PDA

View Full Version : I Know I'm an Idiot, but all of our eggs are in one basket...


KCJohnny
04-22-2001, 02:55 PM
...offense.
Now, this is either brilliant beyond all ability to contemplate or absolute pro football suicide. I cannot remember any team in the modern era making almost every available effort to invest in one aspect of the game as this year's Chiefs. Rams, Rams, Rams! Coaches, players, QBs, WRs, coordinators, playbook, philosophy, etc... C'mon! This is Martzyball, guys! We draft 1 lonley DT in the 3rd round and sign a Rams reject at CB and ALL the rest goes to offense, offense, offense.
KCJ
Hoping KC will score on every possession or else we are LITERALLY looking at the 2000 Rams without the Rams stars.

DaneMcCloud
04-22-2001, 02:58 PM
Go away, edited for content!

Joe Seahawk
04-22-2001, 03:06 PM
Shaunard Harts..

Notes: Former wide receiver and tailback who can return kickoffs. Had 12 catches for 246 yards and one touchdown as a freshman in 1997. Moved to tailback in '98 and carried 90 times for 406 yard and three touchdowns, caught 19 passes for 203 yards and two touchdowns and returned 21 kickoffs for 361 yards. Moved over to defense in '99 and had 64 tackles and his first interception. Second-team All-Big West Conference safety in 2000, when he had 86 stops, seven sacks, 14 tackles for loss, eight passes broken up and two interceptions.

Positives: Good all-around athlete. Very versatile. Has played three positions in college. Fine competitor. Good hitter. Has some speed and quickness. Had a productive senior season.

Negatives: Limited experience on defense and does not look that natural on that side of the ball. Still needs a lot of work on his footwork and coverage skills.

CanadaKC
04-22-2001, 03:06 PM
Johnny, there's always next year's draft! Settle down.
We are going to go through growing pains this season anyways. It is a new coaching staff, and new philosophies on both sides of the ball. Besides, despite DT's and CB's, this draft was very weak for LB's and very average for DE's. Wait and see how this season pans out, I'm sure it may be frustrating, but I certainly don't think the Chiefs threw away their whole future in this draft. That's absurd.

htismaqe
04-22-2001, 03:09 PM
Maybe, just maybe, the defensive guys we drafted last year are the real deal...we don't know because we haven't seen them in real system yet.

The Rams defense under Vermeil was VERY good, so cool off a little bit...

KCJohnny
04-22-2001, 03:10 PM
Joe, thanks for the scouting report.
Cananda, I'm not only referring to the draft. All the FA activity, coaching moves, etc... seem focused on offense. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe this is the way to win the SB. Just don't tell the Ravens that.
KCJ
Pariah

RedandGold
04-22-2001, 03:12 PM
John,

Take a couple of deep breaths and calm down a bit. The defense has not been ignored.

We have drafted a DT in Eric Downing, DE (should be converted to OLB) in Monty Beisel, and SS in Shaunard Harts.

Contrary to your personal belief, I don't think that our defense is in that bad of shape. We suffered more as a result of Kurt's soft zone than we did because of the talent on the field.

We have added some much-needed depth throughout this draft, and I am beginning to feel a little more optimistic about our picks than I did at the beginning.

True, there were some moves that I would have done differently, but what's done is done, and these guys are now Kansas City Chiefs. Give them the support they deserve!

KCJohnny
04-22-2001, 03:20 PM
Red & Gold:
That's good advice.
I'm calm.
I just don't like the new direction at all. I will have a change of heart when I see my beloved Chiefs on the green grass of Arrowhead stadium again, I am sure. In the meantime, I feel like my favorite team has been hi-jacked by the Rams and are trying to copy not the 1999 Rams, but the 2000 Rams. I have never believed in "just enough defense to get by." The Chiefs have a tradition of dominant defense that I see being slighted in favor of a Ramifization of the current roster.
I guess I'll mosey on back to the Star BB where they at least indulge my whacky opinions as conversation starters.
Sorry to disturb your afternoon.
Good day, gentlemen.
KCJ

AJKCFAN
04-22-2001, 03:21 PM
Maybe, just maybe, the Chiefs are waiting to see Kevin Hardy and/or other veterans cast away in the coming weeks in salary cap crunches and they'll address it then.

Picking veterans up has always been the Chiefs way.

Vermeil/Peterson are together with one purpose in mind: winning the Super Bowl for the Kansas City Chiefs.

They're not going to be neglecting every area. This is just the NFL Draft. There's a good two-three months of offseason to bring help on defense and in that time, there will arise plenty of options to improve the defense.

kcred
04-22-2001, 03:23 PM
I think maybe our coaching staff thinks our D may not be as bad as we do, I mean we were ranked in the middle some where, but, our offense left with Elvis evidently. I am somewhat surprised, but counting Holmes, we only had 4 backs, you know we will carry 5, so those two were understandable. And although, we have enough tight ends for 3 teams, the one we drafted looks pretty good, more in the TG mold, than blocking TEs. Really surprised about the tackle, and no guard, but the changes they may have in mind, might move a tackle to guard. Overall, the best you can say about this draft is average, and it could be a bust. But, there could be a jewel or two there too.

