Clayton says Law is still in play - Page 2

go bo · 07-03-2005, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

Even though I didn't start the thread, start with me if it helps your lil' ego. I could care less about rep, and would much rather read a post about the Chiefs, rather than 85% of the front page loaded with personal BS that I don't care about. If you don't want to talk about the handful of Chief topics on the front page, then you have plenty of other options to discuss. I'm interested in the possibility of bringing in a Pro-Bowler on defense. If you don't want to read it, you have plenty of other non-football topics to choose from.

oh, be quiet n00b...

go bo · 07-03-2005, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4th and Long

I'm in. Let me know when we start the assault. I'm so sick and fucking tired of all these bullshit Laws threads I just want to reach through the screen and choke the shit out each and every thread starter.

Have a nice day everyone.

jeez, you're starting to sound like skip...

TRR · 07-03-2005, 09:33 AM

My source in the KC area also says they are still very interested in Law for the right price.

Chiefaholic · 07-03-2005, 09:40 AM

I'm going to

if the Chiefs sign Law. Yes, Tampa has more money that us, but we have enough to sign him, reguardless of what the Planet capologist think. IMO, it'll come down to how much money he wants upfront, and if Lamar is willing to shell out the bucks it'll take to land Law here.

Now, what gets me, I find it REAL odd that a group of Chief fans act like the Chiefs won't need Law. Out window to the Superbowl is closing with several of our offensive stars getting close to retirement. It's not the time to worry about having a "competitive team" in the future. It's time to worry about NOW and get a bad ass defense to go along with our bad ass offense. I could care less if the Chiefs have the 4th or 5th best team in football 3-4 years from now. I want to see them win the Superbowl, and letting a Pro-Bowl CB walk after yeilding the leagues worst defense is just plain stupid.

TRR · 07-03-2005, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

I'm going to

if the Chiefs sign Law. Yes, Tampa has more money that us, but we have enough to sign him, reguardless of what the Planet capologist think. IMO, it'll come down to how much money he wants upfront, and if Lamar is willing to shell out the bucks it'll take to land Law here.

Now, what gets me, I find it REAL odd that a group of Chief fans act like the Chiefs won't need Law. Out window to the Superbowl is closing with several of our offensive stars getting close to retirement. It's not the time to worry about having a "competitive team" in the future. It's time to worry about NOW and get a bad ass defense to go along with our bad ass offense. I could care less if the Chiefs have the 4th or 5th best team in football 3-4 years from now. I want to see them win the Superbowl, and letting a Pro-Bowl CB walk after yeilding the leagues worst defense is just plain stupid.

I would love to have Ty Law as well. But I am concerned about his injury. Anyone can get out there and run around in shorts and T-Shirts. Sly Morris could do that with the best of them. But how is that foot going to hold up when the pads go on?

I would hate to see KC shell out big bucks for a guy who may end up being a shell of his former self.

Chiefaholic · 07-03-2005, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRR

I would love to have Ty Law as well. But I am concerned about his injury. Anyone can get out there and run around in shorts and T-Shirts. Sly Morris could do that with the best of them. But how is that foot going to hold up when the pads go on?

I would hate to see KC shell out big bucks for a guy who may end up being a shell of his former self.

And I'de hate even worse to watch Law play like his former self while teams are picking us to pieces through the air (expecially during Warfields suspension). If we had a healthy Law and Surtain starting and Warfield playing nickle, it's going to force opponents to play a one dimensional offense. And all of us know what Gun can do to a one dimensional offense (see Atlanta game last year). If we have unused cap space left going into this season, while a guys available that has the potential to be a playmaker, SPEND THE DAMN MONEY.

mikey23545 · 07-03-2005, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

And I'de hate even worse to watch Law play like his former self while teams are picking us to pieces through the air (expecially during Warfields suspension). If we had a healthy Law and Surtain starting and Warfield playing nickle, it's going to force opponents to play a one dimensional offense. And all of us know what Gun can do to a one dimensional offense (see Atlanta game last year). If we have unused cap space left going into this season, while a guys available that has the potential to be a playmaker, SPEND THE DAMN MONEY.

Awful easy to spend someone elses money on risky investments, huh?

Chiefaholic · 07-03-2005, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikey23545

Awful easy to spend someone elses money on risky investments, huh?

