PDA

View Full Version : KC Interested In Former Miami Running Back


Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 12:06 PM
http://chiefs.scout.com/2/623220.html

As free agency hits its first day the Chiefs have already shown interest in former Minnesota Vikings linebacker Napoleon Harris. Now they’re moving to the offensive side of the ball, and looking at a former Miami Dolphins running back.

Warpaint Illustrated has learned the Chiefs are hoping to bring in former Buffalo Bills and Dolphins backup running back Sammy Morris.

Morris has been a perennial backup, but has also been a phenomenal special teams player.

A spot starter in Miami, Morris’ downhill, bruising running style appeals to the Chiefs, who might be looking for a bigger back to serve behind Larry Johnson.

That could spell doom for Michael Bennett, who struggled a year ago to stay on the field. He came to training camp injured and never played at 100 percent last season. When he was on the field, he was productive, but Herm Edwards wants to develop a more consistent running game. He wants a back that can gain tough, short yards.

The Chiefs also need to improve their special teams obviously, and that’s where Morris’ added value really helps Kansas City.

In his seven-year career he’s totaled 65 special teams tackles. It’s not known when he might visit Kansas City, but he’s on the radar as the Chiefs start looking at free agents.

Stay tuned to Warpaint Illustrated for more news regarding the Chiefs and free agency.

FringeNC
03-02-2007, 12:09 PM
Why not Bam Morris, too? He seems like the type of back that would fit into the new offense.

Edit:

Reading stuff like "<i>When he was on the field, he was productive, but Herm Edwards wants to develop a more consistent running game. He wants a back that can gain tough, short yards"</i> is so depressing. Are we going to do anything but run up the middle. Wiegman better have an ample supply of vaseline if he wants to make it through the season.

el borracho
03-02-2007, 12:10 PM
Morris can have Dee Brown's spot but I'll be pissed if we cut Bennet before the draft. Anyway, I thought we were high on Derrick Ross? :shrug:

Mile High Mania
03-02-2007, 12:10 PM
Well, he should be a sweet fit under the cap... and for good reason.

Wile_E_Coyote
03-02-2007, 12:10 PM
Chris Chambers is not living up to expectations, go for that Fin

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:11 PM
I wonder if Nick Athan will have any "dreams" that he'd like to report on this scenario?

Tuckdaddy
03-02-2007, 12:11 PM
If we get rid of Bennet for Morris then Herm is stupid.

Woodrow Call
03-02-2007, 12:14 PM
Great use of a 4th rd pick Carl if they cut Bennett. Other than that I always kind of liked Sammy for some reason. Upgrade over Brown on special teams and 3rd RB that for sure.

Since Bennett is so fragile a quality 3rd RB is a need.

Chiefnj
03-02-2007, 12:19 PM
It would be a good pickup to improve STs. I wouldn't dump Bennet yet though.

bringbackmarty
03-02-2007, 12:24 PM
I think it means we are sending Detroit.....

l.j. for their 2007 first, and third,

2008 second,

and Rogers.

Priest is coming back,

He has put on 60 lbs of NACHO MEAt on his legs, shoulders, and trunk. He has completely rebuilt his body from the ground up, has a new TD celebration that involves two fingers a tongue, a backflip and a hipthrust all while crossing the goaline. He has completely changed his running style, but still has his speed. Plus @ 265 lbs he can play fullback, TE, and tackle if need be. He will also be playing for the Vet. Minimum, and donating it all to charity. At least thats what I heard on the internet.....

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:26 PM
It would be a good pickup to improve STs. I wouldn't dump Bennet yet though.


Me neither. I would really look at moving LJ and the #23 pick to Cleveland on draft day if CJ is still on the board. CJ and Gonzo plus maybe another WR like Rice or Meacham in the early 2nd round (trade with Tampa for Allen) along with Bennett out of the backfield would spice up the offense for years to come. Add Croyle - or Brohm from Louisville next draft, and a few young O-linemen in the next couple of drafts, and I would be a happy camper.

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 12:28 PM
Jesus Christ. You really think trading LJ and Allen for two WIDE RECEIVERS is a good idea? Good lord.

dirk digler
03-02-2007, 12:29 PM
Jesus Christ. You really think trading LJ and Allen for two WIDE RECEIVERS is a good idea? Good lord.

LMAO

bringbackmarty
03-02-2007, 12:30 PM
yeah we could be just like the lions and get our asses whipped every thanksgiving, and every other game too.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:30 PM
Jesus Christ. You really think trading LJ and Allen for two WIDE RECEIVERS is a good idea? Good lord.

