In a way, Im content this Kansas City Chiefs team does not have a true #1 WR

RedThat · 02-14-2006, 01:49 PM

I finished watching "NFL Receivers: Wide open" on "NFL Network". after watching the show, I have a new impression on WR's. I think they are the biggest attention whores, and the most selfish players in the league. Also, probably the most egotistical.

Now dont get me wrong, receivers are awesome. They do make big plays. I just sometimes question their morale to the team. Like I wonder, is it more important to some receivers to see themselves steal the spotlight, and catch the ball 8-10 times a game rather then see their team win? I think so sometimes.

It was funny, because they had Phil Sims on the show, and he said, he kinda hated WR's, for the main purpose of having to throw the ball 8-10 times a game. He thinks its boosts their ego. And he didn't like it, I can see why, and i don't blame the guy.

Maybe having a true legit #1 WR on your team is a bad thing, I look at it as a possible distraction. Which now bring me to the Chiefs, we don't have this on our team. And I do like it, we don't need a distraction, why have a guy on your team that is only concerned about the spotlight, and wants the ball 8-10 times a game? And when your team loses, chances are he will complain that he isn't getting the ball enough. And will act like a suck, and blame other people for the teams failures.

We are very fortunate imo we don't have this on our team. Im not just referring to T.O. in general, a lot of receivers are like this.

Hoover · 02-14-2006, 01:52 PM

Am I the only one who still likes Samie Parker?

**Mr. Kotter** · 02-14-2006, 01:54 PM

Nope.

Marvin Harrison, Hines Ward, Tory Holt, Steve Smith, Deion Branch, Rod Smith (in his prime, even as a Donkey), and Reggie Wayne seem to be pretty classy for the most part. And I'd happily take any of them. I'm sure there are others....

I think Parker, and maybe Thorpe, can develop. Some of the better WRs take three or four years.

Hammock Parties · 02-14-2006, 01:55 PM

Nope, Parker's going to get 1,000 yards next year if he stays healthy.

Eddie Kennison is a #1 WR.

**Dunit35** · 02-14-2006, 02:06 PM

There's always a few bad apples at each position. Those bad apples always get the spotlight in the media. As Kotter stated I'd take any of those names..

B_Ambuehl · 02-14-2006, 02:08 PM

You have 2 options:

A: You get your catches on a losing team while making $500 K - 8 million per year for years and years on end.

Or

B: You play on a winning superbowl team but your team runs the ball 90% of the time and you're not even a starter. Every year you're facing the reality of being cut and froced to take a real job or play football in the arena leagues for $50 k per year.

Which situation do you think most players are gonna choose?

The notion that players care about winning more then personal stats and accomplishments is a media creation.

02-14-2006, 01:49 PM
RedThat Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Earth Casino cash: $10004900	In a way, Im content this Kansas City Chiefs team does not have a true #1 WR I finished watching "NFL Receivers: Wide open" on "NFL Network". after watching the show, I have a new impression on WR's. I think they are the biggest attention whores, and the most selfish players in the league. Also, probably the most egotistical. Now dont get me wrong, receivers are awesome. They do make big plays. I just sometimes question their morale to the team. Like I wonder, is it more important to some receivers to see themselves steal the spotlight, and catch the ball 8-10 times a game rather then see their team win? I think so sometimes. It was funny, because they had Phil Sims on the show, and he said, he kinda hated WR's, for the main purpose of having to throw the ball 8-10 times a game. He thinks its boosts their ego. And he didn't like it, I can see why, and i don't blame the guy. Maybe having a true legit #1 WR on your team is a bad thing, I look at it as a possible distraction. Which now bring me to the Chiefs, we don't have this on our team. And I do like it, we don't need a distraction, why have a guy on your team that is only concerned about the spotlight, and wants the ball 8-10 times a game? And when your team loses, chances are he will complain that he isn't getting the ball enough. And will act like a suck, and blame other people for the teams failures. We are very fortunate imo we don't have this on our team. Im not just referring to T.O. in general, a lot of receivers are like this.
Posts: 6,666

02-14-2006, 01:52 PM	#2
Hoover Rufus Dawes Jr. Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $1398179	Am I the only one who still likes Samie Parker?
Posts: 17,385

02-14-2006, 01:54 PM	#3
Mr. Kotter The Dude Abides Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Dakota Country Casino cash: $5705285	Nope. Marvin Harrison, Hines Ward, Tory Holt, Steve Smith, Deion Branch, Rod Smith (in his prime, even as a Donkey), and Reggie Wayne seem to be pretty classy for the most part. And I'd happily take any of them. I'm sure there are others.... I think Parker, and maybe Thorpe, can develop. Some of the better WRs take three or four years. __________________ "I've always said I worry about legacy and winning rings more than making money at this moment...We see what's going on around the league, but at the same time, I'll never do anything that's going to hurt us from keeping the great players around me.”
Posts: 46,352

02-14-2006, 01:55 PM	#4
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4440478	Nope, Parker's going to get 1,000 yards next year if he stays healthy. Eddie Kennison is a #1 WR. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,652

02-14-2006, 02:06 PM	#5
Dunit35 Keepin it Real Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Oklahoma Casino cash: $1267045	There's always a few bad apples at each position. Those bad apples always get the spotlight in the media. As Kotter stated I'd take any of those names..
Posts: 10,490

02-14-2006, 02:08 PM	#6
B_Ambuehl Veteran Join Date: Apr 2005 Casino cash: $9805405	You have 2 options: A: You get your catches on a losing team while making $500 K - 8 million per year for years and years on end. Or B: You play on a winning superbowl team but your team runs the ball 90% of the time and you're not even a starter. Every year you're facing the reality of being cut and froced to take a real job or play football in the arena leagues for $50 k per year. Which situation do you think most players are gonna choose? The notion that players care about winning more then personal stats and accomplishments is a media creation. __________________ Who's decision was it to fire Romeo" - Coleman C Hunt: "It was my decision but it was one that Scott agreed with" LOL
Posts: 2,605