Ashley Ambrose, our new CB? - Page 2

RedThat · 06-28-2005, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ptlyon

Not sure what you mean here RB, but yes, I am saying that they are putting it out there that they are interested in other players. They have said that they will not sign him (Law) for what he wants and argue the passing the physical issue.

Maybe it is an honest move, but it may be a smokescreen saying "you aren't going to get a better deal anywhere else".

Personally, I don't want them to sign Law. The injury let alone the chip on his shoulder frightens me.

Will somebody please hold me?

I think they should only look at depth, because that is what they lost, not a starter. Horrorfield will be the starter once the NFL gets off their @$$ and tell us how many games he is suspended. McCleon will start in place of him, unless they sign somebody significant, which I don't see them doing.

JMO, of course.

When you said smokescreen, i thought you we're referring to this part of the article:

"The thought is to play the whole scanario out, "Vermeil said, "and the scenario does include the final evaluation of Ty Law in terms of what is actually going to happen from a financial standpoint.

"First off, can he pass the physical? And then we have to find out how much money he's going to be offered on the open market. If he's going to be offered big money, then we're automatically out of it."

Wallcrawler · 06-28-2005, 07:32 AM

You have to pay for talent guys.

All of you still living in the wet dream that Ty Law is going to go against everything he has said this whole time and just take the vet minimum and play for the Chiefs need to wake the hell up.

The Chiefs cant afford to add another top flight player, or this offseason with the way it has gone, Im sure they would have.

We got 3 former pro bowlers and the most decorated linebacker in the draft. Thats four top caliber players in one offseason.

Thats way more than ANYONE ever expected from the Chiefs. Anyone else added for depth on this team right now is gravy.

When youre paying the Vet Minimum, youre not going to be adding superstar players. Besides, think about this. Ambrose will be brought in to replace JULIAN BATTLE. A scrub who has done jack so far during his time with the Chiefs, and before the season started was a bit of a longshot to even make the team.

At the very least on this Ambrose deal if it happens, we break even. Im quite sure that Ambrose still has enough talent to match what Julian Battle could have done this season.

htismaqe · 06-28-2005, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

At the very least on this Ambrose deal if it happens, we break even. Im quite sure that Ambrose still has enough talent to match what Julian Battle could have done this season.

Very well said. I'd still rather have Beasley, but at this point, even Ambrose is better than what we have.

RedThat · 06-28-2005, 07:39 AM

Ambrose is not that good guys. I guess to get a guy to come in here for cheap, and start 4 games, this is what we have to expect. Very least he's a nickle back now.

htismaqe · 06-28-2005, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedBull

Ambrose is not that good guys. I guess to get a guy to come in here for cheap, and start 4 games, this is what we have to expect. Very least he's a nickle back now.

Beggars can't be choosers. Would you rather have McCleon start those 4 games? I know I wouldn't.

Wallcrawler · 06-28-2005, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedBull

Ambrose is not that good guys. I guess to get a guy to come in here for cheap, and start 4 games, this is what we have to expect. Very least he's a nickle back now.

Battle isnt that good either, but they were going to go with him.

None of the guys out there available are that good. Aaron Beasley was moved from Cornerback to Safety at one point.

Dewayne Washington? Please.

There isnt anyone that is going to knock anyone's socks off available for what the Chiefs can pay.

If Ambrose is the one with the most skill in the workouts, then thats who they will take. In any case, it will still be better than Julian Battle/Dexter Mcleon starting in my opinion.

beer bacon · 06-28-2005, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

You have to pay for talent guys.

All of you still living in the wet dream that Ty Law is going to go against everything he has said this whole time and just take the vet minimum and play for the Chiefs need to wake the hell up.

The Chiefs cant afford to add another top flight player, or this offseason with the way it has gone, Im sure they would have.

We got 3 former pro bowlers and the most decorated linebacker in the draft. Thats four top caliber players in one offseason.

Thats way more than ANYONE ever expected from the Chiefs. Anyone else added for depth on this team right now is gravy.

When youre paying the Vet Minimum, youre not going to be adding superstar players. Besides, think about this. Ambrose will be brought in to replace JULIAN BATTLE. A scrub who has done jack so far during his time with the Chiefs, and before the season started was a bit of a longshot to even make the team.

At the very least on this Ambrose deal if it happens, we break even. Im quite sure that Ambrose still has enough talent to match what Julian Battle could have done this season.

