PDA

View Full Version : The Carl Peterson Years.....1995


shaneo69
12-03-2004, 07:29 PM
7th in a series…..

UFA additions: Jeff Criswell, Rich Gannon, James Hasty, Brian Washington, Martin Bayless, Webster Slaughter, Leroy Thompson
Trade addition: Victor Bailey (for a 1995 2nd rounder)
Street free agents: Tony Richardson, Keith Traylor

Veteran losses: J.J. Birden, Derrick Graham, Jimmie Johnson, Eric Martin, Charles Mincy, David Whitmore, Arnold Ale, Ron Dickerson, Jaime Fields, Tracy Greene, Monty Grow, Lindsay Knapp, Greg Kragen, Jay Taylor, Jon Vaughn, Rob Waldrop, Bracy Walker
Retired: Joe Montana

1995 Draft

1) (pick 31 overall) Trezelle Jenkins (scouting report from Lindy’s 1995 Pro Football Annual called him “a stretch, and not just because he’s 6’7, 322. Not real dedicated and not good on technique, but the skills are there. Moves ok. If KC coaches can reach him, he can turn into a monster blocker. If not, will be a dud.” Bobby Taylor was taken 19 picks later.)

2) traded to Eagles for Victor Bailey, who was active for two games in two years with the Chiefs

3a) Tamarick Vanover (special teams playmaking ability was offset by lack of production on offense and his criminal activity; Antonio Freeman was taken 9 picks later by Green Bay)

3b) Troy Dumas (played in 13 games with no starts in his KC career; Ken Irvin, a decent CB, was taken 12 picks later)

4) Steve Stenstrom (never played for the Chiefs; quote from Lindy’s ’95 Pro Football Annual: “Stenstrom has been compared to Steve Walsh, which means his best days were in college.” Stephen Boyd and John Holecek, who both started at ILB for four years in the league, were taken in the next 10 picks)

5a) Mike Pelton, DT (never played in the NFL; DT Norman Hand was taken 3 picks later)

5b) Jerrott Willard, LB (played in one game for the Chiefs; Travis Hall, a six year starter at DT for Atlanta, was taken 17 picks later by the Falcons)

6a) Bryan Proby, DT (played in 3 games for the Chiefs; Charles Way, a good FB who was a 4 year starter for the Giants before injuries ended his career, was taken 4 picks after Proby)

6b) Tom Barndt (great pick, became 3 year starter at NT/DT, but the Chiefs coaches wasted his first two years in the league trying to turn him into a OT)

7) no pick (the Rams starting OG’s in the ’99 Super Bowl were both drafted in this round, as were solid players Chad Cota, Byron Chamberlain, Chad Eaton, Jason Fisk, and Siegried and Roy-hater Cole Ford)

1995 Starters:
S. Bono, K. Anders, M. Allen, W. Davis, L. Dawson/W. Slaughter, K. Cash, J. Alt, D. Szott, T. Grunhard, W. Shields, R. Siglar
N. Smith, D. Saleaumua, J. Phillips, V. Booker/D. Mickell, G. Jamison, T. Simien, D. Thomas, D. Carter, J. Hasty, M. Collins, B. Washington
L. Elliott, L. Aguiar

Couple notes about ’95…..it’s amazing that we were able to improve from 9-7 in Montana’s last year to 13-3 in Bono’s first year. Besides the downgrade at QB, Lake Dawson and Webster Slaughter barely matched J.J. Birden’s previous production at WR.

On defense, Gunther Cunningham replaced Dave Adolph, who moved to San Diego, and Schottenheimer totally rebuilt the secondary, adding Hasty at CB and Brian Washington at SS, and moving Mark Collins from CB to FS. Chiefs gave up the least points in the league.

Sure-Oz
12-03-2004, 07:37 PM
Victor Bailey lol, wonder who we could've gotten in the 2nd round that year.

Miles
12-03-2004, 07:42 PM
Wow that was a hell of a bad draft. The funny thing is i remember being optimistic about Victor Bailey for some reason.

Though the FA were solid with Criswell, Gannon, and Hasty. Oddly i was also really excited when we brought Slaughter in but he was disapointment.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 07:50 PM
Victor Bailey lol, wonder who we could've gotten in the 2nd round that year.

