ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Fargas will visit Chiefs (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=224505)

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-07-2010 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585779)
How much do you want to bet Chambers was targeted more than Bowe? For ****s sake some games Long got targeted more than Bowe. Did you even watch the games?

Bowe runs too far for Cassel.

Micjones 03-07-2010 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585768)
You are making comparisons based on one year LOL.

Yes, genius...the most recent one.
And in that one... Chambers outplayed the younger WR.

Quote:

You also have no sense in ecomonics either. I'm not going to buy a microwave that only works for 2 years when I can buy basically the same product that will last longer.
Walter isn't going to be a 5 year solution.
I don't know why you suggested that.
I would much rather re-sign Chambers as a #2 who can stretch the field (something that he's better at than Walter) and DRAFT his replacement.

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 6585774)
This comes down to who was available. Walters got over 4 million a year having never caught for more than 899 yards in a year. 8 TD's was the most he had in a year and that's double his 2nd highest total.

IMO, the only thing Walters has over Chambers is that he's 3 years younger. We know what Chambers can do in this offense. I also don't see why Chambers can't be a good option for 3-4 years. Wideouts can play into their mid 30's easy.

I'm not saying Walters wouldn't have been a good get, but Chambers is established here. There's no reason to think he'll do any worse than he did last year.

C'mon, Flop.

How can you expect a guy that hasn't been consistent over the last 5 seasons to magically maintain that level of play here - as he's aging?

You know, if he had consistently put up 800+ yards over the past 5 years, I wouldn't have nearly the issue.

Problem is, he hasn't. He had an average year catching punts from Matt Cassel, people forget about his past, and now he's a legit WR2?

It doesn't work that way. Unless you're just going out of your way to be optimistic, I see no evidence to lead me to believe that Chambers will replicate his performance of 2009.

Demonpenz 03-07-2010 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585783)
C'mon, Flop.

How can you expect a guy that hasn't been consistent over the last 5 seasons to magically maintain that level of play here - as he's aging?

You know, if he had consistently put up 800+ yards over the past 5 years, I wouldn't have nearly the issue.

Problem is, he hasn't. He had an average year catching punts from Matt Cassel, people forget about his past, and now he's a legit WR2?

It doesn't work that way. Unless you're just going out of your way to be optimistic, I see no evidence to lead me to believe that Chambers will replicate his performance of 2009.

cassel will have more time with Okong blocking for him

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585782)
Yes, genius...the most recent one.
And in that one... Chambers outplayed the younger WR.



Walter isn't going to be a 5 year solution.
I don't know why you suggested that.
I would much rather re-sign Chambers as a #2 who can stretch the field (something that he's better at than Walter) and DRAFT his replacement.

It's painfully obvious you don't watch the games.

What about the 2 years before where Walters outplayed Chambers?

Care to explain why Walter isn't a 5 year option other than it's made up and makes your argument look better?

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585775)
Walters isn't a long term option? You're a ****ing dumbass. Please go to Jonestown and see if theres anymore Kool Aid left to drink.

Give me a ****ing break.

Walter is a good receiver and he would have been a nice add. I would have rather have had him than Chambers.

But let's not treat him like he's some kind of a messiah. He's a guy who can give us a few good years until you find someone younger to replace him. Not a whole lot different than Chambers, except that you have a little more time.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585786)
It's painfully obvious you don't watch the games.

What about the 2 years before where Walters outplayed Chambers?

Care to explain why Walter isn't a 5 year option other than it's made up and makes your argument look better?

Because he'll be 29 years old in August.

You really want this team to be going into the playoffs 5 years from now with a 34 year old receiver who was never a superstar even in his peak years?

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-07-2010 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demonpenz (Post 6585784)
cassel will have more time with Okong blocking for him

Cassel could have time to grill a cheeseburger and brew sun tea in the backfield; he'd still hail mary the goal post.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585787)
Give me a ****ing break.