No doubt...it appears as if Matt Millen has a handle on Chiefsplanet. LOL.

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:33 PM
Jesus Christ. You really think trading LJ and Allen for two WIDE RECEIVERS is a good idea? Good lord.


Yeah I do. I don't think we are going anywhere this year. I am in the blow up the roster and rebuild the team crowd. And if 2 WR's are the best two players available when we pick, I would be all for it. IMO, we need about 2 to 3 years of drafting to rebuild this thing the right way.

I've been through the 70's and 80's with this team. I am ready for the major overhaul.

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:35 PM
yeah we could be just like the lions and get our asses whipped every thanksgiving, and every other game too.


Either that or the Cardianls, who now have Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Leinart to build around in the next few years.

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 12:36 PM
Yeah I do. I don't think we are going anywhere this year. I am in the blow up the roster and rebuild the team crowd. And if 2 WR's are the best two players available when we pick, I would be all for it. IMO, we need about 2 to 3 years of drafting to rebuild this thing the right way.

I've been through the 70's and 80's with this team. I am ready for the major overhaul.

Yeah, but getting two wide receivers for our arguably our two top playmakers isn't the way to go about it.

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 12:36 PM
Either that or the Cardianls, who now have Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Leinart to build around in the next few years.

AND NOTHING ELSE.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:37 PM
Either that or the Cardianls, who now have Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Leinart to build around in the next few years.

I would really hope that you don't want your franchise to emulate the Arizona Cardinals. Lowering the bar, are we?

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 12:37 PM
I would really hope that you don't want your franchise to emulate the Arizona Cardinals. Lowering the bar, are we?

Well, it's not like we went after Jake Plummer or anything. :D

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:39 PM
Well, it's not like we went after Jake Plummer or anything. :D

The Denver Broncos are the best thing that ever happened to Jake Plummer, wouldn't you agree?

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:42 PM
Yeah, but getting two wide receivers for our arguably our two top playmakers isn't the way to go about it.

I'm in the rebuild the team gang. These two want out, let them walk. Build around DJ, Hali, and Page on the defense and starto over on the offense. Indy went with Harrison, Manning and added Wayne before they built the line. Might not be a bad plan to follow.

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:44 PM
I would really hope that you don't want your franchise to emulate the Arizona Cardinals. Lowering the bar, are we?

I'd say we pretty much are the Cardinals. And I would love to have Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Leinart as the cornerstones to build around the next few years.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:45 PM
I'm in the rebuild the team gang. These two want out, let them walk. Build around DJ, Hali, and Page on the defense and starto over on the offense. Indy went with Harrison, Manning and added Wayne before they built the line. Might not be a bad plan to follow.

Indy has had the whole package on offense for quite some time. Their o-line has always been solid, in both pass protection and the running game.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:46 PM
I'd say we pretty much are the Cardinals. And I would love to have Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Leinart as the cornerstones to build around the next few years.

Any coach in the NFL would tell you that it always starts on the lines. The skill talent is great to have, but if you can't establish a legitimate running game to go along with protecting the passer, those skill players aren't worth crap.

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:51 PM
Indy has had the whole package on offense for quite some time. Their o-line has always been solid, in both pass protection and the running game.

Go here...


http://www.nfl.com/teams/depthcharts/IND



Most all of the Colts O-line was added after the skill players.

Coogs
03-02-2007, 12:52 PM
Any coach in the NFL would tell you that it always starts on the lines. The skill talent is great to have, but if you can't establish a legitimate running game to go along with protecting the passer, those skill players aren't worth crap.

And I am OK with 2 or 3 years of 4-12 football to get this thing done right for a change.

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 12:53 PM
And I am OK with 2 or 3 years of 4-12 football to get this thing done right for a change.

Which is absolutely not necessary....

Chiefnj
03-02-2007, 12:56 PM
Which is absolutely not necessary....

In the case of the Chiefs it probably is necessary. If it takes a few really bad seasons for the new owner to dump Carl and Herm, I'm all for it.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 12:56 PM
Go here...


http://www.nfl.com/teams/depthcharts/IND



Most all of the Colts O-line was added after the skill players.

We're talking about a period of years...not just one year. The Colts have been on of the top offenses in the league since the late 90's. I believe Edgerrin James led the league in rushing a couple of years during that time span.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 01:01 PM
In the case of the Chiefs it probably is necessary. If it takes a few really bad seasons for the new owner to dump Carl and Herm, I'm all for it.

