ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs WalterFootball grades the Chiefs Free Agency LOL (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=291322)

Bufkin 03-15-2015 12:10 AM

WalterFootball grades the Chiefs Free Agency LOL
 
Chiefs sign WR Jeremy Maclin (5 years, $55M; $22.5M guaranteed): C- Grade
This move is getting a ton of hype, but it's all unjustified. This is a bad signing - and that goes for both Jeremy Maclin and the Chiefs.

Paying $11 million per year and $22.5 million in guarantees to Maclin is insane, considering his dubious injury history. Maclin finally stayed healthy last year and thrived as a consequence, but he has two bum knees and can't be counted on to have many more healthy seasons. It's also worth noting that Maclin's 2014 stats were inflated because of the number of snaps he played in Chip Kelly's offense. I'm not saying Maclin is a mediocre player, or anything; on the contrary, if he can stay healthy, he's very effective. He's just not the stellar No. 1 receiver that his 1,318 receiving yards say he is, and that's without even factoring in his health.

As for Maclin, you have to wonder what he's possibly thinking. I can't completely bash him because he's reuniting with his former head coach, but he's effectively sabotaging his career by choosing to play with Alex Smith. Maclin should've consulted Greg Jennings, Mike Wallace, James Jones, etc. about how it feels to take more money to play in a worse offense. All three receivers are regretting their decisions.

Chiefs sign G Paul Fanaika (3 years, $8.1 million): D Grade
Quite frankly, this is not a good move whatsoever. The Chiefs traded for Ben Grubbs earlier today - scroll down for that grade - but they wanted to add another guard. That's fine, but they could've done much better than Paul Fanaika. The former Arizona Cardinal was a dreadful blocker this past season in all regards. He doesn't seem like an upgrade, so it's puzzling that the Chiefs would sign him for nearly $3 million per year, especially when there were so many equal or better guards available, per the NFL Free Agent Rankings list.

Chiefs re-sign S Ron Parker (5 years, $30 million): D Grade
Uhh... did the Chiefs mean to re-sign Ron Parker to a 5-year, $3 million deal? Because that would've made more sense. Parker is barely a starter; he would be better served as a backup. He was decent enough in coverage this past season, but was an abomination in run support. In fact, aside from the injuries, Parker was the primary reason why Kansas City struggled to stop the rush in 2014.

Making matters worse, Parker has been a starter just one season in his 4-year career, so it's not like he even has a proven track record prior to his pedestrian 2014 campaign. I just don't get this signing, but I won't give the Chiefs a Millen grade because other teams were inexplicably interested in Parker's services as well.

Chiefs extend G Ben Grubbs (4 years, $24M; $8M guaranteed): B- Grade
I'm not as big a fan of this extension as I was of the initial trade. Giving away a fifth-round pick for a temporary upgrade at one of the guard positions made a lot of sense, but an extension with $8 million guaranteed isn't as good of a move.

This isn't a terrible extension, or anything, as it won't set Kansas City back very much if Grubbs flops. However, there's a chance that he will continue to regress. He's been a strong player throughout his career, but his play dropped off last year. He just turned 31, so that could continue. He should still be a temporary upgrade, but it's conceivable that Kansas City may want to cut him Year 2 into this deal.

TimBone 03-15-2015 12:11 AM

WalterFootball can eat my asshole with jelly.

TimBone 03-15-2015 12:12 AM

Or syrup.

TimBone 03-15-2015 12:12 AM

I prefer syrup.

mdchiefsfan 03-15-2015 12:14 AM

I see what you did there.

ThaVirus 03-15-2015 12:28 AM

I'm having a hard time disagreeing

DaneMcCloud 03-15-2015 12:29 AM

DaneMcCloudfootball.com thinks that Walterfootball.com has sucked for nearly 15 years

thabear04 03-15-2015 12:31 AM

Who is this Walter guy.

kcchiefsus 03-15-2015 12:32 AM

What a ****ing tool. If we should have signed Parker for only $3 million, then why were around a half dozen or more teams interested in signing him? Worst ****ing football site on the internet.

Mother****erJones 03-15-2015 12:33 AM

Walterfootball has sucked for years. I just look as his mocks for pure entertainment

booger 03-15-2015 12:37 AM

he runs the most useless shit stain website out there and his name wouldn't even be heard of around here if direkshun kept posting Walter's mocks and moronic opinions. The more the merrier when it comes to draft sites but that one is pure shit

Gadzooks 03-15-2015 12:38 AM

I agree with Walt's assessment.

mdchiefsfan 03-15-2015 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 11384114)
I'm having a hard time disagreeing

:rolleyes:

DaneMcCloud 03-15-2015 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 11384114)
I'm having a hard time disagreeing

Which is why no one takes you seriously

Bufkin 03-15-2015 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 11384130)
I agree with Walt's assessment.