Walter is a good receiver and he would have been a nice add. I would have rather have had him than Chambers.

But let's not treat him like he's some kind of a messiah. He's a guy who can give us a few good years until you find someone younger to replace him. Not a whole lot different than Chambers, except that you have a little more time.

You keep saying theres not alot of difference besides one being 32 the other being 28. Thats a huge ****ing difference in the NFL.

DeezNutz 03-07-2010 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demonpenz (Post 6585784)
cassel will have more time with Okong blocking for him

Your avi makes me think that you throw up the deuces at home to yourself after every post.

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585782)
Yes, genius...the most recent one.
And in that one... Chambers outplayed the younger WR.



Walter isn't going to be a 5 year solution.
I don't know why you suggested that.
I would much rather re-sign Chambers as a #2 who can stretch the field (something that he's better at than Walter) and DRAFT his replacement.

Wow, hypocritical much?

Walter, who's 28 years old, can't play until he's 33.

Yet the guy you're pimping, who's 31, has at least two years left in the tank.

Interesting.

Demonpenz 03-07-2010 08:54 PM

DUECES!

BryanBusby 03-07-2010 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585679)
I bet we'll sign the 32 year old with off field issues and see the same results as LJ once he got a new contract.

So he's gonna spit on skanks up in da club?

Q_Q because the Chiefs aren't signing anybody and Q_Q because the Chiefs are working on signing somebody

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585788)
Because he'll be 29 years old in August.

You really want this team to be going into the playoffs 5 years from now with a 34 year old receiver who was never a superstar even in his peak years?

You're assuming he'd still be a WR2 at that point.

Then again, considering Pioli's drafting ability, you might be right.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby (Post 6585795)
So he's gonna spit on skanks up in da club?

Q_Q because the Chiefs aren't signing anybody and Q_Q because the Chiefs are working on signing somebody

Looks like he'll be too busy cakn partna.

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585783)
C'mon, Flop.

How can you expect a guy that hasn't been consistent over the last 5 seasons to magically maintain that level of play here - as he's aging?

You know, if he had consistently put up 800+ yards over the past 5 years, I wouldn't have nearly the issue.

Problem is, he hasn't. He had an average year catching punts from Matt Cassel, people forget about his past, and now he's a legit WR2?

It doesn't work that way. Unless you're just going out of your way to be optimistic, I see no evidence to lead me to believe that Chambers will replicate his performance of 2009.

I was incredibly impressed with the way he came to this team and went to work. I'm a big Chris Chambers fan. I know his production dropped off over the last 5 years, and I think he was on his way out of the league.

I also think that Todd Haley would be eating his 22 guys off the street bullshit words if it weren't for Chris Chambers.

I absolutely think he'll repeat last year's performance if not exceed it. He's one of the very few assets I think this team has.

If we actually get him signed, I'll gladly own this post this time next year if he doesn't meet expectations.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585783)
C'mon, Flop.

How can you expect a guy that hasn't been consistent over the last 5 seasons to magically maintain that level of play here - as he's aging?

You know, if he had consistently put up 800+ yards over the past 5 years, I wouldn't have nearly the issue.

Problem is, he hasn't. He had an average year catching punts from Matt Cassel, people forget about his past, and now he's a legit WR2?

It doesn't work that way. Unless you're just going out of your way to be optimistic, I see no evidence to lead me to believe that Chambers will replicate his performance of 2009.

Look, I'm worried about the consistency issue too. But you're really selling him short by saying he had an "average" year. He was on pace to gain 1100 yards for a shitty offense with a QB who was playing like shit.

Chambers was doing a lot of stuff that Bowe should have been long. He was catching a lot of very poorly thrown balls, doing a great job jumping up to get underthrown balls, catching balls in the middle of the field as well as serve as a legit deep option. He wasn't just an average #2 WR in 2009 with the Chiefs. He was a middle-of-the-road #1 WR.