Curtis Martin was taken 17 slots after the 2nd rounder we traded.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 07:54 PM
Wow that was a hell of a bad draft. The funny thing is i remember being optimistic about Victor Bailey for some reason.

Though the FA were solid with Criswell, Gannon, and Hasty. Oddly i was also really excited when we brought Slaughter in but he was disapointment.

Yeah, after catching 68 passes with Houston in '94, Slaughter only caught half that many with us in '95.

Miles
12-03-2004, 07:59 PM
Yeah, after catching 68 passes with Houston in '94, Slaughter only caught half that many with us in '95.

Its been a long time but I seem to remember him having some problems with his hands. He basically was just a player who's numbers were inflated by the Oilers run and shoot offesnse. Though in '94 they had horrible QB's throwing to him.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 08:02 PM
You have pointed out what you feel is the bad draft by the Chiefs. What you barely mention is that they were 13-3. The comment about Joe Montana was worthless, the whole team attitude while Joe was there was "Let Joe do it". The camp that year was grueling, if the Chiefs had have worked as hard Joe's last year they would have been in the Superbowl.

To be totally fair you need to do an analysis for all of the NFL teams for that year. What you will find is that there were some good players taken in the draft (as you pointed out next to the picks you felt were losers) as well as bad players taken, and that is across the board.

The draft couldn't have been that bad, it netted the Chiefs a 13-3 season. The coaching was the lynch pin in the failure that year (and every year that Shottenheimer was at the helm). His mode was very agressive in the regular season, but very conservative in the playoffs. That cost us the whole time he was there. The one time the Chiefs got to the AFC Championship the driving force was Joe Montana (which led to the "Let Joe do it" attitude.)

Basically I'm saying that your report is biased and unfair. I understand your point of view, but you are attacking CP because he drafted and traded for players resulting in a 13-3 record. What's up with that?

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 08:05 PM
Its been a long time but I seem to remember him having some problems with his hands. He basically was just a player who's numbers were inflated by the Oilers run and shoot offesnse. Though in '94 they had horrible QB's throwing to him.

Well, he also had 65 and 64 catch seasons with the Browns, and they weren't running the run-and-shoot.

alpha_omega
12-03-2004, 08:08 PM
Chiefs gave up the least points in the league.

Ahhh...the good old days.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 08:14 PM
You have pointed out what you feel is the bad draft by the Chiefs. What you barely mention is that they were 13-3. The comment about Joe Montana was worthless, the whole team attitude while Joe was there was "Let Joe do it". The camp that year was grueling, if the Chiefs had have worked as hard Joe's last year they would have been in the Superbowl.

To be totally fair you need to do an analysis for all of the NFL teams for that year. What you will find is that there were some good players taken in the draft (as you pointed out next to the picks you felt were losers) as well as bad players taken, and that is across the board.

The draft couldn't have been that bad, it netted the Chiefs a 13-3 season. The coaching was the lynch pin in the failure that year (and every year that Shottenheimer was at the helm). His mode was very agressive in the regular season, but very conservative in the playoffs. That cost us the whole time he was there. The one time the Chiefs got to the AFC Championship the driving force was Joe Montana (which led to the "Let Joe do it" attitude.)

Basically I'm saying that your report is biased and unfair. I understand your point of view, but you are attacking CP because he drafted and traded for players resulting in a 13-3 record. What's up with that?

You're coming in a little late. I've been doing summaries like this for each of Peterson's seasons with the Chiefs, and it just turns out that I'm up to 1995 this week. The 1994 summary was posted about two weeks ago.

I've already gone through the whole "biased and unfair" complaint with other planeteers during previous summaries. If you feel like going back to the start and reading all the summaries, the 1989 season was posted on 10/26/04. If you choose to go back and look, you'll see I'm not criticizing the '95 draft by itself, but rather Peterson's collection of 16 drafts taken as a whole.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 08:20 PM
You're coming in a little late. I've been doing summaries like this for each of Peterson's seasons with the Chiefs, and it just turns out that I'm up to 1995 this week. The 1994 summary was posted about two weeks ago.