CanadaKC
04-22-2001, 03:26 PM
I think the most important thing that will come into play this season is attitude. The players said it themselves,
even angry enough to vent through the media at Gunther and Grbac, that they desperately needed a change of attitude. Vermeil will give this team back it's heart, and they will sacrifice themselves for this team again. How many games did you watch last year when the team just plain out quit? Do you think Gonzalez would honestly stick around after next season, with a dark cloud hanging over the team? No way. Tag or no tag, he would have demanded a trade. Lamar and Carl
should be commended for plugging holes on what was turning out to be a potentially dire situation in the dressing room, and on the playing field. If nothing else,
I think a lot of Chief fans are collectively breathing a sigh of relief that the politics which were running rampant through the team, appear to be taking a back seat now to optimism and a sense of spirit.

AJKCFAN
04-22-2001, 03:26 PM
John:

As for your philosophy, it has worked in the past getting us into the playoffs, but we would lose in the playoffs due to what?

Tell me what it was.

I'll tell you what it was.

Offensive shortcomings.

Plain and simple.

Playoff Loss Scoring Output:

1990: 16
1991: 14
1992: 0
1993: 13
1994: 17
1995: 7
1997: 10

Our defense, the one you claim will get us to the Super Bowl gave up in those games:

1990: 17
1991: 37
1992: 17
1993: 30
1994: 27
1995: 10
1997: 14

So, in the majority of the cases, the Chiefs defense played well enough to win, but the offense couldn't produce enough points to win.

Marty Ball is dead.

Is it any wonder that the Chiefs in those 10 playoff games under Marty scored 20 points or better just twice and won both games?

Give me a brand-new offensive-based philosophy and I'll give you some playoff wins in January.

old_geezer
04-22-2001, 03:37 PM
May I add my two cents worth (and that may be all it's worth)? I have my reservations with some of the picks in this draft but I definitly am not in as good a position as the coaches to make final judgement.

I also think the Chiefs have decided to address their defensive needs with players that become available after June 1st.

Old_geezer firmly believes the Chief's coaches know what they need better than I do. :D

htismaqe
04-22-2001, 04:22 PM
Chaplain,

I respect your opinion as much as anyone's, but it's time for the defensive homers to be quiet for a bit.

As an offensive homer, I've waited TWENTY YEARS to see somthing like this. I don't think the defense is neglected, I think it's alot better than the Stooges made it look last year.

Let's all put away the negativity and let the guy that's been to the Super Bowl TWICE do his job...

WisChief
04-22-2001, 04:28 PM
Man, oh man - you people are depressing the hell out of me!!

I must ask - how many of these players have any of you seen play football? I'll bet the computer your staring at right now that not a one of you have even heard of them, much less seen them play. Anyone here ever heard of Greg Wesley? or Arkansas Pine Bluff? Yea, didn't think so.

AJ - you said exactly what I was thinking about John's thoughts on "dominant" defense. What ever???? Let's see here... St Louis and their crappy defense won a Superbowl and KC and there dominant defense have won 100 games in the 90's.

Just settle down and let's see what happens. You guys listen to Mel "love my hair" Kipper too much. There is a reason that Mel and his bozo cronnies are not GM's somewhere - they're freak'n clueless.

TheFly
04-22-2001, 04:35 PM
What the Rev wants is a stout defense, and an offense that does 3 yards and a cloud of dust... To him that's football...

I totally disagree... It's boring. It never got us to the Super Bowl, and it never won us a playoff game.

Oh, I forgot, he is still grieving over the loss of Gunther...

Mosbonian
04-22-2001, 04:40 PM
Wis-Chief:

"I'll bet the computer your staring at right now that not a one of you have even heard of them, much less seen them play. "

And I'll bet the computer that you are staring at right now that after training camp breaks that we won't hear of them ever again...

For me, the only thing I am bitching about is the trade for Green. IMHO, we paid too much for a QB that is gonna be rehabbing well into July by all accounts now, and then decided that the same Bubby Brister we all laughed at in Denver is our back-up!!! Please explain the logic in all of this.

As for the draft, I HAVE watched Minnis play, and if you keep his head in the game, he can be a good 3rd receiver. As for the rest, I haven't had the luxury to see today's picks so i can't comment on them.

mmaddog
**********

Logical
04-22-2001, 04:47 PM
John,

On this draft I must agree with you John it is just plain bizarre, at a position of marginal need we take two defensive ends. Ok we take one defensive tackle a position of need, then we take a safety another position of dubious need. At CB we take not a single pick (maybe the coaches like all of last years players and we as fans are being too harsh. I guess we do not need a single linebacker, I find that strange.