If Chambers continues to commit to the game, I'm not worried about him. Frankly, I'm a hell of a lot more worried about Bowe.

Micjones 03-07-2010 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585779)
How much do you want to bet Chambers was targeted more than Bowe? For ****s sake some games Long got targeted more than Bowe. Did you even watch the games?

In 2009:
Dwayne Bowe was targeted 87 times in 11 games.
Chris Chambers was targeted 61 times (as a Chief) in 9 games.

Sorry...what were you saying?

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585787)
Give me a ****ing break.

Walter is a good receiver and he would have been a nice add. I would have rather have had him than Chambers.

But let's not treat him like he's some kind of a messiah. He's a guy who can give us a few good years until you find someone younger to replace him. Not a whole lot different than Chambers, except that you have a little more time.

I don't think neither myself nor billay are painting Walter as the messiah.

He produces consistently, and buys you more time.

Chambers has produced once in five years, and you might get another year or two out of him.

I guess he really wowed people pulling in those punts from Cassel.

BryanBusby 03-07-2010 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585801)
If Chambers continues to commit to the game, I'm not worried about him. Frankly, I'm a hell of a lot more worried about Bowe.

This over and over again.

Micjones 03-07-2010 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585793)
Wow, hypocritical much?

Walter, who's 28 years old, can't play until he's 33.

Yet the guy you're pimping, who's 31, has at least two years left in the tank.

Interesting.

Hold on... I NEVER said he could play two more years.
I suggested he's a one year stop-gap and you DRAFT his replacement.
I wouldn't depend on him producing for two more years.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585802)
In 2009:
Dwayne Bowe was targeted 87 times in 11 games.
Chris Chambers was targeted 61 times (as a Chief) in 9 games.

Sorry...what were you saying?

Whered you get those stats? I'd like to see how many times Bowe was targeted the first 2 games.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585793)
Wow, hypocritical much?

Walter, who's 28 years old, can't play until he's 33.

Yet the guy you're pimping, who's 31, has at least two years left in the tank.

Interesting.

The difference being that the next two years, we know we're not going to be perfect at every position. In 5 years, if either of these guys is our receiver, then we ****ed up big time.

Both of these guys are good options 2 years down the road when we're not competing for anything. It's unacceptable if either of these guys, at their age, are a major receiving option 4-5 years down the road.

DeezNutz 03-07-2010 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585802)
In 2009:
Dwayne Bowe was targeted 87 times in 11 games.
Chris Chambers was targeted 61 times (as a Chief) in 9 games.

Sorry...what were you saying?

Link?

I'd like to look at targets.

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585801)
Look, I'm worried about the consistency issue too. But you're really selling him short by saying he had an "average" year. He was on pace to gain 1100 yards for a shitty offense with a QB who was playing like shit.

Chambers was doing a lot of stuff that Bowe should have been long. He was catching a lot of very poorly thrown balls, doing a great job jumping up to get underthrown balls, catching balls in the middle of the field as well as serve as a legit deep option. He wasn't just an average #2 WR in 2009 with the Chiefs. He was a middle-of-the-road #1 WR.

If Chambers continues to commit to the game, I'm not worried about him. Frankly, I'm a hell of a lot more worried about Bowe.

How was he "on pace" for 1100 yards when he played 16 games last year?

Are we just going to gloss over the 7 games he played for a good team with a franchise QB just because he didn't produce there?

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585803)
I don't think neither myself nor billay are painting Walter as the messiah.

He produces consistently, and buys you more time.

Chambers has produced once in five years, and you might get another year or two out of him.

I guess he really wowed people pulling in those punts from Cassel.

Well, I think it does speak volumes that he was finding ways to come down with the ball on very poorly thrown balls. Pretty consistently last year.

All you really need is 1-2 years. Keep in mind that next season, the free agent market is going to be a whole lot better. And you have 2-3 years of drafts to try to find Chambers' successor. I'd rather go after a cream of the crop receiver in the 2011 offseason than to just settle for a long-term option in 2010 because he was the best we could get.

