Priest Holmes may retire...

[Ramzavail]

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slu...ball&type=lgns

Chiefs: Holmes career may be over

by Fanball Staff - Fanball.com
Wednesday, November 9, 2005

News
KSHB NBC TV in Kansas City is reporting that Priest Holmes has "very possibly" played his final game in a Chiefs uniform and could announce his retirement from the NFL as soon as Thursday. According to the report, further examinations revealed a lump on his spine that could lead to paralysis if he continued to play. The Chiefs have not officially confirmed the report and, as of Tuesday, were awaiting the results of a third evaluation in Miami.

Views
If this diagnosis is indeed true, it would not surprise us at all to hear that Holmes is hanging them up. He admitted publicly to considering retirement around the same time Ricky Williams walked out of the Dolphins locker room. If Holmes indeed calls it a career, Larry Johnson immediately becomes a top-five fantasy running back.


This is awful news.

[rkmsuf]

wow, too bad

[Fonzie]

Yikes. If that diagnosis is accurate then I would hope he'd retire.

But on a more selfish note: this development, combined with TO's suspension, ends any hopes my fantasy football team had for being respectable this season.

[cody8200]

Indeed it is (awful). I always have liked Priest.

[albionmoonlight]

A very interesting "what might have been" guy. Gets buried behind Ricky Williams at college. Does not get the chance to start in the NFL until late. When he does get the chance to start, he is totally dominant. Then he has to hang them up while he still has some tred on the tires due to a spine condition.

[rkmsuf]

what are the odds that Larry Johnson has a sh*t eating grin on his face right now

[Raiders Army]

What are the odds that Dick Vermeil is crying right now

[JeeberD]

Originally Posted by Fonzie

Yikes. If that diagnosis is accurate then I would hope he'd retire.

But on a more selfish note: this development...ends any hopes my fantasy football team had for being respectable this season.

Exact opposite for me. This helps out my Alma Mater team TONS!

Still very sad news, though...

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

A very interesting "what might have been" guy. Gets buried behind Ricky Williams at college....

For the love of all that is holy in the world of football, Priest Holmes was not buried behing Ricky Williams in college. This theory is out there and needs to go away.

Priest Holmes was injured in college, too. Priest Holmes' last year in college was Williams' sophomore year. Williams played fullback in Mackovic's offense (a lot of split backs formations) his first two years. Priest Holmes was not behind Ricky Williams. Priest Holmes was behind Shon Mitchell.

It's true that Williams became the featured back by the end of his sophomore year, but he was still the fullback. But Shon Mitchell was the guy that kept Priest off the field once Priest came back. But I still think it was mostly injuries. Holmes had a great game at the end of his sophomore year in the Sun Bowl (against Mack Brown's UNC team). But he got hurt.

Great player and a great guy. I'm sorry to hear this news.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry

For the love of all that is holy in the world of football, Priest Holmes was not buried behing Ricky Williams in college. This theory is out there and needs to go away.

Priest Holmes was injured in college, too. Priest Holmes' last year in college was Williams' sophomore year. Williams played fullback in Mackovic's offense (a lot of split backs formations) his first two years. Priest Holmes was not behind Ricky Williams. Priest Holmes was behind Shon Mitchell.

It's true that Williams became the featured back by the end of his sophomore year, but he was still the fullback. But Shon Mitchell was the guy that kept Priest off the field once Priest came back. But I still think it was mostly injuries. Holmes had a great game at the end of his sophomore year in the Sun Bowl (against Mack Brown's UNC team). But he got hurt.

Great player and a great guy. I'm sorry to hear this news.

Hmmm. Thanks for the insight. I've heard the "Priest behind Rickey" rumor in several places. Doesn't make it true, I guess.

[pennywisesb]

Originally Posted by cody8200

Indeed it is (awful). I always have liked Priest.

I agree. I think he's a real standup guy (which the NFL needs more of).

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Hmmm. Thanks for the insight. I've heard the "Priest behind Rickey" rumor in several places. Doesn't make it true, I guess.

Except the "Priest was not buried behind Williams" theory falls apart when you look at actual facts, rather than a meaningless, fictitious depth chart.

Look at who carried the ball.

1. Williams
2. Mitchell
3. Holmes

The facts are actually that Holmes was behind Williams and Mitchell, but that kind of means he was behind Williams, no?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

what are the odds that Larry Johnson has a sh*t eating grin on his face right now

1:1 as he still always comes off as an ass in every interview he does. He hasn't grown up at all.

