating: there's not a person alive who wouldn't be upset if you went into work one day and found out that, on account of your good work, they're getting rid of a guy who makes more than you... except, gee, you won't be seeing any of that money. You've totally surpassed the expectations the company had when they hired you, and a lot more will be expected out of you now, but you're not going to see anything for it.

I guess anyone who wouldn't like that situation isn't being a "team guy". The team should take care of people who deserve it. Eddie Kenninson deserves it, and he deserves more than being jerked around by Carl all offseason.

And Eddie's agent is even offering to do an incentive based deal, to protect the team if Eddie's production drops off. They could just as easily be saying that Eddie deserves a raise for what he's already done the last few seasons as much as anything. And they'd be right! But they're willing to do something with the best interests of the team in mind, and people here are calling him selfish. Completely embarrassing.

This is the guy...who got all butt hurt about Owens being talked about, the Ty Law contract is mentioned in the article. Then be springs the holdout card. He brings up recievers making more money than him but doesn't point out they are 7 years younger than him.....

To me it looks like a guy who thinks he's better in his own mind than he really is, look at how he reacted to the possibility if Owens being brought in here. I'm not saying he shouldn't try to get what he can I'm saying he's being completely stupid about it.

Eddie Kennison is coming off completely as "me,me.me". It's like Eddie doesn't get there isn't a market for WR's his age with the amount of money he seems to want. No one on the open market would pay him more than what the Chiefs are paying him right now.

Just looks to me like this guy thinks he's on par with the Owens and the Laws with the way he reacted to them being brought in or possibly being brought in.....

tk13
07-27-2006, 05:46 PM
Ty Law=multiple time Pro Bowler, still considered one of the best at his position by many people.....

Eddie Kennison=Uh he's the number 1 on a team that doesn't have great WR talent.....no one think he's an upper echeleon player.

Comparing them is a bit dumb because they aren't on the same planet as far as what type of players they are. Like I said you don't pay old players unless they are superstar multiple time Pro Bowlers...Ty Law is that, Eddie Kennison isn't.
I think Ty Law is the best. That doesn't change the argument. We can afford to lose him more than we can afford to lose Eddie Kennison. I don't think Eddie is asking for a 5 year, 30 mil extention. I could be wrong though, that's speculation on my part.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 05:48 PM
I think Ty Law is the best. That doesn't change the argument. We can afford to lose him more than we can afford to lose Eddie Kennison.

I don't know if I believe that.....Eddie Kennison isn't the catalyst of this offense. He isn't a WR other teams prepare for because he's the man out there. He gets open because he's seeing single coverage every play because defenses worry about the run and Tony Gonzalez. Decent WR's in the league can beat 1-1 coverage.

tk13
07-27-2006, 05:53 PM
I don't know if I believe that.....Eddie Kennison isn't the catalyst of this offense. He isn't a WR other teams prepare for because he's the man out there. He gets open because he's seeing single coverage every play because defenses worry about the run and Tony Gonzalez. Decent WR's in the league can beat 1-1 coverage.
I do. CB is the most overrated position in the league. When Law got hurt, the Pats didn't miss a beat, still got their ring. Just like WR's can benefit from one on one coverage.... CB's rely on getting a good pass rush. Exact same thing, neither position can do it on their own.

Really, I agree, WR's should be able to do that. But we don't have those WR's, which is why Eddie has some leverage. We don't have decent WR's. That's the whole idea... he wouldn't be able to pull this is other cities.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 05:54 PM
By the way if you are comfortable with Lenny Walls and Benny Sapp seeing alot of playing time, you're on a different boat than I am.

tk13
07-27-2006, 05:57 PM
By the way if you are comfortable with Lenny Walls and Benny Sapp seeing alot of playing time, you're on a different boat than I am.
I'm more comfortable with them than I am with Parker and Cro Thorpe being our two starting WR's, yes. Part of that is we have a head coach who gets the most out of his DB's though.

FringeNC
07-27-2006, 05:58 PM
I think Ty Law is the best. That doesn't change the argument. We can afford to lose him more than we can afford to lose Eddie Kennison.

I don't understand your argument. We could really ill-afford to lose Larry Johnson. Does that mean he'd be justified to hold-out and try to squeeze every last drop of surplus of value over salary out of the team?

