PDA

View Full Version : Anybody hear Peter King today on Fox Radio talking about the Chiefs?


Ralphy Boy
09-21-2004, 03:36 PM
Said he thought that after last weekends game, DV should tell Carl to make a deal for Keenan giving up a #3. Went on to say that it's obvious that nothing is going to happen with Keenan in Tampa and it would be the best thing for both ball clubs.

Also said that he still thought this was a playoff team, just very thin because of injury right now. He talked about the fact that we could have grabbed Keary Colbert and instead of him helping Carolina beat us, it could have been the other way around. Said that we didn't because we had Bo and him going down was huge because in his opinion he wouldn't have been suprised to see him catch 70 to 80 balls this season.

Bowser
09-21-2004, 03:40 PM
The loss of Boe WAS huge. Not just for him as a reciever, but his special teams play,as well. Our coverage units have been awful.

And, what the hell? Go after McCardell. At this point, what could it possibly hurt. Give Tampa the 5th and 6th we got from Green Bay for R-Kal.

Demonpenz
09-21-2004, 03:40 PM
too little too late, your going to bring him in and run simple routes because he doesn't know the system, he would be limited at best. That said i wouldn't mind them trying to do something, anything!

tk13
09-21-2004, 03:42 PM
We aren't going to have a #3 if Welbourn plays the whole season... which is why I'm not real high on the deal. We'd probably have to give up a #2... and I'd hate to do that for a guy who probably won't be up to speed until after the bye week, and by then it might be too late, and we'd been better off keeping the draft pick....

ChiTown
09-21-2004, 03:44 PM
Said that we didn't because we had Bo and him going down was huge because in his opinion he wouldn't have been suprised to see him catch 70 to 80 balls this season.

NFW would Bo have caught 70-80 passes. Not a chance. How he derives at that has got to be the largest stretch of all time. Hell, Tony and Priest are #1 & 2 and they are in that range. 40, maybe (with all the other injuries) 50 catches, but no more than that.

J Diddy
09-21-2004, 03:44 PM
The loss of Boe WAS huge. Not just for him as a reciever, but his special teams play,as well. Our coverage units have been awful.

And, what the hell? Go after McCardell. At this point, what could it possibly hurt. Give Tampa the 5th and 6th we got from Green Bay for R-Kal.


I'm thinking they would probably want more.

Especially if a team that was so banged up at WR as the Chiefs were, and Carl ain't gonna do that cuz he's a tough sob negotiator.

Bowser
09-21-2004, 03:46 PM
I'm thinking they would probably want more.

Especially if a team that was so banged up at WR as the Chiefs were, and Carl ain't gonna do that cuz he's a tough sob negotiator.

Tough? Or hard-headed? :hmmm:

Ralphy Boy
09-21-2004, 03:47 PM
NFW would Bo have caught 70-80 passes. Not a chance. How he derives at that has got to be the largest stretch of all time. Hell, Tony and Priest are #1 & 2 and they are in that range. 40, maybe (with all the other injuries) 50 catches, but no more than that.
That is actually what I thought at the time. In fact it was the first thing I heard him say and I was thinking "who the hell is this idiot...".

ROYC75
09-21-2004, 03:51 PM
F**k Keter Ping .............

TEX
09-21-2004, 03:51 PM
Well he was right about drafting Keary Colbert. Boe probably would have caught 50-60, assuming that he would hold on to the ball..

Gaz
09-21-2004, 03:55 PM
You could try and make the argument that Boerigter might have gotten that many catches with Kennison out and Morton hurting.

“What If” is always a fun game. You can never be proven wrong.

xoxo~
Gaz
Still finds it a bit of a reach.

tk13
09-21-2004, 04:00 PM
"What If” is always a fun game. You can never be proven wrong.

xoxo~
Gaz
Still finds it a bit of a reach.

What if Gaz had decided to use Beaker as his avatar instead of Dr. Honeydew? Instead of an esteemed engineer, would we have thought of him as a giant stickly creature that is overly hyper and doesn't make sense?

