PDA

View Full Version : Napoleon Harris is an employee of the Kansas City Chiefs



royalswin100games
05-31-2008, 02:08 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/641906.html

chief31
05-31-2008, 05:24 AM
Gotta love that our only real free agency signee is at a position that we already have covered.

DrunkHillbilly
05-31-2008, 02:18 PM
Like I said when we picked up Williams...Harris will be a back up now!!! JMO. They had been talking about moving Edwards to MLB for a while and I think this just may solidyfy that. It is puzzling how you would take your leading tackler out of the game though. Speculation is great isn't it??!!

hermhater
05-31-2008, 02:26 PM
Great.

Another unhappy Chief.

Herm needs to get the hell out of town.

royalswin100games
05-31-2008, 04:45 PM
Like I said when we picked up Williams...Harris will be a back up now!!! JMO. They had been talking about moving Edwards to MLB for a while and I think this just may solidyfy that. It is puzzling how you would take your leading tackler out of the game though. Speculation is great isn't it??!!

I think Donnie should be playing in the middle and it doesn't matter if you're leading the team in tackles if those tackles are 5 to 7 yards past the line of scrimmage.

Of course, I don't know much about the guy we brought in. Maybe Napoleon is the better option.

greg3564
05-31-2008, 04:59 PM
I think Harris did pretty well. I guess Carl and Company are pulling a 'Jared Allen' on Harris and are prepping him for departure. That seems to be the way the Chiefs work now.

Canada
05-31-2008, 05:22 PM
We get rid of one guy, now that is how we operate? :lol: :lol: :lol: The guy is not happy...the poor millionaire has to compete for his spot!! Stupid Chiefs...how dare they!!

Chiefster
05-31-2008, 06:20 PM
Gotta love that our only real free agency signee is at a position that we already have covered.

HA! :lol:

DrunkHillbilly
05-31-2008, 10:24 PM
I think Donnie should be playing in the middle and it doesn't matter if you're leading the team in tackles if those tackles are 5 to 7 yards past the line of scrimmage.

Of course, I don't know much about the guy we brought in. Maybe Napoleon is the better option.
5 to 7 yards past the line is better than the alternative!!!!!!!

Canada
05-31-2008, 11:03 PM
5 to 7 yards past the line is better than the alternative!!!!!!!

It's almost like you are trying to be optimistic!! :lol:

Chiefster
06-01-2008, 12:53 AM
It's almost like you are trying to be optimistic!! :lol:
Nah, after all he does have a reputation to uphold.

Three7s
06-01-2008, 03:45 AM
Sorry guys, but I'm not that impressed with Napoleon Harris. Sure, he lead the team in tackles, sure he got SOME tackles for a loss, but the majority of the tackles were down the field a ways. He's not good against the run at all.

greg3564
06-01-2008, 03:52 AM
Sorry guys, but I'm not that impressed with Napoleon Harris. Sure, he lead the team in tackles, sure he got SOME tackles for a loss, but the majority of the tackles were down the field a ways. He's not good against the run at all.

Here's where the domino effect comes in. How effective could the LB's be when the CB's were getting roasted all season? The result was playing off the line to help the secondary. The other issue is that if the defensive lineman were doing their job the LB's wouldn't have to stop so many runners 7 yards down the field.

Three7s
06-01-2008, 05:48 AM
Here's where the domino effect comes in. How effective could the LB's be when the CB's were getting roasted all season? The result was playing off the line to help the secondary. The other issue is that if the defensive lineman were doing their job the LB's wouldn't have to stop so many runners 7 yards down the field.
I'll have to agree with you there, I think just getting Dorsey could cut the amount of yards we gave up on the ground by 1/3. We should see how good Harris is next season if he starts!

DMN
06-01-2008, 01:37 PM
You have got to remember that we play the cover 2 as well. so the LBs are getting more zone assignments than blitzes. And with 90% of our d line pressure coming from the DEs and the linebackers dropped back we got run all over.

We need our CBs to step up in a big way so we can start crashing the line better. I am anxious to see all these rookies play but am preparing myself to deal with a lot of mistakes made in coverage.

SomewhereoverDwayneBowe
06-01-2008, 02:19 PM
Meh! Outside of Tony Gonzalez, Who's starting job is secure? I kind of get tired about these guy's whining about their jobs. The guy played pretty good last year. Should that stop the Chiefs from bringing in someone to compete? Not IMO. I think Harris will end up with the starting job. But I don't think it's to much to ask that he earns it. Cry me a friggin river!

chief31
06-03-2008, 01:15 AM
I think Donnie should be playing in the middle and it doesn't matter if you're leading the team in tackles if those tackles are 5 to 7 yards past the line of scrimmage.

Of course, I don't know much about the guy we brought in. Maybe Napoleon is the better option.


Sorry guys, but I'm not that impressed with Napoleon Harris. Sure, he lead the team in tackles, sure he got SOME tackles for a loss, but the majority of the tackles were down the field a ways. He's not good against the run at all.