Ty Law was a free-agent. We paid market for Ty Law. We paid market for Eddie Kennison. In fact, I remember us getting ripped for over-paying Kennison. Kennison would not get more than we are paying him on the open market. The market determines salary, not some subjective measure of intrinsic worth.

Kennison is not a difference-maker and the league knows it. He's a beneficiary of a great O-line, a great RB, and a very good QB. I say let Eddie go out and try to find a better offer, and if he can, we'll trade him for next to nothing. If not, he has to STFD and STFU.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:00 PM
I do. CB is the most overrated position in the league. When Law got hurt, the Pats didn't miss a beat, still got their ring. Just like WR's can benefit from one on one coverage.... CB's rely on getting a good pass rush. Exact same thing, neither position can do it on their own.

Really, I agree, WR's should be able to do that. But we don't have those WR's, which is why Eddie has some leverage. We don't have decent WR's. That's the whole idea... he wouldn't be able to pull this is other cities.

Do you know how many teams have good enough front 7's to mask corner play? There are very very few it takes an extremely highly talented front 7 to do that.

I also get extremely tired of hearing about how the Pats had a bad secondary when they won. They had 2 of the best safeties in the league and Samuel and Gay weren't playing like scrubs.

Some of the theories people use around here are sound in theory sometimes but they don't apply unless you have unusualy circumstances. You still need good corners, the only teams that have gotten by with it had circumstances most teams don't. Like people who scream "you need front 7 to mask the secondary", you need numerous pro bowlers/excellent players to dream of masking a bad secondary with a front 7. "Corners aren't that important", that is totally bull unless you have a top front 7 and good safeties tandem.

There is a reason corners in the NFL get paid and drafted high every single year. 1 of the teams with one of the best front 4's in the game in the Panthers. Took a corner in the first round then paid Ken Lucas alot of jack to sure up that position. If playing corner was as simple as the front 7 why is a good defensive coach like John Fox giving up the cash for a corner?

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:04 PM
I'm more comfortable with them than I am with Parker and Cro Thorpe being our two starting WR's, yes. Part of that is we have a head coach who gets the most out of his DB's though.

I'm more comfortable with young WR's who are generally going to be 3rd,4th and 5th options in our offense getting on the field than I am with a corner who can't cover getting picked on repeatedly. Didn't we see what happens with that the last few years? Teams would snap the ball and just find where McCleon was and toss it up.

tk13
07-27-2006, 06:07 PM
Do you know how many teams have good enough front 7's to mask corner play? There are very very few it takes an extremely highly talented front 7 to do that.


And those are the teams that win championships.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:11 PM
And those are the teams that win championships.

Explain to me why Carolina spent major cash on Ken Lucas and drafted Chris Gamble if corner is overrated. That team has the front 7 to supposedly mask secondary play while having a defensive coach. Obviously there is a reason a team like Carolina values corners.

I do however like how you basically avoided a huge part of my post to get in your little "and those are the teams that win championships" line, how very cliche of you.

Gravedigger
07-27-2006, 06:12 PM
LOL this is hilarious. Nice knowing ya eddie. Don't let the door hit yer arse on the way out.

BigChiefFan
07-27-2006, 06:20 PM
Carl Peterson was just on the air and he basically said he spoke with Eddie Kennison regarding this matter and that Eddie was under contract. He said ALOT of people want raises and may be unhappy with their contracts. He joked even Herman may be displeased. He then went back and stated that it cost holdouts $14,000 a dollar a day and that Eddie was at camp because he definitely knows about this. Carl indicated Eddie didn't have any leverage against the Chiefs because if any player holdouts they will be fined and after so many days their contracts can be terminated.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:22 PM
Kennison has no leverage to begin with because he can't even get as much on the open market as he makes right now.

tk13
07-27-2006, 06:41 PM
I don't think you can get by with total slop at corners. Don't get me wrong. My opinion on this was always the same. I was for signing Andre Dyson and especially Kelly Herndon last offseason. You can't just throw a warm body there... they have to be competent.... just like you can't have a warm body at WR. But generally speaking, corner play is greatly dictated by how well the front four plays. It can be neutered. See how the Colts, Bears, Steelers, Seahawks, and on and on have good defenses without expensive corner play.