Walter, like Chambers, is a stopgap at best. The only main advantage is that he buys you maybe an extra year or 2 to find his eventual replacement.

BryanBusby 03-07-2010 09:02 PM

It's funny people are bitching like resigning Chris Chambers is going to set this franchise back a bazillion years. If he comes back and sucks, Clark Hunt is out of some money and that's about it. It's not like the Chiefs are using picks to get him and will sign him to a 91.5 million dollar contract.

Along with that, if other teams were as interested in the "White Lightning" as CP was, I don't think he'd be as quick to resign with the Texans after Ozzie Newsome told him to GTFO

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby (Post 6585821)
It's funny people are bitching like resigning Chris Chambers is going to set this franchise back a bazillion years. If he comes back and sucks, Clark Hunt is out of some money and that's about it. It's not like the Chiefs are using picks to get him and will sign him to a 91.5 million dollar contract.

Umm it does set the franchise back. We could have signed a player that will produce and for longer.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585812)
How was he "on pace" for 1100 yards when he played 16 games last year?

Are we just going to gloss over the 7 games he played for a good team with a franchise QB just because he didn't produce there?

Yes. Entirely different situation. And nobody knows why it was the case, but he was completely distracted.

Like I said, yes, I worry about motivational issues. But I also know that his failure in San Diego was more in the head than it was lacking pure athletic ability. A lot of people believe that.

Micjones 03-07-2010 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585808)
Whered you get those stats? I'd like to see how many times Bowe was targeted the first 2 games.

Chambers
Bowe

RustShack 03-07-2010 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 6585811)
Link?

I'd like to look at targets.

I don't think you want a link to his ass ROFL

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585825)
Umm it does set the franchise back. We could have signed a player that will produce and for longer.

Produce what? 800 yards in his prime?

He's not an elite receiver now and he's quickly approaching 30. If we were a few steps close to being a playoff team, fine. But who really cares if he gets 800 yards for a team that's not going to make the playoffs anyway?

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585819)
Well, I think it does speak volumes that he was finding ways to come down with the ball on very poorly thrown balls. Pretty consistently last year.

All you really need is 1-2 years. Keep in mind that next season, the free agent market is going to be a whole lot better. And you have 2-3 years of drafts to try to find Chambers' successor. I'd rather go after a cream of the crop receiver in the 2011 offseason than to just settle for a long-term option in 2010 because he was the best we could get.

Walter, like Chambers, is a stopgap at best. The only main advantage is that he buys you maybe an extra year or 2 to find his eventual replacement.

You keep forgetting about the most important advantage:

You know what you're going to get out of Walter because he's produced consistently over the past several years.

Chambers hasn't.

You guys can keep saying you think he'll equal last years production, but there's not a shred of evidence to back it up.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585829)

nevermind.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585833)
You keep forgetting about the most important advantage:

You know what you're going to get out of Walter because he's produced consistently over the past several years.

Chambers hasn't.

You guys can keep saying you think he'll equal last years production, but there's not a shred of evidence to back it up.

Before San Diego, his production wasn't a whole lot different from Walter's. For some reason in 2008-2009, he just had a really lousy stretch. I don't know if it was off-the-field distractions. If it was a falling out with Norv. Who knows. Again, it's something I worry about. But I also know that his play in San Diego was not even close to the same play as in Kansas City. He was dropping almost every easy pass that came his way in San Diego. It wasn't athletic ability--he looked like he didn't want to be on the field.

But apart from that, he was generally a 700-1000 yard receiver. That's about Walter's range too.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:09 PM

Actually Chambers was targeted more Mic.

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585841)
Before San Diego, his production wasn't a whole lot different from Walter's. For some reason in 2008-2009, he just had a really lousy stretch. I don't know if it was off-the-field distractions. If it was a falling out with Norv. Who knows. Again, it's something I worry about.

