PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Carl Peterson or Scott Pioli?


Deberg_1990
11-23-2011, 06:27 AM
Your the proud owner of the NFL's newest expansion team the Portland Pythons! You have narrowed down your GM search to two finalists, Carl Peterson and Scott Pioli. Each man comes with a solid resume. Pioli with his 3 Super Bowl rings. Peterson with his USFL championships and long and distinguished history with the KC Chiefs. Who would you choose to run your franchise?

Zeke
11-23-2011, 06:29 AM
No.

Gonzo
11-23-2011, 06:31 AM
Ghdkeufcxcghhdhddddddddddblahgggg!!!?

Excuse me, I just had a fucking seizure.
Posted via Mobile Device

Bacon Cheeseburger
11-23-2011, 06:32 AM
I'd rather be sodomized by a 400lb man.

memyselfI
11-23-2011, 06:33 AM
Robb Heineman.

Reerun_KC
11-23-2011, 06:37 AM
Pole is flawed. You for got QTWP58 and that is inexcusable...

Just flat out inexcusable to have such a pole without all parties involved..

You should wear this flawed pole like a scarlett letter...

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 06:37 AM
I'd probably fire myself for narrowing it to those two, but given the choices, definitely Pioli. He's had more success and hasn't been worthless for nearly as long.

chiefzilla1501
11-23-2011, 06:49 AM
Here's what I'll say. Pioli has done a good job with drafting. The 2009 draft was a disaster, but everything else has been solid. He hasn't been bad with personnel decisions, even though he has yet to spend the kind of cash necessary.

He hasn't found a QB. But then again, Carl took how many years to find a real one in Trent Green.

The major difference so far? Peterson gave his coaches what they wanted. Pioli is forcing his system and his people onto his coaches.

htismaqe
11-23-2011, 07:01 AM
I should have known it wasn't safe to come back.

DaKCMan AP
11-23-2011, 07:02 AM
DaKCMan AP

FAX
11-23-2011, 07:05 AM
What about Mahatma Gandhi? I always thought he would make an awesome GM.

It would revolutionize the game. Instead of "hut, hut, hut", we could go with "Ommm, Ommm, Ommm" which would put the enemy defense right to sleep, immediately increasing Thomas Jones' average to 3.4 yards per carry.

FAX

Reerun_KC
11-23-2011, 07:08 AM
I should have known it wasn't safe to come back.

LMAO

htismaqe
11-23-2011, 07:13 AM
Okay, okay, hmmm...must collect my thoughts...okay





















WHERE THE **** IS ICARUS?!?!?!? YOU VOTED FOR CARL PETERSON YOU MOTHER****ING WHORE ****ER one who sucks the penis!!!!!!

:thumb:

'Hamas' Jenkins
11-23-2011, 07:14 AM
I'd be a more meddlesome GM than Jerry Jones. It would be a complete disaster. Basically, I'd fit right in from a success standpoint with the last 40 years of Chiefs football. Remember, great opportunities for season tickets are still available.

htismaqe
11-23-2011, 07:19 AM
I'd be a more meddlesome GM than Jerry Jones. It would be a complete disaster. Basically, I'd fit right in from a success standpoint with the last 40 years of Chiefs football. Remember, great opportunities for season tickets are still available.

How much? ROFL

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 07:19 AM
I hope this thread is a trap to ban anyone who votes for Carl.

Deberg_1990
11-23-2011, 07:26 AM
I'd probably fire myself for narrowing it to those two, but given the choices, definitely Pioli. He's had more success and hasn't been worthless for nearly as long.

Ill just say this....Peterson didnt have a losing season with the Chiefs until his 9th or 10th season in. Pioli looks like hes headed for 2 losing seasons in his first 3 years.

OzarksChiefsFan
11-23-2011, 07:30 AM
Peterson, perfect guy to get a team to the level of contender. Once there I might go a different direction but he is savy and puts butts in the seats. Pioli has never done it 100% on his own.

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 07:31 AM
Ill just say this....Peterson didnt have a losing season with the Chiefs until his 9th or 10th season in. Pioli looks like hes headed for 2 losing seasons in his first 3 years.

Well I'm not crazy about losing seasons, but so far the one Pioli has turned in resulted in Eric Berry. If this one yields a QB, then call me a drafturbator cause I think that's worth it as hell.

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 07:34 AM
Peterson, perfect guy to get a team to the level of contender. Once there I might go a different direction but he is savy and puts butts in the seats.

Good point! If I'm an owner who wants to make money and could give a shit about winning a championship, I'd hire Peterson in a second.

Pioli has never done it 100% on his own.

Who has? Belichick?

tk13
11-23-2011, 07:39 AM
Pioli still does have something to prove away from Belichick, but it's not like Carl has an illustrious career without Marty. Neither does AJ Smith at this point... probably not a coincidence.
Posted via Mobile Device

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 07:42 AM
It's not like Carl has an illustrious career without Marty. Neither does AJ Smith at this point... probably not a coincidence.
Posted via Mobile Device

Exactly. How many championship coaches go to new teams and win a SB? Not many. That's because it takes a lot of pieces to win a Superbowl and it's not easy to put them together.

Deberg_1990
11-23-2011, 07:42 AM
Pioli still does have something to prove away from Belichick, but it's not like Carl has an illustrious career without Marty. Neither does AJ Smith at this point... probably not a coincidence.
Posted via Mobile Device

Marty is going to go down as one of the most frustrasting and debatable coaches of all times. Dude absolutely had a knack for rebuilding franchises and is probably the best "Regular Season" coach of all time.