Meanwhile, teams like the Chiefs, (especially the) Vikings, and Ravens have spent huge money on DB's, and didn't succeed. Why? Same reason everybody makes fun of Champ Bailey for getting burned, when there's no pressure, nobody in today's NFL can cover 1-on-1.

You're sitting here making a circular argument. You're telling me any decent WR should be able to win a 1-on-1 in today's NFL, then you're telling me corner is some super important big money position even though every one of them is vulnerable without help. Yeaaah.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:44 PM
WR's on THIS TEAM should be able to beat 1-1. Trent Green gets as much time if not more than any other QB in the league to pass. He holds the ball forever, couple that with a dominant run game and a TE that has to be accounted for WR's on this team should be able to get open against 1-1 coverage which they always face.

tk13
07-27-2006, 06:49 PM
WR's on THIS TEAM should be able to beat 1-1. Trent Green gets as much time if not more than any other QB in the league to pass. He holds the ball forever, couple that with a dominant run game and a TE that has to be accounted for WR's on this team should be able to get open against 1-1 coverage which they always face.
They should.... but do they?

Sure-Oz
07-27-2006, 06:52 PM
Kennison say's he'll honor his contract but hopes to be released and says he'll be in camp. I would rather have something get done and not overpay the guy, cause he sure as hell won't be happy during the season if he isn't paid and def. drops enough balls and fumbles as it is. He is our #1 WR but def. alot of teams #2.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:55 PM
They should.... but do they?

Alright man you win........Eddie Kennison is more important than Ty f'n Law. :rolleyes:

tk13
07-27-2006, 06:56 PM
Alright man you win........Eddie Kennison is more important than Ty f'n Law. :rolleyes:
Thank you, thank you. [/waves to audience]

Mecca
07-27-2006, 06:58 PM
I do hope you know that if you told most people Eddie Kennison was more important than Ty Law they'd probably laugh you out of the room.

Sure-Oz
07-27-2006, 06:59 PM
Alright man you win........Eddie Kennison is more important than Ty f'n Law. :rolleyes:
Kennison is the only proven WR we have that has put up consistent #'s, the rest are pretty raw and unproven to say the least. Also Dante is the only other one and he is more valuable as a #3 at best and as our kr/pr. I think Law is very important to the team as well but as for the passing offense, it will take a huge dent without kennison. We have almost nothing behind him. Atleast on D we have Surtain on the other side, but anyway this is a dumb argument, all i know is Kennison is pretty important to our offense, cause we have ? marks behind him, that could either fill in nicely or bust big time and our offense will be in trouble if we can't pass.

Bwana
07-27-2006, 07:02 PM
Kennison say's he'll honor his contract but hopes to be released and says he'll be in camp.

Well, isn't that big of him. :shake:

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:02 PM
We had Surtain last year and we were 29th in pass D because all teams did was pick on the other side of the field......

I think where I differ is I think Eddie Kennison is more of a product of this offense than the offense is a product of Kennison. I think there are a ton of guys that if put in the position he's in would not only do as well but would do alot better.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:05 PM
And anyway my arguement to this which has been kiltered off with the Ty Law stuff is simple.

A 33 year old WR that is not an elite, Pro Bowl caliber player is not worthy of a pay raise simple as that.

BigRock
07-27-2006, 07:05 PM
This is the guy...who got all butt hurt about Owens being talked about
So? He said "hey, we DO have receivers on the team, you know". I liked it, it showed he had some fire under him. How does that make him selfish or not a "team guy"? And knowing what we do now, that was probably directed more at Carl than anything.

the Ty Law contract is mentioned in the article.
So? He thought the team should have taken care of their own guys first, the guys who have been here getting things done. He didn't say he wants more money than Ty Law. He didn't say that Law doesn't deserve his money. He's frustrated that he's been trying to get something done with Carl all offseason, and Carl's just sitting on his thumbs about it.

He brings up recievers making more money than him but doesn't point out they are 7 years younger than him.....
I guess he was too busy talking about how he puts up better numbers than they do. And they also talked about Terry Glenn, who just got a nice extension despite being 32-33. Don't act like he's basing everything on what 25 year olds are making.

