If Watkins plays, we should give him some targets. Trade him to Min for Diggs

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...810397d2da.jpg

He good


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Running back LeSean McCoy (ankle) has no injury"

IDK why but this dumb sentence by Teicher made me laugh

Gotta shake the injury-prone label in basically a contract year, Sammy... play through it.

No. Never going to happen. Besides, I like Sammy. Based on that alone, he should stay.:thumb:

Diggs ain't no Watkins!

Hell no he ain’t. He can catch.

Yep, despite the huge game against the Jags it’s the same ole Sammy. Although I would trade him for D

I would be very happy with a Diggs for Watkins swap, probably needs to be in the off season though to give Diggs time with the playbook.

Sammy has good hands. I dunno wtf you're talking about.

His catch percent across his career is in the 50's, either QBs have been forcing the ball in to him despite him being covered his whole career or his hands just aren't that good? Tyreek's catch percent is over 10% higher.

72.7% last year and 60.5% this year. Whatever. He's overpaid, quite a bit. That's on us. Sammy is a beast after the catch. It sucks he's injury prone. Talk shit on him if you want. I'm hoping for the best.

Obviously I’m hoping for the best, I’m a chiefs fan. Doesn’t mean Sammy is that good.

Fair enough, mate. Sorry for being argumentative or rude. Let's get a win this week and keep hustlin.

Diggs is a one trick pony.....go deep! We already have that in Tyreek and Hardman....and Sammy!

Maybe it's just me, but he seemed a little deflated after that ball was punched out early on.

I think I saw him kinda limp off the field after a play. Didn’t seem the same after that. Was hoping it wasn’t his foot at the time.

well you don’t limp if it’s your shoulder

I meant because he has a history of foot injuries.

I dont think i have ever seen an argument fizzle out this fast on here.

The mahomes years are even making CP kinder to each other.

Lolwut?

Watkins will be needed tonight. He's questionable. How much will he play? Don't need tonight to be a game where he plays a couple plays then can't go. Deal is those types count as games played. Not really the kind that the OP meant I'm sure.

YU SHUT YER HOAR MOWTH!

I think Sammy Watkins plays. He did a full practice on Wednesday and Thursday with a light practice on Friday. He is listed as questionable but I think he will be out there for a Sunday night game.

One down, two to go.

What's funny though is all the state sheets will list this as a game played since I think he did take the field.

Yep. He played 2 snaps

Counts as a missed game in my book.

Has he developed Haglunds?

Mine as well.

LMAO

Except that he played in it.

Like the weak ass injury prone pussy that he is.

So a streaker get a game check because they were on the filed and ran some?

Nope, they would have to be suited up and by definition a streaker is NOT suited up!

Ah, so they need to paint on red-on-red body paint to draw a check?

he played yesterday though

Two freaking snaps, not even enough time for Cam Erving to blow a blocking assignment.

That's pretty funny

playing two snaps does not constitute playing a game

This is where "Yinz" needed to clarify your rules. Now everyone missing out on a free 50 bucks. He'll go down again soon anyways so I'd eat the loss and get clarification.

From an outsider perspective, if he misses another game he has missed "more than one game," because he sat out well over 3/4 of a game

I would also say that he misses half of another game because of injury, he has also cumulatively missed "more than one game". This interpretation is a little looser though

Except that it does.

If the dude had a roster bonus for each game played, he'd get his roster bonus. It is what it is.

If you wanted a bet based on percentage of snaps taken, then you should've made that bet. Otherwise, this one goes down as a 'game played' in the books, bucko.

But c'mon - everyone knows you just welch on all your bets anyway.

It constitutes a start.

Playing two snaps and then exiting does not constitute playing a game. As far as the spirit of the bet is concerned, this is a notch in my column.

Pretty sure Vegas doesn't grant do-overs for the 'spirit of the bet'....

If you're gonna be a bookie, rules are rules. There's not a stat keeper around that wouldn't call this a 'game played'.

Besides, I don't think anyone took you up on it anyway, nor does anyone actually expect you to honor your bets.

(I still can't post links! Check Pro Football Reference, google search "Sammy Watkins Stats, check your stat record site of choice if you don't like Pro Football Reference for some reason)

Under Games and Games Started, he has a 5 in each column. If the bet were with me, I'd say that's a game played. Had he not done a single snap, then sure, you'd have a point and I'd agree with you, but he played at least 1 snap in the game. That's a game played in any record book and a game played as far as the bet, at least in my opinion.

He did. By definition he played in the game.

It is a little disappointing Clay is already trying to figure out a way for it not to count.