Gaz
09-21-2004, 04:01 PM
What if Gaz had decided to use Beaker as his avatar instead of Dr. Honeydew? Instead of an esteemed engineer, would we have thought of him as a giant stickly creater that is overly hyper and doesn't make sense?

I am hardly a giant...

xoxo~
Gaz
More on the “dwarf” side of the spectrum.

ChiTown
09-21-2004, 04:03 PM
Well he was right about drafting Keary Colbert. Boe probably would have caught 50-60, assuming that he would hold on to the ball..

Bo caught 11 passes in 15 games last year, and 20 in 16 games in 2002 (when we were avg.). 50-60 catches would be a phenomenal leap for this guy given his lack of experience, and his not-so-sure hands.

This is about how I would have seen it prior to the beg. of the season:
Priest 75 catches
Tony 70
Eddie K 60
Johnnie Morton 55
Dante 35
Bo 25
Remainder 20

Bob Dole
09-21-2004, 04:07 PM
Bo caught 11 passes in 15 games last year, and 20 in 16 games in 2002 (when we were avg.). 50-60 catches would be a phenomenal leap for this guy given his lack of experience, and his not-so-sure hands.

This is about how I would have seen it prior to the beg. of the season:
Priest 75 catches
Tony 70
Eddie K 60
Johnnie Morton 55
Dante 35
Bo 25
Remainder 20

By all accounts, it appeared that his corrected vision had made a significant difference in his hands, and the staff intended to utilize him significantly more. Given we have no true #1 WR, it would not have shocked Bob Dole to see them at least attempt to move his numbers up that far.

Molitoth
09-21-2004, 04:10 PM
we'd been better off keeping the draft pick....


Carl Petersons draft pick???

Why wait for a draft pick that we can train up to sit the bench then get traded... when we can get someone who is already good? Draft picks are always 50/50. Err wait, draft picks for the Chiefs are about 20/80.

Ralphy Boy
09-21-2004, 04:14 PM
I just remembered, he called him a poor man's Eddie McAffrey...only a little faster.

Ralphy Boy
09-21-2004, 04:18 PM
Carl Petersons draft pick???

Why wait for a draft pick that we can train up to sit the bench then get traded... when we can get someone who is already good? Draft picks are always 50/50. Err wait, draft picks for the Chiefs are about 20/80.
I'll get roasted for this, but with LJ being called a baby, why not ship him for KM? It doesn't look like DV & company have any confidence that he'll grow up anytime soon, and Chucky saw first hand what a former first round RB can do if given time to mature in Thomas Jones. He's now got Garner & Pittman who aren't getting any younger and one has off field issues. They've already got a young QB & young WR's which would lead to a good future, why not add the RB to go with them. On our side, the window is closing and this literally could be our last chance for a while.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the ship is going down and we should for sure make the trade, just that it should be explored. Then again, I'd have to guess it probably has been or is currently at least being considered.

tk13
09-21-2004, 04:21 PM
Carl Petersons draft pick???

Why wait for a draft pick that we can train up to sit the bench then get traded... when we can get someone who is already good? Draft picks are always 50/50. Err wait, draft picks for the Chiefs are about 20/80.
I was waiting for that... :)

And big name free agents that were considered good coming in have blown the world up for us? Which ones were those? Morton? Holliday? Who was the last really good player that has come in and done well for us? Roaf? I'm not even sure of that, there were supposedly doubts he'd lost a step or two with his legs being as bad as they were. Who was the last really good FA we've brought in, Rison? Grbac? We've had much more success with under the radar moves than guys who may have had a great season last year.

You've gotta be able to draft well... I don't care if we force feed it down Carl's throat before we get it right, we're going to draft and we've gotta draft well. As much as people go on about Super Bowl teams and how they have defense, blah blah blah, they also pretty much all draft very well, because you just usually can't spend enough money with the cap in place to build a great unit on both sides of the ball.

