Chiefs Does anything less than a playoff appearance = Bye Bye Pioli? - Page 6

Titty Meat · 07-15-2012, 12:44 PM

This isn't a thread bashing Pioli it's simply to encourage discussion.

The Facts:

The Chiefs have finished in last place 2 out of the 3 seasons since Pioli took over.

The Chiefs have averaged 7 wins under the Pioli regime.

The 2009 draft= Fail

The Trade for Matt Cassel turns out it wasn't good.

Already fired one coach missing the playoffs this year with this squad would mean Crennel isn't that good of a coach.

So does anything less than a playoff appearance= failure? If so that would be 3 out of 4 years Pioli has failed. That gets you walking papers with most franchises.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 07-15-2012, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I'm not saying One GM is better then the other but draft position is king when it comes to a rebuild like the Chiefs and Lions(They've been rebuilding forever.) have been going through. One or two spots toward the top of the draft can make a huge difference. We had no chance at Stafford or any other legit QB prospect where we've picked at the top of the draft.

Yeah, and Washington had no chance at RGIII from where they picked.

No more excuses.

O.city · 07-15-2012, 05:28 PM

Of course the Lions are in a better spot than we are. They were "lucky" enough to figure out/draft a franchise qb who happens to be a stud. Add that to the fact that they drafted top 5 in what seems like 10 drafts in a row.

Until we get a quarterback to lead the ship, we are worse off than teams that have one, no matter the rest of the roster.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 07-15-2012, 05:28 PM

Oh, and this board went out of their way to claim this asshole as the greatest GM in professional sports, so a playoff appearance in Year Four is letting him off the hook.

Ace Gunner · 07-15-2012, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Don't really like the idea of Rex Ryan as coach.

Overall, I like the approach that Pioli, and Martin Mayhew, have taken in building.

The difference is that Mayhew had less to start with, but he drafted Matt Stafford and hired Swartz, so the Lions, who were worse than the Chiefs at the time Pioli and Mayhew took over their respective teams, are well ahead of the Chiefs.

I think the Lions were well ahead of the Chiefs in 2009 and still slightly ahead now, which means Pioli is gaining on Mayhew.

philfree · 07-15-2012, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yeah, and Washington had no chance at RGIII from where they picked.

No more excuses.

It's not an excuse just reality.

Do you think we could have traded up for Stafford? I don't.

Pasta Little Brioni · 07-15-2012, 05:32 PM

Neither has won a playoff game, so no sucking thier dicks just yet. They still employ Gun for ****'s sake.

I wanted Stafford so bad in the draft that year. Damn the Lions for out sucking KC that year. Our consolation prize would have been Sanchez. YIPEEEE!!!!

**BigMeatballDave** · 07-15-2012, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefsfootballfan

I think the Lions were well ahead of the Chiefs in 2009 and still slightly ahead now, which means Pioli is gaining on Mayhew.

I'd say Detroit is more than slightly ahead of KC.

Why?

Matt Stafford.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 07-15-2012, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

It's not an excuse just reality.

Do you think we could have traded up for Stafford? I don't.

Did you forget that you said "or any other legit QB prospect", or was it better for your argument not to mention it again?

It is an excuse.

milkman · 07-15-2012, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

I'm not saying One GM is better then the other but draft position is king when it comes to a rebuild like the Chiefs and Lions(They've been rebuilding forever.) have been going through. One or two spots toward the top of the draft can make a huge difference. We had no chance at Stafford or any other legit QB prospect where we've picked at the top of the draft.

The fact is, it was reported that the Lions made an offer to the Patriots for Matt Cassel.

Pioli outbid them.

If Pioli, who should have had a better idea of what Matt Cassel really was, stayed away from that trade, and the Lions got Cassel, it's entirely possible that the Chiefs could have traded up to the Lions spot in that draft for Stafford.

So, at the end of the day, there is no excuse.

WilliamTheIrish · 07-15-2012, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yeah, and Washington had no chance at RGIII from where they picked.

No more excuses.

It kills me that a great % of the fanbase doesn't understand to this day that you have to at least try to draft a FQB.

And no, Clark won't fire Pioli after a(nother) losing, non playoff season.

O.city · 07-15-2012, 05:37 PM

Say we make the playoffs this year, that gives Pioli a 50% go of making the playoffs as a GM.

