PDA

View Full Version : tag Gonzo or not? that is the question



wolfpack
12-21-2006, 03:57 PM
do we tag him,sign a one year deal? sign him and see about trading him? i honstly think he wants out. get what you can for him in draft picks. yes i know,he is are only passing threat but he is getting older and we can`t break the bank over a tightend when we need help other places. to bad i like him,the years of players staying with one team are gone. :cry:

Chiefster
12-21-2006, 05:12 PM
wolfpack wrote:
do we tag him,sign a one year deal? sign him and see about trading him? i honstly think he wants out. get what you can for him in draft picks. yes i know,he is are only passing threat but he is getting older and we can`t break the bank over a tightend when we need help other places. to bad i like him,the years of players staying with one team are gone. :cry:

As sad as it is I think you're probably right about Tony G. He is in the twilight of his career and is wanting a Super Bowl ring. The same thing happened with Neal Smith.

kenny1937
12-21-2006, 09:36 PM
Keep all the weapons we have, including Tony G. They are the only reason to go watch the Chiefs. Until we get a crew in there that recognizes real talent, we will continue to go down hill by releasing what we have for draft picks and so forth, that net us nothing. Everytime a true prospect comes around we lose him, and our team continues to suffer, so until you get a bunch in management that really know what they are doing, letting Tony go, and anybody else does us no good. To fix the problem, does not take a mental Giant, it only takes someone with "know How". Lose Tony, no, keep him, because in my humble opinion we will get nothing for him. Besides, I want to see him overtake Shannon Sharpe as a Chief, and set a new mark as a Chief, Go Tony G, You can do it!!

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-) :lol: :pint:

Guru
12-22-2006, 01:20 AM
If we could somehow obtain a high second round pick or a low first, I would be willing to let him go.

kenny1937
12-22-2006, 01:54 AM
Guru wrote:
If we could somehow obtain a high second round pick or a low first, I would be willing to let him go.

Yes, if we get value for value, I agree, but it is going to have to be one that improves the offense, we got a couple of good defensive players out of the draft, but we need Offense, as was stated we need good wide recievers, plus a good offensive line. I think that it is time for youth and ability, to replace the aging, although what good players we have would be great teachers and role models for the talent we need to get to build the winning team of tomorrow (or even next season). I am not sure that on the offensive end we are going to get what we need, for the sacrifice of great players, like Tony G.

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-) :lol: :pint:

oldred
12-22-2006, 12:48 PM
It all depends on who we have to replace him with. Although I have a lot of respect for Dunn I don't think he could replace Gonzalez. Gonzalez seems to have lost some of his drive in the past few years and I wonder about his play after signing him to a longterm contract.

wolfpack
12-22-2006, 04:17 PM
we could more than likely never replace him,i.e. donkies and sharpe. but dont break the bank for a aging TE. to many other holes to fill. besides,if we ever had a WR that was any good i wonder how much Gonzo would have gotten the ball as much. dont get me wrong, i like gonzo but life moves on.

wolfpack
12-22-2006, 04:21 PM
besides,he might have a"no fran tag" clause.

chief31
12-23-2006, 03:23 AM
Aging is, exactly, right. Shields is going to retire. Green can go, in my opinion. Gonzales doesn't want to be here. There is no reason to hold on to anything. We held-off on the "rebuilding" mind-set this season. Willie Roaf taught us a lesson. Let's learn from it.

Chiefster
12-23-2006, 06:11 AM
kenny1937 wrote:


Guru wrote:
If we could somehow obtain a high second round pick or a low first, I would be willing to let him go.

Yes, if we get value for value, I agree, but it is going to have to be one that improves the offense, we got a couple of good defensive players out of the draft, but we need Offense, as was stated we need good wide recievers, plus a good offensive line. I think that it is time for youth and ability, to replace the aging, although what good players we have would be great teachers and role models for the talent we need to get to build the winning team of tomorrow (or even next season). I am not sure that on the offensive end we are going to get what we need, for the sacrifice of great players, like Tony G.

GO CHIEFS :hammer: The Raiders!!

8-) :lol: :pint:

Next season aint gonna happen, or the season after that. IMO

Chiefster
12-23-2006, 06:14 AM
oldred wrote:
It all depends on who we have to replace him with. Although I have a lot of respect for Dunn I don't think he could replace Gonzalez. Gonzalez seems to have lost some of his drive in the past few years and I wonder about his play after signing him to a longterm contract.

Agreed, although I hate to see him go; he is, however, in the twilight of his career.


Oh, and welcome aboard oldred! :-D

Chiefster
12-23-2006, 06:16 AM
chief31 wrote:
Aging is, exactly, right. Shields is going to retire. Green can go, in my opinion. Gonzales doesn't want to be here. There is no reason to hold on to anything. We held-off on the "rebuilding" mind-set this season. Willie Roaf taught us a lesson. Let's learn from it.

Exactly!

Chiefster
12-23-2006, 06:18 AM
wolfpack wrote:
we could more than likely never replace him,i.e. donkies and sharpe. but dont break the bank for a aging TE. to many other holes to fill. besides,if we ever had a WR that was any good i wonder how much Gonzo would have gotten the ball as much. dont get me wrong, i like gonzo but life moves on.

The only constant in the universe is change.