I've already gone through the whole "biased and unfair" complaint with other planeteers during previous summaries. If you feel like going back to the start and reading all the summaries, the 1989 season was posted on 10/26/04. If you choose to go back and look, you'll see I'm not criticizing the '95 draft by itself, but rather Peterson's collection of 16 drafts taken as a whole.

You didn't understand what I said. You are comparing the Chiefs against the Chiefs. Compare them and their drafts against the rest of the league. Compare all teams for the '95 draft and leave the per pick commentary. What you will find is that the Chiefs are on par with the rest of the league.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 08:43 PM
You didn't understand what I said. You are comparing the Chiefs against the Chiefs. Compare them and their drafts against the rest of the league. Compare all teams for the '95 draft and leave the per pick commentary. What you will find is that the Chiefs are on par with the rest of the league.When you only draft 3 stars in 16 years you aren't par with the rest of the league. I just can't get over how many people actually defend Carl's draft history.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 08:52 PM
You didn't understand what I said. You are comparing the Chiefs against the Chiefs. Compare them and their drafts against the rest of the league. Compare all teams for the '95 draft and leave the per pick commentary. What you will find is that the Chiefs are on par with the rest of the league.

Like I've told others who have requested similar research.....I don't care about other teams, and I definitely don't have the time to do it. If Lamar wants to pay me $40k to objectively review Carl's results against all other teams during the past 16 years, then I'd be glad to put in the effort. Or if you feel like doing it for objectivity's sake, then be my guest.

Another thing I've already mentioned to others like you is that I'm sure if you were able to come up with some universally accepted ranking of each teams' drafts, Carl would finish ahead of teams like the Bengals, Cardinals, and possibly a few others. But to quote another planeteer, better than bad does not equal good.

Finally, if you want to be completely objective in comparing Carl with his peers, please let me know of another GM who's been with the same team for the past 16 years, and I'd be glad to compare them side by side. Unfortunately, other GM's who don't get their team to the Super Bowl get fired long before they've been with that team for 16 years.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2004, 09:13 PM
We traded Victor Bailey to the Eagles for their second round pick in which they used it on Bobby Taylor.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 09:30 PM
When you only draft 3 stars in 16 years you aren't par with the rest of the league. I just can't get over how many people actually defend Carl's draft history.

Try looking at the W-L record for the past 16 years, that might give you a clue. Compare that W-L record for the previous 16 years. (and with the same GM - Steadman)

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 09:31 PM
We traded Victor Bailey to the Eagles for their second round pick in which they used it on Bobby Taylor.

Take another look at what you wrote. If we got their second round pick for Bailey how did the use it on Bobby Taylor?

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 09:45 PM
Try looking at the W-L record for the past 16 years, that might give you a clue. Compare that W-L record for the previous 16 years. (and with the same GM - Steadman)
Now your changing your tune to wins and losses, instead of the draft. Fine, we'll try it your way. Like I said earlier, comparing the 70's and 80's to present day NFL is futile at best. It's night and day. Every team has a chance because there is a salary cap now. There wasn't before Carl arrived or right before he got here. That's a major difference, because the fan base increased for ALL teams. Most feel like they have a shot now due to the cap, hence the increased fan base for ALL teams. The same could not be said for the 70's and 80's team.

As far as wins and losses, sure the Chiefs were good, not great in the 90's, but that was 4 years ago. In the past 7 years we've made the playoffs once, not exactly the wins and losses you were hoping for to back your argument. A GM is responsible for NOW and the future and Carl has been given a free pass by some for something that he accomplished 7 years ago and before and even then he didn't achieve what the goal is in the first place. I would say the majority of owners would have said enough is enough, in fact based on the average GMs lifespan with a team, Carl has had more time to get this done than any other GM in the present day and yet, the same thing every year...failure.
How you can defend mediocrity is beyond me.

Logical
12-03-2004, 09:52 PM
Try looking at the W-L record for the past 16 years, that might give you a clue. Compare that W-L record for the previous 16 years. (and with the same GM - Steadman)

All that proves is that Lamar Hunt does not really care about championships and is negligent in managing his franchise.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:05 PM
Now your changing your tune to wins and losses, instead of the draft. Fine, we'll try it your way. Like I said earlier, comparing the 70's and 80's to present day NFL is futile at best. It's night and day. Every team has a chance because there is a salary cap now. There wasn't before Carl arrived or right before he got here. That's a major difference, because the fan base increased for ALL teams. Most feel like they have a shot now due to the cap, hence the increased fan base for ALL teams. The same could not be said for the 70's and 80's team.