And that said, if McCardell was something like 27 or 28, you're right, he would be worth that draft pick 100%, but it does us no good if we have to start looking toward next year and he's 35 years old and we have no 2nd or 3rd round draft pick to even try and get younger. That could really help send us into the death spiral...

ChiefsCountry
09-21-2004, 04:49 PM
I'll get roasted for this, but with LJ being called a baby, why not ship him for KM? It doesn't look like DV & company have any confidence that he'll grow up anytime soon, and Chucky saw first hand what a former first round RB can do if given time to mature in Thomas Jones. He's now got Garner & Pittman who aren't getting any younger and one has off field issues. They've already got a young QB & young WR's which would lead to a good future, why not add the RB to go with them. On our side, the window is closing and this literally could be our last chance for a while.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the ship is going down and we should for sure make the trade, just that it should be explored. Then again, I'd have to guess it probably has been or is currently at least being considered.

Thats the first LJ for McCardell trade.

whoman69
09-21-2004, 05:20 PM
I'll get roasted for this, but with LJ being called a baby, why not ship him for KM? It doesn't look like DV & company have any confidence that he'll grow up anytime soon, and Chucky saw first hand what a former first round RB can do if given time to mature in Thomas Jones. He's now got Garner & Pittman who aren't getting any younger and one has off field issues. They've already got a young QB & young WR's which would lead to a good future, why not add the RB to go with them. On our side, the window is closing and this literally could be our last chance for a while.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the ship is going down and we should for sure make the trade, just that it should be explored. Then again, I'd have to guess it probably has been or is currently at least being considered.
Brilliant, trade a # 1 pick for a 34 year old WR who wants more money and didn't want to be here when he was a FA. Where the hell is our future? We see how little we've gotten out of the draft in the last 5 years. How about making it nothing.

Ralphy Boy
09-21-2004, 05:48 PM
Brilliant, trade a # 1 pick for a 34 year old WR who wants more money and didn't want to be here when he was a FA. Where the hell is our future? We see how little we've gotten out of the draft in the last 5 years. How about making it nothing.

I know I asked for it, but do you really, honestly think that LJ will turn out to be worth the #1 pick we spent on him? He's in his second season and the entire coaching staff was pulling for him to be our 2nd string RB and he couldn't cut it. Now DV is basically calling him a baby, so it's obvious to me that his future here isn't bright.

Why hang on to him any longer when it's obvious that he isn't making any positive contribution to the team?

What do you value more, this season or the season AFTER next when it's most likely he'd be able to be a starter?

I can't see Priest retiring after next year, Blaylock beat out LJ and would be the more likely replacement for him if he did retire. What's more is that DB is a team guy and LJ isn't and DB fits the offense better. LJ was insurance for Priest and it ended up being a wasted pick. I don't hold it against the team for taking him because there were question marks surrounding Holmes injury & contract, but that really isn't the case anymore. There is however a need right now for an experienced WR. We send LJ in trade, move Easy to RB which the team has already said is his more natural position and then when Wilson comes back from injury we let him be the backup FB. Don't give me the crap about KM's lack of experience in this offense, I'd rather have an experienced older Pro Bowl WR than an inexperieced, albeit a training camp's worth of experience, rookie WR. He's played in at least 3 different pro offenses and is more likely to help us now. Parker & Smith aren't ready. I say bring in McCardell for a workout, see how he looks and if he kept himself in shape enough to be ready in a couple of weeks, make the deal. He could make a contribution without knowing the full offense. He knows how to run routes and is savvy enough to recognize a blitz and block downfield.

I don't care to waste any more time on LJ nor do I care to waste any more time or games waiting for them to do something. Our time is now, not next year or the year after and the time to make a deal is now, not in a couple more weeks.