Yeah, he's pretty spot on. He's always shit on the Chiefs moves, which is why Chiefs fans hate him so much. Problem being, he's usually right about those moves.

For instance, last year there was a huge thread about how big of a moron he was for not liking the Dee Ford draft pick. Same with Eric Fisher. Same with the Alex Smith trade.

1. Eric Fisher, OT, Central Michigan: C+ Grade
An offensive tackle is what makes sense most for the Chiefs. Branden Albert was franchised, so he probably won't be around in 2014. He may not even make it to training camp because he could be dealt to the Dolphins, per reports. Luke Joeckel was the consensus top tackle in the 2013 NFL Draft, so he would have been the right pick. Eric Fisher has been considered the lesser prospect throughout, but Andy Reid liked him more than Joeckel. They're both close in talent, but selecting a rising prospect based on workouts is usually treacherous. Also, I'm penalizing the Chiefs because they traded for Alex Smith too soon and ruined all leverage they could have had for a potential trade. There shouldn't have been any hurry to overpay for Smith. That trade earned Kansas City a "Millen" grade, as you can see in the 2013 NFL Free Agent Grades page.

DaneMcCloud 03-15-2015 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gadzooks (Post 11384130)
I agree with Walt's assessment.

Says the guy who's a fan of a team playing in a 1950's high school stadium

LMAO

Get back to us when your team breaks 9-7. If the Chargers were to go 11-5 or better in 2015, half the fan base would die of auto-erotic asphyxiation.

Bufkin 03-15-2015 12:50 AM

Also, here's Walter being dead wrong about that Bowe extension.

Can you say overpaid? Dwayne Bowe is one of the most overrated players in the NFL. He consistently posts solid fantasy numbers, so people think he's better than he really is. The box score doesn't show that Bowe constantly drops passes and is responsible for interceptions. He's a very good No. 2 wideout, but he's too unreliable to be a top option.

Gadzooks 03-15-2015 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384135)
Yeah, he's pretty spot on. He's always shit on the Chiefs moves, which is why Chiefs fans hate him so much. Problem being, he's usually right about those moves.

I've noticed that he shits on the Chiefs a bit more than most teams but the Dee Ford pick and Alex Smith trade blew my mind from an outsiders opinion.

The selection of Fisher over Joeckel is a wash at this point. I couldn't believe the Chiefs bad luck of getting the first pick that year.

Gadzooks 03-15-2015 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11384138)
Says the guy who's a fan of a team playing in a 1950's high school stadium

LMAO

TLO 03-15-2015 01:10 AM

Is this the guy that was in jail reporting stuff for a while?

Mother****erJones 03-15-2015 01:16 AM

He probably hated the Poe pick then also

Mother****erJones 03-15-2015 01:20 AM

I honestly could give a **** what people think about this offseason. It's good so far. Nothing to bitch about. Ofcourse Maclin is overpaid but we have to and with the cap rising per year who gives a ****.

Imon Yourside 03-15-2015 01:26 AM

Man we are so screwed, my day/night has been ruined.

Sorter 03-15-2015 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384099)
Chiefs sign WR Jeremy Maclin (5 years, $55M; $22.5M guaranteed): C- Grade
This move is getting a ton of hype, but it's all unjustified. This is a bad signing - and that goes for both Jeremy Maclin and the Chiefs.

Paying $11 million per year and $22.5 million in guarantees to Maclin is insane, considering his dubious injury history. Maclin finally stayed healthy last year and thrived as a consequence, but he has two bum knees and can't be counted on to have many more healthy seasons. It's also worth noting that Maclin's 2014 stats were inflated because of the number of snaps he played in Chip Kelly's offense. I'm not saying Maclin is a mediocre player, or anything; on the contrary, if he can stay healthy, he's very effective. He's just not the stellar No. 1 receiver that his 1,318 receiving yards say he is, and that's without even factoring in his health.

As for Maclin, you have to wonder what he's possibly thinking. I can't completely bash him because he's reuniting with his former head coach, but he's effectively sabotaging his career by choosing to play with Alex Smith. Maclin should've consulted Greg Jennings, Mike Wallace, James Jones, etc. about how it feels to take more money to play in a worse offense. All three receivers are regretting their decisions.

Disagree

Chiefs sign G Paul Fanaika (3 years, $8.1 million): D Grade
Quite frankly, this is not a good move whatsoever. The Chiefs traded for Ben Grubbs earlier today - scroll down for that grade - but they wanted to add another guard. That's fine, but they could've done much better than Paul Fanaika. The former Arizona Cardinal was a dreadful blocker this past season in all regards. He doesn't seem like an upgrade, so it's puzzling that the Chiefs would sign him for nearly $3 million per year, especially when there were so many equal or better guards available, per the NFL Free Agent Rankings list.