That's a big blow to the Chiefs as he's just not the back that Holmes was. It could be worse, it's not like the Chiefs had to go out and pick some scrub off the scrap heap but he's not one of the top 3 backs in the league like Priest was.

SI

[bryce]

Priest was a great story. Blew out his knee in college, (was he even drafted? can't remember), couldn't find a regular gig in Baltimore, gets picked up by KC, who knew they could do something with him, then hurt his hip and people thought his career was over a la Bo Jackson, but came back better than ever... Good guy to boot. I loved watching him run, one of my favorites of all time.

[Maple Leafs]

Some news organizations are now reporting that he won't retire, although he may still be out long-term.

[zums]

i gotta go to class, but i want to throw this out there so i have somethin to read when i get back:

say holmes is forced to retire, is he HOF material?

discuss...



-zums

[Raiders Army]

No. Terrell Davis isn't and he isn't.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

Some news organizations are now reporting that he won't retire, although he may still be out long-term.

Here's a little insight behind the story ...

The story was broke by Jack Harry based conversations with a source close to the Chiefs that Harry says is usually very reliable and with a family relative(s) of Priest in San Antonio. The injury information came from the source close to the Chiefs, the retirement report came from the relative. What Harry actually reported was that Holmes is considering retirement, and if he does it could happen as early as Thursday.

Then today the Chiefs rolled out spokesperson Bob Moore to say that Holmes is not retiring and no announcement is planned. Moore and an assclown named Bob Gretz (who single-handedly torpedoed Derrick Thomas' Hall of Fame bid last year) are who Carl Peterson usually use to make announcements that will later prove to be false so that no one else in the organization will take the credibility hit.

That said, Priest is an enigma. He's a quiet guy who largely shuns the limelight. It's been clear that he would be a Barry Sanders-type who will just disappear when he thinks its time and he has always said his health is No. 1. When he was coming back from the hip injury he made it clear he wanted to come back but if the doctors told him he was one hit away from walking funny the rest of his life he would quit.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by zums

i gotta go to class, but i want to throw this out there so i have somethin to read when i get back:

say holmes is forced to retire, is he HOF material?

discuss...

Unfortunately, I would say no, but he's more borderline that Davis. Holmes was a much better receiver and was more proficient base on touches. Holmes played in more games, but ened up with fewer rushes per game because he was a backup in Baltimore and didn't get many carries.

In his favor, assuming that Curtis Martin and Marshall Faulk are certain Hall of Famers -- and I think they are locks -- Holmes would have more rushing touchdowns than anyone not in the Hall of Fame. Right now, the only guys with more touchdowns than Priest pass or receiving not in the Hall of Fame are Martin, Faulk, Cris Carter, Marvin Harrison, Terrell Owens, Tim Brown and Randy Moss -- and I'll bet everyone of those guys ends up in the Hall of Fame.

[Ramzavail]

donde es Super Bowl Rings?

He's not more borderline than TD, he's less, and they are both not getting in.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ramzavail

donde es Super Bowl Rings?

He's not more borderline than TD, he's less, and they are both not getting in.

The minute both TD and Holmes could have played defense for their respective teams, then the Super Bowl Ring question can be more than just a footnote.

SI

[Raiders Army]

I think not too much to discuss. John Holmes is HOF material, Priest Holmes is not.

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

The minute both TD and Holmes could have played defense for their respective teams, then the Super Bowl Ring question can be more than just a footnote.

SI

Just so I understand...

Are you saying that b/c they didn't play both sides of the ball and football is a team sport, the lack of Super Bowl Rings shouldn't have a big value on a player career?

[WSUCougar]

Priest deserves to be in the fantasy football HOF - few fantasy players have had the dominant impact that he has - but I think he misses out on Canton.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ramzavail

Just so I understand...

Are you saying that b/c they didn't play both sides of the ball and football is a team sport, the lack of Super Bowl Rings shouldn't have a big value on a player career?

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.

In the same way that baseball players don't pitch and hit (we're not talking about NL pitchers hitting, you know what I mean), you can't blame or heap massive accolades on one player out of 22 or ~15 in baseball for their championships. This isn't basketball.

If every player on the Chiefs were as good as Priest Holmes was at running back, then he'd be wearing 3 rings.

