View Full Version : QB's Denver #1--Chiefs #18 WTF
07-03-2001, 10:42 PM
Someone is a few french fries short of a happy meal
Brian Griese over Trent Green????????????
keg in kc
07-03-2001, 10:50 PM
Not to argue against Green, exactly, but ranking him below Griese makes sense when you consider the fact that Denver has the advantage in virtually every offensive skill position except for tight end. They have 3 vet WRs to our 1 (DA) and 3 RBs to our committee. Griese is playing with players he's familiar with in a system he's started in for 2 years. Taking the homer glasses off, I can tell you if I was drafting today I'd take Griese before Green without even thinking about it (that may well change during TC...).
Remember, though, that preseason fantasy rankings are virtually useless, especially the ones that come out nearly a month before training camp.
Don't sweat it, in other words. ;)
07-03-2001, 10:55 PM
Yes Pam, this does make some sense. Here we are not looking at the starting QB alone, but the whole unit. Our complete unit is NOT very impressive, although I myself think Trent Green is going to be a great QB for our team. Back-ups....in our case will hopefully be obsolete and Green will stay healthy so our back-ups won't have to step up.
07-03-2001, 10:59 PM
I'd take Griese over Green in a heartbeat. He's better, younger and proven. Didn't like saying that, but it's the truth.
Considering the endless lack of respect we get from the national media, I'm surprised Green ranked as high as he did. Green has the skills, but also has a lot to prove.
As Kyle said, though, pre-season rankings don't mean dick.
keg in kc
07-03-2001, 11:01 PM
Fraz, Green has actually been ranked around 9th in most of the fantasy sites I've seen so far, which, funny enough, is ahead of Grbackstabber. :D
07-03-2001, 11:03 PM
They have grbust ranking 8th.
07-03-2001, 11:09 PM
Yeah, Smelvis ranked 8th. That's a good one. Again, proof positive that this preseason crap is exactly that.
BTW, I looked through that list and saw no mention of Dilfer. Is he still unemployed, or did he go to Canada or something? I've been out of the loop for a while.
If he's still available, I'd take him over that idiot Brister, again, in a heartbeat.
I pray for Trent's health regardless.
keg in kc
07-03-2001, 11:18 PM
Dilfer is still unemployed.
You did get caught up on the whole SlyMo ACL tear, Tim? He's probably out for all of 2001, and we're looking to sign someone soon (nothing exciting, Derrick Mayes or Charlie Jones most likely).
Think that's all the news of the past couple of weeks.
07-03-2001, 11:23 PM
I found out about that earlier tonight, to my absolute horror. Like we don't have enough questions/problems on offense. What a sh!tty break. Morris still needs more development time and now has to contend with this on top of it. Looks like the football gods are still relieving themselves on our heads. :mad:
Any news on Green's knee? Is he practicing yet?
keg in kc
07-03-2001, 11:25 PM
Green threw some in 7-7 and 9-7 drills in the last mini-camp - no real movement, but a few dropbacks and some snaps from the shotgun. He looked pretty good from what I could see (on TV) and seems to be progressing nicely. I think they're actually projecting him as maybe being ready at the beginning of training camp as opposed to the middle or end.
07-03-2001, 11:30 PM
I sure hope Green's ready and healthy. Sounds like good news so far. Just hope he has someone worth a crap to throw the ball to other than Alexander and Gonzo.
keg in kc
07-03-2001, 11:37 PM
Word is that Snoop has looked very, very good this in camps this summer - crisp routes, good quickness/speed and good hands.
Doesn't necessarily mean he'll do a whole lot as a rookie, but I'm a lot happier with that pick now then I was in early May (I thought it was a horrible pick initially)...
I think there's a chance we may have landed a good one.
Apparently both Dave Klemic and J.J. Moses have a shot at making the team too, both undrafted rookie FA WRs who've been impressive.
We need a vet though. My guess is we'll end up getting someone now, and then scrape a TC cut victim off the waiver wire in August. It's pretty scary (IMO) to consider the lack of experience we have at wide receiver, first losing Lockett and then losing Morris.
One last thing, rookie placekicker Lawrence Tynes is in full-blown competition with Peterson too, and looking good from what I can gather.
07-03-2001, 11:41 PM
We'll see, Kyle. As always, hope springs eternal.
Off to bed. Goodnight to all. It was good to finally get back in the fold.
07-04-2001, 07:02 AM
I can't really argue with the placement of Green. After all, I believe the majority of the members of this board were arguing just a short time ago that a #1 draft pick was too much to give up for an unproven, injury-prone backup QB.
Green has shown flashes of real talent and if he stays healthy should have a great year. However, he needs to have that great year to impress those people who make the predictions. Until then, he is promise, not finished product.
07-04-2001, 10:32 AM
I wouldn't say Green is injury prone. Granted he has not taken a lot of snaps in the NFL but he has only had just the one injury and that was a cheapshot by R.Harrison that would have blown out the knee on anybody standing in Green's shoes...