As far as wins and losses, sure the Chiefs were good, not great in the 90's, but that was 4 years ago. In the past 7 years we've made the playoffs once, not exactly the wins and losses you were hoping for to back your argument. A GM is responsible for NOW and the future and Carl has been given a free pass by some for something that he accomplished 7 years ago and before and even then he didn't achieve what the goal is in the first place. I would say the majority of owners would have said enough is enough, in fact based on the average GMs lifespan with a team, Carl has had more time to get this done than any other GM in the present day and yet, the same thing every year...failure.
How you can defend mediocrity is beyond me.


So last year at 13-3 the Chiefs were mediocre?

Nice try.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:06 PM
All that proves is that Lamar Hunt does not really care about championships and is negligent in managing his franchise.

Ever heard of Clark Hunt? He is running the franchise nowdays.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:10 PM
So last year at 13-3 the Chiefs were mediocre?

Nice try.
NO the other 6 years. By your logic as long as they make the playoffs once every 7 years and lose in the first round everybody should be happy and accept getting bent over and taking yet another ticket increase.

Funny how you ignored all the other pertinent stuff. Nice try, Gretz.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:10 PM
Ever heard of Clark Hunt? He is running the franchise nowdays.
He's doing stellar. Yea boy.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:18 PM
NO the other 6 years. By your logic as long as they make the playoffs once every 7 years and lose in the first round everybody should be happy and accept getting bent over and taking yet another ticket increase.

Funny how you ignored all the other pertinent stuff. Nice try, Gretz.
Where did you come up with that crap?

I don't like not being in the SB as much as anyone, I just don't try to be the "all knowing" that can point to one person as the guilty party and live with that.

CP is NOT the only reason that the Chiefs are not doing better than they should.

Marty was a good regular season coach but sucked in the playoffs. He had five straight years in the playoffs and couldn't move on. Check out what he does this year if he makes it to the playoffs. I'd bet he chokes in the first round, he didn't learn a thing in KC.

Gunther was a great DC but sucked as a HC.

Vermeil is a good coach but tends to get too involved with his players on the personal level.

The HC job is all about management strategy, you have to give your assistant coaches goals and hold them responsible for their performance. The HC will eat all of the blame, but the guys under him are just as much to blame as he is. He managed poorly, they coached poorly.

Blame who you want, it will not change this season, last season or next season. If you change the whole staff in three to five years you will be back to the same point.

Fans in KC are reportedly the best, I think that the guys that say that don't have a clue as to how much whining goes on behind the scenes.

Let me get you some Cheese for that Whine.

Just for the asking, why do you call me Gretz?

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:19 PM
He's doing stellar. Yea boy.

My guess is that you didn't know that he was in Charge and has been for more than a couple of years.

Dad still owns the Chiefs but has backed out of the front office.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:25 PM
My guess is that you didn't know that he was in Charge and has been for more than a couple of years.

Dad still owns the Chiefs but has backed out of the front office.
I don't give a shit who's running the team, whoever it is there doing just enough to keep the fans in the seats.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:26 PM
Where did you come up with that crap?

I don't like not being in the SB as much as anyone, I just don't try to be the "all knowing" that can point to one person as the guilty party and live with that.

CP is NOT the only reason that the Chiefs are not doing better than they should.

Marty was a good regular season coach but sucked in the playoffs. He had five straight years in the playoffs and couldn't move on. Check out what he does this year if he makes it to the playoffs. I'd bet he chokes in the first round, he didn't learn a thing in KC.

Gunther was a great DC but sucked as a HC.

Vermeil is a good coach but tends to get too involved with his players on the personal level.

The HC job is all about management strategy, you have to give your assistant coaches goals and hold them responsible for their performance. The HC will eat all of the blame, but the guys under him are just as much to blame as he is. He managed poorly, they coached poorly.