Agree

Chiefs re-sign S Ron Parker (5 years, $30 million): D Grade
Uhh... did the Chiefs mean to re-sign Ron Parker to a 5-year, $3 million deal? Because that would've made more sense. Parker is barely a starter; he would be better served as a backup. He was decent enough in coverage this past season, but was an abomination in run support. In fact, aside from the injuries, Parker was the primary reason why Kansas City struggled to stop the rush in 2014.

Making matters worse, Parker has been a starter just one season in his 4-year career, so it's not like he even has a proven track record prior to his pedestrian 2014 campaign. I just don't get this signing, but I won't give the Chiefs a Millen grade because other teams were inexplicably interested in Parker's services as well.
ROFL. Blaming Parker for the run struggles is silly IMO.

Chiefs extend G Ben Grubbs (4 years, $24M; $8M guaranteed): B- Grade
I'm not as big a fan of this extension as I was of the initial trade. Giving away a fifth-round pick for a temporary upgrade at one of the guard positions made a lot of sense, but an extension with $8 million guaranteed isn't as good of a move.

This isn't a terrible extension, or anything, as it won't set Kansas City back very much if Grubbs flops. However, there's a chance that he will continue to regress. He's been a strong player throughout his career, but his play dropped off last year. He just turned 31, so that could continue. He should still be a temporary upgrade, but it's conceivable that Kansas City may want to cut him Year 2 into this deal.

Agree with the second paragraph.

MMXcalibur 03-15-2015 01:35 AM

It's hard to take this guy seriously, because everything he has ever written about the Chiefs is marinated in butthurt. Seriously, find one article/paragraph on that site that gives Kansas City any credit.

Imon Yourside 03-15-2015 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCtotheSB (Post 11384161)
It's hard to take this guy seriously, because everything he has ever written about the Chiefs is marinated in butthurt. Seriously, find one article/paragraph on that site that gives Kansas City any credit.

I think he gave moving up to get Tony Gonzalez a C-

BigMeatballDave 03-15-2015 03:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 11384114)
I'm having a hard time disagreeing

:spock:

Mother****erJones 03-15-2015 04:18 AM

Couldn't help to tweet him that I guess DeVito, DJ and Berry had nothing to do with our bad run D

aturnis 03-15-2015 04:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by booger (Post 11384128)
he runs the most useless shit stain website out there and his name wouldn't even be heard of around here if direkshun kept posting Walter's mocks and moronic opinions. The more the merrier when it comes to draft sites but that one is pure shit

If it weren't for mock drafts, the website would be nothing. They aren't even good, insightful mock drafts though. What keeps people coming back is curiosity.

aturnis 03-15-2015 04:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384135)
Yeah, he's pretty spot on. He's always shit on the Chiefs moves, which is why Chiefs fans hate him so much. Problem being, he's usually right about those moves.

For instance, last year there was a huge thread about how big of a moron he was for not liking the Dee Ford draft pick. Same with Eric Fisher. Same with the Alex Smith trade.

1. Eric Fisher, OT, Central Michigan: C+ Grade
An offensive tackle is what makes sense most for the Chiefs. Branden Albert was franchised, so he probably won't be around in 2014. He may not even make it to training camp because he could be dealt to the Dolphins, per reports. Luke Joeckel was the consensus top tackle in the 2013 NFL Draft, so he would have been the right pick. Eric Fisher has been considered the lesser prospect throughout, but Andy Reid liked him more than Joeckel. They're both close in talent, but selecting a rising prospect based on workouts is usually treacherous. Also, I'm penalizing the Chiefs because they traded for Alex Smith too soon and ruined all leverage they could have had for a potential trade. There shouldn't have been any hurry to overpay for Smith. That trade earned Kansas City a "Millen" grade, as you can see in the 2013 NFL Free Agent Grades page.

Everyone hated the Smith trade.

He's wrong on Ford.

Fisher has been ass, but let's give him next year.

milkman 03-15-2015 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384099)
Chiefs sign WR Jeremy Maclin (5 years, $55M; $22.5M guaranteed): C- Grade
This move is getting a ton of hype, but it's all unjustified. This is a bad signing - and that goes for both Jeremy Maclin and the Chiefs.

Paying $11 million per year and $22.5 million in guarantees to Maclin is insane, considering his dubious injury history. Maclin finally stayed healthy last year and thrived as a consequence, but he has two bum knees and can't be counted on to have many more healthy seasons. It's also worth noting that Maclin's 2014 stats were inflated because of the number of snaps he played in Chip Kelly's offense. I'm not saying Maclin is a mediocre player, or anything; on the contrary, if he can stay healthy, he's very effective. He's just not the stellar No. 1 receiver that his 1,318 receiving yards say he is, and that's without even factoring in his health.

