Chiefs An addition to the Pioli resume

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-28-2012, 02:00 PM

I was bored, thought I'd run some numbers - hadn't done any Chiefs-related homework in a while.

Anywho, discussion in another thread got me to thinking about the "talent level" on this team. People seem to be getting back in the habit of blaming specifically the QB and coaching, while claiming that this roster, and those before it are loaded with talent.

For a team that supposedly has talent, all they've done is beat up on the weak sisters of the poor over the last 4 years of the Pioli Nightmare.

23 wins in 4 years.

Those 23 wins came against teams with a collective 152-214 record and a .415 winning percentage. You can thank Green Bay dropping a metric ****ton of passes back in December of 2011 - take them out of the equation, and you're looking at a .375 winning percentage.

1 win in 4 years against a 10-win or better team.

3 wins in 4 years against a 9-win or better team.

20 wins against 8-8 teams or worse - 11 of those wins against teams with 6 wins or less.

So the "Executive of the Decade" was responsible for 5.75 wins per year, and we should consider ourselves lucky we "earned" that many.

In this era of parity in the NFL, a team with this much "talent" would be winning more than 5.75 games per year. Even without a QB. Even without a QB and HC.

Folks say that Mark Sanchez is a POS, and that we have more talent than the Jets. The same Jets that have won 34 games in the last 4 years. 11 more than the Chiefs.

Buffalo has shit for talent, plays in a brutal division, and has 2 fewer wins over the same time period.

Cleveland is hot garbage, and they've won 4 fewer games over the past 4 years. 1 game a year difference.

Jacksonville has 1 fewer win.

Miami has 4 MORE wins.

Oakland has 2 MORE wins.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that we have more "talent" than every one of the above teams.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our QB play has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better.

The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our coaching has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better.

The overwhelming majority of this board would be dead wrong on one of those three assessments. One of these things is not like the other.

Folks, it's time to wake up and realize that QB and HC are just part of the problem.

I see a lot of bad teams with bad QB's and bad HC's that have won as much or more than we have.

Sadly, the bottom line is that there isn't nearly as much "talent" on this roster that you think there is - and that we're a lot closer to the Cleveland's, Buffalo's and Jacksonville's of the NFL than you want to admit.

12-28-2012, 02:00 PM	Topic Starter
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $3821115	An addition to the Pioli resume I was bored, thought I'd run some numbers - hadn't done any Chiefs-related homework in a while. Anywho, discussion in another thread got me to thinking about the "talent level" on this team. People seem to be getting back in the habit of blaming specifically the QB and coaching, while claiming that this roster, and those before it are loaded with talent. For a team that supposedly has talent, all they've done is beat up on the weak sisters of the poor over the last 4 years of the Pioli Nightmare. 23 wins in 4 years. Those 23 wins came against teams with a collective 152-214 record and a .415 winning percentage. You can thank Green Bay dropping a metric **ton of passes back in December of 2011 - take them out of the equation, and you're looking at a .375 winning percentage. 1 win in 4 years against a 10-win or better team. 3 wins in 4 years against a 9-win or better team. 20 wins against 8-8 teams or worse - 11 of those wins against teams with 6 wins or less. So the "Executive of the Decade" was responsible for 5.75 wins per year, and we should consider ourselves lucky we "earned" that many. In this era of parity in the NFL, a team with this much "talent" would be winning more than 5.75 games per year. Even without a QB. Even without a QB and HC. Folks say that Mark Sanchez is a POS, and that we have more talent than the Jets. The same Jets that have won 34 games in the last 4 years. 11 more than the Chiefs. Buffalo has shit for talent, plays in a brutal division, and has 2 fewer wins over the same time period. Cleveland is hot garbage, and they've won 4 fewer games over the past 4 years. 1 game a year difference. Jacksonville has 1 fewer win. Miami has 4 MORE wins. Oakland has 2 MORE wins. The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that we have more "talent" than every one of the above teams. The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our QB play has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better. The overwhelming majority of this board would claim that our coaching has been at least as good as the above teams, and in most cases, better. The overwhelming majority of this board would be dead wrong on one of those three assessments. One of these things is not like the other. Folks, it's time to wake up and realize that QB and HC are just part** of the problem. I see a lot of bad teams with bad QB's and bad HC's that have won as much or more than we have. Sadly, the bottom line is that there isn't nearly as much "talent" on this roster that you think there is - and that we're a lot closer to the Cleveland's, Buffalo's and Jacksonville's of the NFL than you want to admit.
Posts: 60,402