Then if someone can explain to me why we needed a tight end I will be forever indebted. How about why we needed a full back for an offense that will rarely use a fullback when we have one of the best full backs in the game and a player (Moreau that can be a backup full back for this offense). The running back is ok but unless we are planning on dumping either Cloud or Moreau does not make much sense. WR makes sense, Guard makes sense.

This draft was confounding and makes me think losing our second to get rid of Gun was a good deal. Oh well time will tell on this draft but it seems strange.

Mosbonian
04-22-2001, 05:01 PM
I have had a chance to look at the draft today now, and I am even more disappointed.....

Who, in this organization, was drinking when they scouted Billy Baber, the TE from Virginia? Not only do we have a good enough set of TE's, but we got shut out of some good players after that.

And why the he!! were the Chiefs asleep when they had the opportunity to draft McMahon or Palmer? Do we for some reason believe that we have our QBOTF in Green?

Man this is depressing......

mmaddog
*************

RedandGold
04-22-2001, 05:04 PM
Jim,

I was confused with these picks until I actually had some time to sit back and think about them. I will do my best to justify the ones that look odd on the surface:

"Snoop" Minnis - An excellent choice for a third receiver to fill the void left by Lockett's departure. He has the ability to be a playmaker in our new offense.

Monte Beisel - Even though he played DE in college, he is likely to be moved to OLB. He's got a motor and fills the LB need in the draft.

George Layne - Beyond Richardson, we don't have another FB on the roster. This guy blocked for LaDainian Tomlinson, and he didn't get that yardage on accident. This is a surprise pick, but still fills a need that we really didn't think we had.

Billy Baber - Other than Gonzalez, what talent do we have in the TE position? Baber is an athletic TE, much in the mold of Gonzalez. Another move to add a higher quality of depth.

Derrick Blaylock - Finally, we get the change-of-pace back that we have been lacking. With 4.35 speed, I look to him to work on PR duty and possibly as a slot receiver.

Shaunard Harts - All I can say is that depth is good!

Terdell Sands - This guy might end up being the ultimate sleeper that we drafted. At 6'7" 280 lbs., he was academically inelligible in the 2000 season, but was a dominant force in his sophomore season in 1999. Even though he might need to develop a bit, he was worth the pick.

htismaqe
04-22-2001, 05:09 PM
Thank R&G for a fresh perspective...

1punkyQB
04-22-2001, 05:11 PM
RedandGold
Good info on Sands. Where'd you find that? And does that mean he came out as a junior('99 soph season)?

RedandGold
04-22-2001, 05:19 PM
To those who are interested, here's the link to the story about Sands:

http://www.timesfreepress.com/2000/JUN/04JUN00/07MOCSFB.html

DaneMcCloud
04-22-2001, 05:26 PM
Beisel could be an Eric Hicks type project. Similar size and potential. Sands is a great sleeper pick, and Harts could be the Greg Wesley of 2001. I have a buddy who coaches at Boise State and he really believes in the guy - thinks he'll be a good NFL player. Snoop Minnis and Derrick Blaylock are a great picks for the new offense, and another athletic tight end is not a bad thing! I've read good things about Downing but haven't seen him play. All in all, I think this is a typical strong but not great Chiefs draft, and many of the players will make the team, and some will surprise.

Mosbonian
04-22-2001, 05:58 PM
Snoop" Minnis - I have seen him play and I agree he is an excellent choice for a third receiver to fill the void left by Lockett's departure.

Monte Beisel - Everyone needs to take off your Big 12 blinders on this guy. There is too much homerism on everyone's evaluation of this guy. I bet he is gone by the end of training camp.

George Layne - Can anyone tell me who, without having to look it up, who were the blocking backs for Marshall Faulk, Terrell Davis, Edgerrin James, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, or Eric Dickerson(threw in an easy one for you)? the same will be said for the guy 'who blocked for La Dainlan Tomlinson

Billy Baber - Anyone who compares this guy to Gonzalez, is insulting to #88. I have seen this guy play and he reminds me more of Ricky Dudley than Tony G.
This guy is a nobody!

Derrick Blaylock - This pick I agree with and believe will actually be to the Chiefs what Todd McNair was.

Shaunard Harts/Terdell Sands/Downing-All three will be gone by the time the first cut happens.

Just my humble assessment....

mmaddog
***************

keg in kc
04-22-2001, 06:43 PM
I think that, nomatter what we may think of the guys drafted, the folks in the KC warroom drafted them for a reason, so I'll reserve judgement until I see what happens. This is the draft, after all, and you can't expect every player to pan out, and I think we need to refocus on the fact that we're having a discussion like this about players drafted between the 3rd and 7th rounds and that at best we can hope for impact from a couple of them, if that much; there are no "sure things" when you're discussing players drafted 8+ hours into the draft, and on the second day...