That money was provided to Lamar by the fans that spend $80 to plant their asses in their seats, pay $20 to park their damn car, and $6 for a friggin' beer. The fans have made the man a hell of a lot money over the last several years to watch a mediocre football team. I'm 33 years old and NEVER watched the Chiefs win a Superbowl. It's about damn time Lamar gives a little back to the fans that's made his ass rich while sporting a "competitive team".

milkman · 07-03-2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

And I'de hate even worse to watch Law play like his former self while teams are picking us to pieces through the air (expecially during Warfields suspension). If we had a healthy Law and Surtain starting and Warfield playing nickle, it's going to force opponents to play a one dimensional offense. And all of us know what Gun can do to a one dimensional offense (see Atlanta game last year). If we have unused cap space left going into this season, while a guys available that has the potential to be a playmaker, SPEND THE DAMN MONEY.

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.

Simplex3 · 07-03-2005, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SideWinder

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.

milkman · 07-03-2005, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SideWinder

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.

Something I hadn't thought of earlier.

Again, only for the sake of argument, if Law joins our secondary, he is more versatile than Warfield.
He excels in any scheme.
He can man up and punch the receiver in the mouth off the line, or give the receiver space and still make a play on the ball.

In a base defense, Surtain and Law are your 2 corners.

In nickel packages, you could line up Warfield on the receiver at the line with Law playing the slot.

McPassOn would be the dime.

We would have the best secondary in the league, hands down.

But it's all only a pipe dream.

Coogs · 07-03-2005, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefaholic

I'm going to

if the Chiefs sign Law. Yes, Tampa has more money that us, but we have enough to sign him, reguardless of what the Planet capologist think. IMO, it'll come down to how much money he wants upfront, and if Lamar is willing to shell out the bucks it'll take to land Law here.

Now, what gets me, I find it REAL odd that a group of Chief fans act like the Chiefs won't need Law. Out window to the Superbowl is closing with several of our offensive stars getting close to retirement. It's not the time to worry about having a "competitive team" in the future. It's time to worry about NOW and get a bad ass defense to go along with our bad ass offense. I could care less if the Chiefs have the 4th or 5th best team in football 3-4 years from now. I want to see them win the Superbowl, and letting a Pro-Bowl CB walk after yeilding the leagues worst defense is just plain stupid.

And TRR, who said that right price had to be cheap. At least that is what I am assuming you are inferring. It could be a two part signing bonus or something along those lines.

TRR · 07-03-2005, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

And TRR, who said that right price had to be cheap. At least that is what I am assuming you are inferring. It could be a two part signing bonus or something along those lines.

The price will still have to be cheap for KC to sign Law. I don't think they will sign Law for anything more than veterans minimum. However, I could be wrong.

If KC throws a big deal at Law, I'm afraid they will regret it.

Coogs · 07-03-2005, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRR

The price will still have to be cheap for KC to sign Law. I don't think they will sign Law for anything more than veterans minimum. However, I could be wrong.

If KC throws a big deal at Law, I'm afraid they will regret it.

And I am afraid they will regret it if they don't. Visions of McCleon holding down the fort opposite of Surtain does nothing for me.

TRR · 07-03-2005, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

And I am afraid they will regret it if they don't. Visions of McCleon holding down the fort opposite of Surtain does nothing for me.

I don't have any visions of McCleon holding down the fort. I am very comfortable with Ashley Ambrose starting opposite Surtain.

07-03-2005, 09:33 AM	#3
TRR The Priest and I Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: CO Casino cash: $9420185	My source in the KC area also says they are still very interested in Law for the right price.
Posts: 7,371

07-03-2005, 09:40 AM	#4
Chiefaholic Veteran Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $430027	I'm going to if the Chiefs sign Law. Yes, Tampa has more money that us, but we have enough to sign him, reguardless of what the Planet capologist think. IMO, it'll come down to how much money he wants upfront, and if Lamar is willing to shell out the bucks it'll take to land Law here. Now, what gets me, I find it REAL odd that a group of Chief fans act like the Chiefs won't need Law. Out window to the Superbowl is closing with several of our offensive stars getting close to retirement. It's not the time to worry about having a "competitive team" in the future. It's time to worry about NOW and get a bad ass defense to go along with our bad ass offense. I could care less if the Chiefs have the 4th or 5th best team in football 3-4 years from now. I want to see them win the Superbowl, and letting a Pro-Bowl CB walk after yeilding the leagues worst defense is just plain stupid.
Posts: 4,832