Do You Suffer from TFS? True Fan Syndrome? If So, We Can Help

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Do you lie awake at nights dreaming of 8-8, or 9-7?

Do you judge a season as a success by a Wild Card birth?

Do you believe that defenses and running games are more important than franchise QBs?

Do you hate wide receivers?

Do you love coaches with a complete inability to spot talent at the running back position?

Do you think that 3-13 is better for the long term future of the franchise than 2-14?

Do you think the 2002 Bucs and 2000 Ravens are model NFL teams to aspire to?

Do you find playoff records to be irrelevant?

Do you believe that guards and right tackles should be taken with top five picks?

Do you believe that a quarterback is best served as a game manager?

Do you believe that every 3rd Down play should either be a screen or a draw?

Do you believe kicker is the most important position on the offense?

Do you believe that all of the best prospects reside in the Big XII?

Do you believe in trading down in any situation during the draft?

Do you believe that a team is better served picking 20 rather than 5 because they don't have to pay the player as much?

Do you believe that the only way to be a winning team is to throw money at the most expensive Free Agents every year, regardless of need?

Do you judge QBOTF by their box scores?

Do you think that risk is scary, and therefore, wish to draft last in every round to avoid the perception of failure?

Do you think that Marty and Bill Cowher are the only two coaches left on the planet?

Do you think that Gunther was once a great coordinator?

Do you think that reaction is safer than action?

Do you think every other team that actually drafted a QBOTF just 'got lucky' and that it could never happen to us?

Is your name [alias of claythan and hootie]?

Do you prefer tailgating to Championships?

Do you fear the unknown?

Do you believe that 'being close in the 4th quarter' is the objective of an offense?

Do you believe that the run sets up the pass?

Do you believe that Stafford "has done nothing worth mentioning" in college?

Do you think QBs don't need to know how to play from under the center, and that learning 5 and 7 step drops is irrelevant because once Thigpen completed a 7 yard pass to a hall of fame tight end in quadruple coverage?



If so, you may suffer from TFS, True Fan Syndrome. Here at the ChiefsPlanet Clinic, our staff of experts can help rid you of this debilitating malady. Through study of game tape of such contests as Super Bowl XXIII we can help ameliorate the effects of play not to lose football.

Upon registering at our world-renowned clinic, you will be given the following ID badge:




After six weeks of therapy, our cure rate for TFS approaches 91%, which ironically, is slightly better than Herm Edwards' losing percentage the last 23 games.

If you or a loved one suffers from TFS, please, contact us immediately.

We're here to help.

Sincerely,

The ChiefsPlanet Clinic

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

It's over 'Hahmmy.'
You're presently arguing against points not even espoused.
I don't WANT a shitty QB, I want the QB position put in the right reference frame regarding the entire team. I want you to realize that those who have it, don't have it all the time so that success with them is a no-brainer, and those who have it, still don't have much without a great team around them.
And you're plowing on, founding your premise that we have to suck, get a super high pick and use that super high pick on a QB, on the stellar play of a cadre of second day picks and a bag boy from Hyvee.
You're plowing on insisting excellent game managers aren't game managers because you don't like the term.
You don't see me espousing Cowher, so long as he finds himself a Grbac or Slash to bring along with him, and given Schotty's history here, I'm not even all that strongly in favor of him [though I'd take it, at this point, I'd rather I got to enjoy watching him build a winner elsewhere, preferably not in the AFC].
My stances aren't code for something you wish it were so you could attack. My stance is rock solid D, rock solid lines, a potent running attack, and a QB who can perform when called on, leads the team, understands the game quicker and better than anyone else on the field, and doesn't make mistakes, wherever we get him from and however he is developed.

Actually, you're completely full of shit.

You're stance is the 2007 Jags. You've said as much on this forum. The 2007 Jags really built themselves for the future, didn't they?

Rock solid D, Rock solid line, potent running attack, "QB who doesn't make mistakes".

You're the one who is equivocating because he's on the losing end of the argument.

You've basically went from "QB is just part of the team" and "I want a QB who doesn't make mistakes" to a leader with better field awareness than anyone and can carry the team in spurts. That's a franchise QB to a T.