Maybe it's a minor tiebreaker down the line but if you're saying Terrell Davis is better than Priest Holmes because he has 2 rings, that's crazy. You're punishing Priest Holmes for having, say, William Bartee on his team and giving Terrell Davis credit for having Neil Smith. How, in any way, shape, or form should Bartee and Smith factor into how good of a player Holmes and Davis were?

EDIT: That's like saying Kevin Faulk or Troy Brown are worth looking at because they have 3 rings?

SI

[Raiders Army]

Well, the bottom line is that it's a team sport, you're right. But the NFL doesn't induct teams into the HOF, they induct individual players. Emmitt Smith is a good counterexample. Some think that without the 1990s line in Dallas, Emmitt wouldn't have been nearly the player he was, not to mention they probably wouldn't have won the three Superbowls.

Terrell Davis was a great player, but a flash in the pan, much like Kurt Warner and Priest Holmes. The bottom line is that none of them should get into the HOF because their careers weren't long enough. (And if they get in and Bo Jackson doesn't...)

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.

In the same way that baseball players don't pitch and hit (we're not talking about NL pitchers hitting, you know what I mean), you can't blame or heap massive accolades on one player out of 22 or ~15 in baseball for their championships. This isn't basketball.

If every player on the Chiefs were as good as Priest Holmes was at running back, then he'd be wearing 3 rings.

Maybe it's a minor tiebreaker down the line but if you're saying Terrell Davis is better than Priest Holmes because he has 2 rings, that's crazy. You're punishing Priest Holmes for having, say, William Bartee on his team and giving Terrell Davis credit for having Neil Smith. How, in any way, shape, or form should Bartee and Smith factor into how good of a player Holmes and Davis were?

EDIT: That's like saying Kevin Faulk or Troy Brown are worth looking at because they have 3 rings?

SI

I was using it as a tiebreaker...since TD was being compared to Holmes for the HOF. ie. I said TD would be closer to the HOF than Holmes.

However, I don't see it as a minor one, theres a reason why there are only a couple of handfuls of players in each of the major sports that don't have a championship ring of some kind.

Great players win. Thats the bottom line, its apparent on all the major sports.

I won't respond to your edit, I hope nobody would think that and shame for you for mentioning it, but you are frustrated.

However, I'd like your opinion on Lynn Swann. He won alot and he wasn't the best WR on his team and pales in comparison to the WRs of today.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Well, the bottom line is that it's a team sport, you're right. But the NFL doesn't induct teams into the HOF, they induct individual players. Emmitt Smith is a good counterexample. Some think that without the 1990s line in Dallas, Emmitt wouldn't have been nearly the player he was, not to mention they probably wouldn't have won the three Superbowls.

You are referring to Emmitt "career NFL rushing leader and rushing TD leader in NFL history" Smith, right?

SI

[Vince]

Originally Posted by pennywisesb

I agree. I think he's a real standup guy (which the NFL needs more of).

I'm sure you feel bad after trading him to me in fantasy football.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

You are referring to Emmitt "career NFL rushing leader and rushing TD leader in NFL history" Smith, right?

SI

Was there a different one who played for the Cowboys in the 90s and won three Superbowls?

I remember a big discussion back then if Barry Sanders had run behind the Dallas line he would've been the rushing leader those years instead of Emmitt. The point I was trying to make was that while other members on the team (including Aikman and Irvin) helped Emmitt make the record books, he also did it on his own. There is no asterisk there. Just like there is no asterisk for Priest Holmes nor for Terrell Davis considering their respective teams.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ramzavail

I was using it as a tiebreaker...since TD was being compared to Holmes for the HOF. ie. I said TD would be closer to the HOF than Holmes.

However, I don't see it as a minor one, theres a reason why there are only a couple of handfuls of players in each of the major sports that don't have a championship ring of some kind.

Oh, c'mon. Is it Dan Marino's fault for the teams he played on? How about Ernie Banks? There are quite a few players in both HOFs without rings.

Great players win. Thats the bottom line, its apparent on all the major sports.

I won't respond to your edit, I hope nobody would think that and shame for you for mentioning it, but you are frustrated.

That first part is just a cheap cliche and the second part is a perfect counterexample. "Great players win"- those players I mentioned have won 3 times. 3?!? That's more than John Elway.