Zeke
11-23-2011, 07:45 AM
Robb Heineman.

We have a winner. He may not know football but he's the goddamn best owner in KC and it's not even close.

Reerun_KC
11-23-2011, 07:46 AM
Marty is going to go down as one of the most frustrasting and debatable coaches of all times. Dude absolutely had a knack for rebuilding franchises and is probably the best "Regular Season" coach of all time.

But when it came down to doing the right thing to win a championship... He didnt have a backbone...

One of the biggest post season failures of all time..

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 07:46 AM
But when it came down to doing the right thing to win a championship... He didnt have a backbone...

One of the biggest post season failures of all time..

TELL THAT TO THE VIRGINIA DESTROYERS!!!

Bacon Cheeseburger
11-23-2011, 07:51 AM
LMAO Mecca can't even get a mercy vote.

HemiEd
11-23-2011, 07:53 AM
I should have known it wasn't safe to come back.
Has this place changed?

HemiEd
11-23-2011, 07:54 AM
What about Mahatma Gandhi? I always thought he would make an awesome GM.

It would revolutionize the game. Instead of "hut, hut, hut", we could go with "Ommm, Ommm, Ommm" which would put the enemy defense right to sleep, immediately increasing Thomas Jones' average to 3.4 yards per carry.

FAX

Late entry for post of the year, :LOL::LOL:

DaFace
11-23-2011, 07:56 AM
Stupid thread.

Deberg_1990
11-23-2011, 08:03 AM
Stupid thread.

Its basically a more entertaining way of me asking:


"Who do you think is better, Peterson or Pioli?"

Bane
11-23-2011, 08:15 AM
Who the fuck???They all need to drink aids and die in a tire fire.

lcarus
11-23-2011, 08:23 AM
I am here now. I voted Peterson. Until Pioli proves me wrong, I don't give a shit. Peterson had more success when he was first hired by the Chiefs. I'm able to look past the last 10 years of his time here. Pioli has pissed me off with his moves, what else can I say?

Peterson got us closer to a Super Bowl team (a few times) than the dogshit Pioli has placed in our lap. All the good players on this team are Peterson picks. It's ****ing sad. Pioli hasn't done a god damn thing yet, but I'm willing to give him more time.

BoneKrusher
11-23-2011, 08:34 AM
i voted for Carl because he had the Chiefs in the AFC title game in 93.
Pioli cant even get a QB who's even average added to the roster.

if i were voting on what he did in New England i would have voted for Pioli tho.

htismaqe
11-23-2011, 08:36 AM
Has this place changed?

Um, yeah?

ROFL ROFL ROFL

lcarus
11-23-2011, 08:41 AM
Ah christ, I didn't even read the full poll question. I thought it was more along the lines of "which GM has done a better job with the Chiefs". I guess since the question is "which GM would you rather have to start an NFL franchise with"....****ing either of them and I'll kill myself with a tack hammer.

FAX
11-23-2011, 08:41 AM
Ah christ, I didn't even read the full poll question. I thought it was more along the lines of "which GM has done a better job with the Chiefs". I guess since the question is "which GM would you rather have to start an NFL franchise with"....****ing either of them and I'll kill myself with a tack hammer.

Put the hammer down.

FAX

BoneKrusher
11-23-2011, 08:42 AM
Ah christ, I didn't even read the full poll question.

same here.:p

htismaqe
11-23-2011, 08:42 AM
Ah christ, I didn't even read the full poll question. I thought it was more along the lines of "which GM has done a better job with the Chiefs". I guess since the question is "which GM would you rather have to start an NFL franchise with"....****ing either of them and I'll kill myself with a tack hammer.

ROFL

I was just messing with you anyway.

Love your avatar pic...

lcarus
11-23-2011, 08:42 AM
i voted for Carl because he had the Chiefs in the AFC title game in 93.
Pioli cant even get a QB who's even average added to the roster.

if i were voting on what he did in New England i would have voted for Pioli tho.

We don't know that he did jack shit in New England. As far as we know, it was all Belichick. So far Pioli running the show by himself in KC hasn't shown that he has a god damn clue. The only good player he's gotten us is Eric Berry, and that was basically a no brainer.

Dr. Facebook Fever
11-23-2011, 08:46 AM
Your the proud owner of the NFL's newest expansion team the Portland Pythons! You have narrowed down your GM search to two finalists, Carl Peterson and Scott Pioli. Each man comes with a solid resume. Pioli with his 3 Super Bowl rings. Peterson with his USFL championships and long and distinguished history with the KC Chiefs. Who would you choose to run your franchise?

Why on earth would I have narrowed my search down to those two?

lcarus
11-23-2011, 08:49 AM
Why on earth would I have narrowed my search down to those two?

I was gonna ask the same thing. Why don't we just throw Matt Millen into the ****ing equation while we're at it. I'd honestly rather have Marty as a GM than any of them. At least he's proven time and time again he knows how to evaluate good football players. I just wouldn't want his bad luck as a coach.

BoneKrusher
11-23-2011, 08:50 AM
We don't know that he did jack shit in New England. As far as we know, it was all Belichick. So far Pioli running the show by himself in KC hasn't shown that he has a god damn clue. The only good player he's gotten us is Eric Berry, and that was basically a no brainer.

true and you're right even a Caveman could have made the Eric Berry pick.