From earlier this year:

Originally Posted by Duplicitous Dbag

Jags are what I've long aspired for the Chiefs to be, only I'd want a D as good as the '00 Ravens to boot.
Funny they have all the hallmarks of what Marty tried to instill, right down to a mini-RBBC that is far from a laughingstock, solid low-profile QB who doesn't make mistakes, disciplined line play, etc.

But please, keep spinning.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Oh, okay. Twice a generation. My bad.

I'm happier if we're picking #3 than #6, too. However, at this point we really don't know who's going to be here or gone at those picks. If Stafford is a twice-a-generation talent at quarterback, he's an automatic number one pick. However, if that's the case, why is he not the consensus #1 pick of all the talking heads? (And yeah, I know that many of them don't know what they're talking about, but you'd think a twice-per-generation quarterback is a no-brainer.)

If you want Stafford, I want Stafford. I want a franchise quarterback. However, things change so much between October and April that I'm not going to try to lose games for draft position. For all we know, Stafford could go into the army or get shot by Plaxico Burress or score a 2 on his Wonderlic or get caught with marijuana, and drop 20 draft spots.

It's not just about Stafford, and he's not a twice in a generation quarterback. Stop making shit up. It's about the entire draft. The draft isn't one round. This isn't the NBA where they only thing that matters is the lottery.

[Mecca]

He's never going to admit to the Jacksonville thing because their season makes him look like a moron.

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's not just about Stafford, and he's not a twice in a generation quarterback. Stop making shit up. It's about the entire draft. The draft isn't one round. This isn't the NBA where they only thing that matters is the lottery.

well, Palmer was drafted 6 years ago, so basically you are saying Stafford is a twice a generation QB, right?

[banyon]

Originally Posted by doomy3

well, Palmer was drafted 6 years ago, so basically you are saying Stafford is a twice a generation QB, right?

A generation is about 25 years. (Gen X, Y)

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mecca

He's never going to admit to the Jacksonville thing because their season makes him look like a moron.

Or the 2001 Ravens or Giants, the 91 Giants, 86 Bears, 2003 Bucs, any of Marty's Chief teams, the 2004 Titans, 2003 Steelers...the list goes on.

Funny how those teams that have success with a game manager at QB and a solid running game with a really good defense have problems being competitive year in, year out and the teams that have dependable guys under center are so much more consistent.

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by banyon

A generation is about 25 years. (Gen X, Y)

oh yeah, shit.

I was thinking about a century.

Carry on.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Actually, you're completely full of shit.

You're stance is the 2007 Jags. You've said as much on this forum. The 2007 Jags really built themselves for the future, didn't they?

Rock solid D, Rock solid line, potent running attack, "QB who doesn't make mistakes".

You're the one who is equivocating because he's on the losing end of the argument.

You've basically went from "QB is just part of the team" and "I want a QB who doesn't make mistakes" to a leader with better field awareness than anyone and can carry the team in spurts. That's a franchise QB to a T.

From earlier this year:



But please, keep spinning.

Actually, a duplicitous dbag would more likely fit a person who alters a quote header so it can't be linked back, and characterizes a remark from the playoffs from last year as 'for earlier this year.' True in the sense that it was January 2008, but dbagly duplicitous in that you suggest it was regarding this years jags, or a take from when the jags were sucky.
And I've already said I haven't seen enough of the jags this year to know why they've fallen off.
And this whole argument has been more about what you HAVE TO sacrifice and where you HAVE TO get a franchise QB, because he can only come from a top draft pick, way more than what skill sets he has. I want a smart, mistake-free leader from wherever we find or develop him, and a great team around him as previously outlined. You want to tank seasons for a shot at blue-chippers, who most often get their blue chip status off physique and arm strength and other attributes that belie how they'll respond to the NFL game.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's not just about Stafford, and he's not a twice in a generation quarterback. Stop making shit up. It's about the entire draft. The draft isn't one round. This isn't the NBA where they only thing that matters is the lottery.

Okay, three times a generation? Four? Seven? Does a Stafford come along every year? This was the major foundation of your initial argument for throwing games, because Stafford is an "amazingly rare prospect" http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...=palmer&page=4 - Post 49.

