Chiefs Albert/Joeckel perspective

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-19-2013, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

So, what was their alternative? Kolb? Thigpen? Campbell?

It is absolutely imperative that they put a respectable team on the field in 2013, for many reasons. Do you really believe that any of the available QB's were capable of leading the team to a respectable record?

I don't see that it is imperative that they put a "respectable team on the field" in 2013. That's the kind of desperation move that had me equate them to JC Penney a few days ago. They inherited a situation that needed three years to build a truly competitive team. Rather than acknowledge that, they've sought out every band-aid imaginable to get the team ready this year.

As much as the fans may want it to happen, sometimes things just aren't ready the next year. The car needed a new paint job. They could have realized that it was going to take several coats to get it done, and along with that, more time; instead, they went to Maaco.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-19-2013, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I don't see that it is imperative that they put a "respectable team on the field" in 2013.

Well, sorry Dude, I've talked to agents that have said that Chiefs were a ****ing joke in league circles. There was gross mismanagement and a murder/suicide in 2012. The fans revolted, banners were flown, the stadium was empty. Clark Hunt had to do whatever necessary to turn this franchise around immediately.

They were an embarrassment last year, period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

That's the kind of desperation move that had me equate them to JC Penney a few days ago. They inherited a situation that needed three years to build a truly competitive team. Rather than acknowledge that, they've sought out every band-aid imaginable to get the team ready this year.

And those "band-aids" you speak of will likely fill the stands, put the Chiefs in better standing with the league. The agents and players are also more inclined to want to play for a well run team and will at least visit (which is something that wasn't even happening under *****).

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

As much as the fans may want it to happen, sometimes things just aren't ready the next year. The car needed a new paint job. They could have realized that it was going to take several coats to get it done, and along with that, more time; instead, they went to Maaco.

It's better to go to Maaco and spiff the car up a bit than drive around a piece of shit. And after 2-14, 4-12, 2-14 and 7-9 seasons, the Chiefs were a piece of shit.

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-19-2013, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Well, sorry Dude, I've talked to agents that have said that Chiefs were a ****ing joke in league circles. There was gross mismanagement and a murder/suicide in 2012. The fans revolted, banners were flown, the stadium was empty. Clark Hunt had to do whatever necessary to turn this franchise around immediately.

They were an embarrassment last year, period.

And those "band-aids" you speak of will likely fill the stands, put the Chiefs in better standing with the league. The agents and players are also more inclined to want to play for a well run team and will at least visit (which is something that wasn't even happening under *****).

It's better to go to Maaco and spiff the car up a bit than drive around a piece of shit. And after 2-14, 4-12, 2-14 and 7-9 seasons, the Chiefs were a piece of shit.

It's pretty obvious that the Chiefs fixed the "joke" belief by firing ***** and Crennel. The mere fact that FA's were willing to sign here before the team had even improved the next year suggests that the tarnish put on the franchise left when the New England mafia did.

FWIW, Eric Winston, Peyton Hillis, and Stanford Routt were trash when they signed here, but they weren't considered trash. So although many players possibly avoided the Chiefs b/c of Pioli, Manning the best example, his taint wasn't absolute.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-19-2013, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's pretty obvious that the Chiefs fixed the "joke" belief by firing ***** and Crennel. The mere fact that FA's were willing to sign here before the team had even improved the next year suggests that the tarnish put on the franchise left when the New England mafia did.

Oh, no doubt but that shouldn't diminish the impact of John Dorsey and Andy Reid's arrival in Kansas City. Both men brought instant credibility to the Chiefs franchise and that should not be underestimated.

keg in kc · 04-19-2013, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Oh, no doubt but that shouldn't diminish the impact of John Dorsey and Andy Reid's arrival in Kansas City. Both men brought instant credibility to the Chiefs franchise and that should not be underestimated.

Yeah, it's like we just brought in the Executive of the Decade, and everything is going to be awesome now that Herm is gone!

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-19-2013, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Oh, no doubt but that shouldn't diminish the impact of John Dorsey and Andy Reid's arrival in Kansas City. Both men brought instant credibility to the Chiefs franchise and that should not be underestimated.

If they brought credibility, then why do they need to rush out and adopt a win-now model?

I agree that they fixed the perception issue, and if they did, then why rush out and sign all of these FA stopgaps?

**DeezNutz** · 04-19-2013, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

If they brought credibility, then why do they need to rush out and adopt a win-now model?

I agree that they fixed the perception issue, and if they did, then why rush out and sign all of these FA stopgaps?

Because they (Reid and Dorsey) believe in these FAs, and they're not perceived as stopgaps.

I firmly believe they view Smith as a five-year answer.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-19-2013, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

I firmly believe they view Smith as a five-year answer.

Based on what, exactly?

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-19-2013, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Because they (Reid and Dorsey) believe in these FAs, and they're not perceived as stopgaps.

I firmly believe they view Smith as a five-year answer.

I agree, and that's why I believe they will fail.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-19-2013, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

If they brought credibility, then why do they need to rush out and adopt a win-now model?

Mandated by ownership

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

I agree that they fixed the perception issue, and if they did, then why rush out and sign all of these FA stopgaps?

As opposed to leaving those holes open and not addressing them?

'Hamas' Jenkins · 04-19-2013, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Mandated by ownership

As opposed to leaving those holes open and not addressing them?

I actually like a number of the FA signings. Some are awful (Devito, for example), but plugging a leaking boat with stopgaps when the entire hull needs to be redesigned is only going to cause you to have to go right back to fix the stopgaps, and there's only so much labor to fix the entirety of the boat itself.

duncan_idaho · 04-19-2013, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

It's pretty obvious that the Chiefs fixed the "joke" belief by firing ***** and Crennel. The mere fact that FA's were willing to sign here before the team had even improved the next year suggests that the tarnish put on the franchise left when the New England mafia did.

FWIW, Eric Winston, Peyton Hillis, and Stanford Routt were trash when they signed here, but they weren't considered trash. So although many players possibly avoided the Chiefs b/c of *****, Manning the best example, his taint wasn't absolute.

This.

The Chiefs were a joke because they hired an arrogant, incompetent asshole to run the team. You can't blame the team/Hunt for that, as it was thought of as a slam dunk at the time of the hire.

It just didn't work.

Flushing the garbage fixed the perception issue.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-19-2013, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Flushing the garbage fixed the perception issue.

No, it didn't.

Hiring Reid and Dorsey changed the perception of the franchise.

Fish · 04-19-2013, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

[...]

Manning the best example, his taint wasn't absolute.

Out of context humor...

**HemiEd** · 04-19-2013, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And after 2-14, 4-12, 2-14 and 7-9 seasons, the Chiefs were a piece of shit.

Yep they were, with 6 Pro Bowlers on a 2 and 14 team.

So hey, let's do the exact same thing with the most important position on the team, and maybe it will get us where we want to go this time!

Dane, there is no defending this.

You take the QB when you have the high draft pick, the best one you can get.

Now when they get to your "respectible" position next year, they will be drafting 15-25 and guess what the excuse will be then?

The same ****ing one we heard for 27 years, they were drafting too late to get one! Rinse and ****ing repeat, rinse and ****ing repeat!