As for the defensive homer position, let's look at what we drafted in a little more detail:

1) Downing: a Defensive Tackle.
2) Minnis: potential to play the slot, a position we need to fill.
3) Beisel: Projects as a linebacker, IMO.
4) Layne: FB, a legitimate need since the only one on the roster was Richardson.
5) Baber: TE. I don't understand this pick, but he's apparently athletic and does provide depth behind Dunn. Can catch, so might give us some flexibility.
6) Blaylock: RB. Fastest timed player at the combine and a steal in the 5th round, IMO, one we couldn't pass up.
7) Sulfsted: projects as a guard, IMO, a position where we needed to add some depth.
8) Harts: will probably get a shot as a special-teamer, and a chance to develop as a S or even a CB, if his coverage skills improve - 6', 200 lbs and 4.47 speed sounds pretty attractive for a defensive back.
9) Sands: listed as 6'5, 301 by TSN. Sounds like a project for the D-line, probably a DT.

So, all-in-all, we drafted two DTs (Downing and Sands), a DE/LB (Beisel) and a DB (Harts) - now, while that may not be as much attention spent on the defense as I might have liked, I don't think that classifies as ignoring it, and I think the offensive players added, with the exception of the TE, fill roster needs, as well. Finally, don't forget that there is still a second period of free agency around June 1 and that some good players may be available then (Darren Woodson, Hardy, etc...)

Logical
04-22-2001, 07:09 PM
I think I gave the wrong impression. I am saying that this draft does nothing to convince me that the loss of the 1st and 2nd are huge deals. In addition I am MYSTIFIED by two of the picks. The rest are probably fine but at least a couple of the others did not address key needs. So one more run down:

1) Downing DT other than he was a huge reach (that is a pick that could be made a couple round later) I have no problem with him

2) Minnis WR probably a good pick but probably could have been had in the fourth (only complaint)

3) Beisel DE if he plays out at OLB maybe an OK pick but he is unlikely to make it at DT (again better players at need postions were available)

4) Layne FB, the offense does not need a FB if we were going to draft one better ones were available and finally with Richardson and Moreau (Moreau can fill in for FB position as little as we will use it) we definitely did not need this guy. I agree with Mark he will be cut by the first cut

5) Baber TE Makes no sense at all, Dunn has plenty of ability to fill in for Tony and is probably better than this guy IMO a totally wasted pick.

6) Blaylock RB I like the player I just do not see the need for a 5th running back (this will be okay if we could make a trade for picks next year (even 4th 5th round picks for Cloud or Moreau)

7) Sulfsted G This makes sense if Carls knack for a late round find continues to workout so no complaint here, besides it provides some depth.

8) Harts S I know nothing about him but we really do not need another safety IMO but I guess he provides some possible depth I doubt if he projects out as a CB as converting CBs to safeties usually works much better than converting Safeties to CBs. At least he makes some sense.

9) Sands DE/DT a project player this late is fine I have no problem with this pick

So what are my complaints:

No QBOTF pick
No CB picks
No Offensive Guards or Centers in the 4th or 5th where a starter might have been expected
Reaches for the DE/DTs we picked when better caliber player (at least on the surface appeared available)
That TE pick seems just plain STUPID
The FB pick was a wasted pick considering we could have got a Guard, Center, CB or QBOTF

All in all it was not a disastrous draft, just strange.

redshirt32
04-22-2001, 07:27 PM
From what Ive read some of these players are have played both sides of the ball. It looks like a special teams draft to me. If nothing else we might find the safety playing WR and DT playing LB. We need players that can tackle on kickoffs and punts we suck in that department. I think we will be much improved in the special teams this year which has been lacking for a long time.

keg in kc
04-22-2001, 07:35 PM
That's exactly what I was about to come post after looking over the list of players again, redshirt.

Jim, regarding your list of gripes:

No QBOTF pick - I'm actually ecstatic we didn't pick a quarterback in the draft. I don't like anyone this year, and I thought taking anyone in the first six rounds would be a complete waste.

No CB picks - I didn't see drafting CB as a high need. We have 3 25 year-old CBs on the roster, and I'd like to see what they can do.

No Offensive Guards or Centers in the 4th or 5th where a starter might have been expected - I agree. I actually wanted Gandy in the 3rd, but the Bears beat us to him. Center I'm not as concerned about at the moment.

Reaches for the DE/DTs we picked when better caliber player (at least on the surface appeared available) - I have some questions about this myself, but I'm reserving judgement. Every player we picked was someone moving up on the draft boards, I just think we got them a round or two too early. Who knows, though...

That TE pick seems just plain STUPID - I didn't get that pick either.