But apart from that, he was generally a 700-1000 yard receiver. That's about Walter's range too.

:spock:

Last year was the first time he broke the 700 yard mark since 2005.

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585833)
You keep forgetting about the most important advantage:

You know what you're going to get out of Walter because he's produced consistently over the past several years.

Chambers hasn't.

You guys can keep saying you think he'll equal last years production, but there's not a shred of evidence to back it up.

The only thing we have to go off of is what Chambers accomplished in KC's offense.

There's no evidence that Walters would ever do anything away from the cover of Andre Johnson.

Would you really give a guy that has averaged 600 yards a year and 2 and a half TD's while he was with Houston 4 million a year? That's what Walter got.

Chambers is a much better risk to me. JMHO.

Bowser 03-07-2010 09:10 PM

Really, this is sad. Chambers has never been a "force" ro reckon with on ANY team he's played for - us, the Chargers, or the Dolphins, yet here we are, debating his worth to the Chiefs. I am of the belief that he can be around a 8-900 yard, 5-7 TD guy for us. I'm also of the belief that if he doesn't re-sign with us, I'm not going to shake my head and scream to the heavens "WHY, PILOI???!!", because I feel that we can get that production from any number of places, most notably a draft pick.

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 6585849)
Really, this is sad. Chambers has never been a "force" ro reckon with on ANY team he's played for - us, the Chargers, or the Dolphins, yet here we are, debating his worth to the Chiefs. I am of the belief that he can be around a 8-900 yard, 5-7 TD guy for us. I'm also of the belief that if he doesn't re-sign with us, I'm not going to shake my head and scream to the heavens "WHY, PILOI???!!", because I feel that we can get that production from any number of places, most notably a draft pick.

We really need 2 WR's. That's why Chambers is so important to me. I also think that he found a fire he hasn't had in a while when he came to KC. Why? I have no idea, but his production spiked here for the first time in a few years.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585846)
:spock:

Last year was the first time he broke the 700 yard mark since 2005.

He had almost 1000 yards in 2007. And in 2006, he had 677 yards.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:15 PM

Since Chambers joined the team

Chambers had 61 targets
Bowe 44 targets

Micjones 03-07-2010 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585835)
nevermind.

No worries. I forgive you.
But I would like to know how my ass tastes...
ROFL

Micjones 03-07-2010 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585858)
Since Chambers joined the team

Chambers had 61 targets
Bowe 44 targets

Yeah... We'll forget the fact that Bowe was inactive for 4 of those games.
Dude just stop.
ROFLROFLROFL

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585859)
No worries. I forgive you.
But I would like to know how my ass tastes...
ROFL

I just proved you wrong dumbass.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585860)
Yeah... We'll forget the fact that Bowe was inactive for 4 of those games.
Dude just stop.
ROFLROFLROFL

Chambers was targeted 16 more times just admit you were wrong.

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585860)
Yeah... We'll forget the fact that Bowe was inactive for 4 of those games.
Dude just stop.
ROFLROFLROFL

Yeah but Mic, Chambers only played 7 games here.

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 6585865)
Yeah but Mic, Chambers only played 7 games here.

Nevermind, I'm a dumbass. That's for both guys in those 7 games. Nice play Billay. Inaccurate, but nice play.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:18 PM

Mics a dumbass. In the last 3 games each got 23 targets.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 6585867)
Nevermind, I'm a dumbass. That's for both guys in those 7 games. Nice play Billay. Inaccurate, but nice play.

Chambers played 9 games here Bowe played 11.

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:18 PM

Chambers was a nice player about 7 years ago, now he's an aging player that played a nice final what 8 games?

He was never an elite player, if we're going off this theory let's go sign Owens at least he was great once.

Demonpenz 03-07-2010 09:19 PM

anytime cassel throws down the field everyone gets a target

SAUTO 03-07-2010 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585861)
I just proved you wrong dumbass.

now you move the posts, remember earlier when you yourself wondered how many targets bowe got in the first two games? now that magically doesnt matter?
Posted via Mobile Device

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585869)
Chambers played 9 games here Bowe played 11.

