Football You guys really have weepy vaginas!!!!!!! - Page 43

God of Thunder · 09-12-2013, 09:49 PM

Wow. He looks pathetic out there. You guys were crying like babies when KC didn't draft him.

-King- · 09-13-2013, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It doesn't, but that doesn't mean it's irrelevant. Chiefs fans have developed a worldview that rationalizes the choices of their front office, and the team's FO and ownership has been risk and QB-averse since before Iran Contra.

You've just described 32 fan bases.

Do you guys not read other message boards or talk to any other team's fans? Why do you act like Chiefs fans are the only people that always rationalizes their favorite team's moves?

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-13-2013, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

I think that's every fan base, for the most part.

It has no bearing on what the front office does though, so it doesn't really matter

It is, and it doesn't affect the FO's choices, but it definitely affects the perception of those choices and the arguments used to rationalize the choices. Chiefs fans are risk averse. They prefer a certain style of football because it's the style they have been served, and almost none of them analyze whether or not the style has merit; instead, they attempt to rationalize the choices because they are made by the Chiefs.

-King- · 09-13-2013, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR

You're wrong. We're both speculating on this one, but you're wrong. Entirely wrong.

How is he? Talk to the average Chiefs fan and they'll tell you they're excited about Bray in the future. You think they wouldn't have been ecstatic about Flacco when he started playing? Chiefs fans always back their QB to a fault. People would have rationalized drafting Flacco pretty damn fast.

**DeezNutz** · 09-13-2013, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

What? Derrick Johnson was touted as one of the best linebackers to come out in a few years. Putting him on the leagues worst defense was common sense. The Chiefs offense was 2nd in the league in 2004, 1st in the league in 2003, 1st in 2002, yet we lost because of defense. Picking DJ over Aaron Rodgers was a no brainer right there.

In hindsight would Aaron Rodgers have worked better for us? Of course. But at the time, it was obvious that the Chiefs needed to fix their defense to have any hope at the superbowl.

DJ was widely considered a top-5 pick very early in the process, and then we watched the drop because of concerns about his ability to shed blocks.

The odds of any draft pick being an immediate game changer are slight, and thus taking a short-sighted view with the draft is the height of foolishness; it's rarely a win-now proposition.

O.city · 09-13-2013, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It is, and it doesn't affect the FO's choices, but it definitely affects the perception of those choices and the arguments used to rationalize the choices. Chiefs fans are risk averse. They prefer a certain style of football because it's the style they have been served, and almost none of them analyze whether or not the style has merit; instead, they attempt to rationalize the choices because they are made by the Chiefs.

Sure the arguments of the fans.

But arguing that this front office or that office did this or that has nothing to do with th fans

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-13-2013, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

You've just described 32 fan bases.

Do you guys not read other message boards or talk to any other team's fans? Why do you act like Chiefs fans are the only people that always rationalizes their favorite team's moves?

Have I suggested that they don't?

The difference for the Chiefs, and this is crucial, is that the Chiefs have never changed their approach, have continually failed, and yet the fans still don't shift. The Raiders are generally ****ups, but they've ****ed up in a multitude of ways. Similar with the Bengals, Jags, Browns, Cardinals, and many others.

The Chiefs are singular in that the entirety of their struggle has been tied to their inability to draft and develop a QB, and yet in spite of the same event happening over and over, they never learn. That makes the stupidity of their fanbase unique, because it's not just tied to supporting a team breathlessly, but supporting a team that fails and never makes any meaningful changes to any aspect of its model.

**BossChief** · 09-13-2013, 10:07 PM

Of the 11 that don't have question marks, the only one that's even in question is Andy Dalton.

I listed 14 quarterbacks total that we passed on over the last 30 years.

Selecting ANY of them would have significantly improved this teams outlook for the 10-15 years after the selection.

O.city · 09-13-2013, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

Of the 11 that don't have question marks, the only one that's even in question is Andy Dalton.

I listed 14 quarterbacks total that we passed on over the last 30 years.

Selecting ANY of them would have significantly improved this teams outlook for the 10-15 years after the selection.

I lold that you used Brady.

We didn't "pass" on Marino and Kelly, we chose the wrong one.

beach tribe · 09-13-2013, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

That's exactly my point. Your counterargument is a 36 year old guy that started 29 games for the team. There's no commitment to development of a long-term solution, because the organization is too afraid of the risk. The team's management and the fans' desire are both wholly risk averse with almost no sustainable upside.

Who are these fans who hate drafting QBs?

Can you name one?

It seems like all of this mindset was created in the argument over Mark Sanchez.

Every fan I know is sick of not having a young stud QB.(and we have one BTW)

A group of people got so pissed off over a long dead opinion, that they think the majority of fans still think this way,and lay the dumbass decisions of Carl and Pioli at the feet of Dorsey and Reid under the guise of This Organization.

All of those people have been fired.
Had they gotten a franchise QB they would probably still be employed.

Reids first pick was a QB with the #2 overall. The pack took Rodgers with FARVE on the roster. You think theyll pass on one for Smith?

Your opinion of the fan base, and intent of the Chiefs is outdated and expired.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-13-2013, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beach tribe

Who are these fans who hate drafting QBs?

Can you name one?

Your opinion of the fan base, and intent of the Chiefs is outdated and expired.

-King- · 09-13-2013, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

DJ was widely considered a top-5 pick very early in the process, and then we watched the drop because of concerns about his ability to shed blocks.

The odds of any draft pick being an immediate game changer are slight, and thus taking a short-sighted view with the draft is the height of foolishness; it's rarely a win-now proposition.

When you've had a top 3 offense for 3 consecutive years that's been held back by a bottom 5 defense, picking what may be the best defensive talent in the draft is a no-brainer.

It's like saying the Saints should have drafted EJ Manuel this year instead of Vaccaro (even though he's nowhere as good a prospect as DJ was).

-King- · 09-13-2013, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Chiefs could have drafted a long snapper and they'd have had the same reaction.

**cdcox** · 09-13-2013, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

DJ was widely considered a top-5 pick very early in the process, and then we watched the drop because of concerns about his ability to shed blocks.

The odds of any draft pick being an immediate game changer are slight, and thus taking a short-sighted view with the draft is the height of foolishness; it's rarely a win-now proposition.

Yep. One rookie LB wasn't going to make that defense good.

I've become convinced that you should be drafting for 2 to 3 years out.

Fill your immediate needs through FA.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 09-13-2013, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

Chiefs could have drafted a long snapper and they'd have had the same reaction.

Kind of my point. Getting swindled in eight different ways is different than getting swindled the same way eight times.

beach tribe · 09-13-2013, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

And you think they would have booed had they selected, a QB, or Leon Sandcatle, or Scott Bakula, or uncle Rico.?

09-12-2013, 09:49 PM
God of Thunder Trained to reign as the one. Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Los Angeles, CA Casino cash: $8969344	You guys really have weepy vaginas!!!!!!! Wow. He looks pathetic out there. You guys were crying like babies when KC didn't draft him.
Posts: 1,476

09-13-2013, 10:07 PM	#637
BossChief SuperBowl or bust Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: BF Iowa Casino cash: $1364088	Of the 11 that don't have question marks, the only one that's even in question is Andy Dalton. I listed 14 quarterbacks total that we passed on over the last 30 years. Selecting ANY of them would have significantly improved this teams outlook for the 10-15 years after the selection. __________________ Dreams do come true... http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=1407
Posts: 47,195