Rather coincidental that Donnie Edwards has been labeled as a downfield tackler for the majority of his career, then we are going to criticize another guy in the same way, and suggest that that is why we would start Edwards.

When Harris played for the Vikings, he didn't have that criticism. But then his DTs in Minnesota weren't being shoved into his way either. :D

Three7s
06-03-2008, 02:12 AM
Rather coincidental that Donnie Edwards has been labeled as a downfield tackler for the majority of his career, then we are going to criticize another guy in the same way, and suggest that that is why we would start Edwards.

When Harris played for the Vikings, he didn't have that criticism. But then his DTs in Minnesota weren't being shoved into his way either. :D
I dunno, whenever I watched the games, it just seemed like he wasn't really standing out. I always heard Derrick Johnson's name, as well as Edwards, but I only heard Harris twice or so. I'm willing to see what he's got this coming season though.

hermhater
06-03-2008, 04:58 AM
I dunno, whenever I watched the games, it just seemed like he wasn't really standing out. I always heard Derrick Johnson's name, as well as Edwards, but I only heard Harris twice or so. I'm willing to see what he's got this coming season though.

chief31 mentioned last year how much Harris wasn't getting mentioned as well

Chiefster
06-03-2008, 09:38 AM
Rather coincidental that Donnie Edwards has been labeled as a downfield tackler for the majority of his career, then we are going to criticize another guy in the same way, and suggest that that is why we would start Edwards.

When Harris played for the Vikings, he didn't have that criticism. But then his DTs in Minnesota weren't being shoved into his way either. :D


I dunno, whenever I watched the games, it just seemed like he wasn't really standing out. I always heard Derrick Johnson's name, as well as Edwards, but I only heard Harris twice or so. I'm willing to see what he's got this coming season though.


chief31 mentioned last year how much Harris wasn't getting mentioned as well


All good points; perhaps it is just that we are getting him towards the end of his career and, unlike Edwards and Gonzolas, it shows. Then again maybe this year he will shine, only time will tell.

Pro_Angler
06-03-2008, 09:59 PM
I think it is a smart move we need more in the middle against the run game of our division rivals.

Seek
06-17-2008, 05:01 PM
Rather coincidental that Donnie Edwards has been labeled as a downfield tackler for the majority of his career, then we are going to criticize another guy in the same way, and suggest that that is why we would start Edwards.

When Harris played for the Vikings, he didn't have that criticism. But then his DTs in Minnesota weren't being shoved into his way either. :D

Harris did have that criticism when he played for the Vikings thus is why he does not play for the Vikings anymore.

I truly believe there was a stint last year that Harris looked dazed and confused out there. I literally saw him running side by side with the ball carrier for 10 yards before he realized he had the ball and then failed to make the tackle.

I see the signing of Williams as more of an alternative should a LB get hurt. Donnie isn't getting any younger and Key Fox wasn't up to the task.

chief31
06-17-2008, 11:16 PM
Harris did have that criticism when he played for the Vikings thus is why he does not play for the Vikings anymore.

I truly believe there was a stint last year that Harris looked dazed and confused out there. I literally saw him running side by side with the ball carrier for 10 yards before he realized he had the ball and then failed to make the tackle.

I see the signing of Williams as more of an alternative should a LB get hurt. Donnie isn't getting any younger and Key Fox wasn't up to the task.

You are kidding. Because the Vikings didn't allow any rushing, period. So there was no way to complain about Harris making tackles downfield. They allowed 2.8 yards per carry.

I know several very dedicated Vikings fans, and they were all very happy with Harris, and upset that he wasn't re-signed.

Also, since Harris left the Vikings, that average rose to 3.1, and they allowed 13 more yards per game.

I have nothing at all against Williams, but that we had far more pressing needs than backup LB, that never were addressed.

Seek
06-18-2008, 12:04 AM
You are kidding. Because the Vikings didn't allow any rushing, period. So there was no way to complain about Harris making tackles downfield. They allowed 2.8 yards per carry.

I know several very dedicated Vikings fans, and they were all very happy with Harris, and upset that he wasn't re-signed.

Also, since Harris left the Vikings, that average rose to 3.1, and they allowed 13 more yards per game.

I have nothing at all against Williams, but that we had far more pressing needs than backup LB, that never were addressed.

No I am not kidding. My Viking Friends said he was serviceable but did not make plays for them. He lead the teams in tackles because other teams ran at him as a weak point in the defense.

The whole reason Harris became a free agent is because of that weakness and the Vikings upgraded.

Many feel the lack of production now against the run was the missing link at DE now occupied by Jared Allen.

What do I know, I don't care about the Queens and don't follow them, but they were not upset he is gone. The described him as our Monte Biesel or Mike Mazlowski. Makes the tackles but never the plays.

Three7s
06-18-2008, 08:42 AM
No I am not kidding. My Viking Friends said he was serviceable but did not make plays for them. He lead the teams in tackles because other teams ran at him as a weak point in the defense.