The FB pick was a wasted pick considering we could have got a Guard, Center, CB or QBOTF - it's hard to call any fifth round pick "wasted" IMHO. As for the reasoning behind it, I think we need a fullback behind Richardson, and there is some word on this guy is that he might actually have a bright future in the NFL. He apparently did a bang-up job blocking for LT and has skills of his own. I've even heard one or two draft 'pundits' say they think it's possible he may actually be the better player from the TCU backfield, but I'll not quite go that far...

Logical
04-22-2001, 07:42 PM
Thanks for your thoughts Keg. Well the weekend has been fun even if a little frustrating. By the Way Damn you Bears and Dam you GB.

I really wanted Gandy and I wanted Torrance Marshall just so I could tell Johnny Proctor I told you so. Well I guess I still can since Proctor wanted the Chiefs to take him in the 1st with our 12th pick and we almost got him in the third. He would have been a great pickup in the third IMO.

keg in kc
04-22-2001, 08:32 PM
Well, we did take 4 defensive players, just not the ones people seemed to want...

All-in-all, I'm fairly happy with the personnel we had on defense before the draft, and my only major concern was LB and DT. We may have addressed the DT, time will tell, but I'm still concerned about the linebackers. However, there are some guys playing in Europe right now who may give us what we need. I really think we're going to be better on defense than other folks are stipulating, but heck, I've been wrong before (many many many times...)

Mosbonian
04-22-2001, 08:41 PM
Logical:


"5) Baber TE Makes no sense at all, Dunn has plenty of ability to fill in for Tony and is probably better than this guy IMO a totally wasted pick."

" That TE pick seems just plain STUPID "


I've seen Baber play...Your remarks are hitting the nail on the head...

mmaddog
*********

splatbass
04-22-2001, 09:04 PM
Baber made no sense to me either, then it occurred to me that maybe they are worried TG will leave via free agency next year. Hope not....

WisChief
04-22-2001, 09:24 PM
Originally posted by Mark Kilgore
Wis-Chief:

"I'll bet the computer your staring at right now that not a one of you have even heard of them, much less seen them play. "

And I'll bet the computer that you are staring at right now that after training camp breaks that we won't hear of them ever again...

For me, the only thing I am bitching about is the trade for Green. IMHO, we paid too much for a QB that is gonna be rehabbing well into July by all accounts now, and then decided that the same Bubby Brister we all laughed at in Denver is our back-up!!! Please explain the logic in all of this.

As for the draft, I HAVE watched Minnis play, and if you keep his head in the game, he can be a good 3rd receiver. As for the rest, I haven't had the luxury to see today's picks so i can't comment on them.

mmaddog
**********

Uhh, okay....

I think we've all seen or heard of Minnis - that's not the point. The point is that we are not even a day past the draft and just like last year the vast majority of people are ready to fry the players selected and the people who selected them and, geez, last time I checked VD has been to two SB's, and let's not even count the SB's his staff has between them. All I'm saying is lighten up and wait and see if "we won't hear of them ever again" after camp.

Oh, and by the way - I agree that Green may not be worth the price paid - for what it's worth.

AJKCFAN
04-22-2001, 09:31 PM
Goddamnit... Baber will NOT be replacing Tony Gonzalez.

Not now.

Not ever.

He'll replace Drayton this year and Dunn in the future.

You do NOT let go of the greatest TE to ever strap on the helmet.... for a 5th Round Pick, for chris'sakes

If the Chiefs drafted Todd Heap, then it would hold a little more water, but even that wouldn't mean Gonzalez is through.

Tony Gonzalez will wear only two NFL jerseys in his brilliant career.

They both are # 88

One is white with red lettering.

The other is red and he wears that one when he's HOME at Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City, Missouri!!!!

milkman
04-22-2001, 09:42 PM
Wis,
I'm not ready to fry the players that were picked. I just don't understand the need at some of the positions picked.

KCTitus
04-23-2001, 07:52 AM
Ok, everyone seems to be bagging on Baber in this pick. Im not going to say he's a great TE and a replacement for TG, but I should tell you all, he did impress in the combines in Feburary.

He ran a 4.7 40, fastest of all the other TE's and was top three in the other categories.

Now he may not make the team, but he has sleeper potential.

For those of you that have said you've 'seen him play', well, you must have been strictly watching the O-Line blocking because Baber blocked most of the time and only caught 54 balls (544 yds, 5 TD's) in his 4 years at UVA--George Welch's version of football is slightly more running the football than Gunther was in 1999.

This is not a defense of Baber, but thought since Im probably closest to UVA, that I would let you all know what he did and didnt do.

KCJohnny
04-23-2001, 07:52 AM
Well guys,
I have gotten such a rude reception that I think I will spend my time on the other BB. I have been reluctant to post here for that very reason, but you all have no need of me and seem to all know each other. I guess I am a troll on this BB.