To me it looks like a guy who thinks he's better in his own mind than he really is
Right, because of how he said he wants to be paid like Randy Moss or Chad Johnson or TO are. Wait, no, he didn't say that at all. The Chiefs paid Eddie Kennison as a #2 WR behind Johnnie Morton. Are you saying that Eddie is crazy if he thinks he's better than that? Because he certainly is better than that.

Eddie Kennison is coming off completely as "me,me.me".
By totally outperforming his contract for 2 years, waiting in vain for the team to take care of him, and still being willing to do a deal that protects the team in case his production starts dropping? Oh man, what a selfish a-hole. He's like another TO, isn't he?

It's like Eddie doesn't get there isn't a market for WR's his age with the amount of money he seems to want.

Of course he gets it. He knows he's not going to command big money on the open market, that's why he hopes that his team, the team he's been producing for year in and year out, will take care of him. He wants the team to recognize that he's been performing well beyond what they expected when they signed him. The fact that he won't get a big contract anywhere else is probably the big reason he's upset that the team isn't doing right by him. He could feel like they're taking advantage of the fact that he won't get a big deal anywhere else by not paying him what he's earned.

But if they can't show him that respect, then he's not going to want to play here anymore. And he'll probably catch on with San Diego or Oakland and start sticking it to us the way he sticks it to Denver every year.

tk13
07-27-2006, 07:10 PM
I do hope you know that if you told most people Eddie Kennison was more important than Ty Law they'd probably laugh you out of the room.
I could give a crap what other people think. You obviously haven't been paying attention...haha.

Eddie Kennison is not a better football player than Ty Law. That was never my argument, and I said as much. I don't believe that for a second. Ty Law is one of my favorite football players, he's a superstar. Losing Eddie Kennison would be more harmful to this team's success though, yes. I think the evidence backs me up.

Even last year. Surtain got hurt a couple times. And we still played good defense and won. Our offense though has suffered with poor WR play. It did in 2001, and it did at the beginning of 2004. Maybe this year will be different, that's always possible. I mean having two all-pro corners is great. That can't hurt. But that means our front four has to play well... or Gunther has to outcoach the opponent every week with his blitz packages. That's what Larry Coyer tries to do in Denver, and he's very good at it. It can be done. Just that when he doesn't... well you've seen their playoff meltdowns. I think I come across probably as too negative when I say that, but I don't mean to, just that corners can be neutralized easier than any position on the field probably.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:10 PM
Eddie Kennison is worth what his market value says he's worth and you know what that ain't much. I don't care what he wants to think or feels the team is doing him wrong. Overpaying 33 year olds that aren't big time players isn't smart I'm sure Carl knows this.

By the way the comment about the Chiefs taking care of their own players is laughable. This team has taken care of their in house guys to a fault over the last 5 years. That was probably alot of Vermiel but I'm happy that attitude appears to be gone. Some guys who are here should be taken care of but Eddie Kennison isn't on the top of that list nor should he be.

Sure-Oz
07-27-2006, 07:15 PM
Eddie Kennison is worth what his market value says he's worth and you know what that ain't much. I don't care what he wants to think or feels the team is doing him wrong. Overpaying 33 year olds that aren't big time players isn't smart I'm sure Carl knows this.

By the way the comment about the Chiefs taking care of their own players is laughable. This team has taken care of their in house guys to a fault over the last 5 years. That was probably alot of Vermiel but I'm happy that attitude appears to be gone. Some guys who are here should be taken care of but Eddie Kennison isn't on the top of that list nor should he be.
I think it's a joke that Kennison makes 2.1 mill to Erick Hicks 4.4 mill, yeah that's a tad f'ed up, i'd def. say he was taken care of...

Chiefs need kennison more than he needs them. I don't see Carl ponying up dough for him either, there probably isn't much room left anyway. I just don't like the chances of Thorpe and Parker as our starting WR's. That would def. put alot of pressure on Gonzo to get open more.

HC_Chief
07-27-2006, 07:15 PM
I can't believe all the "don't let the doorknob hit you on your ass as you leave!" statements I'm reading here!!