Skip Towne
09-21-2004, 06:13 PM
I was waiting for that... :)

And big name free agents that were considered good coming in have blown the world up for us? Which ones were those? Morton? Holliday? Who was the last really good player that has come in and done well for us? Roaf? I'm not even sure of that, there were supposedly doubts he'd lost a step or two with his legs being as bad as they were. Who was the last really good FA we've brought in, Rison? Grbac? We've had much more success with under the radar moves than guys who may have had a great season last year.

You've gotta be able to draft well... I don't care if we force feed it down Carl's throat before we get it right, we're going to draft and we've gotta draft well. As much as people go on about Super Bowl teams and how they have defense, blah blah blah, they also pretty much all draft very well, because you just usually can't spend enough money with the cap in place to build a great unit on both sides of the ball.

And that said, if McCardell was something like 27 or 28, you're right, he would be worth that draft pick 100%, but it does us no good if we have to start looking toward next year and he's 35 years old and we have no 2nd or 3rd round draft pick to even try and get younger. That could really help send us into the death spiral...
The last good FA we brought in? I think Priest is pretty good.

Ralphy Boy
09-21-2004, 06:24 PM
The last good FA we brought in? I think Priest is pretty good.
Which would be considered an under the radar move, which he mentioned. He's is right, we haven't had a good FREE AGENT move for quite a while, we did however do okay TRADING for players like Green & Roaf. Welbourn may turn out to be a decent trade, but the jury is way out at this point.

Since we haven't drafted real well in the early rounds and haven't done well signing big name FREE AGENTS, why not TRADE for a proven player?

PastorMikH
09-21-2004, 08:10 PM
From the way things look to me, a 3rd rounder for McCardel is well worth it. Kennison could be hampered with the hamstring of and on for the rest of the season and Morton will most likely be slow and lazy all season just like the last 3. We need Keenan now more than ever.

Claynus
09-21-2004, 08:12 PM
From the way things look to me, a 3rd rounder for McCardel is well worth it. Kennison could be hampered with the hamstring of and on for the rest of the season and Morton will most likely be slow and lazy all season just like the last 3. We need Keenan now more than ever.

Morton's off to the best start of his KC career. When was he slow and lazy? Maybe he didn't get open enough but he's not Derrick Alexnader.

McCardell isn't coming to KC. That time has passed.

PastorMikH
09-21-2004, 08:16 PM
Morton is still overpaid, even after the renegotiations. For him to earn what he's already been paid he'd need to play for free and mow the grass at Arrowhead on thursdays for the next 3-4 years

Sure-Oz
09-21-2004, 08:16 PM
I wouldn't trade LJ for mccardell. I really hope he plays sunday and does a great job so some of the haters can stfu about him.

Claynus
09-21-2004, 08:18 PM
Morton is still overpaid, even after the renegotiations. For him to earn what he's already been paid he'd need to play for free and mow the grass at Arrowhead on thursdays for the next 3-4 years

This is true. I'm not really worried about money though. There are quite a few overpaid players on the Chiefs. As long as Morton puts up numbers as good as last year and doesn't choke in important situations, I'm happy.

WilliamTheIrish
09-21-2004, 08:22 PM
Bo's gone. He's fishwrap. Never mention him again. F Peter queen.

PastorMikH
09-21-2004, 08:22 PM
Wow! You'd be happy with 700 yards recieving? 700 yards recieving is probably what got his contract renegotiated. If you add up all the yards he has caught for since being a Chief you start to get close to what he should be putting up every year.

Ugly Duck
09-21-2004, 08:25 PM
we could have grabbed Keary Colbert and instead of him helping Carolina beat us, it could have been the other way aroundI tried to tell you guyz that Colbert was the dude... but nobody listens to me and you drafted Saliva instead....

tk13
09-21-2004, 08:26 PM
Don't get me wrong, I think McCardell is worth a 2nd round pick value-wise (if we get similiar production out of him that he's put up in previous years)... but now it's probably too late. We're sitting at 0-2, and McCardell probably wouldn't be up to speed in this offense until after the bye week I'd imagine, and if we aren't 2-2 by then, it's going to be an uphill battle to even make the playoffs. If we don't make the playoffs, we go into next year with no 2nd or 3rd round draft pick and a 35 year old WR that we're paying more money than Johnnie Morton... we'd definitely be going the way of the Raiders.