We could get Beasley for very cheap. He is still a decent corner. There is no reason to sign Ambrose over Beasley.

kc rush · 06-28-2005, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beer bacon

We could get Beasley for very cheap. He is still a decent corner. There is no reason to sign Ambrose over Beasley.

Except that the coaching staff is saying they think Ambrose will serve their needs better. Other than that...

Wallcrawler · 06-28-2005, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beer bacon

There is no reason to sign Ambrose over Beasley.

Unless of course Ambrose was more impressive than Beasley in the workouts, which is in effect what the article says.

You dont make teams based on past reputation. If Ambrose was the most impressive in the workouts, then that is a damn good reason to go with him over anyone else.

beer bacon · 06-28-2005, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

Unless of course Ambrose was more impressive than Beasley in the workouts, which is in effect what the article says.

You dont make teams based on past reputation. If Ambrose was the most impressive in the workouts, then that is a damn good reason to go with him over anyone else.

I would take past performance in games over a workout performance.

ct · 06-28-2005, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wallcrawler

You have to pay for talent guys.

All of you still living in the wet dream that Ty Law is going to go against everything he has said this whole time and just take the vet minimum and play for the Chiefs need to wake the hell up.

The Chiefs cant afford to add another top flight player, or this offseason with the way it has gone, Im sure they would have.

We got 3 former pro bowlers and the most decorated linebacker in the draft. Thats four top caliber players in one offseason.

Thats way more than ANYONE ever expected from the Chiefs. Anyone else added for depth on this team right now is gravy.

When youre paying the Vet Minimum, youre not going to be adding superstar players. Besides, think about this. Ambrose will be brought in to replace JULIAN BATTLE. A scrub who has done jack so far during his time with the Chiefs, and before the season started was a bit of a longshot to even make the team.

At the very least on this Ambrose deal if it happens, we break even. Im quite sure that Ambrose still has enough talent to match what Julian Battle could have done this season.

Most excellent points!

Wile_E_Coyote · 06-28-2005, 07:48 AM

Ambrose, at 34, may wear down with the season. But for the first 4 games has the most to offer

jspchief · 06-28-2005, 08:04 AM

I would prefer Beasley. He'll make a quality nickel after Warfield gets back, so he's not just a band-aid, he's a legitimate addition to the team.

Ambrose probably excites me the least. I guess we can line him up against Rod Smith and we'll have a mini Old Timers game right there at Incestco.

RedThat · 06-28-2005, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspchief

I would prefer Beasley. He'll make a quality nickel after Warfield gets back, so he's not just a band-aid, he's a legitimate addition to the team.

Ambrose probably excites me the least. I guess we can line him up against Rod Smith and we'll have a mini Old Timers game right there at Incestco.

Line up Ambrose against Lelie or Rice. Rod Smith has been a Chiefs killer, he must be stopped, and Patrick Surtain is the remedy.

Chiefnj · 06-28-2005, 08:14 AM

DeWayne Washington was able to play in 16 games last year for a good Jax defense.

06-28-2005, 07:39 AM	#4
RedThat Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Earth Casino cash: $10004900	Ambrose is not that good guys. I guess to get a guy to come in here for cheap, and start 4 games, this is what we have to expect. Very least he's a nickle back now.
Posts: 6,666

06-28-2005, 07:48 AM	#12
Wile_E_Coyote avatar down for remodel Join Date: Jul 2001 Casino cash: $10004900	Ambrose, at 34, may wear down with the season. But for the first 4 games has the most to offer
Posts: 6,009

06-28-2005, 08:04 AM	#13
jspchief BAMF Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Your Face Casino cash: $9998710	I would prefer Beasley. He'll make a quality nickel after Warfield gets back, so he's not just a band-aid, he's a legitimate addition to the team. Ambrose probably excites me the least. I guess we can line him up against Rod Smith and we'll have a mini Old Timers game right there at Incestco. __________________ Courage is not the absence of fear but rather the judgment that something is more important than fear. The brave may not live forever but the cautious do not live at all.
Posts: 27,207

06-28-2005, 08:14 AM	#15
Chiefnj MVP Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Willis, Harris and Davis. Casino cash: $10004900	DeWayne Washington was able to play in 16 games last year for a good Jax defense. __________________ "I always tell (the assistant coaches), 'Make it simple, 'cause I'm stupid,'" Edwards said. "This ain't computer football." Herm Edwards, 3-20-07 Q: Herm, back on December 25th you were asked if Trent Green was your starter going into next season and you said, ‘yeah, why wouldn’t he be?’ Have you changed your mind on that? EDWARDS: No, I have not.” (1-11-07)
Posts: 6,811