As for Maclin, you have to wonder what he's possibly thinking. I can't completely bash him because he's reuniting with his former head coach, but he's effectively sabotaging his career by choosing to play with Alex Smith. Maclin should've consulted Greg Jennings, Mike Wallace, James Jones, etc. about how it feels to take more money to play in a worse offense. All three receivers are regretting their decisions.

First, I have to ask, what hype?
Outside of KC, no one is talking about this.

I don't think anyone, including Walter here, is looking at the fit.
They just see Maclin, call him a vertical threat, and see Smith, who isn't a vertical passer, and dismiss the potential impact this could really have.

If the "experts" really broke it down, they could see how this works for the Chiefs, though I would have to agree that Maclin himself isn't doing himself any favors.

Quote:

Chiefs sign G Paul Fanaika (3 years, $8.1 million): D Grade
Quite frankly, this is not a good move whatsoever. The Chiefs traded for Ben Grubbs earlier today - scroll down for that grade - but they wanted to add another guard. That's fine, but they could've done much better than Paul Fanaika. The former Arizona Cardinal was a dreadful blocker this past season in all regards. He doesn't seem like an upgrade, so it's puzzling that the Chiefs would sign him for nearly $3 million per year, especially when there were so many equal or better guards available, per the NFL Free Agent Rankings list.
Pretty much agree here, though I think that he's just another stop gap, but he's better than the garbage we trotted out at guard last season.

Quote:

Chiefs re-sign S Ron Parker (5 years, $30 million): D Grade
Uhh... did the Chiefs mean to re-sign Ron Parker to a 5-year, $3 million deal? Because that would've made more sense. Parker is barely a starter; he would be better served as a backup. He was decent enough in coverage this past season, but was an abomination in run support. In fact, aside from the injuries, Parker was the primary reason why Kansas City struggled to stop the rush in 2014.

Making matters worse, Parker has been a starter just one season in his 4-year career, so it's not like he even has a proven track record prior to his pedestrian 2014 campaign. I just don't get this signing, but I won't give the Chiefs a Millen grade because other teams were inexplicably interested in Parker's services as well.
At the end of the day, the Chiefs had to pay what the market demanded in a weak safety market, but this is just a 2 year commitment, really.

Quote:

Chiefs extend G Ben Grubbs (4 years, $24M; $8M guaranteed): B- Grade
I'm not as big a fan of this extension as I was of the initial trade. Giving away a fifth-round pick for a temporary upgrade at one of the guard positions made a lot of sense, but an extension with $8 million guaranteed isn't as good of a move.

This isn't a terrible extension, or anything, as it won't set Kansas City back very much if Grubbs flops. However, there's a chance that he will continue to regress. He's been a strong player throughout his career, but his play dropped off last year. He just turned 31, so that could continue. He should still be a temporary upgrade, but it's conceivable that Kansas City may want to cut him Year 2 into this deal.
I don't know, seems like a petty detail to grade this on the extension.

In the broad view, it seems like this guy is just looking at the big numbers without considering the structures of these contracts.

From what I can see, none of them really are more than 2 year commitments, at the most.

Hog's Gone Fishin 03-15-2015 06:07 AM

The guy is a moron !

Anyway , Parkers deal is for $25 mill with another $5 mill tied to playoffs and performance incentives.

Bufkin 03-15-2015 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hog Farmer (Post 11384198)
The guy is a moron !

Anyway , Parkers deal is for $25 mill with another $5 mill tied to playoffs and performance incentives.

So it's for $30 mill...

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-15-2015 06:23 AM

I did not realize I had a brother in the world.

notorious 03-15-2015 06:25 AM

He could be right, he could be wrong.


I think that results are going to fall into the gray area.



Maclin's numbers will decline, but his deep threat is going to open up the underneath game, which will improve the entire team.

Marcellus 03-15-2015 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384199)
So it's for $30 mill...

If he reaches the incentives which would validate the contract. Moron.

This cracks me up as well.

Quote:

I just don't get this signing, but I won't give the Chiefs a Millen grade because other teams were inexplicably interested in Parker's services as well.
On other words Walterfootball just doesn't understand market value.

Rausch 03-15-2015 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11384116)
DaneMcCloudfootball.com thinks that Walterfootball.com has sucked for nearly 15 years

Dane would be right.

I'm the biggest Dorsey basher on here but in this very short sample of the offseason he's doing a B to B- job.

We gained more than we lost and Maclin has been solid in Phat Andy's WCO.

That probowl G may be a stop-gap but if he plays at a pro bowl level for two years and allows us to add another piece to this line each year it's perfect. If we're going to have a young and inexperienced C this year we need some competent G play around him...

Rausch 03-15-2015 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 11384213)
On other words Walterfootball just doesn't understand market value.

I don't think his true value matches his market value.

I don't like the signing.

I'm not complaining though, so far, this is the only thing Dorsey's done that I haven't loved...