I would actually kind of agree with this. It seems like the Chiefs are a victim of imbalance between offense and defense for the last 10 years or so. During the latter Schottenheimer years, the defense was really good but the offense sucked. Then Vermiel comes in and the offense is really good and the defense sucks. By the time they get around to fixing the D that offense has aged considerably and needs to be overhauled...which has left the Chiefs a very small window of opportunity to win which is closing rapidly. How do you reverse the trend? Sometimes starting over is the only way to go. If I were a Chiefs fan I'd be a lot more comfortable if it were a different GM doing the building process, though.

Chief Chief
03-02-2007, 01:03 PM
Whew! My initial reaction to the thread title was "Holy crap! Not Ricky Williams!"!

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 01:04 PM
Whew! My initial reaction to the thread title was "Holy crap! Not Ricky Williams!"!

I was hopin' for at least one bass...

Coogs
03-02-2007, 01:32 PM
Which is absolutely not necessary....

IMO, it is. We have rode the old "we are a couple of players away thing" until we are now an old football team. We need to blow it up, and go the way of the 49ers three or 4 years ago. Couple of 3 bad seasons, and now they have what appears to be a bright future. I'm all for that method.

Count Zarth
03-02-2007, 01:35 PM
IMO, it is.

In the opinion of most NFL general managers, it's not. The only reason for going 4-12 is if you get saddled with tons of lousy draft picks and bad coaches. The Chiefs have enough talent that they can make the transition from old to young smoothly.

Bowser
03-02-2007, 01:37 PM
Why? I'd take Blaylock over this turd.

Coogs
03-02-2007, 01:42 PM
The Chiefs have enough talent that they can make the transition from old to young smoothly.


And there is where we will have to agree to disagree. Right now I only see 3 to 4 on defense. Allen (who wants to leave), Hali, DJ, and possible Page.

On offense LJ (who is a cancer possibly) and then what. And I am putting Gonzo on the talent list, but decending instead oof ascending list.

htismaqe
03-02-2007, 01:48 PM
And there is where we will have to agree to disagree. Right now I only see 3 to 4 on defense. Allen (who wants to leave), Hali, DJ, and possible Page.

On offense LJ (who is a cancer possibly) and then what. And I am putting Gonzo on the talent list, but decending instead oof ascending list.

Allen, Hali, DJ, and Page are all there right now. Pollard has talent as well, but he needs to develop.

Wilkerson and Fox are good backups.

There's some talent there.

Steve Sewell
03-02-2007, 01:51 PM
In the opinion of most NFL general managers, it's not. The only reason for going 4-12 is if you get saddled with tons of lousy draft picks and bad coaches. The Chiefs have enough talent that they can make the transition from old to young smoothly.

So most would recommend that the Chiefs rebuild then? I kid, I kid!

CosmicPal
03-02-2007, 01:53 PM
You mean Preist Holmes is retiring?

Coogs
03-02-2007, 01:57 PM
Allen, Hali, DJ, and Page are all there right now. Pollard has talent as well, but he needs to develop.

Wilkerson and Fox are good backups.

There's some talent there.

All Gun needs is 5 or 6 more pro bowl players to add to them, and we are set! ;)

htismaqe
03-02-2007, 02:18 PM
All Gun needs is 5 or 6 more pro bowl players to add to them, and we are set! ;)

At this point, Gun is DC in name only...

boogblaster
03-02-2007, 02:41 PM
I like the two bigback punch..We can't trade away LJ he's the powerback of the NFL..What good would it do to trade for two WRs with no one to throw to them...

Logical
03-02-2007, 02:50 PM
Yeah, but getting two wide receivers for our arguably our two top playmakers isn't the way to go about it.


Well one is a cancer and it appears the other cannot rid himself of his alcohol problems. In that light it is more understandable, but I do agree two WRs is not the formula.

Halfcan
03-02-2007, 03:00 PM
Let the SCRUB parade begin-lol,

Coogs
03-03-2007, 06:56 AM
Well one is a cancer and it appears the other cannot rid himself of his alcohol problems. In that light it is more understandable, but I do agree two WRs is not the formula.

I didn't say 2 wide receivers. I said take CJ. And then I said take the best player available with the rest of the picks. And I threw in, if that next best available player happens to be a WR, so be it, then draft another WR as well.