Would you still want to throw games if Stafford wasn't there?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Actually, a duplicitous dbag would more likely fit a person who alters a quote header so it can't be linked back, and characterizes a remark from the playoffs from last year as 'for earlier this year.' True in the sense that it was January 2008, but dbagly duplicitous in that you suggest it was regarding this years jags, or a take from when the jags were sucky.
And I've already said I haven't seen enough of the jags this year to know why they've fallen off.
And this whole argument has been more about what you HAVE TO sacrifice and where you HAVE TO get a franchise QB, because he can only come from a top draft pick, way more than what skill sets he has. I want a smart, mistake-free leader from wherever we find or develop him, and a great team around him as previously outlined. You want to tank seasons for a shot at blue-chippers, who most often get their blue chip status off physique and arm strength and other attributes that belie how they'll respond to the NFL game.

You wanna know why the Jags suck?

Because they gave Garrard 60 million and he ****ing sucks, and their hard-nosed Marty clone coach has half their team at each others throats because of chemistry problems and all the thugs they've brought in.

Who does that remind you of?

And I didn't alter the quote header at all. Anyone knows who I'm referring to, your candyass, and I've quoted that same post more than once with your clown shoes self attached to it.

Sorry, I'll take a 50% shot at drafting a pro bowl QB, which is what your odds in the NFL the last several years are.

One more time, for posterity, and I'm going to 'alter' the tag again (how will the boys at CSI solve this one?)

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...7&postcount=26

Originally Posted by Captain one who sucks the penisy

Jags are what I've long aspired for the Chiefs to be, only I'd want a D as good as the '00 Ravens to boot.
Funny they have all the hallmarks of what Marty tried to instill, right down to a mini-RBBC that is far from a laughingstock, solid low-profile QB who doesn't make mistakes, disciplined line play, etc.

And it doesn't matter if you posted that this year, or 10 years ago. You said you aspire to be the 2007 Jags, which I have made clear numerous times. I didn't say 2008 Jags, but the '08 Jags are what happens when you put all your chips in with that formula. It's not my fault that you end up running from your argument like a scared little bitch, claiming that I was making inferences to the '08 Jags, when I've said the 2007 multiple times not only in this thread, but on this very ****ing page.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Okay, three times a generation? Four? Seven? Does a Stafford come along every year? This was the major foundation of your initial argument for throwing games, because Stafford is an "amazingly rare prospect" http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showt...=palmer&page=4 - Post 49.

Would you still want to throw games if Stafford wasn't there?

Amazingly rare would seem to indicate a once every five year prospect. Please though, continue on this semantic distraction while you formulate another 300 response poll, though.

And would I want us to lose this year for a higher draft pick even if Stafford weren't there? Hell yes. This team needs ****ing playmakers, not Rocky Boiman and Wade Smith

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Amazingly rare would seem to indicate a once every five year prospect. Please though, continue on this semantic distraction while you formulate another 300 response poll, though.

And would I want us to lose this year for a higher draft pick even if Stafford weren't there? Hell yes. This team needs ****ing playmakers, not Rocky Boiman and Wade Smith

Other than Stafford, who are those playmakers this year?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by doomy3

Other than Stafford, who are those playmakers this year?

Orakpo is a playmaker. Taylor Mays is a playmaker. Maualuga is a playmaker. Options 2 and 3 don't have top 5 value, but I believe Orakpo does. Beanie Wells will be a Larry Johnson type back (I wouldn't take him, though). And there are 3-4 franchise LTs in this draft.

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Orakpo is a playmaker. Taylor Mays is a playmaker. Maualuga is a playmaker. Options 2 and 3 don't have top 5 value, but I believe Orakpo does. Beanie Wells will be a Larry Johnson type back (I wouldn't take him, though). And there are 3-4 franchise LTs in this draft.

So, assuming Stafford is gone, which he probably will be, you are saying the Chiefs are better off this year to have the #2 pick and to reach for one of those guys?

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Orakpo is a playmaker. Taylor Mays is a playmaker. Maualuga is a playmaker. Options 2 and 3 don't have top 5 value, but I believe Orakpo does. Beanie Wells will be a Larry Johnson type back (I wouldn't take him, though). And there are 3-4 franchise LTs in this draft.

Eazyb is gonna show up and yell at you because according to him Aaron Curry is light years better than Maualuga.