EK is one of EIGHT receivers to have surpassed 1000yds in the past two seasons. Eight. He is, without a doubt, the best receiver on this football team. After EK we have NOBODY. This team is already thin at that spot and people actually think we'd be better off showing EK the door?

Thank God you fools don't run this franchise!

CP should give him $1mil bonus for the btb 1000yd seasons and add another $1mil if he eclipses 1000yds <i>this</i> season. Or simply offer a $2mil if he can hit the 1000yd mark again, + show him some money (500k cash) upfront to get him focused on football rather than this contract nonsense.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:16 PM
Eddie Kennison probably wouldn't get on the open market what he's making right now.....don't think he doesn't know that either. He can posture and try to force the Chiefs hand but he knows there isn't a market to pay WR's his age that have never been to Pro Bowls or been considered elite players.

BigRock
07-27-2006, 07:17 PM
Overpaying 33 year olds that aren't big time players isn't smart I'm sure Carl knows this.
Underpaying the only dependable WR you have on your team to the point that he's willing to walk over it is an even dumber move. Hopefully Carl understands this better than you do.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:20 PM
I can't believe all the "don't let the doorknob hit you on your ass as you leave!" statements I'm reading here!!

EK is one of EIGHT receivers to have surpassed 1000yds in the past two seasons. Eight. He is, without a doubt, the best receiver on this football team. After EK we have NOBODY. This team is already thin at that spot and people actually think we'd be better off showing EK the door?

Thank God you fools don't run this franchise!

CP should give him $1mil bonus for the btb 1000yd seasons and add another $1mil if he eclipses 1000yds <i>this</i> season. Or simply offer a $2mil if he can hit the 1000yd mark again, + show him some money (500k cash) upfront to get him focused on football rather than this contract nonsense.

Let's look at the other view of this.......2 of the better run franchises in our conference. Pats and Steelers, they don't cave into demands by veterans entering the downsides of their career........I seem to recall the Pats telling this guy Lawyer Milloy to get to steppin when he pulled something like this.

Mcgee24
07-27-2006, 07:20 PM
Even last year. Surtain got hurt a couple times. And we still played good defense and won. Our offense though has suffered with poor WR play. It did in 2001, and it did at the beginning of 2004.

Bills fan here just wondering if do you watch the same chiefs everyone else does?

just for some further elaboration I'm just curious to know when you think you played "good defense" I sure as hell haven't seen it out of your team in a long time, now granted I don't watch many KC games but finishing 25th in yards allowed and 16th in points allowed doesnt seem like playing "good defense".....

tk13
07-27-2006, 07:23 PM
Personally, I'm not sure there isn't somebody out there that wouldn't give him a little more than he already makes. 2 mil a year is a bargin for a 1000 yard receiver who can fly. His hands are the problem. He is faster than some of these younger guys that make more money though.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:26 PM
Alright guys lets pay Eddie Kennison what he wants. Then when he retires in 2 years to go along with the 10 other guys that probably will plus the cuts we need to make. It'll be fun watching our team win 2 games with the 25 million dollars of dead cap money.

tk13
07-27-2006, 07:27 PM
now granted I don't watch many KC games .....

That could be your problem. That proves my point though. You couldn't even tell which games Surtain got hurt. He got hurt in the Jets game and the second Raiders game... and we won both.

tk13
07-27-2006, 07:29 PM
Let's look at the other view of this.......2 of the better run franchises in our conference. Pats and Steelers, they don't cave into demands by veterans entering the downsides of their career........I seem to recall the Pats telling this guy Lawyer Milloy to get to steppin when he pulled something like this.
I agree. And they also don't cave in and pay big money to CB's. I win again.

chubychecker
07-27-2006, 07:33 PM
Alright man you win........Eddie Kennison is more important than Ty f'n Law. :rolleyes:
Yep, to this team he is. Truth is with the new rules cb is the most overrated position on the field. I feel more comfortable with our young cb's than our young wideouts, albeit by a slim margin.

And we pay him half of what we paid ty and he would be happy.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:34 PM
I agree. And they also don't cave in and pay big money to CB's. I win again.

