John Dorsey agrees to be the Chiefs next GM

[ShowtimeSBMVP]

Reid Ferrin ‏@KCChiefs_Reid

John Dorsey agrees to be the Chiefs next GM. More info to come. #Chiefs

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

Why are scouts fighing with anyone? They are information feeders. They write their reports based on their evaluations.

Good ****ing christ.

So why are you trying to argue that they were "yes men" as if that's a bad thing? I am saying it's their job to follow orders and to get guys their leaders are asking for.

[ChiefRocka]

Black Boobing

[The Bad Guy]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

So why are you trying to argue that they were "yes men" as if that's a bad thing? I am saying it's their job to follow orders and to get guys their leaders are asking for.

You were arguing that we really don't know what we have with them because they had to take orders with Pioli.

I'm saying the scouts Pioli had blew and blew hard.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

The Chiefs couldn't and didn't draft for shit during *****'s tenure, yet our "scouting network" was strong?

Yeah, not buying this one single bit. ***** didn't know the first thing about scouting, acquiring, or developing talent. Biggest fraud in NFL history.

And I'd like to thank the mods for wiping his name from this board. The ***** filter is brilliant.

Mother**** you for all time, *****.

Pioli runs a very effective, efficient scouting network. He did in New England. He did in Kansas City. If you followed where our scouts were, you'll see that they went to a ton of games. And you hear reports about scouts talking to people as deep into the college as the equipment manager to get a sense for a player's character. That's why I'm not convinced our scouts are the problem.

The problem was the unbelievably shitty decisions Pioli made in dictating horrible schemes. And then using ego to drive his draft strategy. Just because Pioli made dumb picks, doesn't mean that he was fed bad information.

[Hammock Parties]

1-gap 3-4?

[Brock]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

***** runs a very effective, efficient scouting network. He did in New England. He did in Kansas City. If you followed where our scouts were, you'll see that they went to a ton of games. And you hear reports about scouts talking to people as deep into the college as the equipment manager to get a sense for a player's character. That's why I'm not convinced our scouts are the problem.

The problem was the unbelievably shitty decisions ***** made in dictating horrible schemes. And then using ego to drive his draft strategy. Just because ***** made dumb picks, doesn't mean that he was fed bad information.

I don't see any evidence supporting your assertions. And I mean none.

[BigRedChief]

Hope is restored!

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

***** runs a very effective, efficient scouting network. He did in New England. He did in Kansas City. If you followed where our scouts were, you'll see that they went to a ton of games. And you hear reports about scouts talking to people as deep into the college as the equipment manager to get a sense for a player's character. That's why I'm not convinced our scouts are the problem.

The problem was the unbelievably shitty decisions ***** made in dictating horrible schemes. And then using ego to drive his draft strategy. Just because ***** made dumb picks, doesn't mean that he was fed bad information.

We don't know what ***** did in NE, but his time in KC strongly suggests that he did very, very little of consequence.

Given *****'s propensity to focus on all of the wrong things, it makes sense that he'd have his scouts talking to equipment managers rather than looking at tape and evaluating if the player can actually...wait for it...play at a high level. All the while disregarding some of the most obvious and damning evidence that can be presented (evidence A: Brokaki).

***** was a ****ing fool, and there is nothing but weak speculation to try to claim that his scouting network was any less foolish. There is, however, plenty of empirical evidence to prove that everything ***** tried to do was a mistake, so I'll continue to put my faith in what we definitively know.

[Easy 6]

This new dynamic is wasting NO time, head coach wrapped up far before anyone else, general manager wrapped up way early...

The speed with which change has taken place is heartwarming, Clark has once again shown he definitely has the stones to swing for the fences... "one supposedly brilliant mind couldnt get it done, well then this time i'll get TWO"

THIS can potentially build the Pittsburgh West kind of team that Clark and most everyone else envisioned ***** accomplishing... btw, his "scouting" was pure garbage.

/swoons for the excitement of 2013

[PhillyChiefFan]

Excellent. Onward to Geno!

[SAUTO]

Who gives a **** how spread out the scouts were.if they were idiots like Pioli they didn't know what to look for.

We don't know they aren't idiots. **** them
Posted via Mobile Device

[mnchiefsguy]

Press Conference is set for 2pm on Monday, per kcchiefs.com

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

We don't know what ***** did in NE, but his time in KC strongly suggests that he did very, very little of consequence.

Given *****'s propensity to focus on all of the wrong things, it makes sense that he'd have his scouts talking to equipment managers rather than looking at tape and evaluating if the player can actually...wait for it...play at a high level. All the while disregarding some of the most obvious and damning evidence that can be presented (evidence A: Brokaki).

***** was a ****ing fool, and there is nothing but weak speculation to try to claim that his scouting network was any less foolish. There is, however, plenty of empirical evidence to prove that everything ***** tried to do was a mistake, so I'll continue to put my faith in what we definitively know.

Let's hope it's different with Dorsey.

[BigMeatballDave]

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

We don't know what ***** did in NE, but his time in KC strongly suggests that he did very, very little of consequence.

Given *****'s propensity to focus on all of the wrong things, it makes sense that he'd have his scouts talking to equipment managers rather than looking at tape and evaluating if the player can actually...wait for it...play at a high level. All the while disregarding some of the most obvious and damning evidence that can be presented (evidence A: Brokaki).

***** was a ****ing fool, and there is nothing but weak speculation to try to claim that his scouting network was any less foolish. There is, however, plenty of empirical evidence that everything ***** tried to do was a mistake, so I'll continue to put my faith in what we definitively know.

Brokaki is a classic example of what I'm trying to say. Do you think Brokaki was picked because the scouts were gushing about him? Or do you think that pick was made because of Ferentz, because of Pioli's obsession with finding his version of Daniel Graham, and because of Pioli's "playbook" decision to draft only captains with high character?

Look, I get what you're saying on the second point. I am not saying we know we have outstanding scouts. I am saying we don't know what we have because we had a leader who was making terrible decisions with the information he got. There is a ton of proof that Pioli made a lot of terrible decisions that had nothing to do with getting bad information. There is little proof of knowing whether it was Pioli making bad decisions with bad information, or making bad decisions with good information. I think the scouts deserve at least some benefit of the doubt that it was maybe the latter, given what we know about Pioli.