The whole reason Harris became a free agent is because of that weakness and the Vikings upgraded.

Many feel the lack of production now against the run was the missing link at DE now occupied by Jared Allen.

What do I know, I don't care about the Queens and don't follow them, but they were not upset he is gone. The described him as our Monte Biesel or Mike Mazlowski. Makes the tackles but never the plays.
Ah yes, Mike Mazlowski, the most overrated LB we've ever had.

Seek
06-18-2008, 01:47 PM
Ah yes, Mike Mazlowski, the most overrated LB we've ever had.

Yep, right up there with Boomer Grigsby as a MLB and FB.

chief31
06-20-2008, 03:46 AM
No I am not kidding. My Viking Friends said he was serviceable but did not make plays for them. He lead the teams in tackles because other teams ran at him as a weak point in the defense.

The whole reason Harris became a free agent is because of that weakness and the Vikings upgraded.

Many feel the lack of production now against the run was the missing link at DE now occupied by Jared Allen.

What do I know, I don't care about the Queens and don't follow them, but they were not upset he is gone. The described him as our Monte Biesel or Mike Mazlowski. Makes the tackles but never the plays.

I'm not trying to compare the guy to Ray Lewis or anything, but when you hold staedy on the d-line, he makes tackles up front. When the d-line gets shoved into his lap, he makes tackles further downfield.

This is the exact same nonsense that has followed Donnie Edwards throughout his career. Except that, aside from you, I have never heard it about Harris before K.C.

Seek
06-20-2008, 10:18 AM
I'm not trying to compare the guy to Ray Lewis or anything, but when you hold staedy on the d-line, he makes tackles up front. When the d-line gets shoved into his lap, he makes tackles further downfield.

This is the exact same nonsense that has followed Donnie Edwards throughout his career. Except that, aside from you, I have never heard it about Harris before K.C.

You should get out more. Everyone has different opinions. My old Forum were a bunch of blind homers, where people on this forum seem more realistic. There is a huge difference in opinions regarding the same team. The comments about Harris were made. I didn't create them by myself since I don't follow the Vikings.

Like I said, I am hearing it from my group of friends, and other Chief fans and you are hearing it from yours. Both sides may be biased. Fact of the matter, I saw Harris doing this with the Chiefs. He literally was running side by side with a ball carrier unaware he had the ball until he was 10 yards down field and then failed to make the tackle. There was many times I was wishing for Kawika back and I was glad to see him leave for the same reasons.

The fact of the matter, the Vikings didn't resign Harris even after he lead the team and tackles. WHY???. Regardless what fans think, the Vikings gave up on a player that they took as compensation for one of their best players in history.

chief31
06-21-2008, 01:06 AM
You should get out more. Everyone has different opinions. My old Forum were a bunch of blind homers, where people on this forum seem more realistic. There is a huge difference in opinions regarding the same team. The comments about Harris were made. I didn't create them by myself since I don't follow the Vikings.

Like I said, I am hearing it from my group of friends, and other Chief fans and you are hearing it from yours. Both sides may be biased. Fact of the matter, I saw Harris doing this with the Chiefs. He literally was running side by side with a ball carrier unaware he had the ball until he was 10 yards down field and then failed to make the tackle. There was many times I was wishing for Kawika back and I was glad to see him leave for the same reasons.

The fact of the matter, the Vikings didn't resign Harris even after he lead the team and tackles. WHY???. Regardless what fans think, the Vikings gave up on a player that they took as compensation for one of their best players in history.

Kawika Mitchell was more than fine by me. Give him a strong front line, and he makes tackles up front too.

As for Harris, I still see the Vkings defense took a step back without him. Say what you want about the DE position, but they didn't have anything there when Harris was there either.

They gave up on their leading tackler, and their defense took a step back. Nothing too amazing there. But they allowed him to go because his contract came to an end and they didn't want to pay full price for a LB, when they had some guys drafted that were supposed to replace him.

Might be ok for them in the long run, but it didn't help immediately.

Three7s
06-21-2008, 02:19 AM
Kawika Mitchell was more than fine by me. Give him a strong front line, and he makes tackles up front too.

As for Harris, I still see the Vkings defense took a step back without him. Say what you want about the DE position, but they didn't have anything there when Harris was there either.

They gave up on their leading tackler, and their defense took a step back. Nothing too amazing there. But they allowed him to go because his contract came to an end and they didn't want to pay full price for a LB, when they had some guys drafted that were supposed to replace him.

Might be ok for them in the long run, but it didn't help immediately.
Weren't the Vikings the best in the league against the run, though?

chief31
06-21-2008, 04:14 AM
Weren't the Vikings the best in the league against the run, though?

They went from 1st in YPG (61.6) and 1st in YPC (2.8) to 1st in YPG (74.1) and 2nd in YPC (3.1).

Not that they fell apart against the run, as the primary reason for their success is the pair of Williams' they have at DT, but that they slipped by 12.5 YPG and 0.3 YPC.