So was your post total targets for the year for both players with KC? Or just since Chambers showed up?

Micjones 03-07-2010 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585861)
I just proved you wrong dumbass.

One more time...
In the 9 games Chambers played in Kansas City last year...
He was targeted 61 times.

Bowe was targeted 44 times over the same stretch, but he missed 4 games.

If we just look at the games they played in TOGETHER...
Chambers was targeted 32 times. Bowe was targeted 44 times.

ROFL

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585877)
One more time...
In the 9 games Chambers played in Kansas City last year...
He was targeted 61 times.

Bowe was targeted 44 times over the same stretch, but he missed 4 games.

If we just look at the games they played in TOGETHER...
Chambers was targeted 24 times. Bowe was targeted 44 times.

ROFL

Chambers didn't even start the first game either dumbass. How bout the last month of the season? Why'd Chambers get the same # of targets?

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:23 PM

I think it's a pretty clear sign that your team isn't very good when we actually think resigning a 32 year old player that his past employer just outright cut is something that is key and must happen.

This FA period sucks, it's like being a Royals fan.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 6585875)
So was your post total targets for the year for both players with KC? Or just since Chambers showed up?

Just games played in KC. Remember Chambers didn't start his first game here it also takes a newly acquired played a few weeks to get used to the offense. The last month of the season is very telling.

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 6585855)
He had almost 1000 yards in 2007. And in 2006, he had 677 yards.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2qk1jph.jpg

I'd love to know how 555 yards in 2007 is "almost" 1000.

Nevermind. Reading fail.

On a side note, WHOO!

Chris Chambers broke 700 yards TWICE!

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 6585880)
I think it's a pretty clear sign that your team isn't very good when we actually think resigning a 32 year old player that his past employer just outright cut is something that is key and must happen.

This FA period sucks, it's like being a Royals fan.

I thought the executive of the decade was paid 5 mil a year to find talent?

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585884)
http://i45.tinypic.com/2qk1jph.jpg

I'd love to know how 555 yards in 2007 is "almost" 1000.

He had 415 in Miami that year. Looks like he got pretty miserable in San Diego. He did well before and after leaving that shit hole.

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:26 PM

Also it's really difficult to quantify the value of Chambers when the Chiefs are a team that rolled up a ton of garbage time numbers.

Hell Chambers had a ton of them in the Jaguars game, the 4th hits game is all but over and dude rolls up what 100 and 2 TD's?

dirk digler 03-07-2010 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 6585847)
The only thing we have to go off of is what Chambers accomplished in KC's offense.

There's no evidence that Walters would ever do anything away from the cover of Andre Johnson.

Would you really give a guy that has averaged 600 yards a year and 2 and a half TD's while he was with Houston 4 million a year? That's what Walter got.

Chambers is a much better risk to me. JMHO.

I agree. Walters hasn't produced like you would expect a #2 WR playing opposite one of the best WR's in the game if not the best. He should be putting up TJ Houshmandzadeh types numbers when he was playing along side Chad Johnson.

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585886)
I thought the executive of the decade was paid 5 mil a year to find talent?

He's the Dayton Moore of the NFL, big name, no substance.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585884)
http://i45.tinypic.com/2qk1jph.jpg

I'd love to know how 555 yards in 2007 is "almost" 1000.

Nevermind. Reading fail.

On a side note, WHOO!

Chris Chambers broke 700 yards TWICE in 6 years!

I'm no math major, but I believe 555 + 415 = 970

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:27 PM

Zilla have you been sniffing Piolis butt hash?

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:27 PM

Also if I read "Walters" one more time my brain is going to implode

Walter, Kevin ****ing WALTER.

There is no S, not one, there's only an s if you are showing possession Walter's.