Plus Green was never injured when he played at IU also...
Brian Griese on the other hand is flirting with the injury prone tag cause I think he has been hurt every year he has been in the league.
07-04-2001, 11:29 AM
The Chiefs are ranked about right IMO, but what are the Jags doing at #13?!?
Brunell under contract, with Jamie Martin and Jonathan Quinn after him. Sounds like they should be in the top 5 to me. I also think Tampa are ranked a bit low.
07-04-2001, 12:52 PM
While I don't like Griese being 1, I do think Green's placement is accurate.
My attitude of Griese is what a lot of people think about Green in these parts: a super talented qb who has injury problems.
I think Green has all the potential in the world, he just hasn't been able to translate that into production. And I mean consistent production, as well as staying on the field.
07-04-2001, 01:47 PM
I also would take Griese over Green. He's younger, tough, perfect for that system, and a drunk driver... ooops, let's leave that last part out of it.
Now Green, I've liked the way he talks. But he needs to produce, and he needs to prove himself on the field over an extended period this year. No one really knows whether he's good or whether it was the skill positions around him that made him look better than he really was. I'm not a student of the Lambs and Trent Green so I really couldn't say. We'll see how he adjusts to our group of personnel. At least the HC and OC seem convinced that this guy is the real deal...
It seems about right to me. If Trent stays healthy, we're in good shape. But if he goes down, we're in TROUBLE.
I was in a good mood until I read the article and was reminded that the Raiders drafted Marques Tuiasosopo -I wanted that guy in KC. :mad:
Mile High Mania
07-05-2001, 06:14 AM
It's just a preseason ranking that means little in the grand scheme of things. I don't know where Griese would rank on his own, but I think it would be somewhere around 7 or 8.
As a whole though, you have to rank the trio of QBs that Denver has in the top 3. I'm trying to think of a team that has 3 comparable QBs and it's tough. The Jags have a nice trio, but Martin and Quinn have never really started full seasons or been to pro-bowls like the guys behind Griese.
I don't typically agree with Peter King, but I do love the signing of Beurleine (guess I gotta learn how to spell his name now)... if Steve returns 100% from the surgeries he's had, then he's a steal for Denver.
Offensively, Denver is freaking solid!!! The OL concerns me, but my brethren on the Bronco boards tell me not to worry, so I'll put on my 'orange-n-blue' glasses when I talk about the OL.
The defense has nowhere to go but up, so I'm anxious to see what happens.
What's the latest with Priest Holmes? How's he working out?
07-05-2001, 08:25 AM
I agree w/ Brad - this ranking is for overall team QB strength. Green is a damn fine QB -as the rest of the AFCW will soon learn (to their dismay I might add ;))- but our backups aren't exactly great. Bubby may be flirting with retirement and Collins is pathetic.
Denver, on the other hand, starts with Griese -a noodle-arm to be certain- but very smart and good at the dink&dunk WCO.... which equates to a very high accuracy rating. Behind him, Beuerlein is probably the best backup in the league -worthy of starter status IMO. 'Headbutt' Frerotte is a loser, but J Jackson looked solid in NFLE and looks to be a future contributor in the NFL (perhaps a starter in another year or two).
Brad - Priest Holmes is still slated as the #1 HB. At mini-camp, he looked great. I expect him to win-out at RB - but TRich will still recieve nearly as many carries and receptions (he's too fast and talented to NOT feed the ball to regularly)
07-05-2001, 08:40 AM
Bob Dole would have to agree that we are likely in a world of hurt if Trent goes down.
07-05-2001, 09:53 AM
And to think that the Chiefs traded the 12th pick in the draft for Green! As usual every single year, the Chiefs have a journeyman for a quarterback and are not developing one for the future.
Thats one of the reasons why this team hasnt won a playoff game in 8 years.
07-05-2001, 10:19 AM
We're all wondering how Holmes is doing, and how he'll work out for us. It seems as though we might use a lot of 2 TE sets (with our shortage of experience at WR, and our strength at TE), with only 1 back. If I remember rightly DV is on record as saying that Holmes will get 80% of the carries. But he also said he likes T-Rich in the one back sets. So it looks as though the carries might end up getting split pretty much evenly.......similar to Oakland with Garner/Wheatley, and maybe Seattle with Watters/Alexander, and many other teams like NY Giants, New Orleans??, Arizona, maybe even Green Bay??. If this happens, it's fine with me. It's not exactly RBbyC in KC until the starter gets taken out after each good carry.......:D :rolleyes:
keg in kc
07-05-2001, 12:34 PM
Peckerfan, your complete football idiocy is somewhat humorous, but does become tiring.
1. We didn't spend the #12 pick for Green. We spent the #12 for Green, Derrick Blaylock and the rights to Tony Horne. Considering that the asked price for Green was the #12 and the #75, at the least, I'd say we did fine on that deal. Finally, to call Green a "journeyman" is a stretch at the least, but that's another argument altogether and I'm not going to waste my time on it. Finally, you would be complaining no matter what we did. If we kept Elvis you'd complain. If we had gotten a FA, you'd call them a "journeyman". If we had gotten a rookie, you'd say it was the wrong one. That's just what you do, because you're unable to say anything more than "that's why you haven't won a playoff game in 8 years".
2. What young developmental QB was available? This was about the worst draft class at that position that I've ever seen. And we were planning on taking a shot with Mike McMahon in the 5th, but he was taken the pick before us (we got Derrick Blaylock...). Of course, again, if we'd taken him, you'd be on here saying we'd taken the wrong young quarterback...
3. Since you think we did the wrong thing, please reveal your "genius" to all of us and tell us what we should have done. By all means give us the "peckerfan" plan for the future, which I'm sure will begin with "well, I would have fired Carl Peterson first." However, since that didn't happen, let's hear your great plan for the future of the QB position in KC, based on reality instead of your constant idiodic ranting. Maybe we should have spent 100 million dollars on a 32 year old two hits from a wheelchair who hasn't gotten a rating above 78 in two years.
07-05-2001, 01:17 PM
Was he a back-up for the band Journey?? Because Mr. Farve is as much of a journyman as Grbac was.
The below information is from the NFL.com site .
Was selected by San Francisco in the eighth round of the '93 draft
If memory serves me correctly, Farve, god in your eyes, was not originally drafted by the current team he is on the roster with.
the Chiefs have a journeyman for a quarterback and are not developing one for the future.
Who are the Packers grooming for the QOTF? Doug Pederson sure looks like a future hof'r..
Quit spouting your shi*....
keg in kc
07-05-2001, 01:24 PM
I'm sure peckerfan will say they're grooming Jonathan Beasley, who was an undrafted free agent.
Oh wait, he can't say that, because that would mean that our undrafted free agent, Ryan Helming, might be a legitimate QBotF candidate, too, and then his argument would be screwed-up.
Maybe it's Henry Burris.
Oh, no, guess it couldn't be Burris, either, since he's a "journeyman" who has developed in the CFL for 4 years.
Yep, you're right, it must be Doug Pederson! :D
Not to be contrary, but all you Chefs fans have lost ALL credibility after the Jesse Haynes debacle. I think he was the guy making my Eggs over My Hammy at Denny's this morning. Then add to that, Greg "Real Deal" Hill, Mike Cloud, Rashaan Shehee, TRich, Donnell Bennett and anyone else I missed.
And not to reiterate a point that has already been made, but to call Trent Green anything BUT a journeyman is jumping the gun. He has never started a full season, he's very well-traveled (SD, Wash, St. Loo and KC), and even I would have a great QB rating in the Rams O.
And how can you possibly say that youve upgraded over last season? If youre lucky, Green will throw for 4K yds and 25 TD's. thats still a wash between Grbackup from last year. Is your D line better or worse? Is your O line better or worse? Are your CB's better or worse? And with SlyMo out, are your WR's better or worse? And if you think DV's offense is going to turn things around, check out his W-L record outdoors and on natural grass. Brings him down to earth a bit. In St Loo, he played 11-13 games indoors. Now he's going to play 13 games outside.
Not to be a jerk, but the odds of the Chiefs competing this year or next is slim. You would have been far better off using your 1st round pick on a RB or DL and signing Dilfer/Beurlein/Kitna/Gus. And dont give me crap about the Chiefs owning the Broncos. So what? I couldnt care less if the Chiefs beat the broncs for the next fifty years as long as we win the SB again and again.
07-05-2001, 02:18 PM
"I think he was the guy making my Eggs over My Hammy at Denny's this morning. "
Actually he is the "rooty-tooty, fresh, and fruity" guy at IHOP.
07-05-2001, 02:19 PM
Then add to that, Greg "Real Deal" Hill, Mike Cloud, Rashaan Shehee, TRich, Donnell Bennett and anyone else I missed
I might give you the other running backs, but not T Rich. Every time he has been given the chance he has performed.
07-05-2001, 02:26 PM
December 24, 2000
"The Chiefs returned to old form last week, running the ball for over 250 yards in a 20-7 whipping of playoff-bound Denver. "
I would rather have been playoff bound.
The Chiefs have lots of problems. Will denver be any better against the run this year? Just asking I don't really pay attention to Denver in July.
07-05-2001, 03:03 PM
You make some good points.
Yes, we have had more than our share of busts at RB. But this year we have a speedy Priest Holmes to go with all-purpose T-Rich. You can't blame us for feeling better about that.
Yes, Green could be called a journeyman. But isn't this the age of journeyman QBs. What's Kurt Warner.....Rich Gannon........Vinny Testaverde....Brad Johnson......even Grbac for that matter? In fact, Green has hardly had ample playing time to be called anything. He's an unknown entity. He's 30. He is coming back from a serious knee injury. But he's a leader. He's accurate. He knows the system. And he's ours!
Our D-line? Still a problem at tackle IMO. But we can generate a pass-rush.
Our O-line? Can hardly compare it to years past, as we are apparently changing our scheme so much. Our pass-blocking could hardly be any better. Our run blocking had better be.
Our WRs? With SlyMo out, our WR corps is probably worse off right now. But the roster is still not set, and there is time to amend that. At the beginning of last season, our WR corps didn't have anyone shaking in their boots either.
Indoors/outdoors? I don't buy this theory. We are not the Rams. By all accounts, this offense has evolved from San Diego and Dallas as well as the Rams. It doesn't have to be indoors to work. If the coaches can't allow for the fact that we play on grass, we have more problems than I'd care to admit.
The biggest difference to the Chiefs this season is the coaching staff. What effect they will have on the immediate performance is hard to say. But I am pretty sure that our starting RB will get more than 5 carries per game........that Vermeil won't threaten to quit after 2 games........that we won't go 0-4 in preseason and treat the season opener like it's training camp.........that the coaching staff knows how long the play-clock is........that DV knows when to go for 2.........and, most of all, that when we have 1st and goal from the 3, we won't bring on Donnell Bennett for 3 pathetic runs up the middle for -1 yard.
I don't think the Chiefs will compete this year, but I do think they could be seriously improved by 2002. This is pretty good progress for a team that had to lose about $30m in cap space, gave up its 2 top draft picks, and has a new coaching staff, QB and RB.
All in all, it's a pretty good time to be a Chiefs fan :)
keg in kc
07-05-2001, 03:12 PM
Welcome to the Board, Craig.
I'll start off by saying that your first statement is notreally pertinent to this discussion, but I will respond by saying two things:
1. every team makes draftday mistakes and FA errors, that's the nature of what is, essentially, gambling. That's not to excuse Carl Peterson and some of the completely idiotic moves he has made (he's also made some very good ones...), it's just a statement of fact.
2. Why would front office moves effect your image of KC fans? We don't have anything to do with those moves...
Concerning your statement of Green being a journeyman, you may or may not have an argument. He has never started a full season, that's a fact, so there's no debate there. However, free agency and the salary cap system dictate player moves, that's just the nature of the modern NFL. And if you believe he's a "journeyman" (I don't...) calling a QB a journeyman isn't exactly an insult, anyway, since a number of team-jumping QBs have been successful in the NFL in the last decade, including leading teams to the playoffs and winning Super Bowls. I'll provide a number of names if you need them, but I suspect you don't.
As for whether we've upgraded, where did that question come from? In any event, I'll say that I'd agree, Green is at best a push statwise compared with the performance of Grbackstabber last year, but the leadership he brings, as well as his media savvy, is a clear improvement. He has to produce on the field however.
Our O-line will be similar to last year at worst, but I believe they'll be improved.
Our CBs are a mystery. They weren't good last year, and I doubt they'll be much worse, even with the loss of Hasty, because of the incredibly poor system we ran. They also may not be improved, however. Robinson/Guinta worries me and I hate the Crockett signing.
Our receivers are a mystery until we know who they are. Losing SlyMo and Lockett hurts, as has been discussed to death on threads other than this one. A bunch of rookies and unproven young talent isn't much to hang your hat on.
You (or I, for that matter) don't know what the Saunders offense is going to do yet, so it's probably best to reserve judgement. They're most likely designing an offense to be played outdoors and on natural grass not one for a dome, and there are clear references to this all over the web if you're willing to look for it and not just listen to the national media. They are going to make use of the TE and FB in this offense, for starters, and while there will still be an emphasis on playing fast, that does not mean the offense will be built completely around speed. This will be, in my estimation, a hybrid of the Coryell, Gibbs, Turner and Martz systems, or, better, the Saunders system, something unique...
Nobody is expecting the Chiefs to compete this season, at least speaking realistically. As homers we all want them to do well, obviously, but we know what the situation is.
I disagree that bringing in a low-quality backup quarterback and drafting a rookie would have made a significant impact on this team, either immediately or in the long run, but that's a matter of opinion. At least you have the knowledge and cahones to post what you think would have been better, and I respect that.
Don't get your hopes up about that Super Bowl, although you are the class of the division at this point - last year's Raiders were a fluke. You still need an upgrade in personnel on defense before you're a serious contender again, however, and not having the Elway guy makes a big difference. ;)
Again, welcome to the Planet.
My point is not that the Chiefs fans dont have any credibility based on King Carl's personnel moves. My point is that the replies that are being posted here are somewhat tainted by the fact that they are eerily similar to the comments of the past 10 years or so, just the names have changed. While Im certain that fans of all different teams take a Pollyana perspective toward their respective teams, sometimes reality is better suited.
While I have been a lifelong Broncos fan, I still try to see my team for what they are. I didnt like Griese when they drafted him and I still dont. Maybe its my prejudice against Michigan QB's (worse, the Chiefs had two of them last year), but I hesitate to believe that he's the one to take us to the promised land, and I'll lobby every single year to draft a stud QB. And while being a "journeyman" QB is not necessarily a bad thing, ther's as much evidence aginst Green as there is for him and to post otherwise is irrational. And to buy into whatever Carl, marty, Gunther, Whitlock or Lamar are spewing sight unseen, is premature, especially when one examines their record. I think KC fans are too ready to believe the company line. For instance, the 97 playoff game against Denver. I was at the game. Grbac was getting it done. He was making things happen and scrambled for a few key first downs. The play that lost it for you wasnt Elvis' meltdown at the end, but Marty's mind-numbing decision to go fake the FG in the 2nd half. Stoyo beat Denver with a 54 yd fg earlier in the year and Marty fakes it. Not only that but the key to a fake fg is the element of surprise. There wasnt a person in Arrowhead or all of North America that didnt see it coming. If Stoyo makes that fg, then KC is only down by one point on their last drive instead of four. That changed the whole dynamic of the game. I challenge all you Chiefs fans to go back and watch that game and tell me its Grbac's fault they lost.
I think the main problem with the Chiefs in the Carl Petersen era is the tendency to simply try to patch their holes from year to year instead of really fixing the problem. Denver was 11-5 last year but Mike Shanahan realized that there were SERIOUS problems and took the necessary, although radical, steps to correct them. And while you may claim that is what Carl is doing this year, but I think that is more out of necessity.
Lastly, being en ex-resident of KC, I respect most of your fans but you still have a lot to prove. Until you can be faithful through the bad times as well as the good, then you'll still be missing what it takes to be special.
And my impressions of the new DV/Saunders offense dont come from the national press, but rather the posts here.
07-05-2001, 08:18 PM
The reason Marty tried the fake was because Stoyo missed a 40 yarder earlier in the game. I guess he didn't want to go out with missed field goals again like in 95.
Had Manusky not been flagged for the phantom holding call, Stoyo's first field goal would've counted and we may have been able to get into field goal range at the end of the game.
The non call on the push off on Gonzo in the endzone was a killer as well.
BTW, Girlbac DID melt down in that game. There was other circumstances that may, or may not have led Girlbac into that situation, but when the heat was on, HE DID meltdown.
I am sorry, but a professional QB should NOT let the fuggin time run off the clock in the waning seconds of a playoff game because he can't hear the playcall from the booth. He should have called his own fugging play.
keg in kc
07-05-2001, 08:47 PM
You should read a little bit more then, Craig, because most of what you say is already reflected in postings on this board at one point or another (although I do realize there are over 200,000 posts here, so you're not going to see everything, obviously ;)); there are Chiefs homers here, obviously, but you'll find knowledgeable and level-headed football savvy folks here as well (not that the two are mutually exclusive...).
Concerning the offense, again, there are several posts on the board dealing with what people think the offense will be (although the threads may not be labeled as such). There seems to be a lot of support for the idea that this offense will be a hybrid of the "traditional" Chiefs powerball game and the St. Louis offense under Martz, which would seem to be what our personnel dictates, at least for 2001.
If you think the guys here buy the "party line" you need to reconsider. Many (most?) of us don't like Carl Peterson and/or the personnel moves he makes. A fair number of us don't like Marty Schottenheimer, either, and there's been a lot of debate over whether DV was a good hire. We all think Whitlock is an idiot, by the way, so it's generally best to leave him out of the picture...
Concerning Green, you should have been here before the trade, because there was heavy debate (I was vehemently against the trade, btw). Now he's the QB, so there's growing support for him, but all of us see the need for youth at the QB position and we know we're weak at backup. And if Green doesn't play up to par, he will probably be crucified, that's just how KC treats their QBs for some reason.
Grbac was bashed a lot in the past here because people simply don't like him (I was a supporter). Nearly all of us dislike him now because of the way he left and comments he's made since leaving.
You're absolutely right about how patching the hole doesn't fix the problem, and this year we began to do just that; we took nearly all of the cap damage from ill-devised hirings this season, which is costing us 19 million in dead cap money (thanks for that, Carl...). That's the reason the team has had to be low key in FA acquisitions, and that's the reason the team shouldn't have to be low key next year in the FA market - moves this year have already shaved off more than 7 million off of next year's cap. Hopefully at that time the team will be able (and willing) to acquire a franchise-quality running back and solve that one key problem; for now Holmes/Richardson will have to do - we couldn't afford anything more...
Now, I'm a newer Chiefs fan, since I only moved here in 1999, so I don't have the history of some of these other guys, but, I will say I have yet to live through any particularly "good" times. 9-7 and 7-9 with horrendous coaching hasn't been a hell of a lot of fun to watch, but here I am, and I'll be going to Arrowhead for as long as I'm able. Maybe it's because I'm an NFL fan as much or more than I'm a KC fan, but either way, I'll support the team (like I support the pathetic Royals) as long as I'm able...
Now, I do realize there are some bad fans in KC, too, I've been around plenty of those. But the guys on this board, at least, all seem to be pretty fair in terms of both loyalty and football acumen.
As for your squad, IMHO Shanahan hasn't really fixed any holes yet. Chester the Digester and Leon Lett are no solution to the DT problem, and there's a real possibility that they'll both negatively impact the team attitude. Most of the other signings I consider to be minor players of little impact, with the exception of Beuerlein, who may or may not be a solid backup (injury risk at both #1 and #2 QB now), and Poole/Kennison, both of whom also have attitude problems. Now, all of that said, we're still talking about a playoff team from last season, and you'll probably be one again this year barring something drastic happening in terms of injury. Bringing on Ray Rhodes was a good move as well (one I wish we had been able to make).
Just one last thing: don't think the people here are suckers to the Chiefs PR department. We may talk about things from the website and so forth, but generally there's a lot of debate on here about a lot of things (moreso when there's actually something going on...). There's a few good posters from some other teams as well.
Man, I must be in long post mode tonight.
07-05-2001, 09:05 PM
Alot to prove? What are you talking about? You have no idea how long some of these fans have been fans of the Chiefs, so you can't say we have anything to prove? Alot of "these fans" have been through the tough times (the late 70s, and the 80s) and still ARE fans. So you really can't make a statement like that unless you know "these fans" on this BB or any other Chiefs fans.
oh, and we will win the Super Bowl again...I do not know when, but destiny will arrive once again for us Chiefs faithful...and you Broncs...Elways gone so...:D
dont get all self-righteous with me about the loyalty of the Chiefs fans. While I know there are some dedicated, long-time Chiefs fans, how many people went to Arrowhead during the Gansz era or even the Mackovic era? 30-35K?
07-05-2001, 09:55 PM
True Craig, but does that speak for everyone? Nope.
07-05-2001, 10:11 PM
we lost to the Niners, Chargers, Falcons, and Raiders last year....TWICE!
I'd say we're way past our prime as far as being competitive. I think DV/CP will bring us back, but these are definitely not the Chiefs of old right now.
It should be obvious that the few of us on here, in the offseason no less, are true die hard Chiefs fans. Otherwise, why be on the bb of a losing team in the offseason? We're here because we still, and always will, love the Chiefs.
I can't speak for all of Missouri, just all of the bb members on right now..:D
07-05-2001, 10:36 PM
Very well said, Brad, I couldn't of said it better myself.
07-05-2001, 11:01 PM
And your point is?
Just about every professional franchise goes through down cycles (including your Broncos). You may sellout a stadium but what are the actual turnstile numbers when your team is sucking?
There's two ways to view low attendance;
A - The fans are not suppotive of their team OR
B - The fans are not that stupid to pay huge bucks for a horrible product.
You talk about the Mackovic and Ganz eras but those were the high water marks. Try the Paul Wiggin/Tom Bettis years or the Winged T Marv Levy debacles.
You can sit there on your Super Bowl perch and cast stones upon a fan base that hasn't sniffed a Lombardi in 31 years. How many times have the Broncos made it there since their first anal whipping against Dallas in '77?
I highly doubt you'd be such avid fans if your beloved Bronocs sucked like the Chiefs teams have the past 3 decades.
But then I'll never know what it is like to be a Denver Nuggets fan after watching my Lakers build yet another dynasty.
Is it tough to get seats at McNichol's arena during the NBA season?
I thought so.............
07-05-2001, 11:07 PM
HOLD HIM BACK!!! Cali is holdin it down like WHOA!!!
thinks Cali made some great points
keg in kc
07-05-2001, 11:36 PM
You're just happy because he mentioned the Lakers, Cody. :p
I would have stopped with "I highly doubt you'd be such avid fans if your beloved Bronocs sucked like the Chiefs teams have the past 3 decades." No real reason to bring the NBA into an NFL debate.
Although I might have added "no playoff wins in 8 years and we're still selling out the joint and have one of the highest season ticket renewal rates in the league."
07-05-2001, 11:55 PM
HAHA Kyle, very funny:D ,
but seriously, he made some great points.
keg in kc
07-05-2001, 11:57 PM
07-06-2001, 12:04 AM
Just curious, but what were the Ravens ranked?
This team is seriously screwing with one of the great works of a Great writer. Now I don't think of the poem, I think of Girlbac and the Super bowl slaughter gang.........
07-06-2001, 12:07 AM
Keg in kc,
I just received my "Back-to-Back" pennant in the mail and was feeling full of it.
But my point was to observe that all Denver fans are not die-hard. They sell out for the Avalanche and the Broncos because of their success.
Why don't they buy tickets for the Nuggets?
Oh that's right... you can only spend so much money with a family of four to support.:rolleyes:
Question: who was/is crazier?
Edgar Allan Poe...
07-06-2001, 12:11 AM
Poe wasn't crazy, just extremely intelligent and EXTREMELY drunk more often than not....
Tell ya' what, I'll take that job!:D
I don't know Brad, I think the drugs/alcohol combo got to him. Don't mean to imply he wasn't genious, but I think he was pretty off the proverbial rocker.
07-06-2001, 12:23 AM
What genious isn't? :D
Ol' Albert secretly was in love with his first cousin, Patton thought he was a reincarnated Roman General, and some lone nut shoots Lennon and leaves Yucko Ono unharmed!
It's a nutty nutty world!
"I'll buy that for a dollar."
Bonus points if you can name the movie
Really sucks about John.
Lets get something straight. Broncos have sold out every single home game since I was three years old. Thats during 3-13 seasons, 5-11, 6-10 and so on. And while Im not so naive as to imply that every single seat was filled during those games, I will say that, at its lowest point, Mile High still held tens of thousands more fans than Arrowhead did at its lowest point. And anyway you want to justify it -
A - The fans are not supportive of their team OR
B - The fans are not that stupid to pay huge bucks for a horrible product.
it still wreaks of Bandwagon-itis. And as far as not paying huge bucks for a horrible product, let me tell you a story. back in 78, 79, 80, 81, the Broncos werent a very good football team. We had mediocre yet serviceable players. Rick Upchurch, Craig Morton, Steve Watson, Larry Canada and the such were hardly superstars and the owner, Mr. Kaiser, didnt really have an interest in his team at that point. But that didnt stop 70000 people from making the trip (I lived 280 miles away) to Mile High to support the players who busted their butts despite playing on a bad team. To me its easier to cheer on superstars and great teams. Dont get me wrong. Ive been to Arrowhead many times and Ive seen the enthusiasm and support the fans have shown. But to further prove my point, just look across the parking lot from 1 Arrowhead Drive to Kauffman Stadium. Its one of the most beautiful parks in the majors, tickets are cheap (GA seats are less than what a movie costs a few exits down I-70), yet theres still enough empty seats to hold an NBA Illigitimate Children Convention on any given night. I was there last year on a Friday night against the Yankees and there were a whopping 18000 people in the stands. The Denver Bears (minor league baseball during the 70's, 80's) drew more than that.
And dont get me started on the Nuggets. Its true that they dont have near-capacity crowds every night like the Broncos, Avalanche, Rockies, but they still are well above the league average in attendance despite being pretty bad and having no identity. For the record, they play in the Pepsi Center (aka, The Can), not McNichols anymore. And coming from a comparably sized city that cant even support minor league hockey, I dont think KC has a lot of room to talk about a four-franchise city.
And I know that their are a lot more Broncos fans now than there were even 5 years ago courtesy of the back-to-back championships, but I think thats one of the worst things about it. the same people who bought Coboys, Packers and Niners jerseys just a few years before were now sporting Denver jerseys. It used to be when you saw somebody in a Broncos Tshirt, especially during the 39-20, 55-10, etc.. years, it was like a badge of courage. Now its probably because they had a sale at Champps.
And although I dont think I need to prove my loyalty to the broncos, I'll share another story. Two years ago on Monday, November 16, I was the guy with the UHaul covered in 12'x8' Broncos banners, the portable generator, TV and stereo tailgaiting in the Arrowhead parking lot passing out free beer and Denver-style ribs to Denver and KC fans. I wa swilling to risk life and limb to see my beloved Broncos. Of course I bought my tickets from a "Chiefs fan" for a reasonable price because KC was in the middle of a 5 game losing streak.
And in 1997, when the Chiefs were 13-3, there were 13000 no-shows to their last home game. Denver didnt have that many no-shows all season. Of course it was a tad bit cold and icky and all the "dedicated" Chiefs fan didnt want to get the sniffles.
07-06-2001, 07:54 AM
You're preaching to the wrong crowd. This board is about SERIOUS Chiefs fans, not the ones you want to talk about. Take it somewhere else, it's old and it's tired...
07-06-2001, 07:59 AM
mmcann - Robocop ;)
Morton - you must be lacking more than a few brain cells if you think KC fans are not loyal! Hell, that's what the KC fan base is known for: extreme loyalty and the best tailgating in the league.
Denver Southstanders on the other hand, are known for chucking foreign objects into the face of their own players(Dale Carter), trying to start fights with players(BIG mistake), and rioting after a SB victory(trash downtown - woohoo, there's a classy fan base for ya!)
Granted, the Kansas City hasnt had a riot after all its Super Bowl victories...oops, I meant victory. Of course, if they did, I wouldnt remember, considering I wasnt quite 2 years old yet. And I was in Denver for both Super Bowl victories. The five second film clip you saw on TV was essentially isolated to one part of downtown right by the Falling Rock Taphouse. And it wasnt the Broncos fans doing it. It was the punk kids coming downtown AFTER the game to act stupid.
And Chiefs fans are known for loyalty? Give me a break. Except for the last 10-12 years, have the Chiefs ever gotten overwhelming support, year in, year out? So dont tell me about loyalty.
And Arrowhead fans would neeeever do anything that was unclassy. Yeah, I might believe that if I hadnt been there to see it with my own eyes. Just like in Denver, a few ignorant dumbasses taint the perception of the entire fan base. Ive been in the South Stands. 99% of the people their are salt of the earth. Of course, if you had to sit on freezing bleachers with the wind whipping in from the Front Range, you'd be a little uppity, too.
07-06-2001, 08:33 AM
For those of us that have been fans since the 70's, your comments are offensive. I warned you once, continue insulting me and you'll be edited...
Have a nice day. :D
07-06-2001, 08:36 AM
parker - I don't think that is at all necessary. Morton is an opposing fan with opposing viewpoints - he is not 'trolling' or spamming, or cursing, or acting in any matter by which he should be moderated.
07-06-2001, 08:40 AM
Dammit, HC, you don't think I know that?
I've been over at the park reading all the lawsuit threats, so I was just getting on my high horse and having a little fun with a BroncGirl fan...
I'm not going to edit his post, jesus...
07-06-2001, 08:42 AM
Hehehe... my bad :) Sometimes sarcasm is difficult to discern via the video monitor
Lets try this again. Ive said time and again that I have the upmost respect for fans that have been loyal through thick and thin. I personally know several Chiefs fans with unquestionable allegiance to their team. And I have never disputed your ardor for the Chiefs. What I did say is that generalizing about the dedication about all Chiefs fans is extremely misplaced. Hey, make know mistake, Ive seen Mile High empty out with five minutes left to go in a preseason game and the people who didnt want the Broncos to go back to the Super Bowl after they got stomped by the Niners really pissed me off. So we have some too. But they havent stopped Mile High from being near-capacity every single game for the last thirty years. Thats loyalty and thats what the Chiefs fans have to shoot for.
You can edit me all you want but at least go into an argument with your eyes open.
And a recommendation for everyone in KC, go to a Royals game. Yeah, their pitching is subpar, but the have a good lineup and deserve your support. Tickets are cheap and if you dont want to pay to park, just drive across the street to Denny's and park there for free.
07-06-2001, 09:27 AM
Your starting to sound Like Ken. Sorry.
The Chiefs have been respectable to very good for the last 10-12 years. Prior to that they were completely inept. Some of our younger fans are spoiled and don't remember the dark years. I remember going out on game day and having my pick of club level seats. After a team shows utter and complete incompetence for 15-20 years why would any city show up in large #s just to watch another beating? I would assume there would be more to do in Denver than KC, Right? Do corporations buy up large blocks of tickets in Denver? I know this is common in some cities.
I'll admit that a corporation that will remain nameless had to buy 4-5K tickets to prevent blackouts on a few occasions, but that still leaves 70,000 actual tickets sold and 60-65K fans in the seats. As a matter of fact, I was at a game two years ago when some people started leaving in the middle of the 4th quarter (which I absolutely HATE. People complain about paying too much for tickets, then dont stay for the entire game. Are they really going to beat that much traffic?). So Denver is not without its share of fairweather fans. And while I post this under the not-so-veiled threat of being edited, about half the games Ive been to at Arrowhead (I wont count the Monday Night two years ago when DT had his 3rd quarter meltdown), there were WAY too many people leaving early. If anyone should have left early it was me, in order to avoid a probably-deserved beating in my Elway jersey. But I have to admit that every time I went, the Chiefs fans were for the most part hospitable. I expect to have the token beer spilled on me and some choice profanities directed toward me, but it never escalated beyond that.
07-06-2001, 09:55 AM
We all get beer spilled on us. It just comes with the territory. Some good natured SMAK is to be expected but I would be truly embarrassed if it was anything worse than that. I mean were not Raiders fans out on a work furlough. One should not need fear for their safety going to a sporting event. I would think I could go to Denver and see a game with-out danger but I don't think I would try it in Oakland. I for one, am happy to have fans from opposing teams come to our city and spend their money.
The first time I saw the Broncos in Arrowhead, I had an extra ticket because a buddy of mine canceled at the last minute. So I went to a scalper and traded those two endzone tickets for one ticket on the 30-35 yard line. It turned out that was the Chiefs employee section. We had a great time and even had a few beers bought for me.
And while I think you would be welcome if you ever went to Mile High in a Steve Bono Chiefs jersey (just kidding about the Bono thing), I would have a serious problem with the "Broncos fan" who sold you the tickets. No offense to the KC fans or fans of any other team for that matter, but I would just as soon throw the tickets in the trash than to sell them to the opposition. And I would have to be on my deathbed not to go to the game myself anyhow. If I couldnt find a Broncos fan to give them to, I sur ewouldnt sell them to anyone else. Although Im sure scalpers get hold of some of them and dont care who they sell them to.
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.