FWIW: Nobody on this or any other BB can find evidence that I supported a "3 yds and a cloud of dust" philosophy. I am in favor of a balanced, attacking offense as long as it can sustain drives and convert the 3rd and 2 without having to pass. You all scream at me because I am able to produce statistics that prove that the Gun/Raye offense had nearly 11,000 total yards in 2 years, the highest 2-year total since the 1960s in KC. The 1999 Chiefs, long castigated as a run-run-run team actually had a run/pass balance of 51/49%.

As for defense, again, my point was twisted wildly out of context. I was alluding to a total personnel posture, not just the draft, which does have some potential, however long-shot they may be. This team is focused almost radically on the offensive side of the ball, and you will see that Greg Robinson/Peter Guinta may improve the Chiefs defense, but not in the proportion that you anticipate based on your disdain of Kurt Schottenheimer.

Gentlemen, I will be in touch with some of you on the other BB. At least there I am allowed to clown and be ridiculous, as part of a comaraderie of cyber-friends. I am disappointed that I did not find that kind of fellowship here. People here are telling me to %$#@ off, go to the Redskins BB, leave immediately, etc...

Good day.
John "KCJ" Proctor

KCTitus
04-23-2001, 07:56 AM
Proctor, sorry that you feel that way, but I would say that the reason KC is focused on the offensive side of the ball is because that is the side that needs the most help. After having been neglected for 12+ years, it needs a little focus for a change.

Enjoy the zephyr and the other BB, and you're allways welcome here in my book.

Gaz
04-23-2001, 07:58 AM
KCJohnny-

I am sorry to see you go.

However, I am somewhat surprised at your reaction. Reading the posts on this BB, I do not see that your reception here was any colder than what you get at the Star BB when posting the same type of thing. True, I would have hoped for a more civilized response from some of my fellow Planeteers, but I hardly think you will find solace and civil behavior at the Star.

Perhaps you have become over-sensitized by continuous bashing?

xoxo~
Gaz
Disappointed.

keg in kc
04-23-2001, 08:12 AM
That's too bad, John. Didn't really see any negativity aimed towards you except for that single post by Dane, but you're a big boy and are more than wise enough to make your own decisions...

See you on 'the other side'...

htismaqe
04-23-2001, 08:16 AM
Chaplain,

I'm not gonna say "don't go" but come on...there was ONE comment, and Dane knows better. He's a good guy, but he, like some of the rest of us, get real tired of the negativity.

John, your opinions are always welcome on this BB, and always will be. But there is a dialog here, not a monologue and oftentimes it gets heated.

Just ask HC_Chief. :D

Mosbonian
04-23-2001, 08:17 AM
Titus:

"For those of you that have said you've 'seen him play', well, you must have been strictly watching the O-Line blocking because Baber blocked most of the time and only caught 54 balls (544 yds, 5 TD's) in his 4 years at UVA--George Welch's version of football is slightly more running the football than Gunther was in 1999."

Although I don't live as close as you do to UVA, I live here in the heart of ACC country and have watched him. My reason for the comment on my part was that he did nothing to distinguish himself that would make me want to pick a blocking TE in an offense built on high octane passing.

Besides, we already have 3 TE's, why pick another.

mmaddog
*********

Otter
04-23-2001, 08:18 AM
Don't have time to go through all the posts JP but don't hold the whole board resposnsible for the opinions of a few.

Almost sounds like it should be precededed with "confucis say" :D

Gaz
04-23-2001, 08:24 AM
KCJohnny-

I wondered if my recollections of the Star BB were clouded, so I went there. I clicked on your "If I Were Todd Collins..." thread and read through all the replies.

I must say that your contention that you are "allowed to clown and be ridiculous, as part of a comaraderie of cyber-friends" goes beyond overzealous hyperbole to just plain untrue.

It is unfortunate, however, that you are personally attacked on any BB. And I am disappointed that the best we can say about the Planet is that we are not any less polite or civil than the Star. I had higher hopes for us.

xoxo~
Gaz
Disappointed on many levels.

KCTitus
04-23-2001, 08:32 AM
Agreed, Mark. He didnt do anything to distinguish himself, but he did impress in the combines that's why I said he has sleeper potential.

He's got speed and size, 6'3", 257.

old_geezer
04-23-2001, 12:08 PM
Folks

Slap me down if I'm out of line here, but if John left because of what was said, he was looking for an excuse to leave IMO.
I believe Dane was out of line mainly because of the civil responses I have always received here and I have grown accoustomed to them. It's one of the main reasons I like this BB so much and will continue to come back as long as I'm not thrown off for doing something stupid.
I've seen some of the replies John has gotten on the "other" BB with some of his topics and for him to stomp off in a huff for what was said here means his skin must be getting thin.
John, we love ya, and you're welcome here anytime. Next time maybe bring a little lotion for your chapped skin. :D

DaneMcCloud
04-23-2001, 02:25 PM
John, I was out of line and I admit it, but I also posted my remarks because that's the way you have made me (and other posters) feel. I did it so that "maybe" it might snap you out of the "funk" you've been in and possibly to help you realize that you've been down on the Chiefs for so long now, that your comments are not inciting discussion, and in fact are bringing out the negativity in all of us. I really don't want to constantly defend the Chiefs actions to anyone, especially a "homer". I apologize again, but hope that your attitude will change.