Gonzo
11-23-2011, 08:53 AM
I'd rather be sodomized by a 400lb man.
I weigh 200 lbs, I could just do it twice. (I have the stamina)
Posted via Mobile Device

Deberg_1990
11-23-2011, 09:11 AM
Ah christ, I didn't even read the full poll question. I thought it was more along the lines of "which GM has done a better job with the Chiefs". I guess since the question is "which GM would you rather have to start an NFL franchise with"....****ing either of them and I'll kill myself with a tack hammer.

Thats basically what i was asking, in a roundabout and humorous way.....

Dr. Facebook Fever
11-23-2011, 09:46 AM
either of them and I'll kill myself with a tack hammer.

Thank you David Spade

pr_capone
11-23-2011, 09:53 AM
Who would you choose to run RUIN your new NFL franchise?

FYPoll

Bacon Cheeseburger
11-23-2011, 09:58 AM
Why on earth would I have narrowed my search down to those two?
You didn't, there are also the Gaz, Mecca and Hamas options.

Dr. Facebook Fever
11-23-2011, 10:02 AM
You didn't, there are also the Gaz, Mecca and Hamas options.

Then I'll go with kill myself... or sell the team for beer money

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 10:03 AM
If that's my choice, I'd probably go with Peterson.

Pioli and his insistence on this bullshit, 'bend but don't break' 3-4 scheme is simply falling behind. Further, he doesn't seem very good at actually acquiring personnel for it.

He falls in love with backup quarterbacks, just like Peterson. He's an arrogant, stubborn, know-it-all prick just like Peterson.

The only area where I can see him being clearly better than Peterson is in getting draft picks signed, but even that's now a moot point due to the rookie slotting scale.

He's essentially all of Peterson's warts, in addition to being a slave to an awful defensive scheme. Oh, and with Peterson, I can at least count on him giving his head coach a little autonomy and not completely hamstringing him in personnel matters.

Pioli's nothing more than Bill Belichick's errand boy.

Dr. Facebook Fever
11-23-2011, 10:05 AM
You guys remember "greatest off season ever?"

Gonzo
11-23-2011, 10:06 AM
Stupid thread.

Aren't they all, really?

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 10:08 AM
Ill just say this....Peterson didnt have a losing season with the Chiefs until his 9th or 10th season in. Pioli looks like hes headed for 2 losing seasons in his first 3 years.

Exactly.

Peterson simply overstayed his useful era. If he dies after 10 seasons, people recall him as the greatest GM in Chiefs history. Hell, the man probably ends up as a quasi-legend in NFL circles.

Peterson bought into his own hype and let his ego run amok with it. When Marty left and there was no longer a personality strong enough to balance Peterson out, he was a disaster. However, with another strong personality in the organization, Peterson can be protected from himself. At that point, he's actually a pretty decent football mind.

Peterson's problem was duration and the sense of infallibility that comes from it.

lcarus
11-23-2011, 10:11 AM
Thank you David Spade

Actually I really do have a tack hammer sitting here next to me for what we do. But yeah I used the Tommy Boy reference.

The Bad Guy
11-23-2011, 10:20 AM
If that's my choice, I'd probably go with Peterson.

Pioli and his insistence on this bullshit, 'bend but don't break' 3-4 scheme is simply falling behind. Further, he doesn't seem very good at actually acquiring personnel for it.

He falls in love with backup quarterbacks, just like Peterson. He's an arrogant, stubborn, know-it-all prick just like Peterson.

The only area where I can see him being clearly better than Peterson is in getting draft picks signed, but even that's now a moot point due to the rookie slotting scale.

He's essentially all of Peterson's warts, in addition to being a slave to an awful defensive scheme. Oh, and with Peterson, I can at least count on him giving his head coach a little autonomy and not completely hamstringing him in personnel matters.

Pioli's nothing more than Bill Belichick's errand boy.

Pioli is far, far better at also extending the contracts of players on the roster.

DaWolf
11-23-2011, 10:31 AM
Oh, and with Peterson, I can at least count on him giving his head coach a little autonomy and not completely hamstringing him in personnel matters.

Seriously? Larry Johnson ring any bells? Pushing Vermeil to hire Gunther Cunningham again? Forcing Herm Edwards to keep Gunther around? Carl was very proficient at telling his coaches to STFU when he wanted to after Marty left...

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 10:34 AM
Pioli is far, far better at also extending the contracts of players on the roster.

Probably so, but remember, Peterson never really had the wealth of cap space and bevy of young, cheap players that make that job easier for him.

Peterson spent about 8 years in an 'up' cycle. That takes a ton of money to pull off. You have veterans that feel they were vital contributors that want to get paid accordingly. Every offseason they're coming in for raises and you're spending a lot of time squeezed up against the cap.

We remember him running off Jared Allen because that's our last vision of him. At the same time, he kept guys like DT here. Will Shields never played elsewhere. Neil Smith was a guy we lost because we had limited cap space and chose to spend it on DT and the O-line at the time.

Look at it this way - if the Chiefs had spent the last 5 years kicking ass and taking names, they'd have a bunch of players on this squad making more money than they're making presently. that's exactly the situation Peterson found himself in during the Smith negotiations. With all that money tied up elsewhere, the Chiefs simply couldn't give out a boatload of money for Smith like they could for, say, Hali.