Bufkin 03-15-2015 06:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 11384213)
On other words Walterfootball just doesn't understand market value.

I don't think that was his point sunshine...

The market value for Mike Wallace was 60 million dollars in 2013. The market value for Dunta Robinson was 57 million in 2011. The market value for Ron Parker in 2015 was 30 million dollars. In each instance, you have a dumb GM overpaying due to that market value.

Rausch 03-15-2015 06:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384216)
I don't think that was his point sunshine...

The market value for Mike Wallace was 60 million dollars in 2013. The market value for Dunta Robinson was 57 million in 2011. The market value for Ron Parker in 2015 was 30 million dollars. In each instance, you have a dumb GM overpaying due to that market value.

Exactly.

Market value is what one or more teams are willing to pay a player.

If Houston were a free agent there's probably a team out there willing to make him the highest paid defensive player in the league...

BigMeatballDave 03-15-2015 07:03 AM

No way he sees all of that $30m. He's 28. He probably won't be here after this coming season and next.

Marcellus 03-15-2015 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384216)
I don't think that was his point sunshine...

The market value for Mike Wallace was 60 million dollars in 2013. The market value for Dunta Robinson was 57 million in 2011. The market value for Ron Parker in 2015 was 30 million dollars. In each instance, you have a dumb GM overpaying due to that market value.

There are dumb GMs who overpay for players certainly, I am sure almost every one have done that at some point.

There are also dumb people who just look at the advertised number and assume that's the real value of the contract rather than realizing its closer to a 2 year $8MM deal if performance isn't up to par.

BigMeatballDave 03-15-2015 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcellus (Post 11384223)
There are also dumb people who just look at the advertised number and assume that's the real value of the contract rather than realizing its closer to a 2 year $8MM deal if performance isn't up to par.

LOL

Red Dawg 03-15-2015 07:17 AM

This report is stupid. I guess we should have done nothing and just rolled out the same team as last year. All that matters is whether the team roster got better.

It definitely did so they can STFU. Last year they dogged Pats for Edleman and Laffelle and looked like idiots.

redshirt32 03-15-2015 07:20 AM

Its easy to forecast failure in the NFL, since 30 teams fail each year anyone can open a web page and forecast failure.

Because if you do not make it to the super bowl = fail so your going to be right on at least 30 teams each year.

That is more than enough to make it seem you know what your talking about same as shit spewed here easy to do.

Kman34 03-15-2015 07:43 AM

The bottom line is Maclin is a upgrade over Bowe....The O-line will be better... The pass D will be as good as last year....and, We'll draft a receiver and will have at least one TD from a WR...Win ROFL

KCUnited 03-15-2015 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshirt32 (Post 11384228)
Its easy to forecast failure in the NFL, since 30 teams fail each year anyone can open a web page and forecast failure.

Because if you do not make it to the super bowl = fail so your going to be right on at least 30 teams each year.

That is more than enough to make it seem you know what your talking about same as shit spewed here easy to do.

Yeah, but it's easier for the Chiefs. I'm sure he has a hotkey script for KC that he just substitutes names and contract numbers.

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-15-2015 07:46 AM

Parker. lol

Bufkin 03-15-2015 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kman34 (Post 11384249)
The bottom line is Maclin is a upgrade over Bowe.... We'll draft a receiver and will have at least one TD from a WR...Win ROFL

He would have been an upgrade over Doug Baldwin and Paul Richardson in Seattle as well.

But yet Seattle didn't pay 50+ million for a shiny hood ornament. You know why?

Because champions don't pay 50+ million dollars for shiny hood ornaments.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...-man-law/2490/
(For those unfamiliar with shiny hood ornaments)

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-15-2015 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCUnited (Post 11384252)
Yeah, but it's easier for the Chiefs. I'm sure he has a hotkey script for KC that he just substitutes names and contract numbers.

It's all you need, really.

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-15-2015 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384254)
He would have been an upgrade over Doug Baldwin and Paul Richardson in Seattle as well.

But yet Seattle didn't pay 50+ million for a shiny hood ornament. You know why?

Because champions don't pay 50+ million dollars for shiny hood ornaments.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...-man-law/2490/
(For those unfamiliar with shiny hood ornaments)

Of course they do, and someone will be along shortly to explain it to you.

Kman34 03-15-2015 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384254)
He would have been an upgrade over Doug Baldwin and Paul Richardson in Seattle as well.

But yet Seattle didn't pay 50+ million for a shiny hood ornament. You know why?

Because champions don't pay 50+ million dollars for shiny hood ornaments.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...-man-law/2490/
(For those unfamiliar with shiny hood ornaments)

Tom Brady....

Bufkin 03-15-2015 07:49 AM

I know your pain Chief fans. As a Falcon fan, I was also blinded by my franchise mortgaging the future for a shiny hood ornament.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...ns-fall/12766/

Bufkin 03-15-2015 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kman34 (Post 11384259)
Tom Brady....