To put a finer point on it, where is this line where "tiebreaker" comes into account? For Priest Holmes vs Terrell Davis, using just aggregate career statistics (which is much too simple of a picture, of course, but to illustrate the point), you're saying 2 Super Bowl rings are worth more than 1 Super Bowl ring (Holmes with the Ravens, tho he was a backup, similar to the Faulk example above), 400 rushing yards, 25 rushing TDs, and 1700 reception yards.

However, I'd like your opinion on Lynn Swann. He won alot and he wasn't the best WR on his team and pales in comparison to the WRs of today.

I'll readily admit he was before my time and I don't know football history nearly as well as baseball so anything I say is incomplete. So, here how I'd evaluate it. You say he wasn't even the best on his team, but was he part of a killer receiving tandem (say, if Randy Moss and Terrell Owens somehow landed on the same team, they would take catches away from each other but would still be very good)? Also, comparing to WRs of today is not a fair measure much as comparing Honus Wagner to ARod or Walter Johnson to Roger Clemens is an incomplete science at best. Compare them to their contemporaries- was he one of the best in the league at the time? I dunno, just looking at rough numbers, only 3 Pro Bowls in 9 years seems a bit light. So, at first blush, I'd say he didn't deserve to get in.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

Was there a different one who played for the Cowboys in the 90s and won three Superbowls?

I remember a big discussion back then if Barry Sanders had run behind the Dallas line he would've been the rushing leader those years instead of Emmitt. The point I was trying to make was that while other members on the team (including Aikman and Irvin) helped Emmitt make the record books, he also did it on his own. There is no asterisk there. Just like there is no asterisk for Priest Holmes nor for Terrell Davis considering their respective teams.

I understand that, which is why I'm careful to use defense as a counterpoint so far. Getting into offensive lines and offenses gets much more sticky and it's much harder of a metric to guage, especially in football. Baseball, it's easier to separate because it's much more of an individual sport and also why rings don't matter as much.

SI

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Oh, c'mon. Is it Dan Marino's fault for the teams he played on? How about Ernie Banks? There are quite a few players in both HOFs without rings.



SI

Dan Marino. Bah! Of course it was his fault.

[Subby]

If you put Terrell Davis on the worst teams in the league during his career, could he have won those rings? Of course not.

[Raiders Army]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I understand that, which is why I'm careful to use defense as a counterpoint so far. Getting into offensive lines and offenses gets much more sticky and it's much harder of a metric to guage, especially in football. Baseball, it's easier to separate because it's much more of an individual sport and also why rings don't matter as much.

SI

Gotcha.

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Oh, c'mon. Is it Dan Marino's fault for the teams he played on? How about Ernie Banks? There are quite a few players in both HOFs without rings.

I said a couple of handfuls, should I change it to a few?

In the last 15 years of Hall of Fame baseball voting, 7 (3 in one year) out of 26 voted players don't have rings. Also, alot of the VC players who got voted in, had rings as well. I would suspect that percentage would lower if I looked further back.

I'm not as good historically with football as I am with baseball. But, Barry Sanders, Jim Kelly, James Lofton, Dickerson, Dan Marino, Steve Largent, Earl Campbell, Dan Fouts thats all I can guess who didn't win a ring and who is in the HOF. Again, I would think the percentage would lower as we got further back, with less teams and more of a chance to win a ring.

Originally Posted by sterlingice

That first part is just a cheap cliche and the second part is a perfect counterexample. "Great players win"- those players I mentioned have won 3 times. 3?!? That's more than John Elway.

To put a finer point on it, where is this line where "tiebreaker" comes into account? For Priest Holmes vs Terrell Davis, using just aggregate career statistics (which is much too simple of a picture, of course, but to illustrate the point), you're saying 2 Super Bowl rings are worth more than 1 Super Bowl ring (Holmes with the Ravens, tho he was a backup, similar to the Faulk example above), 400 rushing yards, 25 rushing TDs, and 1700 reception yards.

We are still talking about Kevin Faulk and Troy Brown for the HOF? Just b/c they are riding Brady's and Vinatieri's coattails - thats means what? Nothing.

You are considering Priest Holmes' ring a valid ring? I wouldn't. He had 8 yards in the Super Bowl and had 500+ for the year.

I don't think either of them should go, I stated that, but if you put a gun to my head and yelled "choose!", I'd choose TD, 2000 yards and 2 rings and braces.