Pioli's had an easy time getting guys like Flowers and Hali re-signed because frankly, there are only about 10 guys on this roster that are worth a shit. That makes it easy to allocate your big $$$ purchases. Look at the Flowers contract; at best that's a market price (and probably a bit above market). How is it that Pioli is a master negotiator for getting Flowers to sign a market deal? Same for Hali. The answer is that he isn't; he's just a guy that doesn't have a hell of a lot of options on who to give that money to, so he's giving it to our guys.

When Pioli builds a 53 man roster that actually has skill and depth and multiple positions, and then that roster succeeds for 5 years and Pioli can manage to keep it intact and thriving under the constraints of a salary cap, I'll give him credit as a stellar contract negotiator. As it is, all I see is a guy that's had a pretty good run of getting his guys re-signed at market prices without any legitimate cap constraints.

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 10:37 AM
Seriously? Larry Johnson ring any bells? Pushing Vermeil to hire Gunther Cunningham again? Forcing Herm Edwards to keep Gunther around? Carl was very proficient at telling his coaches to STFU when he wanted to after Marty left...

Absolutely - what part of the 'duration' argument was missed?

All of that came when Peterson was left with a power vacuum and saw himself as a bulletproof dictator. Again - his issue was simply being around too long. Far greater men than him have succumbed to similar temptations.

If you bring a 'new' Carl Peterson into an organization, the Larry Johnson-era Peterson is not the guy you're dealing with. You're dealing with a Peterson that was fired from his last job and will now have to start from scratch.

Epic Fail 007
11-23-2011, 10:40 AM
Here's what I'll say. Pioli has done a good job with drafting. The 2009 draft was a disaster, but everything else has been solid. He hasn't been bad with personnel decisions, even though he has yet to spend the kind of cash necessary.

He hasn't found a QB. But then again, Carl took how many years to find a real one in Trent Green.

The major difference so far? Peterson gave his coaches what they wanted. Pioli is forcing his system and his people onto his coaches.

I agree

chiefzilla1501
11-23-2011, 10:48 AM
Probably so, but remember, Peterson never really had the wealth of cap space and bevy of young, cheap players that make that job easier for him.

Peterson spent about 8 years in an 'up' cycle. That takes a ton of money to pull off. You have veterans that feel they were vital contributors that want to get paid accordingly. Every offseason they're coming in for raises and you're spending a lot of time squeezed up against the cap.

We remember him running off Jared Allen because that's our last vision of him. At the same time, he kept guys like DT here. Will Shields never played elsewhere. Neil Smith was a guy we lost because we had limited cap space and chose to spend it on DT and the O-line at the time.

Look at it this way - if the Chiefs had spent the last 5 years kicking ass and taking names, they'd have a bunch of players on this squad making more money than they're making presently. that's exactly the situation Peterson found himself in during the Smith negotiations. With all that money tied up elsewhere, the Chiefs simply couldn't give out a boatload of money for Smith like they could for, say, Hali.

Pioli's had an easy time getting guys like Flowers and Hali re-signed because frankly, there are only about 10 guys on this roster that are worth a shit. That makes it easy to allocate your big $$$ purchases. Look at the Flowers contract; at best that's a market price (and probably a bit above market). How is it that Pioli is a master negotiator for getting Flowers to sign a market deal? Same for Hali. The answer is that he isn't; he's just a guy that doesn't have a hell of a lot of options on who to give that money to, so he's giving it to our guys.

When Pioli builds a 53 man roster that actually has skill and depth and multiple positions, and then that roster succeeds for 5 years and Pioli can manage to keep it intact and thriving under the constraints of a salary cap, I'll give him credit as a stellar contract negotiator. As it is, all I see is a guy that's had a pretty good run of getting his guys re-signed at market prices without any legitimate cap constraints.

I think Pioli builds a terrific scouting network. Peterson was a complete boob when it came to the draft. Whereas Peterson seemed to rely on a few of his buddies giving him draft advice and then showing preferential treatment to his Pac-10 cronies, Pioli seems to really get great due diligence from his area scouts and his personnel guys. If you matched Pioli's drafting and gave him license to spend freely the way Peterson did, no doubt Pioli's teams would clobber Peterson's. For some reason, Pioli isn't spending. I personally believe it has more to do with arrogance than it does with Clark Hunt tightening the purse strings. We get all riled up over a few picks here and there, but the fact is that the 2010 draft was effective, and I think the 2011 draft will go down as a very good one as well.

If he can learn to temper his arrogance, he has potential to be very good. But that's a very big "if." And again, if he finds a QB (again, he has to tone down his ego and realized he messed up on Cassel... and stop with the "I can find diamond in the rough" egotistical method), I think he's built a solid team otherwise.

Spend money. Get a real QB. Let your coaches coach, and let him coach the systems he wants to coach. I believe that completely changes Pioli into a good GM.

Epic Fail 007
11-23-2011, 10:52 AM
I am here now. I voted Peterson. Until Pioli proves me wrong, I don't give a shit. Peterson had more success when he was first hired by the Chiefs. I'm able to look past the last 10 years of his time here. Pioli has pissed me off with his moves, what else can I say?

Peterson got us closer to a Super Bowl team (a few times) than the dogshit Pioli has placed in our lap. All the good players on this team are Peterson picks. It's ****ing sad. Pioli hasn't done a god damn thing yet, but I'm willing to give him more time.

I voted perterson to.He would of got us to a sb if he would not of messed up and hired Herm.

kysirsoze
11-23-2011, 10:55 AM
I voted perterson to.He would of got us to a sb if he would not of messed up and hired Herm.