Likely if we don't lose our two best players last year for the entire year, we have a good chance of being in the playoffs last year.

I'd say he's done a better job than some around here give him credit for, but he's also had a few colossal **** ups, add to that the fact that he's so stubborn.

So I'm torn on the matter. You aren't going to get good by rebuilding every 4 or 5 years, but you also aren't getting to the level you want if you aren't building right.

philfree · 07-15-2012, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Did you forget that you said "or any other legit QB prospect", or was it better for your argument not to mention it again?

It is an excuse.

Who did we have a chance at?

Yeah you're right though draft position doesn't really matter.

milkman · 07-15-2012, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefsfootballfan

I think the Lions were well ahead of the Chiefs in 2009 and still slightly ahead now, which means Pioli is gaining on Mayhew.

The 2009 Lions, who finished the 2007 season with a perfect 0-16 record were ahead of the Chiefs?

O.city · 07-15-2012, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Who did we have a chance at?

Yeah you're right though draft position doesn't really matter.

We had a chance at basically anybody.

If you have a guy you like, go get the guy. Trade picks.

A franchise qb is worth more, IMO, than a couple first round picks.

philfree · 07-15-2012, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

The fact is, it was reported that the Lions made an offer to the Patriots for Matt Cassel.

Pioli outbid them.

If Pioli, who should have had a better idea of what Matt Cassel really was, stayed away from that trade, and the Lions got Cassel, it's entirely possible that the Chiefs could have traded up to the Lions spot in that draft for Stafford.

So, at the end of the day, there is no excuse.

I'd like to see the real reports about that. I don't remember hearing that before but that doesn't mean it isn't true but I think Stafford was their guy all along. Hell they could have got Cassel for less then the Chiefs and then drafted Stafford too. From what I recall the Lions were not going to pass on Stafford at any point.

07-15-2012, 12:44 PM
Titty Meat Inmem 2.0 Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: My house Casino cash: $-1122442	Does anything less than a playoff appearance = Bye Bye Pioli? This isn't a thread bashing Pioli it's simply to encourage discussion. The Facts: The Chiefs have finished in last place 2 out of the 3 seasons since Pioli took over. The Chiefs have averaged 7 wins under the Pioli regime. The 2009 draft= Fail The Trade for Matt Cassel turns out it wasn't good. Already fired one coach missing the playoffs this year with this squad would mean Crennel isn't that good of a coach. So does anything less than a playoff appearance= failure? If so that would be 3 out of 4 years Pioli has failed. That gets you walking papers with most franchises.
Posts: 78,118

07-15-2012, 05:28 PM	#77
O.city In Search of a Life Join Date: Jul 2009 Casino cash: $-675936	Of course the Lions are in a better spot than we are. They were "lucky" enough to figure out/draft a franchise qb who happens to be a stud. Add that to the fact that they drafted top 5 in what seems like 10 drafts in a row. Until we get a quarterback to lead the ship, we are worse off than teams that have one, no matter the rest of the roster.
Posts: 84,209

07-15-2012, 05:28 PM	#78
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2071115	Oh, and this board went out of their way to claim this asshole as the greatest GM in professional sports, so a playoff appearance in Year Four is letting him off the hook.
Posts: 60,758

07-15-2012, 05:32 PM	#81
Pasta Little Brioni Consuming CP souls Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: U.S.A. Casino cash: $228880	Neither has won a playoff game, so no sucking thier dicks just yet. They still employ Gun for **'s sake. I wanted Stafford so bad in the draft that year. Damn the Lions for out sucking KC that year. Our consolation prize would have been Sanchez. YIPEEEE!!!! __________________ Official TFWdemB Trivia Commisioner**
Posts: 72,983

07-15-2012, 05:37 PM	#86
O.city In Search of a Life Join Date: Jul 2009 Casino cash: $-675936	Say we make the playoffs this year, that gives Pioli a 50% go of making the playoffs as a GM. Likely if we don't lose our two best players last year for the entire year, we have a good chance of being in the playoffs last year. I'd say he's done a better job than some around here give him credit for, but he's also had a few colossal **** ups, add to that the fact that he's so stubborn. So I'm torn on the matter. You aren't going to get good by rebuilding every 4 or 5 years, but you also aren't getting to the level you want if you aren't building right.
Posts: 84,209