Wrong, the bet was made official with BWillie before the season.

And second, I honor all bets.

Nice try bud.

"He will not get injured, or at least enough to miss more than one regular season game"

If he misses next week entirely, I think he has missed "more than one game "

Plus, we all know Watkins left the Detroit game early and missed more than two snaps.

https://i.imgur.com/cCVqHor.png

Our bet is for 14.

If you look on his espn player card it says GP 5 for Sammy.

It IS a game played. He has not missed a game yet in accordance to our bet.

Very disappointing there is even a dispute.

You're just going to have to deal with the fact that between missing 99% of this game 1% of the Lions game, it equals one full game missed.

Them's the breaks, kid.

"Except for the ones where I decided to change the definition of completely unambiguous terms such as 'games played'...."

Eh, this goes under the same umbrella as the fanduel debacle. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Everyone knows who they're dealing with here. Making a bet with Clay and expecting it to go smoothly is no different than allowing Hootie to have a say in the outcome of pooled funds and expecting it to not go poorly.

I really hope there continues to be ambiguity here, but I'm starting to think Clay will have this wrapped up by week 8 if not sooner.

It would be disingenuous to say a receiver who left a game after two snaps played that game.

Completely so.

You could be onto something... Most youth leagues require 6-8 plays per half to constitute the parent's kid having "played", so depending on how you count, he could be 10-14 plays short of that definition. And the Chefs played like Pop Warner, so those rules might apply.

Yes, the ambulance chaser's interpretation of "played in the game", vs "played the game".

In my opinion, your language was vague.
"Watkins will play 15 games"
"He will not miss more than one"
"Our bet is for 14"

These things don't mean the same thing.

I'm convinced Sammy knew he wasn't going to play, but wanted to get an official start because 3 years down the line no one will remember he played 1 snap and left the game.

Did he get paid? Yes.

Did he get a game started and game played added to his stats? Yes.

Was he on the field, in pads, active during the game? Yes.

That's playing in a game, and it's totally ingenuous to say so. There was no prior agreement regarding missing X% of snaps = a game not played. I have no skin in the game, I'm just saying.

No dog in this fight.... I would not count him as playing in this game considering he was questionable coming in and only played a couple of snaps.

Counts as a game. It's bush-league to try and say otherwise.

He took the field and played in the game. This isn't hard. You see him on the sideline wearing sweats at the coin toss then you mark that one down.

I think that it's disengenious to count this as a missed game, but just as disingenuous to treat this as equal to a game he played in its entirety. That why I believe that if he misses a game in its entirety after this, he has satisfied the stipulation of missing "more than one game" , because he will have at that point missed an entire game (one game) + more.

Granted I'm the type of asshole that doesn't take being "technically correct" as an insult.

This counts as a game played.

If you and I ever took a single snap in an NFL game, you can bet your ass we'd refer to ourselves as NFL players.

If you played even a single snap, it's a game played. I just don't see where the room for argument is here.

And besides - it's elementary. It's Sammy !@#$ing Watkins we're talking about here. He's missing 3 complete games before all is said and done.

It's sad that this team sucks so much that we have to argue over the legal definition of a mother****er playing two snaps. Only at "Andy's Buffet of Sadness" does this talk happen every year in relation to a supposed super star.

But I guess that's what you get with a players coach instead of a coach that plays to win the game.

Chiefs are 4-1, second best record in the AFC, with three wins on the road. GloryDayz: “This team sucks!”

****ing clown.

LMAO

I might bump your post if they lose Sunday. I'll see how I feel.

Technically it counts.

Even a few snaps means he suited up and did in fact "play."

he played IN a game

but did he play A game

'fraid not, chief

Waiting for him to go week-to-week and milk the Chiefs Haglund style.

All I'm going to say is I'm going to be ****ing livid if he misses one game and you claim the last one is a missed game too even though he played in it.

Quite frankly that is bullshit and you are already trying to do it.

Lost alot of respect for you today, Claynus.

I pay my ****ing bets and bet fair and square.

I'm not actually claiming that.

He missed 98% of this game and 2% of the Lions game.

I think you can respect math?

Watkins is just plain soft pure and simple. You can't count on him.:banghead:

The OP was wrong, Watkins is still made of glass. Watkins has already gotten injured enough to miss time.

He hasn't technically lost the bet yet though.

We probably won't be able to trade his fragile ass for much next offseason.

If Watkins misses 4-6+ games in total this season, he can go find another team to overpay him.

Nullify it and be done with it. 5 games in and this bush league bullshit is already being pulled by Clay.