This is who you are agreeing with, Icarus. Think about that for a minute.

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 10:58 AM
I think Pioli builds a terrific scouting network. Peterson was a complete boob when it came to the draft. Whereas Peterson seemed to rely on a few of his buddies giving him draft advice and then showing preferential treatment to his Pac-10 cronies, Pioli seems to really get great due diligence from his area scouts and his personnel guys. If you matched Pioli's drafting and gave him license to spend freely the way Peterson did, no doubt Pioli's teams would clobber Peterson's. For some reason, Pioli isn't spending. I personally believe it has more to do with arrogance than it does with Clark Hunt tightening the purse strings. We get all riled up over a few picks here and there, but the fact is that the 2010 draft was effective, and I think the 2011 draft will go down as a very good one as well.

If he can learn to temper his arrogance, he has potential to be very good. But that's a very big "if."

I don't think we can say that Pioi's drafts have been hits just yet.

The 2009 draft was an unqualified disaster. Further, the 2010 draft was only mediocre. Berry was a no-brainer, he gets no credit from me for that one. All he had to do was not be an idiot there. McCluster was a jackson-esque fuckup. Arenas was an okay pick at best (still way too high to take a kick returner and nickle corner). Moeaki fell as far as he did because of injury concerns, now he's injured.

Lewis and Asomoah were nice picks, Lewis especially so (as Asomoah was another one of those guys with a 2nd roundish grade that we were fortunate to see fall to the 3rd). Lewis was absolutely a scouting victory, I'll give him that. Then again, Peterson found Tongue and Page in similar situations. Page is actually in incredibly similar comparison, so it's not as though Peterson has no 'scouting wins' in the defensive backfield either. And this is not giving him any credit at all for the 2008 draft, which was a damn gold mine (and it's probably not fair to give Herm all the credit for that draft).

2011 is just an unknown. I personally love the draft and Baldwin, if he pans out, is a scouting win. Hudson was a lot like Asomoah in that he just fell to where he was a definite value pick, ditto Houston (but credit is due to Pioli for having the balls to take the chance). Bailey is likely to be a bust, IMO. Jalil Brown hasn't impressed. Stanzi and Powe were good selections, but I'd have been absolutely furious had he not taken them where they were availabe, so doesn't that mean they weren't exactly 'tough' calls? And besides, he's burying both of them now anyway.

Look at his draft record his last 4-5 years in NE and there's nothing to write home about.

The jury is very much out on Scott Pioli as a draft expert. All I know is that we're almost 50 games into his tenure as a GM and virtually every impact player on this roster came from the previous regime. That's not an appropriate timeline for a draft wizard, IMO.

lcarus
11-23-2011, 11:08 AM
This is who you are agreeing with, Icarus. Think about that for a minute.

Perhaps I should kill myself.

Epic Fail 007
11-23-2011, 11:12 AM
This is who you are agreeing with, Icarus. Think about that for a minute.

No im agreeing with myself and the facts.

OnTheWarpath58
11-23-2011, 11:14 AM
I don't think we can say that Pioi's drafts have been hits just yet.

The 2009 draft was an unqualified disaster. Further, the 2010 draft was only mediocre. Berry was a no-brainer, he gets no credit from me for that one. All he had to do was not be an idiot there. McCluster was a jackson-esque fuckup. Arenas was an okay pick at best (still way too high to take a kick returner and nickle corner). Moeaki fell as far as he did because of injury concerns, now he's injured.

Lewis and Asomoah were nice picks, Lewis especially so (as Asomoah was another one of those guys with a 2nd roundish grade that we were fortunate to see fall to the 3rd). Lewis was absolutely a scouting victory, I'll give him that. Then again, Peterson found Tongue and Page in similar situations. Page is actually in incredibly similar comparison, so it's not as though Peterson has no 'scouting wins' in the defensive backfield either. And this is not giving him any credit at all for the 2008 draft, which was a damn gold mine (and it's probably not fair to give Herm all the credit for that draft).

2011 is just an unknown. I personally love the draft and Baldwin, if he pans out, is a scouting win. Hudson was a lot like Asomoah in that he just fell to where he was a definite value pick, ditto Houston (but credit is due to Pioli for having the balls to take the chance). Bailey is likely to be a bust, IMO. Jalil Brown hasn't impressed. Stanzi and Powe were good selections, but I'd have been absolutely furious had he not taken them where they were availabe, so doesn't that mean they weren't exactly 'tough' calls? And besides, he's burying both of them now anyway.

Look at his draft record his last 4-5 years in NE and there's nothing to write home about.

The jury is very much out on Scott Pioli as a draft expert. All I know is that we're almost 50 games into his tenure as a GM and virtually every impact player on this roster came from the previous regime. That's not an appropriate timeline for a draft wizard, IMO.

Spot on.

DaWolf
11-23-2011, 11:19 AM
I think it's still too early to judge Pioli. We had two decades to judge Carl.

Even Ted Thompson, who I think anyone would take right now, started off in Green Bay as follows:

2005: 4-12
2006: 8-8
2007: 13-3
2008: 6-10

So that's 1 winning season in his first four years, and that was with both Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers running the show. So even with all that, it took him 5 years to really get that team to start looking ready to compete every year. And I use that allusion because Green Bay is another team like us who looks to build through the draft rather than free agency.