Originally Posted by sterlingice

I'll readily admit he was before my time and I don't know football history nearly as well as baseball so anything I say is incomplete. So, here how I'd evaluate it. You say he wasn't even the best on his team, but was he part of a killer receiving tandem (say, if Randy Moss and Terrell Owens somehow landed on the same team, they would take catches away from each other but would still be very good)? Also, comparing to WRs of today is not a fair measure much as comparing Honus Wagner to ARod or Walter Johnson to Roger Clemens is an incomplete science at best. Compare them to their contemporaries- was he one of the best in the league at the time? I dunno, just looking at rough numbers, only 3 Pro Bowls in 9 years seems a bit light. So, at first blush, I'd say he didn't deserve to get in.

SI

I was just trying to give you the opposite position and see what you thought. You were saying that Super Bowl rings mean nothing and yet Lynn Swann arguably got in b/c of the team he played for and the rings he won.

But even when you can't really compare Honus Wagner to A-Rod, Wagner was still dominant in his era. Swann was not, he never had a 1000 yard receiving year in an era where there would be at least 5-6 a year.

[Huckleberry]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Except the "Priest was not buried behind Williams" theory falls apart when you look at actual facts, rather than a meaningless, fictitious depth chart.

Look at who carried the ball.

1. Williams
2. Mitchell
3. Holmes

The facts are actually that Holmes was behind Williams and Mitchell, but that kind of means he was behind Williams, no?

As stated above, Holmes battled injuries in college and was behind Mitchell. He was not behind Williams. If you had spent those years watching the Longhorns play, you would know that in Mackovic's system the roles were defined. Priest missed time because of injury and came to the rescue in the 1996 game against Nebraska after Mitchell was injured early on.

Just because the fullback has more carries than the halfback doesn't mean the second string halfback is "buried behind" the fullback.

[TwinCitiesFan]

Carl Peterson is on NFL Network right now confirming, P Holmes is being placed on the IR - out for the season.

[sterlingice]

Speculation is that his career is probably over but isn't going to announce until the end of the season for financial reasons. But there's always a chance that he gets some good medical news at the end of the season, too, and decides to come back. I'd say odds are more in favor of the former, however.

SI

[bryce]

This doesn't jibe with the usual reputation Priest has, so not sure how credible it is, but:

Priest Holmes - RB - Chiefs


Priest Holmes reportedly shut down his season in part because of Dick Vermeil's difficult practices.
Vermeil is well known for running some of the longest practices in the league. One league source told ProFootballtalk that Holmes is "A pain in the ass. He is either hurt or bitching about his contract." The Kansas City Star's Jason Whitlock believes Holmes may only play again if the Chiefs go after his signing bonus. ProFootballtalk believes Holmes will only return if Vermeil doesn't. Nov. 10 - 1:56 pm et
Source: ProFootballtalk.com

[Crapshoot]

Profootballtalk can usually be relied to slam a player, any player, who doesnt thank the good lord he's getting paid to play football. Typical scoop - "Unnamed source told us player X sucks."

[sterlingice]

Well, and Jason Whitlock is credible as always ... That said, he could be right this time. Depends on how banged up Priest really is.

In this regard, the press conference yesterday was a farce with Peterson saying he could go again in 30 days. It sounds like they could be setting up to battle for his signing bonus cash and if that happens, well, that's just classless on the Chiefs part and things will get ugly.

SI

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by bryce

This doesn't jibe with the usual reputation Priest has, so not sure how credible it is, but:

Yeah, I think you dismiss this as total BS; especially after they cite Jason Whitlock as a source. Those comments are not based on any facts or interviews by Whitlock -- it's just his suppositions. Holmes is not faking or playing contract games -- the medical sources and the Chiefs have confirmed he has a spinal cord bruise. The Chiefs dismiss it as season-ending but not career-threatening, but the local media has had interviews with doctors who say a spinal cord brusie is career-threatening for a football player.

In other news, the Chiefs have lit into the reporter who broke the story, mostly because he reported it was a "growth" on his spinal cord. He also admitted that his report indicating Holmes might retire immediately was "premature." Also, Priest appears to have gone AWOL. He was supposedly going to remain with the team and had been schedule to do a local radio interview, but now the team and his publicist say he has left town and they can't get a hold of him. The conjecture is that he is very hurt that somebody within the organization went to the media with exaggerated news about his injury.

Money is certainly going to play a role. If he retires now, he'll owe the Chiefs bonus money back, so regardless of the extent of his injury he's financially better off not retiring until he has to.