OnTheWarpath15 03-07-2010 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts (Post 6585888)
He had 415 in Miami that year. Looks like he got pretty miserable in San Diego. He did well before and after leaving that shit hole.

See my edit.

I owned up to my fail, and didn't delete my post, unlike a certain someone who has posted in this thread.

Micjones 03-07-2010 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585879)
Chambers didn't even start the first game either dumbass. How bout the last month of the season? Why'd Chambers get the same # of targets?

Keep moving the goalposts.
Maybe it'll help ease the pain of that ass-whooping you just took.

"I was wrong" is much easier.

Look at Weeks 9, 10, 15, 16, 17...
Those are the 5 games they played in together.

Chambers = 32 targets
Bowe = 44 targets

It's in Black & White chief. Quit while you're behind.

dirk digler 03-07-2010 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 6585896)
Also if I read "Walters" one more time my brain is going to implode

Walter, Kevin ****ing WALTER.

There is no S, not one, there's only an s if you are showing possession Walter's.

just be quiet meccas :p

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:29 PM

Looking at those stats, Chris Chambers was a reliable, consistent, 8-900 yard and 8TD a year receiver before he ended up in SD. I can write that off considering what he did when he came here.

BryanBusby 03-07-2010 09:29 PM

Chase Daniels

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585900)
Keep moving the goalposts.
Maybe it'll help ease the pain of that ass-whooping you just took.

"I was wrong" is much easier.

Look at Weeks 9, 10, 15, 16, 17...
Those are the 5 games they played in together.

Chambers = 32 targets
Bowe = 44 targets

It's in Black & White chief. Quit while you're behind.

Chambers didn't even start the first week he signed here. So there targets are about the same.

chiefzilla1501 03-07-2010 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585895)
Zilla have you been sniffing Piolis butt hash?

Nice cop out, dick cheese.

And go ahead through my recent history and tell me how many positive things I've said about Pioli since free agency started.

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby (Post 6585906)
Chase Daniels

Yea how's Kendall Gammons doing?

The misspelling of such simple names is debalcling my mind.

Micjones 03-07-2010 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billay (Post 6585907)
Chambers didn't even start the first week he signed here. So there targets are about the same.

Bowe didn't start the Week 17 game.
This changes nothing.

YOU...WERE...WRONG.
ROFL

Mecca 03-07-2010 09:33 PM

Also if the Chiefs idea of FA is Justin Fargas and Chris Chambers and they follow that with Bulaga, I think I'll need a new hobby.

Titty Meat 03-07-2010 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Micjones (Post 6585913)
Bowe didn't start the Week 17 game.
This changes nothing.

YOU...WERE...WRONG.
ROFL

Dickriding NEVER pays off. I told you to go sit down somewhere.

Nice spin dumbass. Bowe still played the whole game. How much of the Raiders game did Chambers play in? The answer is not much because he just signed with the team.

Mr. Flopnuts 03-07-2010 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 6585898)
See my edit.

I owned up to my fail, and didn't delete my post, unlike a certain someone who has posted in this thread.

Hey, no worries broheim. It wasn't there when I posted, I was just pointing that out. We don't disagree often, but I'm a believer in Chris Chambers.

Who didn't own up to their fail and removed their post? I missed it.

FTR, Chambers hit 700 yards in 4 of his last 6 years. Really, close to 900 in 3 of the last 6. He had an off year in Miami, I don't know what his deal was. He played in all 16 games. I'm willing to give him a pass on the SD experiment. Sometimes guys just don't fit well with a team.

RedThat 03-07-2010 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 6585880)
I think it's a pretty clear sign that your team isn't very good when we actually think resigning a 32 year old player that his past employer just outright cut is something that is key and must happen.

This FA period sucks, it's like being a Royals fan.

We know this team sucks. But at the very least resigning Chambers or adding Thomas Jones gives me some optimism. Id like to feel good once in a while you know? because it hasn't happened that much recently with the performance of this team over the years. Why not ease some of that pain?


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:58 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.