So is Pioli looking bad now? Yeah, he probably is. But is this team a completed product? No way. Now the biggest knock I have with Pioli right now is that I'm not sure his first hire as head coach was the right one. But then again, would Haley have looked better if he had inherited Brett Favre at the beginning? Probably. The other issue is we don't have a franchise QB to build around, and I think it's evident Cassel isn't going to be that guy. So Pioli needs to find that guy for any of this to really work, because that really was Peterson's biggest failure while he was here. If we had ever been able to get that top guy instead of trading for other team's backups every few years, it might have been a better ending. And the only thing we have to go off of with Pioli right now is that he traded for another team's backup. So until we get ourselves that franchise guy, both Pioli and Carl's tenures will end the same way: no trophy...

chiefzilla1501
11-23-2011, 11:27 AM
I don't think we can say that Pioi's drafts have been hits just yet.

The 2009 draft was an unqualified disaster. Further, the 2010 draft was only mediocre. Berry was a no-brainer, he gets no credit from me for that one. All he had to do was not be an idiot there. McCluster was a jackson-esque ****up. Arenas was an okay pick at best (still way too high to take a kick returner and nickle corner). Moeaki fell as far as he did because of injury concerns, now he's injured.

Lewis and Asomoah were nice picks, Lewis especially so (as Asomoah was another one of those guys with a 2nd roundish grade that we were fortunate to see fall to the 3rd). Lewis was absolutely a scouting victory, I'll give him that. Then again, Peterson found Tongue and Page in similar situations. Page is actually in incredibly similar comparison, so it's not as though Peterson has no 'scouting wins' in the defensive backfield either. And this is not giving him any credit at all for the 2008 draft, which was a damn gold mine (and it's probably not fair to give Herm all the credit for that draft).

2011 is just an unknown. I personally love the draft and Baldwin, if he pans out, is a scouting win. Hudson was a lot like Asomoah in that he just fell to where he was a definite value pick, ditto Houston (but credit is due to Pioli for having the balls to take the chance). Bailey is likely to be a bust, IMO. Jalil Brown hasn't impressed. Stanzi and Powe were good selections, but I'd have been absolutely furious had he not taken them where they were availabe, so doesn't that mean they weren't exactly 'tough' calls? And besides, he's burying both of them now anyway.

Look at his draft record his last 4-5 years in NE and there's nothing to write home about.

The jury is very much out on Scott Pioli as a draft expert. All I know is that we're almost 50 games into his tenure as a GM and virtually every impact player on this roster came from the previous regime. That's not an appropriate timeline for a draft wizard, IMO.

This is all spot-on, but I'm comparing that to the 20-ish years of Carl Peterson. A while ago, I think I did a count that less that in his last 10 years, I think it was something like over 90% of players didn't see a full-time roster after 3-5 years. I think it's quite possible that Carl Peterson was one of the bottom 5 when it comes to draft track record. I credit most of the 2008 draft success on Bill Kuharich (Herm deserves credit not for the draft, but it seems clear that he crowded Peterson out of the draft and gave the power back to Kuharich and the scouts). And a big part of that is process. You can see that Pioli is a lot more aggressive in terms of getting himself and area scouts out to watch and to talk to people. A huge departure from the Carl Peterson "let's call a few guys I know and trust" approach.

I don't think we can assess draft impact on just impact players. I know this will get me shit, but I do think it was smart to build a team around high character guys. Even though the team loses, they do play hard and they seem to quickly diffuse distractions (e.g. Thomas Jones / Baldwin scuffle). And at least the majority of the draft picks in the last 2 years at least contribute, even if that's only in special teams or specialty packages. From a personnel standpoint, think we've done a pretty good job the last 2 years for a team that hasn't spent a lot of money.

But his ego has absolutely crippled this team. The Cassel decision. The insistence on running 2-gap 3-4. The arrogance to insist on building on the cheap. The insistence on forcing Haley to run the Patriot Way instead of adapting to the coach. Again, I think you place a very good QB on this team, and I think we'd see that this team is actually deeper and more complete than we give it credit for.

Okie_Apparition
11-23-2011, 11:27 AM
Where is the CoMo & KnowMo in PR option
so much win

Rausch
11-23-2011, 11:43 AM
Not even close...

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 11:49 AM
But his ego has absolutely crippled this team. The Cassel decision. The insistence on running 2-gap 3-4. The arrogance to insist on building on the cheap. The insistence on forcing Haley to run the Patriot Way instead of adapting to the coach. Again, I think you place a very good QB on this team, and I think we'd see that this team is actually deeper and more complete than we give it credit for.

I think you're overstating Peterson's reliance on 'cronyism' and understating Pioli's. I also think you're giving more weight to the end of the Peterson regime than the beginning. There may be a difference, but I believe its fairly nominal. Pioli has absolutely shown a willingness to 'fall back' on old networks in his picks, just as Peterson did.

As to the rest of it - that sounds a hell of a lot like Peterson, only without the decade of sustained winning that came with Carl's early years.

Scott Pioli walked through the door as the 1999 Carl Peterson. When last I checked, we didn't win a hell of a lot with that guy at the top.

Epic Fail 007
11-23-2011, 11:52 AM
I think it's still too early to judge Pioli. We had two decades to judge Carl.

Even Ted Thompson, who I think anyone would take right now, started off in Green Bay as follows:

2005: 4-12
2006: 8-8
2007: 13-3
2008: 6-10

So that's 1 winning season in his first four years, and that was with both Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers running the show. So even with all that, it took him 5 years to really get that team to start looking ready to compete every year. And I use that allusion because Green Bay is another team like us who looks to build through the draft rather than free agency.