What are you winning? Teams that don't invest in corners invest heavily in Dlineman, LB's and Safeties. And the Chiefs haven't done any of those things to the extent to be able to ignore corner. So what exactly is it you're winning here?

Count Alex's Losses
07-27-2006, 07:35 PM
I bet Carl is royally pissed about this. He's done a great job this year, gets everyone to camp on-time, signs God's gift to defensive football...and now Kennison f*cks him in the ass.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:37 PM
Yep, to this team he is. Truth is with the new rules cb is the most overrated position on the field. I feel more comfortable with our young cb's than our young wideouts, albeit by a slim margin.

And we pay him half of what we paid ty and he would be happy.

I'd just like to say I find alot of the views here very odd. So let me get this right....Top 5 offense, bottom 5 defense. Yet everyone posting here feels MORE comfortable with the young players at a defensive position that we were ranked 29th in than with the young WR's.

I'd like to know how that makes any sense what-so-ever.

chubychecker
07-27-2006, 07:46 PM
I'd just like to say I find alot of the views here very odd. So let me get this right....Top 5 offense, bottom 5 defense. Yet everyone posting here feels MORE comfortable with the young players at a defensive position that we were ranked 29th in than with the young WR's.

I'd like to know how that makes any sense what-so-ever.

Although I am very happy about the law signing. If i'm not mistaken, he did lead the league, or come damn close to it, in pass interferance penalties. I believe that the drop off from Ty, a starting cb, to his backup, is less drastic than the drop from Eddie, our #1 receiver to his backup. I hope I'm wrong and we have some talented young receivers in the wings, but we sure as hell haven't seen that.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:49 PM
Although I am very happy about the law signing. If i'm not mistaken, he did lead the league, or come damn close to it, in pass interferance penalties. I believe that the drop off from Ty, a starting cb, to his backup, is less drastic than the drop from Eddie, our #1 receiver to his backup. I hope I'm wrong and we have some talented young receivers in the wings, but we sure as hell haven't seen that.

Tell me what you've seen in any of those backup/young corners that makes you think they're any good. Because personally I haven't seen jackshit to make me think they have any semblence of being decent let alone good.

chubychecker
07-27-2006, 07:53 PM
Tell me what you've seen in any of those backup/young corners that makes you think they're any good. Because personally I haven't seen jackshit to make me think they have any semblence of being decent let alone good.

what have you seen out of our backup wr's???
At least our backup cb's have seen some time on the field and again I believe the secret to pass defense is pass rush plain and simple. I don't care if we had both ty and patrick in their prime, with the rule change if the front seven can't get pressure on the qb it's either pass interferance or a completion.

Mecca
07-27-2006, 07:59 PM
what have you seen out of our backup wr's???
At least our backup cb's have seen some time on the field and again I believe the secret to pass defense is pass rush plain and simple. I don't care if we had both ty and patrick in their prime, with the rule change if the front seven can't get pressure on the qb it's either pass interferance or a completion.

Just for the record, there wasn't a "rule change" that rule has been on the books since the 80's they just enforce it more than they did before.

I like this idea that the end all be all of defense is pass rush. Does it help to have a good pass rush? Yea it helps, but it isn't the end all be all of defense.

I'll tell you this I'm a hell of alot more confident in Samie Parker and Cro Thorpe than I am in say Benny Sapp and one of the many nameless corners we have. And for people who love Lenny Walls you know what Lenny Walls is? He's ass as a CB, he's a FS trying to be a corner......hrm where have we seen that before?

philfree
07-27-2006, 08:01 PM
I don't view this as an either or proposition. We need Law and we need Kennison if we are going to win it all. IMO Eddie has earned a little more money but from the sound of it Carl doesn't seem like he's gonna cough it up though so I hope Eddie can reconcile with himself and play like he's played the last two seasons.


PhilFree:arrrow:

noa
07-27-2006, 08:11 PM
I think Carl should just bite the bullet and pay him what the 30th ranked WR in the league earns, if EK is willing to accept that. Of course, EK has put up better numbers in the last two years than a lot of other people, but he's not exactly in a position to ask for elite receiver money.

chubychecker
07-27-2006, 08:21 PM
I think Carl should just bite the bullet and pay him what the 30th ranked WR in the league earns, if EK is willing to accept that. Of course, EK has put up better numbers in the last two years than a lot of other people, but he's not exactly in a position to ask for elite receiver money.