WilliamTheIrish
09-21-2004, 08:26 PM
Morton is still overpaid, even after the renegotiations. For him to earn what he's already been paid he'd need to play for free and mow the grass at Arrowhead on thursdays for the next 3-4 years

Morton should renegotiate again. Maybe if he's pays a good Neuro guy, he can find his spine again.

He's dead to me. Dude wussed out on that ball over the middle.

Claynus
09-21-2004, 08:26 PM
Wow! You'd be happy with 700 yards recieving? 700 yards recieving is probably what got his contract renegotiated. If you add up all the yards he has caught for since being a Chief you start to get close to what he should be putting up every year.

Yeah, i'd be fine with that. Whatever gets us to rank #2 in the league like last year is just fine with me. I really don't care how much he's being paid.

Besides, I think he's good for at least 850 yards this year. He might sniff 1,000.

Sure-Oz
09-21-2004, 08:27 PM
Morton needs to make big catches and sacrifice his body a bit, pussy ducked one pass in sundays game.

tk13
09-21-2004, 08:29 PM
I tried to tell you guyz that Colbert was the dude... but nobody listens to me and you drafted Saliva instead....
Says the man who brags about his shiny new defensive tackles in the middle of his D-line...

PastorMikH
09-21-2004, 08:32 PM
Don't get me wrong, I think McCardell is worth a 2nd round pick value-wise (if we get similiar production out of him that he's put up in previous years)... but now it's probably too late. We're sitting at 0-2, and McCardell probably wouldn't be up to speed in this offense until after the bye week I'd imagine, and if we aren't 2-2 by then, it's going to be an uphill battle to even make the playoffs. If we don't make the playoffs, we go into next year with no 2nd or 3rd round draft pick and a 35 year old WR that we're paying more money than Johnnie Morton... we'd definitely be going the way of the Raiders.



Kennison was able to help out right away. He was limited, but he added right away. Even if McCardel (or any decent veteran WR for that matter) were to come in, he would be able to add right away. Even if it is putting another person out there that they have to respect and cover it will open up other players.

The shape we are in right now, it isn't too hard to imagine out entire WR corp being guys who haven't played WR before in the NFL.

WilliamTheIrish
09-21-2004, 08:33 PM
Morton needs to make big catches and sacrifice his body a bit, pussy ducked one pass in sundays game.

Couldn't you just see him on the sidelines next to DV after that happened?

DV: "So WTF was that out there?

JM: "Well coach, the ball was little high and Leon just ain't up for stretching for the ball today."

DV: "What?"

JM: "Yea, baby. Hey coach, the camera's on us. Can we switch places? I want them to get Leon's good side."


Morton's dead to me too.

tk13
09-21-2004, 08:34 PM
Kennison was able to help out right away. He was limited, but he added right away. Even if McCardel (or any decent veteran WR for that matter) were to come in, he would be able to add right away. Even if it is putting another person out there that they have to respect and cover it will open up other players.

The shape we are in right now, it isn't too hard to imagine out entire WR corp being guys who haven't played WR before in the NFL.
Kennison played for Vermeil in St. Louis...

PastorMikH
09-21-2004, 08:34 PM
Morton = Leon


ROFL ROFL

Claynus
09-21-2004, 08:36 PM
The only reason Kennison was able to come in and contribute immediately was because he already knew the offense. McCardell does not, and he also has no history with Dick. We all need to shut up about Keenan McCardell, because he's never going to be a Kansas City Chief.