KCTitus
04-23-2001, 03:49 PM
OldGeezer: I believe you are correct on this, very well said.

Any of the old timers remember SportsWax from the 'ol BB, he had a very similar goodbye post on that one as well...of course, he came back a few weeks later after getting caught using troll identities.

Baby Lee
04-23-2001, 04:16 PM
Let's see here... St Louis and their crappy defense won a Superbowl and KC and there dominant defense have won 100 games in the 90's.

Please know you shi. . . stuff . . . before posting. The '99 Rams had the 6th D in the league overall and, more importantly, had the D in the clutch. Defensive stands in the 4th quarter, against TB were the difference in a championship game almost entirely bereft of offense. Defense the entire game, and in particular on the last play of the game, secured them a SB victory agianst Tenn.

Believe me, it pained me to no end as a lifetime Chiefs fan living in St. Louis, when I would opine 'knowlingly' that St. Louie would have their regular season fun against their cupcake schedule, but fold in the playoffs when real Defense would be necessary, only to eat my words when their Defense did the things I always hoped the Chiefs D would do in the playoffs.

JC-Johnny
Giving the kudos 'til it hurts.

Lightning Rod
04-23-2001, 04:47 PM
Mahatma- I've been reading your stuff for several years now. Your an old fashioned Smash mouth football fan. Don't hide from it. I still visit the Star BB from time to time this one is certainly at least as civil as it is.

To be fair if you look back at 1999 the Rams had the easiest Regular season schedule I've ever seen. But hey ya gotta give credit where credit is due they won it all and our beloved Chiefs haven't even sniffed the SB in a Long Long time.

KCJohnny
04-23-2001, 05:47 PM
I apologize for lumping all posters into the group of rude antiproctors. That was unfair.
That said, I thank those of you who extended me cyber hospitality. I mean that.

For the record:
I am ferociously loyal to the Chiefs. But not the Rams. And since none of these Rams players, coaches, coordinators, systems and philosophies have appeared on NFL grass in KC red, I am skeptical. I LOVE the Chiefs. These (Rams) guys are Chiefs on paper only, and they are bringing in something somewhat foreign to Arrowhead IMO. The very act of bringing in a wholesale overhaul of systems/players/coaches from another franchise is in itself a condemnation of the Kansas City Chiefs. I do NOT ask you to agree with me. What I do ask is that you see the tireless loyalty I have toward all things Chiefs that makes me resent being force-fed the Ramifization of my favorite sports team. Again, I do not expect agreement. But it is patently wrong to say I am negative against the Chiefs. In a certain way, I am standing with only a few die-hards resisting the bluing of our beloved red and gold. To me, that defines loyalty.
I suppose some of you felt that the 1998 Florida Marlins were a wonderful team to plant your loyalty behind. A year after they won the World Series, all their 'loyal' stars flew the coup because Wayne Heuzenga went into deep debt to 'buy' a championship by bringing in other people's players. Next season, they finished dead last. And those great players were gone.

I will be solidly behind the Chiefs CURRENT roster of players and coaches by opening day. But I cannot stomach all the laud, honor and praise being lavished on the Rams by the CURRENT Chiefs leadership. Maybe you can.

Sincerely,
KCJ

DaneMcCloud
04-23-2001, 06:00 PM
Johnny, if Bill Parcells would have been hired instead of Dick Vermeil, would you complain that the Chiefs roster would have been poplulated by available Patriots and Jets players? How about Mike Holmgren populating with available Packers? This is just par for the course. A successful coach who drafted, signed and developed players from a very successful team wants any available player that can help his new team! Who cares where these guys are from? Should I slam you because you're a Chiefs fan living in North Carolina, not a Kansas or Missouri resident? In the era of free agency, we should be THRILLED that a coach can easily bring in players that conform with his style of play and mentality. All of these changes have been for the good of the Chiefs; they haven't had much success in the past 5 years, so I for one applaud the changes!

WisChief
04-23-2001, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by KCJohnny
Red & Gold:
I have never believed in "just enough defense to get by." The Chiefs have a tradition of dominant defense that I see being slighted in favor of a Ramifization of the current roster.

KCJ

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JC-Johnny
[B]

Please know you shi. . . stuff . . . before posting. The '99 Rams had the 6th D in the league overall and.....