According to usa today the 30th highest paid wr last year was David Patten with the redskins he made $ 2,920,170 compared to $ 1,645,000 for Eddie who was the 51st highest paid.

http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/playersbyposition.aspx?pos=4&order=Salary+desc

noa
07-27-2006, 08:24 PM
According to usa today the 30th highest paid wr last year was David Patten with the redskins he made $ 2,920,170 compared to $ 1,645,000 for Eddie who was the 51st highest paid.

http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/playersbyposition.aspx?pos=4&order=Salary+desc


If its do-able for us, I'd say that's fair. EK is certainly more valuable than David Patten (what were the Skins thinking?).

Halfcan
07-27-2006, 08:49 PM
EK signed a contract and has to live up to that regaurdless if he is happy about it.

stevieray
07-27-2006, 09:15 PM
I can't believe all the "don't let the doorknob hit you on your ass as you leave!" statements I'm reading here!!

EK is one of EIGHT receivers to have surpassed 1000yds in the past two seasons. Eight. He is, without a doubt, the best receiver on this football team. After EK we have NOBODY. This team is already thin at that spot and people actually think we'd be better off showing EK the door?

Thank God you fools don't run this franchise!

CP should give him $1mil bonus for the btb 1000yd seasons and add another $1mil if he eclipses 1000yds <i>this</i> season. Or simply offer a $2mil if he can hit the 1000yd mark again, + show him some money (500k cash) upfront to get him focused on football rather than this contract nonsense.

Ok, you convinced me.

Jim Jones
07-27-2006, 09:21 PM
I agree that CB's are overrated in today's NFL. Ultimately, it's about the passrush. We already have Patrick Surtain, really, what difference is Ty Law going to make if we still can't get any pass rush? If we didn't sign Ty Law this year, would our defense really be all that much worse? Law is gonna get a few picks, but ultimately he's not gonna be pressuring the QB. As someone said earlier, the Pats proved that if you have a passrush, you can win with f'in Randall Gay in the backfield.

Kennison is our best receiver, and our only receiver who has proven to be worth a crap in the NFL. Parker couldn't catch a cold, and Thorpe has proven nothing. This may be our last chance for a ring and frankly I don't want to waste it on if's and's and buts.

HolmeZz
07-27-2006, 09:26 PM
I'm not completely sure what Eddie's agent is thinking. He's not going to get a contract like he currently has if we cut him this close to the season.

Valiant
07-27-2006, 09:32 PM
Eddie Kennison a NUMBER 3 receiver? Please.

Oh man. I disagree with you there. Eddie Kennison would be a #2 on most teams, and maybe a #1 on some teams. I don't think it is fair to call the guy a #3 receiver on a lot teams. Do you know what his statistics were last year? He caught 68 balls, for 1,100 yards, and 5 touchdowns. Is that a #3 receiver to you?

If anything, he does deserve a raise. I agree with Philfree. He has the stats to back it up. He is the only Chiefs WR since Carlos Carson to produce back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons. And he has gotten better with age. I don't blame Kennison. He has a point. Frankly, Im upset at the market because guys like David Givens shouldn't be getting paid what they're getting. That does create a problem, and sets a standard for the other guys. Eddie is just an example of what Im talking about. And I think Kennison is better than David Givens.


But Eddie did not sign a new contract this year, he signed last year... He wants to be paid as a top WR...

The guy does not get seperation, he is not a sure thing like other slower WR when it comes big catches.. He is not the focal point of a defense... Defenses try and stop our running game and then our TE first... Hell EK is usually the 3rd look on our O, and will be less IF Parker comes into his own this year...

EK gets so many yards per catch to get a 1000 because of those other players not because of his skill.. If TG did not demand a double team and get the better CB half the time do you think EK would even get 800 yards??

If the guy would be happy with a minimal raise great, but if wants to be paid 5-6 million a year he needs to be let go...

Der Flöprer
07-27-2006, 09:33 PM
Wow, a 500 post thread. Ty Law never got this kind of attention on one thread. PAY THE MAN CARL!!!! :cuss: