PDA

View Full Version : To Win, You Have to.... Lose?


jspchief
03-04-2008, 09:01 AM
It seems like there's a bit of a trend in the last decade's list of Super Bowl Champions... Stinking it up for a season or two to get some of the key players on your championship team.

10 years ago, organizations like the Ravens and Rams built championship teams by sucking for multiple years... 3+ years worth of top ten picks has it's advantages.

The Colts did it by being the flatout worst in the league (Manning), but also added Freeney with a less than mediocre 6-10 record.

The Giants got their Manning the same way.

The Steelers had a fall from grace to land Roethlisberger.

Even the mighty Patriots dropped a 5-11 turd that netted them Seymour and Matt Light.

The Tampa Bay Bucs are the only team in recent history to hoist the Lombardi Trophy without really hitting a homerun with an early draft position.

Of course another common denominator has been how these teams drafted outside of round 1, and how they drafted outside of the top 15. You don't see them trading away first round picks or trading down to get Siaviis. Many of them have a steady string of very good 2nd round picks. And Many of them also have found a little gold in sleepers (Tom Brady comes to mind). They don't strikeout in round 1, and they get occasional clutch hits in later rounds.

So where the hell am I going with all of this?

It feels like the Chiefs have been treading water for the last decade. But have they really? Have they been on the decline the last few years, or are they actually righting the ship? Since the great draft depression that ended in Ryan Sims, the Chiefs have actually been pretty impressive in round 1. They have landed undeniable NFL starters in LJ and DJ, a promising DE in Hali, and a WR that looks like he could be something Chiefs fans haven't seen in red since the invention of the wheel. The only flop being Siavii. They've also landed some pretty impressive sleepers in the last few years with Allen and Page. Improvement from Pollard, and a showing by Tyler, McBride or both, and suddenly our drafts are starting to look downright respectable. And now we come into 2008 staring down the barrel of the draft that might just be the catalyst for sunshine beyond the looming clouds. The number 5 overall pick needs to be a homerun. He needs to be a guy that becomes synonymous with Chiefs success. But beyond that the 2nd round pick, which comes on the edge of round 1, needs to become a starter caliber player in short order.

There's little question this franchise is in a rebuilding mode. But I think the mistake fans are making is in thinking the rebuilding has just begun, when in reality it may have started 5 years ago. This is the year where we can add the keystone.

In an off-season full of the same tired teeth-gnashing about the GM, coaches, and talent, I'm seeing a glass that's half full with a pitcher poised to pour. Let's hope we don't spill this April.

OnTheWarpath58
03-04-2008, 09:03 AM
Rep.

But you have to post again to get it, apparently.

:D

Brock
03-04-2008, 09:04 AM
Effin A Cotton.

SNR
03-04-2008, 09:05 AM
I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Go and get your "hopeful" ideas out of here. This is the offseason, we're all about serious business.

DaFace
03-04-2008, 09:06 AM
Rep.

But you have to post again to get it, apparently.

:D

Right-click the rep icon and open the link in a new window.

Chiefnj2
03-04-2008, 09:09 AM
Herm is going to live and die with the draft just like Vermeil did.

Herm is also going to need to start hitting on some of his veteran acquisitions. Edwards, Reed, Law, Nap, Turley and Terry have hurt.

siberian khatru
03-04-2008, 09:13 AM
Outstanding post.

This, I think, is the money graph:

Of course another common denominator has been how these teams drafted outside of round 1, and how they drafted outside of the top 15. You don't see them trading away first round picks or trading down to get Siaviis. Many of them have a steady string of very good 2nd round picks. And Many of them also have found a little gold in sleepers (Tom Brady comes to mind). They don't strikeout in round 1, and they get occasional clutch hits in later rounds.

Rooster
03-04-2008, 09:14 AM
You are not allowed to write positive ideas or opinions. All you are allowed to do is bitch and moan about things you have no control over.:thumb:

jspchief
03-04-2008, 09:24 AM
Herm is going to live and die with the draft just like Vermeil did.

Herm is also going to need to start hitting on some of his veteran acquisitions. Edwards, Reed, Law, Nap, Turley and Terry have hurt.
IMO, Herm has been very solid in his drafting so far. 2006 has the potential to be an excellent draft.

As for the FA signings, I don't know how much he's hampered by spending limits, but the overall strategy in who's being targeted has been disappointing.

Iowanian
03-04-2008, 09:28 AM
There is merrit to what you are saying, but I think there is a fine line.

Those teams who have struggled for too many seasons and didn't get over the hump, I feel are hampered because they suck. Why?

When picking consistently in the top 5-10, teams end up with such high salaries at a few positions, that they don't have the funding to surround those highly paid players with quality talent. They have little depth and sub-par talent on the bottom half of their rosters.

I'll point to teams like the Bengals of the 1990s as my example.

jspchief
03-04-2008, 09:34 AM
There is merrit to what you are saying, but I think there is a fine line.

Those teams who have struggled for too many seasons and didn't get over the hump, I feel are hampered because they suck. Why?

When picking consistently in the top 5-10, teams end up with such high salaries at a few positions, that they don't have the funding to surround those highly paid players with quality talent. They have little depth and sub-par talent on the bottom half of their rosters.

I'll point to teams like the Bengals of the 1990s as my example.No question. Sucking doesn't guarantee anything but an opportunity to draft high. You still have to get the pick right.

And in this day and age, have draft picks in the top 5 in multiple years will put so much strain on your salary cap it becomes a detriment. Bill Pollian has been talking about it a lot this year. My guess is rookie salary cap/slotting will be the next big issue that the NFL takes on. And if the NFLPA truly represents the players, they should be all for it.

OnTheWarpath58
03-04-2008, 09:38 AM
There is merrit to what you are saying, but I think there is a fine line.

Those teams who have struggled for too many seasons and didn't get over the hump, I feel are hampered because they suck. Why?

When picking consistently in the top 5-10, teams end up with such high salaries at a few positions, that they don't have the funding to surround those highly paid players with quality talent. They have little depth and sub-par talent on the bottom half of their rosters.

I'll point to teams like the Bengals of the 1990s as my example.

Had the Bengals actually drafted worth a shit, it wouldn't have been as much of an issue.


Here's a list of R1 picks 1991-1999

Alfred Williams
David Klingler
John Copeland
Dan Wilkinson
KiJana Carter
Willie Anderson
Reinard Wilson
Takeo Spikes
Akili Smith

UGLY

Out of 82 picks over those 9 years, the only other players of note that they picked in later rounds were:

Kelly Gregg, R6, 1999
Corey Dillon, R2, 1997
Kimo von Oelhoffen, R6, 1994
Carl Pickens, R2, 1992

jspchief
03-04-2008, 09:45 AM
Had the Bengals actually drafted worth a shit, it wouldn't have been as much of an issue.


Here's a list of R1 picks 1991-1999

Alfred Williams
David Klingler
John Copeland
Dan Wilkinson
KiJana Carter
Willie Anderson
Reinard Wilson
Takeo Spikes
Akili Smith
Exactly.

Now look at St Louis' 1st round in the same span. It's no mystery how one team put together a winner.

Chiefnj2
03-04-2008, 09:48 AM
IMO, Herm has been very solid in his drafting so far. 2006 has the potential to be an excellent draft.

As for the FA signings, I don't know how much he's hampered by spending limits, but the overall strategy in who's being targeted has been disappointing.

It's going to hinge on his 2nd and 3rd rounders. His drafts are better than Vermeils, but that doesn't mean they are good.

ChiefsCountry
03-04-2008, 09:51 AM
The key to rebuilding is if you suck for a year or two, you need to hit with your first round pick.

OnTheWarpath58
03-04-2008, 09:51 AM
Exactly.

Now look at St Louis' 1st round in the same span. It's no mystery how one team put together a winner.

Just need the time in STL to prove the point. 1995-1999

Kevin Carter
Lawrence Phillips & Eddie Kennison
Orlando Pace
Grant Wistrom (Leonard Little in R3)
Torry Holt


That's just counting the 1st round guys, other than Little. They hit on a lot of later picks.

RedThat
03-04-2008, 09:52 AM
Sometimes a 4-12, 3-13 season is well worth it. It gives you a chance to land that superstar player with a top pick. We can say those 4-12, 3-13 seasons have worked well for teams like SD(Tomlinson), and Indy(Manning).

It all depends too? Because we can also say teams like Oakland, Detroit, Arizona pick in the top 5 a lot and those teams still suck. Teams like Cleveland picked in the top 5 forever, and sucked for a while. But, it payed dividends for them down the road. As they have improved. They got Winslow, Edwards, Thomas picking in the top 5. So that was worth it for them.

What we are seeing is that the Chiefs are drafting better then they were in years past. That's for sure. I see improvement. My main concern though is not just hitting on round 1, but drafting well overall. They need to score in round 2. Oh my gosh how they haven't hit on a 2nd round pick in like forever. It almost seems like a hex. They need to draft well overall especially since they've given every indication to the fans that they're mainly relying to build this whole team through the draft.

Chiefnj2
03-04-2008, 09:58 AM
It all depends too? Because we can also say teams like Oakland, Detroit, Arizona pick in the top 5 a lot and those teams still suck. Teams like Cleveland picked in the top 5 forever, and sucked for a while. But, it payed dividends for them down the road. As they have improved. They got Winslow, Edwards, Thomas picking in the top 5. So that was worth it for them.

.

It shows what a good GM can do. It looks like Savage has things turned around. It never hurts to get lucky with a QB either.

jspchief
03-04-2008, 09:58 AM
It's going to hinge on his 2nd and 3rd rounders. His drafts are better than Vermeils, but that doesn't mean they are good.No question. Pollard for example shows a ton of potential, but if he doesn't grow he'll ultimately be a liability outside of STs. We have to get at least one "success" out of Croyle, Tyler, and McBride, and really need 2 of them to succeed. But I also think we can get solid contributions out of Kolby Smith and Jeff Webb.

The biggest problem with Vermeil is we spent off-seasons hearing about the Key Foxs and Kris Wilsons, and we never got them on the field enough to figure out what we had.

OnTheWarpath58
03-04-2008, 09:58 AM
Sometimes a 4-12, 3-13 season is well worth it. It gives you a chance to land that superstar player with a top pick. We can say those 4-12, 3-13 seasons have worked well for teams like SD(Tomlinson), and Indy(Manning).

It all depends too? Because we can also say teams like Oakland, Detroit, Arizona pick in the top 5 a lot and those teams still suck. Teams like Cleveland picked in the top 5 forever, and sucked for a while. But, it payed dividends for them down the road. As they have improved. They got Winslow, Edwards, Thomas picking in the top 5. So that was worth it for them.

What we are seeing is that the Chiefs are drafting better then they were in years past. That's for sure. I see improvement. My main concern though is not just hitting on round 1, but drafting well overall. They need to score in round 2. Oh my gosh how they haven't hit on a 2nd round pick in like forever. It almost seems like a hex. They need to draft well overall especially since they've given every indication to the fans that they're mainly relying to build this whole team through the draft.


Part of the reason the Chargers are one of the most talented teams in the league? Look no further than the 2004 draft:

R1: Philip Rivers
R2: Igor Olshanksy
R3: Nate Kaeding
R3: Nick Hardwick
R4: Shaun Phillips (what a ****ing steal)
R5: Dave Ball
R5: Michael Turner
R7: Shane Olivea

Nothing like hitting 8 of your 11 picks out of the park......

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:08 AM
bullshit ..... to be good you have evaluate talent well.

"needing to lose" is just an excuse for staying mediocre


but Carl loves u for saying it.

RedThat
03-04-2008, 10:10 AM
No question. Pollard for example shows a ton of potential, but if he doesn't grow he'll ultimately be a liability outside of STs. We have to get at least one "success" out of Croyle, Tyler, and McBride, and really need 2 of them to succeed. But I also think we can get solid contributions out of Kolby Smith and Jeff Webb.

The biggest problem with Vermeil is we spent off-seasons hearing about the Key Foxs and Kris Wilsons, and we never got them on the field enough to figure out what we had.

Thats why I like what Herm is doing. Playing the young guys. Even though the Chiefs will suck. You see what you get out of the young players. At least if you suck you suck young?

I think all those guys Croyle, Webb, Tyler, McBride, Smith all showed some flashes and good things last year...Im with you, I hope at least 2 of those guys can be good for the Chiefs.

jspchief
03-04-2008, 10:13 AM
bullshit ..... to be good you have evaluate talent well.

"needing to lose" is just an excuse for staying mediocre


but Carl loves u for saying it.Odd. Because the Chiefs have only posted a hadnful of losing seasons under Carl Peterson's tenure. It looks to me like Winning isn't exactly your ticket out of mediocre-ville.

You're just one of the fans that will continue to rehash the same cliche bitches about how the team is doing it the wrong way no matter how many different ways they do it. Somewhere, It stopped being about football and started being about Carl Peterson for you.

FFS, if you hate rooting for the team so much, feel free to stop.

Kerberos
03-04-2008, 10:14 AM
bullshit ..... to be good you have evaluate talent well.

"needing to lose" is just an excuse for staying mediocre


but Carl loves u for saying it.


BINGO

How many WR's did Detroit take with High first round picks?

It's quality that is key. I would like to think Herm is a better talent evaluater than what we have had here in a long time.

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:16 AM
Odd. Because the Chiefs have only posted a hadnful of losing seasons under Carl Peterson's tenure. It looks to me like Winning isn't exactly your ticket out of mediocre-ville.

You're just one of the fans that will continue to rehash the same cliche bitches about how the team is doing it the wrong way no matter how many different ways they do it. Somewhere, It stopped being about football and started being about Carl Peterson for you.

FFS, if you hate rooting for the team so much, feel free to stop.
go fook yourself

check that

go fist fook yourself

CosmicPal
03-04-2008, 10:17 AM
Well, I tried to add to your rep, but the "reputation" link wasn't working for me, so I guess I'll say it here: Nice post! :clap:

I agree with basically everything you had to say and have said repeatedly myself, that this draft is the key to the Chiefs having a remarkably great team or another long and dire few years of average football at its best. A strong draft this year and a strong addition from next year's draft will be tremendous.

I'm curious though....four years from now, are we going to have the money to keep all of these young players we signed? :shrug:

jspchief
03-04-2008, 10:23 AM
go fook yourself

check that

go fist fook yourselfThats what I thought. You talk in circles just for a chance to whine like a bitch. You don't want to lose, but you're not happy with 2 decades of winning either. God forbid you try and take a little enjoyment out of being a Chiefs fan when you can martyr yourself for it instead.

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:23 AM
BINGO

How many WR's did Detroit take with High first round picks?

It's quality that is key. I would like to think Herm is a better talent evaluater than what we have had here in a long time.
very true

you can acquire talent whether you win,lose or draw

this fallacy that losing team get the the jump is just a byproduct of getting lucky or the team making a change in their talent evaluation BECAUSE they are losing.

i believe both the colts and ravens made player personal changes right because their runs. Detroit,Arizona ... somewhat Cincy have all continued to stink regardless of losing because their player personal has stayed the same.


good coaching + good player personal = success

losing has almost no direct correlation


Colts and Pats are winning and continue to draft better than we do ... even though we pick higher than them.


losing to win is just an excuse for small-minded douche nozzles who can't comprehend the reality of our terrible player evaluation process.

Brock
03-04-2008, 10:25 AM
Colts and Pats are winning and continue to draft better than we do ... even though we pick higher than them.


losing to win is just an excuse for small-minded douche nozzles who can't comprehend the reality of our terrible player evaluation process.

The Colts and Pats didn't get where they are without any high draft picks.

jspchief
03-04-2008, 10:26 AM
The Colts and Pats didn't get where they are without any high draft picks.Leave facts out of this. We only allow cliched rhetoric from the football fan equivalent of emo cutters.

/wrist.

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:27 AM
Thats what I thought. You talk in circles just for a chance to whine like a bitch. You don't want to lose, but you're not happy with 2 decades of winning either. God forbid you try and take a little enjoyment out of being a Chiefs fan when you can martyr yourself for it instead.
That's what i thought. The first thing out our mouth is "true fan"

tell me ... do you let Carl T-Bag you at night before you go to sleep? Does his warm scrotum give you comfort instead of counting sheep?

Kerberos
03-04-2008, 10:29 AM
Leave facts out of this. We only allow cliched rhetoric from the football fan equivalent of emo cutters.

/wrist.


Now you're onboard!

:thumb:

Dylan
03-04-2008, 10:30 AM
Hey Laz:

Missed your birthday thread!

Happy Belated Birthday!!!

Dylan
03-04-2008, 10:30 AM
what's t-bag mean?

and QFT... something like that...

i don't know

jspchief
03-04-2008, 10:31 AM
That's what i thought. The first thing out our mouth is "true fan"

tell me ... do you let Carl T-Bag you at night before you go to sleep? Does his warm scrotum give you comfort instead of counting sheep?Yes because if nothing else, the 4 years I've spent here have been in defense of Carl Peterson.

Either that or I'm just sick of listening to the same worn out responses from the same handful of little girls regardless of what moves this team makes.

It has nothing to do with "true fan" because you and I are spectators for two entirely different things. I watch football. You watch front offices.

Dylan
03-04-2008, 10:35 AM
and why y'all explaining how did i get extra casino cash?

Casino cash: $1111

TIA





nobody ever talks to me... lol

Chiefnj2
03-04-2008, 10:42 AM
what's t-bag mean?

and QFT... something like that...

i don't know

Google it with images and tell us what you get.

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:44 AM
The Colts and Pats didn't get where they are without any high draft picks.
really ..... so show me where all these high draft picks are for the Pats?

2 ...... 2 picks in the upper half of the 1st round out of virtually all of their starters. And one of those draft picks they traded up to get the pick which means they didn't "lose for it"

tom brady - 6th round
Randy Moss - FA
Tedy Bruschi - 3rd round
Laurence Maroney RB - 1st round 21st pick
Wes Welker - trade
Vince Wilfork - 1st round 21st pick
adarrius thomas - trade
Donte Stallworth - FA
Richard Seymore - 1st round(6th pick 2001 draft)
Ty warren - 1st round/ 13th pick (2003 draft they traded up for)
Rodney Harrison - FA
Mike Vrabel - FA
Ellis hobbs - 3rd round
Kevin Faulk - 2nd round
Heath Evan - 5th round
Dan Koppen - 5th round
matt light - 2nd round
Nick Kaczur - 3rd round
Junior seau - FA
Jame sanders - 4th round
Asante Samuel - 4th round
Ben watson - 1st round/32nd pick
Kelley Washington - FA
Logan Mankins - 1st round/32nd pick
Stephen Neal - FA
Jabar Gafney - FA

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:45 AM
Hey Laz:

Missed your birthday thread!

Happy Belated Birthday!!!

thank you very much :D

jspchief
03-04-2008, 10:48 AM
really ..... so show me where all these high draft picks are for the Pats?

2 ...... 2 picks in the upper half of the 1st round out virtually all of their starters.Just curious, did you actually read the thread starter, or did you just skim down to the part where I displayed optimism so you could launch straight into your misery?

The reason I ask is that you seem to have missed nearly every key point of the entire topic.

Chiefnj2
03-04-2008, 10:48 AM
Looks like NE knows enough to use those first rounders on the line.

Dylan
03-04-2008, 10:50 AM
Google it with images and tell us what you get.

both?

should i wait until i'm at home? :eek:


Chiefnj2: you don't have any cash left in your casino money

Brock
03-04-2008, 10:50 AM
really ..... so show me where all these high draft picks are for the Pats?

Like Richard Seymour is no big deal? Also, smart move not talking about the Colts.

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:56 AM
Like Richard Seymour is no big deal? Also, smart move not talking about the Colts.
did i say seymour wasn't a big deal? But basically 1 high pick for a "dynasty" team is hardly relying on high picks to win.

nice diversion for you BEING WRONG again.

as for the colts .... i think i did enough work to prove you wrong, again.

it's not about losing to get high picks ... it's about having a good player personal dept that knows what they hell is going on.

Mr. Laz
03-04-2008, 10:56 AM
both?

should i wait until i'm at home? :eek:


Chiefnj2: you don't have any cash left in your casino money
you don't wanna google it ROFL


it's a sexual act ...... let's leave it at that.

Chiefnj2
03-04-2008, 10:58 AM
both?

should i wait until i'm at home? :eek:


Chiefnj2: you don't have any cash left in your casino money

Don't google it.

I don't have any money. The casino t-bagged me on the blackjack table.

Dylan
03-04-2008, 10:59 AM
thanks Laz... i can't imagine what kind? lol

Ohhhh... lol

htismaqe
03-04-2008, 11:09 AM
i believe both the colts and ravens made player personal changes right because their runs. Detroit,Arizona ... somewhat Cincy have all continued to stink regardless of losing because their player personal has stayed the same.