Blame who you want, it will not change this season, last season or next season. If you change the whole staff in three to five years you will be back to the same point.

Fans in KC are reportedly the best, I think that the guys that say that don't have a clue as to how much whining goes on behind the scenes.

Let me get you some Cheese for that Whine.

Just for the asking, why do you call me Gretz?

Who do you think is charge of hiring all those coaches in the first place? If you're the man in charge, you're the man in charge and that's Carl failure Peterson.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:28 PM
Who do you think is charge of hiring all those coaches in the first place? If you're the man in charge, you're the man in charge and that's Carl failure Peterson.

LIttleWhineyChiefFan, buy the Chiefs and fire Carl. That is the one thing that you can do to make most of the people on this board happy.

I swear the name of this board needs to be the HateCPChiefsPlanet.

When you grow up maybe you will see that it's not at all what you think.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:29 PM
I don't give a shit who's running the team, whoever it is there doing just enough to keep the fans in the seats.

Need more Cheese?

Logical
12-03-2004, 10:31 PM
Who do you think is charge of hiring all those coaches in the first place? If you're the man in charge, you're the man in charge and that's Carl failure Peterson.:clap:

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:33 PM
Need more Cheese?
Pick up your lemming suit from the dry cleaners-it's ready.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 10:33 PM
Just for the asking, why do you call me Gretz?

Because you spew the same propaganda that we read everyday on KCChiefs.com from Gretz and Rufus.

It's never one person's fault; therefore, nobody deserves to be fired.....right?

Actually, you're probably right that Peterson only deserves some of the blame and that it's not solely his fault. But here's the thing.....if Peterson was fired, the next President/GM would most likely fire all the other culprits besides CP who deserve the rest of the blame.......DV, Stiles, Kuharich, the scouts, etc.

Peterson's biggest problem is that he refuses to do what needs to be done, because he doesn't want to upset his good 'ol boy network.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:38 PM
Pick up your lemming suit from the dry cleaners-it's ready.

You are wrong, my suit still has the chees stains from your whining session. It may never come back!!!

Buy the Chiefs and make the changes. Then you won't have to pay the thousands of dollars to watch the game, they will all be comped.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:39 PM
Because you spew the same propaganda that we read everyday on KCChiefs.com from Gretz and Rufus.

It's never one person's fault; therefore, nobody deserves to be fired.....right?

Actually, you're probably right that Peterson only deserves some of the blame and that it's not solely his fault. But here's the thing.....if Peterson was fired, the next President/GM would most likely fire all the other culprits besides CP who deserve the rest of the blame.......DV, Stiles, Kuharich, the scouts, etc.

Peterson's biggest problem is that he refuses to do what needs to be done, because he doesn't want to upset his good 'ol boy network.

What propaganda? You can blame CP for everything, but you cannot expect a new GM to fire everyone. I don't think anyone has the balls to do that.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:48 PM
You are wrong, my suit still has the chees stains from your whining session. It may never come back!!!

Buy the Chiefs and make the changes. Then you won't have to pay the thousands of dollars to watch the game, they will all be comped.Sorry I'm not a lemming like the Chiefs would like to have in all their fans, but tough shit. You just sit back and enjoy all the shit they are serving you. MMM MMM good.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 10:48 PM
What propaganda? You can blame CP for everything, but you cannot expect a new GM to fire everyone. I don't think anyone has the balls to do that.

So how many guys do you think your buddy Carl kept on from the Chiefs previous regime when he was hired in 1988?

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:50 PM
So how many guys do you think your buddy Carl kept on from the Chiefs previous regime when he was hired in 1988?

I wasn't watching, but on December 24th I'll be able to scan the history of the Chiefs and tell you who stayed and who left.

Logical
12-03-2004, 10:51 PM
So how many guys do you think your buddy Carl kept on from the Chiefs previous regime when he was hired in 1988?

He is playing a game here by using the word all. It is true that people like the head of security, concessions, accounting were probably kept on and would be if a new GM was named. But cleaning house for coaching staff and football operations is not at all unusual. The Chargers did it just a few years back.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:54 PM
He is playing a game here by using the word all. It is true that people like the head of security, concessions, accounting were probably kept on and would be if a new GM was named. But cleaning house for coaching staff and football operations is not at all unusual. The Chargers did it just a few years back.