So is Pioli looking bad now? Yeah, he probably is. But is this team a completed product? No way. Now the biggest knock I have with Pioli right now is that I'm not sure his first hire as head coach was the right one. But then again, would Haley have looked better if he had inherited Brett Favre at the beginning? Probably. The other issue is we don't have a franchise QB to build around, and I think it's evident Cassel isn't going to be that guy. So Pioli needs to find that guy for any of this to really work, because that really was Peterson's biggest failure while he was here. If we had ever been able to get that top guy instead of trading for other team's backups every few years, it might have been a better ending. And the only thing we have to go off of with Pioli right now is that he traded for another team's backup. So until we get ourselves that franchise guy, both Pioli and Carl's tenures will end the same way: no trophy...
hmmmmmmmm good point

chiefzilla1501
11-23-2011, 12:05 PM
I think you're overstating Peterson's reliance on 'cronyism' and understating Pioli's. I also think you're giving more weight to the end of the Peterson regime than the beginning. There may be a difference, but I believe its fairly nominal. Pioli has absolutely shown a willingness to 'fall back' on old networks in his picks, just as Peterson did.

As to the rest of it - that sounds a hell of a lot like Peterson, only without the decade of sustained winning that came with Carl's early years.

Scott Pioli walked through the door as the 1999 Carl Peterson. When last I checked, we didn't win a hell of a lot with that guy at the top.

From a personnel standpoint, yes. From a draft standpoint, I don't agree. He is heavily reliant on the SEC, but who wouldn't be? We saw him pass on Bulaga and McClain for Berry. We saw him pass on Clausen, even though he was a Weis guy. The three guys that seem to be crony guys are Moeaki, Arenas, and Stanzi, and all three of those guys have played fine for us (Arenas being the only one that was a slight reach).

And Peterson's drafting was never particularly strong, even in the early years. Marty has a way of making a lot of GMs look like personnel masterminds.

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 12:08 PM
So is Pioli looking bad now? Yeah, he probably is. But is this team a completed product? No way. Now the biggest knock I have with Pioli right now is that I'm not sure his first hire as head coach was the right one. But then again, would Haley have looked better if he had inherited Brett Favre at the beginning? Probably. The other issue is we don't have a franchise QB to build around, and I think it's evident Cassel isn't going to be that guy. So Pioli needs to find that guy for any of this to really work, because that really was Peterson's biggest failure while he was here. If we had ever been able to get that top guy instead of trading for other team's backups every few years, it might have been a better ending. And the only thing we have to go off of with Pioli right now is that he traded for another team's backup. So until we get ourselves that franchise guy, both Pioli and Carl's tenures will end the same way: no trophy...

If he shows a concerted effort to actually fix the quarterback problem, I'll get off his case.

I don't have a problem riding his ass because I said from the moment the Cassel trade was made that this was a Peterson move; a trade designed to get an adequate quarterback that wouldn't be an obvious bust. It was a risk-averse, chickenshit maneuver from Pioli.

Sure enough, it failed. To me, he still looks a lot like a guy that simply will not take the necessary risks to get this team over the top.

DJ's left nut
11-23-2011, 12:09 PM
From a personnel standpoint, yes. From a draft standpoint, I don't agree. He is heavily reliant on the SEC, but who wouldn't be? We saw him pass on Bulaga and McClain for Berry. We saw him pass on Clausen, even though he was a Weis guy. The three guys that seem to be crony guys are Moeaki, Arenas, and Stanzi, and all three of those guys have played fine for us (Arenas being the only one that was a slight reach).

And Peterson's drafting was never particularly strong, even in the early years. Marty has a way of making a lot of GMs look like personnel masterminds.

I recall McCluster also being a 'crony' guy. He has a source at Ole Miss, IIRC.

bevischief
11-23-2011, 12:13 PM
I voted perterson to.He would of got us to a sb if he would not of messed up and hired Herm.

Wait wut?

whoman69
11-23-2011, 12:54 PM
Gaz would kill them both. Herm seems like a better choice as long as he gets zero onfield input.

I was hoping the Portland team was going to take the name Dreadnauts.

DaWolf
11-23-2011, 01:49 PM
If he shows a concerted effort to actually fix the quarterback problem, I'll get off his case.

I don't have a problem riding his ass because I said from the moment the Cassel trade was made that this was a Peterson move; a trade designed to get an adequate quarterback that wouldn't be an obvious bust. It was a risk-averse, chickenshit maneuver from Pioli.

Sure enough, it failed. To me, he still looks a lot like a guy that simply will not take the necessary risks to get this team over the top.

I don't disagree with that. You could argue that he was gambling that Cassel could blossom into a Schaub type guy for this team. That didn't happen obviously. I am still of the opinion, and I could be wrong, that Pioli is a smart guy, is not blind to Cassel's faults after watching him start for four years, and wouldn't be averse to making an upgrade if that were available now. But until he does, that's the big question. Carl never could or never would.

Looking back at the 2009 and 2010 drafts, I think in hindsight the only glaring thing that could have been done differently that would have made a difference is not trading for Cassel and instead using the No 3 pick on Freeman instead of drafting Jackson. But what's done is done, so we'll see what happens in the next few years...