Tom Brady is a QB, or a driver. The absolute most essential part.

The Shiny Hood Ornament law:

ONE – Wide receivers, for all their eye-catching flash and dash, are little more than shiny ornaments on the hood of an NFL offense. Oh, sure, they're nice to have and they look all bright and sexy. But they don't necessarily make the engine run any better – and they rarely if ever make your team any better.

TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

THREE – Even the greatest receivers of all time can make a big impact only when all those pieces are in place, and even then the impact is largely overstated. Even the great Jerry Rice, for example, touched the ball just four to five times per game. So the impact of even the greatest at the position is minimal compared with the impact of a certain position that touches the ball on every offensive snap. And remember, Rice did not make the 49ers a great team. He was drafted by the 18-1 defending Super Bowl champ 49ers in 1985.

FOUR – Quarterbacks make wide receivers; wide receivers do not make quarterbacks. You can have a receiving corps of Rice, Don Hutson, Randy Moss, Homer Jones and the Catawba Claw ... they won't make many game-changing plays if the quarterback can't get them the ball.

FIVE – Drafting wide receivers in the first round is almost always a bad decision; mortgaging your future with five draft picks to make it happen should get any personnel manager or GM fired immediately.

Kman34 03-15-2015 07:54 AM

Terrell Owens helped Andy make it to the Super Bowl....

Bufkin 03-15-2015 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kman34 (Post 11384269)
Terrell Owens helped Andy make it to the Super Bowl....

And they were killed by a team whose top two receivers left for big money after their rookie contracts. Those receivers (David Givens and Deion Branch) did precious little after getting paid, and Tom Brady continued to be the best ever.

Hog Rider 03-15-2015 07:56 AM

This Walter place must be a training ground for future General Managers - they are smart.
GM's are dumb.

Kman34 03-15-2015 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384263)
Tom Brady is a QB, or a driver. The absolute most essential part.

The Shiny Hood Ornament law:

ONE – Wide receivers, for all their eye-catching flash and dash, are little more than shiny ornaments on the hood of an NFL offense. Oh, sure, they're nice to have and they look all bright and sexy. But they don't necessarily make the engine run any better – and they rarely if ever make your team any better.

TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

THREE – Even the greatest receivers of all time can make a big impact only when all those pieces are in place, and even then the impact is largely overstated. Even the great Jerry Rice, for example, touched the ball just four to five times per game. So the impact of even the greatest at the position is minimal compared with the impact of a certain position that touches the ball on every offensive snap. And remember, Rice did not make the 49ers a great team. He was drafted by the 18-1 defending Super Bowl champ 49ers in 1985.

FOUR – Quarterbacks make wide receivers; wide receivers do not make quarterbacks. You can have a receiving corps of Rice, Don Hutson, Randy Moss, Homer Jones and the Catawba Claw ... they won't make many game-changing plays if the quarterback can't get them the ball.

FIVE – Drafting wide receivers in the first round is almost always a bad decision; mortgaging your future with five draft picks to make it happen should get any personnel manager or GM fired immediately.

So....you seen something on a website....copied and pasted it... and now its Law...ROFLROFL

Sweet Daddy Hate 03-15-2015 08:00 AM

I am jelly at the amount of sweet, delicious butt-hurt Walter has generated amongst the Lil' Chiefy.

Imma' go work out now.

milkman 03-15-2015 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384263)
Tom Brady is a QB, or a driver. The absolute most essential part.

The Shiny Hood Ornament law:

ONE – Wide receivers, for all their eye-catching flash and dash, are little more than shiny ornaments on the hood of an NFL offense. Oh, sure, they're nice to have and they look all bright and sexy. But they don't necessarily make the engine run any better – and they rarely if ever make your team any better.

TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

THREE – Even the greatest receivers of all time can make a big impact only when all those pieces are in place, and even then the impact is largely overstated. Even the great Jerry Rice, for example, touched the ball just four to five times per game. So the impact of even the greatest at the position is minimal compared with the impact of a certain position that touches the ball on every offensive snap. And remember, Rice did not make the 49ers a great team. He was drafted by the 18-1 defending Super Bowl champ 49ers in 1985.

FOUR – Quarterbacks make wide receivers; wide receivers do not make quarterbacks. You can have a receiving corps of Rice, Don Hutson, Randy Moss, Homer Jones and the Catawba Claw ... they won't make many game-changing plays if the quarterback can't get them the ball.

FIVE – Drafting wide receivers in the first round is almost always a bad decision; mortgaging your future with five draft picks to make it happen should get any personnel manager or GM fired immediately.

Overall, I agree everything here.

However, as with every rule, there are always exceptions.

AJ Green makes Andy Dalton look like a serviceable NFL QB, and Alshon Jefferies and Brandon Marshall made Josh McCown look like a viable NFL QB.

