Priest would be interested in Cowboys

[siegbach]

Priest would be interested in Cowboys

Monday, Aug 6, 2007 12:38 pm EDT

Getty Images

Kansas City Chiefs running back Priest Holmes, attempting a comeback at age 34 after nearly two years off with a neck injury, told reporters that he wouldn't mind playing for the Dallas Cowboys if the Chiefs don't want him.

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

 

[iceberg]

Priest would be interested in Cowboys

Monday, Aug 6, 2007 12:38 pm EDT

Getty Images

Kansas City Chiefs running back Priest Holmes, attempting a comeback at age 34 after nearly two years off with a neck injury, told reporters that he wouldn't mind playing for the Dallas Cowboys if the Chiefs don't want him.

Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer

repeat - but lord no. i don't see him helping at all when we have youth out there fighting for a 4th spot we may not even have.

put in priest you lose:
tyson thompson
jackie battle

why? if you're down to your 3rd string RB anyway you're lost and priest may be able to bust a move from time to time but he won't play special teams like the others will.

we already did our "eddie george" - be interested priest. we appreciate the thought and the goodwill about where we're headed, but we've long since passed up the need for an aged RB who's done.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

I would also be interested, and I assure you that the Cowboys have the SAME amount of interest in me as they do Priest running the ball for them this year!

ZERO

 

[AbeBeta]

This is good to keep in mind if there is an injury to JJ or MBIII but not a realistic option at this point. He's only be useful in filling a #1 or #2 role -- bringing him in as a 3rd RB would be silly since that guy should play ST.

 

[Ren]

5 years ago this would have been really good news

 

[sago1]

NO NO NO NO NO. No more Eddie Georges. We got JJ, MBIII and maybe an emerging TT (meaning he's got same speed as before his injury but supposedly in TC has shown cuts/moves that he never did before). Let's get a grip here. We don't need anymore cast offs from other teams. Believe it or not, other teams are signing our cast offs. See Jason Fabini in Washington, etc.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

repeat - but lord no. i don't see him helping at all when we have youth out there fighting for a 4th spot we may not even have.

put in priest you lose:
tyson thompson
jackie battle

why? if you're down to your 3rd string RB anyway you're lost and priest may be able to bust a move from time to time but he won't play special teams like the others will.

we already did our "eddie george" - be interested priest. we appreciate the thought and the goodwill about where we're headed, but we've long since passed up the need for an aged RB who's done.

I agree with that 100%.

We're trying to build a team that competes for several seasons-- not just one.

34 yo running backs need not apply.

 

[ZeroClub]

Yup, this has Eddie George, Part 2 written all over it.

 

[HighTechDave]

speaking of, to this day I still couldn't understand why a talent as George, couldn't do a damn thing here. Puzzling

 

[AbeBeta]

speaking of, to this day I still couldn't understand why a talent as George, couldn't do a damn thing here. Puzzling

In Dallas he went for 3.3 YPC.

His three previous years he went 3.0, 3.4, and 3.3.

Not puzzling at all.

 

[sago1]

He didn't do a damn thing went he went back to the Titans from here and they weren't interested in him again either. BTW: He was bitter about what happened in Dallas so I have the impression he either expected get more reps and/or didn't get the proper respect he thought he entitled to or felt OL didn't help him enough. Now I could easily see a team with a major need with legit SB aspirations checking him out to see if he could give them one year but not us.

 

[Vintage]

I agree with that 100%.

We're trying to build a team that competes for several seasons-- not just one.

34 yo running backs need not apply.

LOL.

While I do not think signing Priest is necessary (because he wouldn't get much, if any, carries this year)...

How is signing him, if we did, a bad thing? It would cost the all mighty Tyson Thompson his roster spot, most likely.

I think we'd survive. If we want, we can find another fast RB who seems to not to have much wiggle. They probably are pretty common.

But more importantly - its not like Thompson is being groomed to be a backup RB or anything. He's just there. I'd have a problem if we were cutting someone like, say, Pat McQuistan (for a similar OL talent comparable to Priest) because its clear we are trying to groom McQuistan.

Thompson, not so much.

He's there because he can return kicks (Austin can too). And because we might not have any better options at the #3 RB spot. This notion that we are trying to "build" a team to compete for multiple seasons and signing Priest takes away from that is foolish, considering the cost is Tyson Thompson.

You'd have a point if it concerned Barber or Jones.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

LOL.

While I do not think signing Priest is necessary (because he wouldn't get much, if any, carries this year)...

How is signing him, if we did, a bad thing? It would cost the all mighty Tyson Thompson his roster spot, most likely.

I think we'd survive. If we want, we can find another fast RB who seems to not to have much wiggle. They probably are pretty common.

But more importantly - its not like Thompson is being groomed to be a backup RB or anything. He's just there. I'd have a problem if we were cutting someone like, say, Pat McQuistan (for a similar OL talent comparable to Priest) because its clear we are trying to groom McQuistan.

Thompson, not so much.

He's there because he can return kicks (Austin can too). And because we might not have any better options at the #3 RB spot. This notion that we are trying to "build" a team to compete for multiple seasons and signing Priest takes away from that is foolish, considering the cost is Tyson Thompson.

You'd have a point if it concerned Barber or Jones.

If you are not going to give your third down back many carries, as you suggest.

Than why would you want to sign someone with a much higher salary...even if it is the vet minimum to take a place of a much cheaper third down back that will not get many carries either but will also be on special teams?

Would not seem to make sense to me to sign him unless you want him to be a starter or to split carries with a starter.

 

[AbeBeta]

He didn't do a damn thing went he went back to the Titans from here and they weren't interested in him again either. BTW: He was bitter about what happened in Dallas so I have the impression he either expected get more reps and/or didn't get the proper respect he thought he entitled to or felt OL didn't help him enough. Now I could easily see a team with a major need with legit SB aspirations checking him out to see if he could give them one year but not us.

As I recall, Eddie didn't run very hard in a short yardage situation and Bill really soured on him. There were also some comments from the OL guys about how they felt energized by Julius' performance - especially in his first game back in Baltimore because he was running so hard on each play.

Eddie was legitimately beaten out by a back who could do more for the team.

 

[joseephuss]

speaking of, to this day I still couldn't understand why a talent as George, couldn't do a damn thing here. Puzzling

Because he was never truly that talented. He was a good back that played behind a very good O-line. Bruce Mathews, one of George's O-lineman was just enshrined into the Hall of Fame. He went over 4 yards a carry only twice in his career. That was when he was at his best. By the time he got to Dallas he was wore down. There were a lot of people predicting that George would not do much in Dallas. It was easy to understand.

 

[Vintage]

If you are not going to give your third down back many carries, as you suggest.

Than why would you want to sign someone with a much higher salary...even if it is the vet minimum to take a place of a much cheaper third down back that will not get many carries either but will also be on special teams?

Would not seem to make sense to me to sign him unless you want him to be a starter or to split carries with a starter.

I am not saying I'd sign him (partially because of the money).

I am saying that the idea of not signing him because we need to compete in the future (when we are talking about our 3rd RB) is amusing for the reasons I listed.