Wile_E_Coyote
09-21-2004, 08:38 PM
what few changes they made turned out okay, Welborne, Bober(?), Dalton, Smith, Tynes, Cheek. With that track record take a chance on Mc..McKenzie :)

Wile_E_Coyote
09-21-2004, 09:16 PM
rumor on a Buc board is that McKenzie will be in N'awlins for a 2cond & 4th

damit carl :cuss:

Ralphy Boy
09-22-2004, 05:50 PM
The only reason Kennison was able to come in and contribute immediately was because he already knew the offense. McCardell does not, and he also has no history with Dick. We all need to shut up about Keenan McCardell, because he's never going to be a Kansas City Chief.

Just because Kennison played for Vermeil in St Louis doesn't necessarily mean that he already knew THIS offense. Yes, the basics of the offense were there when he played in a version of it for his first 3 years in the league under DV. But as DV & AS have said each coordinator makes the offense his own. AS learned some of it from his days in San Diego and learned most of it from his 2 years in St Louis from Martz. Kennison played it under neither of them and had a 3 1/2 year period where he played in other offenses. The bottom line is that McCardell is a vet and naturally more apt to pick up the offense quicker than a rookie, even if that rookie has had a few months to learn it.

I'll agree it probably, almost definitely, isn't going to happen, but don't tell me he wouldn't contribute in his first game because he would. Opposing defenses would respect his ABILITY and EXPERIENCE and that means more than his lack of experience in THIS offense.

Vermeil wanted him here badly when he was a FA and had he come available before Morton, they'd have wanted him over Morton, IMO.

DV might not necessarily want him now, but the injuries and the window of opportunity could change what he wants. Especially if winning is the most important thing that DV wants to do and it should be.

Ralphy Boy
09-22-2004, 05:52 PM
Dude wussed out on that ball over the middle.

Yeah he did, his arms didn't even extend enough to be called alligator arms. More like turtle arms.

tk13
09-22-2004, 06:36 PM
Vermeil wanted him here badly when he was a FA and had he come available before Morton, they'd have wanted him over Morton, IMO.


I don't know about that. We signed Morton two months before attempting to go after McCardell... McCardell had not even been cut yet when we signed Morton. I don't think you can necessarily prove that.

Really, he wanted both of them, because he tried to sign both of them. I don't think it was an either/or thing.

The Bad Guy
09-22-2004, 06:40 PM
I think what Ralph is saying that if McCardell was available at the same time as Morton that DV would of signed McCardell before he did Morton.

Ralphy Boy
09-22-2004, 07:50 PM
I think what Ralph is saying that if McCardell was available at the same time as Morton that DV would of signed McCardell before he did Morton.
ding ding ding ding ding!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course I couldn't prove that because there is no way that DV would have said that at the time because he wouldn't want to offend his new FA. When he didn't sign with us there was obviously no reason for him to say it. So yes I'm speculating.

Having said that, he was wanting to sign KM and make him and Morton the starters which would have left EK as the #3. I do remember that much.

If you use the rule that DV did last year in regards to Vonnie outplaying the FA he really wanted in Hugh Douglas, when he said the guy we ended up getting outperformed the guy we thought we wanted(something to that effect). So if you look at how far KM out performed JM in both of their first years in a new offense, and just look at the numbers, it's clear that KM was the better pickup. It may not be fair to say because there is nothing to say KM would have performed as well here, but then again how do we know that HD here wouldn't have outperformed Vonnie?

KM 61 receptions 1,174 yards, 8 TD's
JM 29 receptions 397 yards, 1 TD

Vonnie Holliday 2003 stats 38 tackles, 31 solo, 5.5 sacks, 3.5 STF's, 1 FF
Hugh Douglas 2003 stats 27 tackles, 23 solo, 3.5 sacks, 4.5 STF's, 2 FF

For the sake of arguement, I'll agree that McCardell is old, born 1/6/70, but Morton isn't a spring chicken, born 10/7/71. So there is less than 2 years between them and some people's bodies age faster than others. Morton is banged up now and while KM might be out of playing shape at least he's rested.

The biggest difference that nobody pointed out between bringing EK in when we did and bringing in KM is that EK was in playing shape at the time because he'd been playing, or at least practicing. Nobody knows what kind of shape KM is in.