The irony of a guy dismissing the substance off the offseason's improvements in saying the team will just tread water, then turning around and saying that people aren't paying attention to the substance of his post shouldn't be lost on anyone.

:thumb:

Whoa..

We lost

Bowe
Hudson
McGlynn

We gained

Maclin
Grubbs
Branch
Derrick Johnson
Mike Devito

A strong rookie class consisting of

Peters (best CB in last 4 drafts)
Morse (Mayock called the pick and said he's a 10 year starter)
Conley (comic book quality athlete)
Nelson (perfect scrapper for nickel)


The improvement of this group

Fisher
Gaines
Kelce
Ford
Wilson

I think were gonna see a real contender show more and more of itself as the season goes on and if Houston's here all year, I see us having a chance at HFA kinda year.

That's not what Chiefs Country said.

He said they cannot be a Super Bowl contender with Alex Smith at QB. That's absurd.

As to what bet I'd be willing to make - really? You're saying that in a 'Chiefs vs. the field' bet that you'd take the field? Well man, that's going out on a limb right there.

I've said this before, I'll say it again - the odds overwhelmingly suggest that the Chiefs won't win a SB this year. There are 32 teams and only 1 of them win the damn thing. But again, I'd take the field over every single team in football and there are only 3 teams in the AFC who's odds should be appreciably better than KCs. Even that's arguable - for instance, if our D is as good as it can be, then our D is as good as Pitt's O - is our O better than Pitt's D? I think it is. We have no idea what Manning will be.

To blast Boss for saying the Chiefs are building a potential SB team while saying 'eh, the Chiefs can't win shit with Alex Smith' is just the highest of hypocrisy. It's dogmatic, worthless garbage that does a hell of a lot more to turn posters off than acknowledging that Dorsey's done some damn good things with this team over the last 2+ seasons and there's reason to suggest he can continue doing so.

Discuss Thrower will not read this because he has all the answers. Then he'll accuse you of blasting the poster not the content.

Don't worry though because I think I've covered the 'blast his content' stage.

DJ is doing work in this thread

Hahaha


:clap:

Who cares what that guy says?

Hes on the level of blackbob.

For every Discuss Thrower.....there is a SeeingRed.

For every Inmem.....there is a RunKC.

I don't think it is absurd. I think he is mostly correct. I think the days of a Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson being a bystander QB while the D does it all are long gone. As a QB you have to make big plays. Now we have seen AS do it but he hasn't done it on a consistent basis like the best QB's in the NFL do. All you have to do is look at last year and him not throwing 1 TD to a WR. I don't think that had ever happened in NFL history. He is just to risk averse IMHO.

Except for in 2013 when Russell Wilson was a bystander to a SB championship.

Wilson developed into a better QB in '14 than he was in '13, no question. And at this point I do think he's a better QB than Smith because he is more aggressive.

But we're literally 18 months removed from the Seahawks D dragging Wilson to a SB championship. The first two rounds of the playoffs were Seattle's D doing serious work while Wilson largely spun his wheels. And against the Broncos are you really going to try to say that the savage beating the D put on Manning and crew isn't why they won that championship?

One. Season. Ago.

That's not ancient history, fellas. If the 2013 Seahawks can win a Super Bowl with Wilson's exceedingly mediocre performance, the Chiefs can absolutely do so in 2015. And if the 2014 Seahawks can lose in the SB despite improved play from their QB in 2014, then perhaps we should stop acting like the QB is the only thing that matters or that failing to win a SB is an indictment on a team at large.

So you are certain that a WR corps of Maclin/Avant/Wilson/Conley/Thomas/Hammond(Hemingway) is going to be a marked improvement over Bowe/Avery/Avant/Wilson/Jenkins/Hammond/Hemingway to the tune of an extra 500-750 yards of receiving and an additional 6-10 touchdowns over last year en route to two or more wins?


That's what I'm talking about: Wilson and Conley could be outstanding receivers but neither have proven that in the NFL yet. And given Reid's overly complicated offense, it's going to take time for both of them to get to the level beyond being a JAG type of receiver. To say unequivocally that "These guys are going to be AWESOME as guys in their second or first year" is sheer speculation. That shouldn't be too unfair to say. If they chip in a touchdown here and there along with combine for 500+ yards that'd be great. But that's a leap to count on that production given their college background and the fact that Conley hasn't even played a down of NFL-level ball yet.

So, it shouldn't be too ****ing hard to see it from my perspective that there are really two downfield threats on the team: Maclin and Kelce. Again, how is that demonstrably better than the previous season? It is only if you think the difference in Maclin's athleticism and playing style is going to translate to 250+ yards over Bowe's number from last year. Fact is, Maclin doesn't exactly have a 900+ yard track record in his career and has had the benefit of having other quality receivers opening up coverage for him in Philly.


Does KC have that? Only if you think a second year Wilson has the qualities of DeSean Jackson or if Conley will come on the seen strong as a rookie a la Jordan Matthews. It's possible, but you can't honestly say that it's better than a coinflip's odds of that being the case.

And I said absolutely nothing about Kelce being worse: the tight end position as a WHOLE isn't any better than last year. Kelce/Harris/O'Shaughnessy is not a marked improvement over Kelce/Fasano/Schiltz or whatever waiver wire pickup Dorsey cycled through last year because there's no guy with an established track record like Fasano as shitty as that track record is. O'Shaughnessy and Harris could be critical contributors to the team, but as of now, they're projects.


And sure, Grubbs is an improvement over McGlynn... But you really think the line is going to look any better with a rookie or practically rookie at center and whatever guys can be used to flesh out the right side of the line? Hell, Fisher looked like ass a lot of the time last year according to people. But that's apparently an improved situation compared to last year.

The problem with DJ and DeVito is that they're an improvement over nothing as much as they are capable of playing like they have had in the past. DeVito flaming out isn't really a concern given the depth on the DL but there's really nothing at ILB available beside DJ.

Beyond that I said nothing about the defense being drastically worse. It'll probably still be a unit that's comfortably in the top half of the league at worst and still in the top third, but it's not going to be some sort of unheralded legion of boom that doesn't get the doors blown off of it and keeps offenses from scoring an average of 19 points or more. Peters is the only guy you can point to as an improvement in one spot over last year (as it should be with a 1st round draft pick more often than not) but you can't expect that this one guy alone is going be the catalyst to taking the squad into '85 Bears territory.


How is it categorically false? Players develop, sure, but until it translates into more wins or quantifiable production in terms of stats, it's all speculation. It's not some huge leap to look at how the roster is constructed and come to the conclusion that the team will look no better or worse than the year before.

It's like people for some reason are arguing how the Seahawks won the superbowl that year and that Wilson was the 3rd most important piece on the team behind the defense and Marshawn Lynch.

174 yards per game. 1 TD per game. That's what Wilson did in that title run. And because of the defense and running game, despite those below average Wilson numbers, they won pretty much each game comfortably.

um what?

I'm nobody's favorite poster, and I'm certainly not the longest of long time posters, but I definitely fit into this bin. I'll post maybe once a week, but **** man... as much as I want to be optimistic about the chiefs, I don't see the organization as anything worth taking time away from an increasingly busy life (I'm finishing up my phd, got hired for an actual adult job for post phd, have a girl I'm pretty serious with and we have a seven month old daughter who's amazing).

Life happens. The chiefs are who they are, and until they prove otherwise, I really don't feel that they're worth the time I used to put to them, which reflects on how I browse this site really.