I don't have ready access to the media guide. It has the total history of the franchise as well as who was working at what position when.

Those answers will have to come later.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 10:54 PM
He is playing a game here by using the word all. It is true that people like the head of security, concessions, accounting were probably kept on and would be if a new GM was named. But cleaning house for coaching staff and football operations is not at all unusual. The Chargers did it just a few years back.
After seeing posts like we've read lately, I'm beginning to think the Chiefs PR department is out in full force, possibly even posting on message boards, because it's very clear that Carl has failed 16 years in a row and some still defend it like we can't see with our own two eyes.

MonroeChief
12-03-2004, 10:59 PM
After seeing posts like we've read lately, I'm beginning to think the Chiefs PR department is out in full force, possibly even posting on message boards, because it's very clear that Carl has failed 16 years in a row and some still defend it like we can't see with our own two eyes.

Just to ease your mind, I am not part of the PR department. I don't work for the Chiefs or for the press in KC or any other town. I am not a network person, I don't work for any TV or Radio station.

I am a Chiefs fan. If they win 1 game out of 16 I will still be a Chiefs fan. I will refuse to sling mud at what they do for a living. I am entertained when I watch the team play. I hate it when they lose, but there can only be one winner at the end of the year and the odds to that are at best 31-1.

Cry in your beer if you must, but if you can only be happy if they win the SuperBowl you might be unhappy for longer than 34 years. Winning the SuperBowl will only bring you a moment of happiness and then you will fall back into your old ways.

Lotsa luck.

shaneo69
12-03-2004, 11:00 PM
I don't have ready access to the media guide. It has the total history of the franchise as well as who was working at what position when.

Those answers will have to come later.

I'll be here.

BigChiefFan
12-03-2004, 11:04 PM
Just to ease your mind, I am not part of the PR department. I don't work for the Chiefs or for the press in KC or any other town. I am not a network person, I don't work for any TV or Radio station.

I am a Chiefs fan. If they win 1 game out of 16 I will still be a Chiefs fan. I will refuse to sling mud at what they do for a living. I am entertained when I watch the team play. I hate it when they lose, but there can only be one winner at the end of the year and the odds to that are at best 31-1.

Cry in your beer if you must, but if you can only be happy if they win the SuperBowl you might be unhappy for longer than 34 years. Winning the SuperBowl will only bring you a moment of happiness and then you will fall back into your old ways.

Lotsa luck.
Obviously I'm a Chief fan, too because I'm still here after this dismal season. We both want the same things, the difference is you are still pleased with Carl Peterson and I believe he has had more than ample time to make it happen and continued to fail. I do think he has done some positive things for the Chiefs, but I honestly believe his tenure has run its course and I would welcome a change.

Manila-Chief
12-04-2004, 03:31 AM
Monroe, Just curious ... how long you been a Chiefs fan? I don't see your name on the list of those who watched us play in 2 S.B.'s ... My point is some of the younger guys are content with watching them "play good." Most of us who have been around for a while really do believe that it is time we at least went to a S.B. .... And yes in our front office ... the buck stops with Kingless coz he has complete control!!! The coaches may not coach or players may not play ... but it's his responsibility ... plus ... the topic of his thread is poor draft picks ... it doesn't take an expert to realize Kingless has done a very bad job of drafting!!! Compare N.E. if you want a comparision!!!

shaneo69 and BigChief .... I'm with you guys ... Kingless' drafts are horrible.... a coach can draw up all the X's & O's but if the talent is not there ..... well, the D can't stop a team when the need to stop them...

He has no ability for judging talent ... It's not only with the stars on the team but the guys who should be good solid player who can just do their job... How many of our 2nd. rounders are starting .... and yes, compare that stat with N.E. .... Kingless wants the credit for running a franchise with a low budget ... that doesn't go over board on FA's ... only problem ... the ones he gets don't help us win!!!

Enough is enough... bring in some new blood ... we may go through a down time but at least it will bring in some fresh hope for the future. Right now ... I don't think we will ever win a S.B. under Kingless and D.V. .... D.V. lucked into one S.B. win ... and it is questionable if he can do it again????

