bah, where's the fun in that? :shrug: ROFL :D

We won't sign Law and you can take that to the bank.

banana?

you're talking about bananas?

that's even worse than a ty law thread!! :p :p :p


psssst... some of us are kidding you...

pshaw...

another n00b speaks up... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Thank you. The one piece of information I continued past page one of this thread for.

You spelled guard wrong. Get with the program, it is spelled g a u r d. Don't believe me? Look it up in the Lexicon.....:)

A healthy Law added to Surtain and our new LB's is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much for a Chief fan that lived through the last 35 years to hope for.

An incentive laden contract would be ideal and it just might be plausible with Law's attitude. Challenge him to live up to his statement that he will be the best CB in the NFL next season.

After that it is real simple, if he is then pay him like he is!! If not then he is paid commensurate with his performance.

Either way he is motivated and seems like someone who would like the challenge of backing up their words while playing for a contender.

Could you imagine if our defense was good enough to give our offense one or two more opportunities to score per game than the last couple of seasons. What a sight that would be!!!

I'm really kind of ambivalent about Law right now.
I have difficulty believing that the Chiefs will sign him.

However, assuming, for the sake of argument, that Carl does bring Law in, I just don't think that putting Warfield at nickel is a very good idea.

He struggled for 3 years in Spinner's scheme because he wasn't able to line up at the LOS and man up on the receivers.

I was one of the few that defended him in those years, because I recognized that Spinner didn't utilize his strengths.

Putting him at nickel will put him in a position that again exposes his weakness, and he'll revert back to the "Toast" that everyone labeled him.

On the other hand, McPassOn played well in Spinner's scheme, and is much better suited for the nickel than Warfield.

IMO, if Law were brought in, Warfield becomes an expensive benchwarmer by midseason.
That, or he is really crisp by seasons end.

Nice analysis. I'd bet $10 if they sign Law AND he's healthy enough to start opposite Surtain that Ambrose takes that nickle spot. I won't even be the least bit suprised if Ambrose takes Warfield's job if we don't get Law.

Law is Good, but...
 

I think the Chiefs secondary is fine. Patrick Surtain should be decent, and Ashley Ambrose will do OK. I think Warfield will come back a new man and record 14 INT's in 12 games. He will have 70 tackles and a couple of sacks too. You heard it here first.

Considering Warfield makes over 3 million in salary, that's not a bad scenario at all. :hmmm:

ROFL

That's making a splash with your first post.
Talk about unrealistic hopes!

Welcome aboard.

Don't take the soon to come bashing too hard.

I don't know.
From what I've seen of Ambrose, he, like Warfield, struggles when he lines up off the line.
Despite his size, he's much better in physical man up coverage.

And because he has lost a step, I don't think he can take Warfield's job as the #2 corner, and I also see McPassOn as a better nickel than him.

Bull Crap