JC-Johnny

My point exactly! I know my shi...stuff...before posting. My "crappy" was John's "just enough defense to get by". They (St Louis) won it all - we (KC) won 100 games.

Please, next time, know your shi...stuff...before posting. :D

Logical
04-23-2001, 08:26 PM
John,

I went back and read every post, I do not see a general trend of ridicule or even you getting a hard time except in a couple of cases.

Seems to me most people were actually bantering back and forth about the draft and the way it went. So you did a good job of getting one of the more posted threads going. Hope you reconsider as your always welcome.


Jim

KCJohnny
04-23-2001, 09:35 PM
Jim:
I count you as one of my friends. I mean that. God bless you.

Dane: Imagine you are a stock car fan. Your car has had some close calls, but few wins. The owner decides to put a Ford engine under the hood of your Chevy chassis. After all, Fords win. Then he gets another driver, who has always hated your team. Finally, he struts about garnering support for the new improved car that will compete. After a period of adjustment, that is. Now you have a foreign engine and a foreign driver, but after all, it's still your steering wheel, paint and tachometer, so why all the fuss?

To everyone: I am an artist, not a sports broadcaster. My forte is writing songs, not critiquing athletes. This is fun, but not life. My opinions about football mean very little in the grand scheme of things.

"Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousnous, and all these things will be added unto you." St. Matthew 6:33

Warrior5
04-23-2001, 09:42 PM
Chaplain,
Over the years I've seen numerous lame attempts by many on TOBB to label you: "poofter", "warmonger", "statmonger", "Maulball-lover", "RBbC lover", "holier-than-thou", "head-in-the-sand dinosaur", and "hypocrite". Yet you withstood it all as the "BB Chaplain" and remained a stalwart of optimism.
While I understand your discontent and temporary pessimism with the "Ramifization" of the Chiefs, I do not understand you being so easily "run" from the Planet because of one or two posts questioning your loyalty to the Chiefs.
You are undoubtedly a die-hard Chiefs fanatic, a man of God, a genuine conservative, a proud soldier, a non-commissioned officer, and an Airborne warrior in a proud unit that takes crap from no one.
Unless you have some other reason for wanting to leave the Planet, I'm frankly surprised. The choice is obviously yours, but I for one sincerely hope you stay on board for the upcoming ride and continue to provide the quality input you're famous for.

Zebedee DuBois
04-23-2001, 09:44 PM
KCJohnny;

This is a little late, should have been for Easter, but here is a Jesus Easter quote:

"For all the sins you do,
This Bloods for you"
Agustus Busch Translation

A little irreverent, but true nontheless.

Everyone: forgive me my non-football moment.

KCJohnny
04-23-2001, 09:51 PM
Warrior 5 (are you a company XO?)
Thanks for your vote of confidence.
At the risk of looking like a self-pitying ***, I will take your invitation to stay. God, that's all I wanted to hear. I LOVE my Chiefs and have since I was a skinny little kid trying on shoulder pads for the first time in '71. This team has a very spiritual meaning for me. That is why I am so torn over bringing in SOOO many non-Chiefs people who have NOOOO stake in our heritage. Only the truly sentimental will know where I am coming from. This team is a friend, a brother, a close confidant, a war horse I have accompanied into battle for decades (in spirit). I am heartbroken to see such a sell out to another franchise's good fortune, yet I must be loyal.
This Chiefs team is unrecognizeable from the glory years of the 90s, yet I hope they accomplish the ultimate victory in the NFL.
Thank you, Warrior, for giving a dinosaur like me the vote of confidence I need to give my beloved Kansas City Chiefs the optimistic support they need.
KCJ
Blathering old fool

Warrior5
04-23-2001, 09:59 PM
Sincerely glad to hear it, and welcome back with open arms. Was wondering when some green-suiter would pick up on the call sign...had it as Bn XO of 1-33 Armor (Warriors), 3d Bde, 2d ID (the ARROWHEAD Brigade!). Have to show you our coin sometime (I designed it, and patterned it after, well, you know).
How'd the night jump go?

KCJohnny
04-24-2001, 07:52 AM
I should have realized that your call sign was at least a Bn XO or higher. The coin is beautiful. I wore the 2nd ID patch from JUN 99-JUL 00 in 2nd Brigade (Strike Force). That was the coolest brigade - two Air Assalt Infantry Battalions and a Mechanized Infantry Battalion (1-9th Manchus). Nothing else like it anywhere in the Army. The 1999 NFL season helped me get through my tour, and I loved what the Chiefs did that year.
My jump was a nice one. Thanks for asking, sir.
Well, off to 2nd Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division!
Respectfully,
SSG Proctor (KCJ)

KCJohnny
04-24-2001, 07:54 AM
Zebedee:
Thank you!
May the Lord bless you real good!
KCJ