Maclin's game is a perfect match for Smith.

Protection needs to be improved, but Maclin can help Smith's production.

TRR 03-15-2015 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384270)
And they were killed by a team whose top two receivers left for big money after their rookie contracts. Those receivers (David Givens and Deion Branch) did precious little after getting paid, and Tom Brady continued to be the best ever.

Yea what a beat down. 24-21.

New World Order 03-15-2015 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 11384138)
Says the guy who's a fan of a team playing in a 1950's high school stadium

LMAO

Get back to us when your team breaks 9-7. If the Chargers were to go 11-5 or better in 2015, half the fan base would die of auto-erotic asphyxiation.


half of their fan base? Thats like 20 people

notorious 03-15-2015 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384270)
And they were killed by a team whose top two receivers left for big money after their rookie contracts. Those receivers (David Givens and Deion Branch) did precious little after getting paid, and Tom Brady continued to be the best ever.

Killed?


Terrell would have been the MVP of the Superbowl if McNabb doesn't shit all over himself on the last drive, and that's coming off of a broken leg during the season.

srvy 03-15-2015 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384139)
Also, here's Walter being dead wrong about that Bowe extension.

Can you say overpaid? Dwayne Bowe is one of the most overrated players in the NFL. He consistently posts solid fantasy numbers, so people think he's better than he really is. The box score doesn't show that Bowe constantly drops passes and is responsible for interceptions. He's a very good No. 2 wideout, but he's too unreliable to be a top option.


I cant disagree with any of this! ^^^

He was a bit harsh on Parker being responsible for lack of run defense kinda a stretch. The rest will be answered in the coming season. Free agency usually it seems high profile players dont do as well as expected and the under the radar ones can be gems.

dannybcaitlyn 03-15-2015 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 11384279)
Overall, I agree everything here.

However, as with every rule, there are always exceptions.

AJ Green makes Andy Dalton look like a serviceable NFL QB, and Alshon Jefferies and Brandon Marshall made Josh McCown look like a viable NFL QB.

Maclin's game is a perfect match for Smith.

Protection needs to be improved, but Maclin can help Smith's production.

Milk, I'm still on the fence if any receiver could help smiths production. They are more like decoys for him it seems. If you look at most QB's there is a combo. Montana/Rice, Dalton/green, Manning/Harrison etc. In Alex career I can't have think of anyone that he had that kind of consistency with. Vernon Davis the TE was the closest thing.

milkman 03-15-2015 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannybcaitlyn (Post 11384336)
Milk, I'm still on the fence if any receiver could help smiths production. They are more like decoys for him it seems. If you look at most QB's there is a combo. Montana/Rice, Dalton/green, Manning/Harrison etc. In Alex career I can't have think of anyone that he had that kind of consistency with. Vernon Davis the TE was the closest thing.

As much as I hate the excuse making for Smith, the fact is that he ha never had a receiver with Maclin's game.

Very good route runner who gets separation in the short to intermediate areas that Alex Smith's passing game lives in.

Jim Lahey 03-15-2015 09:27 AM

If they wanted to hire some jackass with shitty takes on everything they coulda hired me

milkman 03-15-2015 09:33 AM

To stay with the car analogy, Maclin might be that lever on the seat that moves it back and forward so the driver can drive comfortably without having to stretch his legs to reach the pedal.

Easy 6 03-15-2015 09:41 AM

Walter football means less than nothing to me, its been a fantastic free agency, everything I wanted and then some... and we still have a bevy of picks in the draft and the flexibility to be creative with them.

Imon Yourside 03-15-2015 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Easy 6 (Post 11384383)
Walter football means less than nothing to me, its been a fantastic free agency, everything I wanted and then some... and we still have a bevy of picks in the draft and the flexibility to be creative with them.

oh i feel better, gonna stop losing sleep now :D

Oh and I agree, love the moves so far.

Easy 6 03-15-2015 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN (Post 11384386)
oh i feel better, gonna stop losing sleep now :D

Oh and I agree, love the moves so far.

Rest easy, old chum :)

CapsLockKey 03-15-2015 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384254)
He would have been an upgrade over Doug Baldwin and Paul Richardson in Seattle as well.

But yet Seattle didn't pay 50+ million for a shiny hood ornament. You know why?

Because champions don't pay 50+
(For those unfamiliar with shiny hood ornaments)

Seattle doesn't pay big for receivers? Sidney Rice, Percy Harvin, and Jimmy Graham disagree. Seattle not only is willing to pay top dollar, they are willing to throw away first round picks to do it.

Brock 03-15-2015 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 11384371)
To stay with the car analogy, Maclin might be that lever on the seat that moves it back and forward so the driver can drive comfortably without having to stretch his legs to reach the pedal.

hopefully he'll be like a light on the dashboard telling the driver "shift, mother****er"

Chiefshrink 03-15-2015 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384263)
Tom Brady is a QB, or a driver. The absolute most essential part.