Aries Walker
11-23-2011, 02:05 PM
I can't believe anyone anywhere would consider Carl Peterson. Are these Raiders fans?

The only thing Carl Peterson has going for him is that it's fun to say his name like Cameron in Ferris Bueller's Day Off.

KC Tattoo
11-23-2011, 03:22 PM
Right now I don't see any difference between Carl Peterson and Scot Pioli.

Mojo Jojo
11-23-2011, 04:40 PM
Having dealt with both in business...Carl is a much better person than Scott. Pioli is just an ass...he is costing the Chiefs money. Hence Clark doesn't want to spend.

'Hamas' Jenkins
11-23-2011, 04:46 PM
Having dealt with both in business...Carl is a much better person than Scott. Pioli is just an ass...he is costing the Chiefs money. Hence Clark doesn't want to spend.

Could you explain in a little more detail, please?

whoman69
11-23-2011, 05:30 PM
Could you explain in a little more detail, please?

I think he's putting it from an ownership prospective. CP probably made more money for the franchise than Pioli. Yay team. I'm glad we're all able to contribute another $30million in the Hunt family pockets at the end of the year. That's what I'm rooting for.

Mojo Jojo
11-23-2011, 08:02 PM
Could you explain in a little more detail, please?
I'm talking about them as human beings...Carl had a lot more class than Pioli ever will.

KCChiefsFan88
11-23-2011, 10:54 PM
The fact this question is even being asked nearly 3 years in, shows how much of a failure Pioli has been in KC.

There needs to be an epic change of course by Pioli this offseason.

Tribal Warfare
11-24-2011, 01:29 AM
No kill yourself option???????

Poll FAIL

ChiefsCountry
11-24-2011, 01:47 AM
Ironic thing is guess who is in the Carl Peterson tree and the Patriot Bullshit Way Tree - Tom Dimitroff.

ChiefsCountry
11-24-2011, 01:49 AM
I'm talking about them as human beings...Carl had a lot more class than Pioli ever will.

Never had any dealings with Pioli, I have with Peterson, but some of the people I know who do have said the same thing. Very arrogrant motherfucker. Its costing the Chiefs some sponsorship dollars for sure, see the quote in the new Holley book. The secert bullshit only goes so far.

Deberg_1990
09-17-2012, 09:57 AM
heh, Is this even a contest now? Pioli makes Peterson look brilliant, classy and without ego.

Bump
09-17-2012, 10:08 AM
apples to apples...

TEX
09-17-2012, 10:09 AM
I voted for Mecca. His drafts have been better than both.

TEX
09-17-2012, 10:10 AM
The fact this question is even being asked nearly 3 years in, shows how much of a failure Pioli has been in KC.

There needs to be an epic change of course by Pioli this offseason.

There needs to be one by Clark Hunt and Pioli needs to be part of it...

htismaqe
09-17-2012, 10:12 AM
I voted for Mecca. His drafts have been better than both.

I voted for Gaz. HIS drafts have been better than both. ;)

DaKCMan AP
09-17-2012, 10:15 AM
DaKCMan AP

.

DJ's left nut
09-17-2012, 10:41 AM
I win this thread.

DaneMcCloud
09-17-2012, 11:39 AM
Peterson drafted two Hall of Famers and signed two more via free agency in his first four years.

Pioli drafted Tyson Jackson with the #3 overall pick, signed Mike Goof, Zach Thomas and Amani Toomer (and actually gave Toomer a press conference!).

'Nuff said.

DJ's left nut
09-17-2012, 11:43 AM
And at least when Peterson traded high draft picks for quarterbacks they were Joe Montana and Trent Green.

There's something to be said for at least executing a flawed strategy well. Pioli can't even manage to pull that off.

htismaqe
09-17-2012, 11:49 AM
And at least when Peterson traded high draft picks for quarterbacks they were Joe Montana and Trent Green.

There's something to be said for at least executing a flawed strategy well. Pioli can't even manage to pull that off.

ROFL

:bravo:

qabbaan
09-17-2012, 12:21 PM
Carl made all his money off Marty. Pioli made all his off Belichick

Start Croyle
09-17-2012, 12:22 PM
Carl Peterson actually put together some competitive teams!

Mr. Laz
09-17-2012, 12:44 PM
Marty Shottenheimer actually put together some competitive teams!

FYP


there is more talent on this team than Marty EVER got from Carl

DJ's left nut
09-17-2012, 01:41 PM
FYP


there is more talent on this team than Marty EVER got from Carl

There's not a single player anywhere near as good as DT, Smith or Shields on this team. And for all the hosannas about how good this secondary is, it's still nowhere near as good as the Hasty/Carter-lead secondaries. The O-Line that Carl put together was excellent and for as shitty as the Bono's, Grbac's, and Krieg's of the world were, they were significantly better than Matt Cassel.

There is a better RB and some better pass-catchers, that's it.

This idea that Pioli has loaded this roster outside of QB is a complete myth. Besides, 90% of the real 'talent' on this team is talent that Carl acquired for Herm.

Pioli has been complete trash as the general manager of this football team. Carl Peterson absolutely fist-fucks this clown.

Bowser
09-17-2012, 01:45 PM
'Hamas Jenkins', and it isn't even close.

Sweet Daddy Hate
09-17-2012, 02:46 PM
Hamas. I like winning.

Setsuna
09-17-2012, 03:10 PM
Everyone get behind Hamas!!!

Guru
09-17-2012, 03:45 PM
Right now, I would take Carl.