Tell me why we're here then. Are we all just supposed to be cheerleaders. Put on your skirt, missy, and go back to the sidelines.

IMO 7-9 is not heading in the right direction (barring unforeseen injuries).

If this team has as much talent as some of you claim (not specifically you, Ed) this team should win at least 9 games.

You can't ignore the schedule in 2010 and then use it as an excuse in 2011.

tougher schedule and growing pains with rookies cause me to think it could be as you indicated

we have no idea what is going to happen in the future. If you take that into consideration then every grade for Pioli will be incomplete until the team actually wins the super bowl.

When Pioli inherited the team it was heading down and had won 4 games iirc. Two years with Pioli and the team is heading up and won 10 games and a division.

I consider that turning it around.

We don't know if that success will continue but this is a grade request not a prediction request.


btw i've already said the Chiefs could actually be a better team this year and end up with a worse record because of the SOS. I was hammered for it but i still believe it.

Exactly. I hate this built in schedule excuse. Good teams beat other good teams.

This. A million times this.

The schedule was very soft last year, anyone that says different has their head buried in the sand.

Give me the NFC West every year please, 40% of the team's win total. They may not win a single game against the NFC this year, it would not surprise me.

So that right there could be the difference between 10-6 and 6-10.

Agreed...

As NJ said, good teams beat other good teams.

If this team has as much talent as some people think, and are "turned around" as others think, there's no reason to win fewer than 9 games.

I think the talent on this roster is capable of competing with most of the teams in the league.

67% of games last season were decided by a touchdown or less.

That's one or two plays a game that decide the outcome.

This team's fortunes, as I've said numerous times, lies squarely on Cassel.

The plays he makes, or fails to make, could be the difference between 10-6 or 6-10.

It was not meant as an excuse, sorry you took it that way.

If you think this team is good enough, and are far enough along for the schedule not to matter, I do not. They got 4 wins last year, that could be 4 losses this year.

Are they headed in the right direction? Yes, but they are sure not elite yet.

They are not Pittsburgh, New England, San Diego, or Green Bay.

***Matt Cassel***

the only real difference is at QB....but we're not supposed to talk about that


point is, as milkman said, this season comes down to Cassel...if he's the superstar that reerun and that weirdo pats fan says he is, then we're fine...

this is the biggest twisted piece of crap ever

'good' is an extremely relative term

Houston is a good team but saying that winning against them is the same as winning against the Steelers is just plain stupid.

every year in the NFL there are 8 or so elite teams that will get their wins no matter what. There are also around 8 crappy teams that aren't going to make it regardless. The rest of the teams in the league have their win/loss record go up and down based on SOS.

So technically yes "good teams win no matter what" but only the elite type teams.

There is huge grey area around that statement.

The Chiefs are NOT elite yet so they can still be a better team than last year and have a worse record because of their SOS.

Agreed, and as per my previous posts, I went back and put Cassel in stars on the post you quoted.

If only he could play like he did in Seattle last year, that was almost like a fantasy coming true. The team was obviously there all along, Cassel was clearly the difference.

I must admit though, he looked pretty good up in Green Bay after a couple series. Bowe was just sick though, catching everything in the general area.