The Shiny Hood Ornament law:

ONE – Wide receivers, for all their eye-catching flash and dash, are little more than shiny ornaments on the hood of an NFL offense. Oh, sure, they're nice to have and they look all bright and sexy. But they don't necessarily make the engine run any better – and they rarely if ever make your team any better.

TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

THREE – Even the greatest receivers of all time can make a big impact only when all those pieces are in place, and even then the impact is largely overstated. Even the great Jerry Rice, for example, touched the ball just four to five times per game. So the impact of even the greatest at the position is minimal compared with the impact of a certain position that touches the ball on every offensive snap. And remember, Rice did not make the 49ers a great team. He was drafted by the 18-1 defending Super Bowl champ 49ers in 1985.

FOUR – Quarterbacks make wide receivers; wide receivers do not make quarterbacks. You can have a receiving corps of Rice, Don Hutson, Randy Moss, Homer Jones and the Catawba Claw ... they won't make many game-changing plays if the quarterback can't get them the ball.

FIVE – Drafting wide receivers in the first round is almost always a bad decision; mortgaging your future with five draft picks to make it happen should get any personnel manager or GM fired immediately.

I agree with the majority of this and especially No.4 when playing fantasy football just ask Larry Fitz when Warner left.

Mav 03-15-2015 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384254)
He would have been an upgrade over Doug Baldwin and Paul Richardson in Seattle as well.

But yet Seattle didn't pay 50+ million for a shiny hood ornament. You know why?

Because champions don't pay 50+ million dollars for shiny hood ornaments.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com...-man-law/2490/
(For those unfamiliar with shiny hood ornaments)

They don't? Is that why they just traded a pro bowl center and their first for a shiny hood ornament?

Mav 03-15-2015 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bufkin (Post 11384263)
Tom Brady is a QB, or a driver. The absolute most essential part.

The Shiny Hood Ornament law:

ONE – Wide receivers, for all their eye-catching flash and dash, are little more than shiny ornaments on the hood of an NFL offense. Oh, sure, they're nice to have and they look all bright and sexy. But they don't necessarily make the engine run any better – and they rarely if ever make your team any better.

TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

THREE – Even the greatest receivers of all time can make a big impact only when all those pieces are in place, and even then the impact is largely overstated. Even the great Jerry Rice, for example, touched the ball just four to five times per game. So the impact of even the greatest at the position is minimal compared with the impact of a certain position that touches the ball on every offensive snap. And remember, Rice did not make the 49ers a great team. He was drafted by the 18-1 defending Super Bowl champ 49ers in 1985.

FOUR – Quarterbacks make wide receivers; wide receivers do not make quarterbacks. You can have a receiving corps of Rice, Don Hutson, Randy Moss, Homer Jones and the Catawba Claw ... they won't make many game-changing plays if the quarterback can't get them the ball.

FIVE – Drafting wide receivers in the first round is almost always a bad decision; mortgaging your future with five draft picks to make it happen should get any personnel manager or GM fired immediately.

You won that trade by a ****ing mile. Do you even know who the picks you gave the browns turned in to?

Here.

Phil Taylor,
Brandon Weeden,
Greg Little,

Mav 03-15-2015 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brock (Post 11384414)
hopefully he'll be like a light on the dashboard telling the driver "shift, mother****er"

LMAO

redshirt32 03-15-2015 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mav (Post 11384428)
They don't? Is that why they just traded a pro bowl center and their first for a shiny hood ornament?

Thats what #2 says
TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

Mav 03-15-2015 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshirt32 (Post 11384441)
Thats what #2 says
TWO – You should add a flashy wide receiver only when all the other pieces of a great team are in place: a great driver (the quarterback), some sporty tires that provide plenty of traction (the offensive line and ground game), a powerful motor (the defense) and a great transmission (special teams) that allows you to change gears quickly and effectively.

They have up a lot for that shiny hood ornament.

Prison Bitch 03-15-2015 10:17 AM

Paying $11 million per year and $22.5 million in guarantees to Maclin is insane, considering his dubious injury history. Maclin finally stayed healthy last year and thrived as a consequence, but he has two bum knees and can't be counted on to have many more healthy seasons. It's also worth noting that Maclin's 2014 stats were inflated because of the number of snaps he played in Chip Kelly's offense. I'm not saying Maclin is a mediocre player, or anything; on the contrary, if he can stay healthy, he's very effective. He's just not the stellar No. 1 receiver that his 1,318 receiving yards say he is, and that's without even factoring in his health.


This was precisely my opinion when we signed mACLin. It won't work out for us, and he won't even make it 12 games year 1. The out years, he won't even be on the roster. I'd bet money on this.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.