Deberg_1990
12-04-2004, 11:04 AM
God what a horrible draft......Well, I guess Vanover won a few games for us, but the others drafted werent even worth the time you spent to type out their names. Thanks for the bad memories!!!

Calcountry
12-04-2004, 02:06 PM
If the Armor piercing bullet would have been 2 inches more to the left, I wouldn't exist right now.

Some of you probably wish it had, but, oh well wtf.

What I am saying is hindsight is always 20/20

We could have one every super bowl had we had a crystal ball and picked all the players that panned out the best, but then so could every other team.

I do not excuse Carl for not chitting out and getting lucky once in a while. It seems as though he consistently fugs it up if all you know it alls are correctl. Carry on. :thumb:

MonroeChief
12-04-2004, 02:58 PM
Obviously I'm a Chief fan, too because I'm still here after this dismal season. We both want the same things, the difference is you are still pleased with Carl Peterson and I believe he has had more than ample time to make it happen and continued to fail. I do think he has done some positive things for the Chiefs, but I honestly believe his tenure has run its course and I would welcome a change.

I wouldn't go as far to say I agree with everything he has done, but I refuse to put the blame for the season soley on him.

MonroeChief
12-04-2004, 03:03 PM
Monroe, Just curious ... how long you been a Chiefs fan? I don't see your name on the list of those who watched us play in 2 S.B.'s ...

And yes in our front office ... the buck stops with Kingless coz he has complete control!!! The coaches may not coach or players may not play ... but it's his responsibility ... plus ... the topic of his thread is poor draft picks ... it doesn't take an expert to realize Kingless has done a very bad job of drafting!!! Compare N.E. if you want a comparision!!!



Look at the post count. I'm new on this board. I've been a Chiefs fan since 1963 and a season ticket holder since 1972.

I watched the first SB on TV like the rest of you. I attended the second (SB4) Superbowl and watched Lenny and the gang do the job.

As far as your claim that CP has total control, you are wrong.

Comparing the Chiefs with N.E. is only the beginning. You have to compare them with the rest of the league to stake a claim that CP is as bad as you wish he was.

Like I said before, I don't agree with everything he has done, but I refuse to put the total blame for the Chiefs season on him.

Hydrae
12-04-2004, 04:29 PM
MonroeChief, the way I view these threads is not so much actual CP bashing as a look at the facts. I know I appreciate the effort shaneo69 is putting into these threads. :thumb:

At the very least these are interesting trips down memory lane. When was the last time you even thought about what a disappointment Slaughter was for us? With a season like this one it can become a good time to reflect on how we got where we are as a team as a the fans of that team.

MonroeChief
12-04-2004, 05:04 PM
MonroeChief, the way I view these threads is not so much actual CP bashing as a look at the facts. I know I appreciate the effort shaneo69 is putting into these threads. :thumb:

At the very least these are interesting trips down memory lane. When was the last time you even thought about what a disappointment Slaughter was for us? With a season like this one it can become a good time to reflect on how we got where we are as a team as a the fans of that team.

If you are going to shoot facts about what is wrong in KC you are going to have to get a bigger quiver for your arrows. There is plenty of blame to go around.

Has anyone ever thought about what would happen if someone was hired to replace CP and did a worse job? We could end up like the 'aints!!! Never been, probably never will.

shaneo69
12-04-2004, 10:10 PM
Has anyone ever thought about what would happen if someone was hired to replace CP and did a worse job? We could end up like the 'aints!!! Never been, probably never will.

Don't look now, but the 'aints have actually won a playoff game more recently than us (2000), and they're probably closer to winning another one before us, as soon as they show Haslett the door. And if I recall, they beat us this year.

Funny, it's getting harder and harder to pick out teams that we can honestly say that we're lucky not to be their team's fans.

MonroeChief
12-04-2004, 10:47 PM
Don't look now, but the 'aints have actually won a playoff game more recently than us (2000), and they're probably closer to winning another one before us, as soon as they show Haslett the door. And if I recall, they beat us this year.

Funny, it's getting harder and harder to pick out teams that we can honestly say that we're lucky not to be their team's fans.

They may have won a playoff game more recently than the Chiefs, but how playoff games have they been in their history?