I have to take exception to this part because it's not true.

Manning, James, Harrison, etc. were all acquired under Jim Mora. The won 10 and 13 games in a couple of those years. The Colts changed their personnel people in the MIDDLE of a run that started under Mora and culminated in Dungy winning the Super Bowl.

Detroit has changed personnel people at least twice in the last decade, and Arizona has done so 3 times.

htismaqe
03-04-2008, 11:11 AM
His drafts are better than Vermeils, but that doesn't mean they are good.

Be careful with the wording there. I have a certian phrase trademarked. I don't want to have to unleash my lawyers on you...

jspchief
03-04-2008, 11:12 AM
did i say seymour wasn't a big deal? But basically 1 high pick for a "dynasty" team is hardly relying on high picks to win.

nice diversion for you BEING WRONG again.

as for the colts .... i think i did enough work to prove you wrong, again.

it's not about losing to get high picks ... it's about having a good player personal dept that knows what they hell is going on.
So who said anything about relying on high picks to win?
Was there any mention of the need to have success in other areas of the draft?
Did anyone claim that having high draft picks was the guarantee to success?

Your cynicism is clouding your reading comprehension.

Let me try the crayon font. You make need to take the decay colored glassess off and remove yourself from the crucible to get this. Nearly every Super Bowl winner of the last decade had at least one shitty season in close enough proximity of that SB win that the players netted from that draft played a key role in that SB. A season like we had in '07 could net us a real impact player. It doesn't have to be the start of a freefall into the 1980s.

Of course, I don't expect you to actually comprehend this idea.

Brock
03-04-2008, 11:14 AM
did i say seymour wasn't a big deal? But basically 1 high pick for a "dynasty" team is hardly relying on high picks to win.

nice diversion for you BEING WRONG again.


Every Super Bowl winner over the past 10 years has had a cornerstone player who was a top 10 pick. Every. Single. One. I could probably go back further, but don't have the time or inclination. So no, I'm not wrong.

Also, you did nothing to disprove what I said to begin with. I said NE and Indy didn't get where they are without high draft picks. It's a fact, and so is not disproveable.

Ultra Peanut
03-04-2008, 11:18 AM
bullshit ..... to be good you have evaluate talent well.

"needing to lose" is just an excuse for staying mediocre


but Carl loves u for saying it.Way to read the post, dumbass.

el borracho
03-04-2008, 12:34 PM
"To Win, You Have to.... Lose? "

No, not exactly. To win you have to accrue great players and support them with great coaches. Losing increases the chances of getting talented players because you get to choose before the other teams but this really doesn't assure it will happen; the people making the selections still have to do a superior job and the players still need the support of great coaching. In their respective careers Carl has demonstrated that he is average at selecting players and Herm has demonstrated that he is below average as a head coach. I'd guess these two clowns have less than 1% chance of ever leading a team to the SuperBowl no matter how many picks they have or how high those picks may be.

greg63
03-04-2008, 01:30 PM
Just as long as we don't trade for some aging veteran whose better years are behind him.

ChiefaRoo
03-04-2008, 04:06 PM
Just as long as we don't trade for some aging veteran whose better years are behind him.

NEWFLASH - The Kansas City Chiefs have announced the acquisition of Daunte Fatpepper. Cost, KC's 2nd round pick in the 2008 draft and a 6th in 2009 based on performance. King Carl will make his usual pronouncement of self congratulations via press release shortly.
:)

Chris Meck
03-05-2008, 12:15 PM
I sort of agree with this post, although I don't think you need to have top 5 draft picks to do it.

I think when you're a winning team, you can totally grab whatever player is highest on your board at whatever slot you're picking at.

I think when you're mediocre, it's okay to draft QB's or WR's, skill position players, etc. Often times, they're the difference between mediocre teams and good/great ones.

when you're truly lousy, you should be drafting LINE. Offensive and defensive. Early and often. The Lions kept drafting WR's in the first round with top picks and had no line so no QB had enough time to find anyone. How much better might they be if they'd drafted a LT, RT, maybe some DE's or DT's?

Football is still won and lost and the line of scrimmage. If you can't win that battle, you lose, regardless of anything else. (See the Super Bowl).