damn, again? the pop burns

You play to **** up the game!
Posted via Mobile Device

Clark is going CHEAP this year to replinish the money he coughed up to renovate the stadium.

It would be nice if the Jackson County Tax payers had such a deal.

To illustrate the point about how veterans can help a team, I thought I'd post a passage from an article involving Dawkins and the Broncos:

http://blog.denverbroncos.com/denver...kick-off-camp/

Yep.

Herm was a shitty coach but the love of veterans is not really a great way to build your team, Vermiel did that and look where it left us.

Yeah, it's really killed the Patriots this decade.

It would have been fine if we would have hit on a few draft picks. That's the key to everything. The reason we ended up with no talent, has nothing to do with the fact that we had veteran players. It's because we picked guys like Sims, and Siavii.

They also had 0 long term planning skills, everyone knew alot of those guys could retire at any time and they continued to sink money and picks into the defense.

You PLAY to win the draft!

Although I didn't vote in the poll, since I'm a Patriots fan, I would've voted "older". Pioli, when in New England, was skilled at finding older players who were either underutilized by their teams (Mike Vrabel) or supposedly "washed up" (Rodney Harrison, Junior Seau) and got some mileage out of them. Not to mention finding supposed "problem children" looking for a career revitalization (Corey Dillon, Randy Moss).

Whenever Belichick makes a move, I ask myself the simple question, "Is the guy he wants to put out there better than another option?" Yeah, a guy like Seau might be 89 years old and slow as a tortoise, but he still might be better than the young clueless guy who shows nothing in practices and training camp.

Ayup. In 2000 the Pats signed, as free agents, Joe Andruzzi, Bobby Hamilton, and Otis Smith. In 2001 they added Je'Rod Cherry, Mike Compton, Damon Huard, Larry Izzo, David Patten, Roman Phifer, Anthony Pleasant, Antowain Smith, Chris Sullivan, Mike Vrabel, and Ken Walter. They all contributed towards the first Super Bowl win.

Sometimes, with a young team, you gotta throw a lot of sh*t at the wall and see what sticks. So don't fret too much if a pick-up doesn't work out: the key is that they be CHEAP pick-ups, who won't ruin your cap for seasons to come. Save the big money for the big names (like the Pats did with Rosevelt Colvin and Adalius Thomas) and hope to hit on a cheap older guy or underutilized backup.

And don't fret too much if Pioli signs guys you haven't heard much about. For example, the Pats just signed LB Paris Lenon. He's 31, and he played for the crap-ass Lions. I'm sure they didn't break the bank for the guy. But he led his team in tackles, so I won't be surprised if and when New Englanders go from "Who the #$^& is he?" to "Omigod I love this guy!". Those are the kind of pick-ups Belichick and Pioli made together and hopefully the kind Pioli will make for you guys: the Wes Welkers of the world, who are just waiting for an opportunity.

He's working for ESPN for a reason

The reviews are not good. But they are local.

I loved the way Herm wanted to build a team. It sounds great to build a young team like, similar to the way the Colts were built, and win 10+ games a season for the next decade and squeeze in a Lombardi or two.

It clearly wasn't working... at least yet.... would it have worked? Who's to say? I don't think so. I think that what many, including myself, lost sight of is that you need older guys to show the younger guys the way.

Eventually, five years from now, I would like to see the Chiefs with their own culture, and see them drafting and developing their own players. So that, like the Colts, the Chiefs can field 22 starters who are all homegrown. I guess 21, assuming that Cassel pans out.

If the Chiefs are signing stop gaps five years from now, then Pioli is failing.

Take five hundred and eighty-six point two:
Vets....not.....permanent.
Vets....no....get.....big....contract.
Can't....build....entire.....team.....in....two.....seasons.

And CUT! That's a wrap.

I agree with the Mike Webster point about Grunhard because they play the same position. And let's face it, Derrick Johnson is not a young guy anymore. He has been in the league for 4 years.

So, what young guy is Thomas or Engram going to teach??? This whole teaching and leadership thing is entirely overrated for player development unless the player is an understudy like Cottam was with Tony Gonzalez last year.

Please say something like Zach Thomas and Bobby Engram are going to teach Tyson Jackson how to play the game... That may sound good to some people who have never played football or like to read newspapers. But in reality that doesn't happen.

If it doesn't happen in reality then why do you have guys like Tim Grunhardt saying it does? Why do you have young guys like Meachem in New Orleans saying that he went to David Patton and basically lived with him in the offseason to learn how to play, and watch film, and how to prepare? The fact is, it does happen, but only if you have players that are willing to take advantage of it.

If Derrick Johnson doesn't want to learn from Vrabel and Thomas, then you're right those guys will have given a year or maybe two of service and left. But generally you have at least a few motivated guys on the team that want to learn. And when you're a young guy on a team that has not won very much the fact is, you don't know what it takes week in and week out to prepare to actually win on a consistent basis. Thomas, Vrabel, and Engram all come from places where they won a lot more than they lost. They have been in play off games, Super bowls, etc and won. We don't have anyone on this team that can show these guys what kind of effort it takes to get there, and what kind of attitude you need to have as a team to become a champion.

So the fact is, you can't win with a completely young roster because those guys don't know what it takes to win, and then when they lose over and over and over again, losing becomes a fact of life. It's why some franchises can't get over the losing hump, because they never changed the culture. That culture gets changed by players who know how to win, and what it takes to get there. Young guys don't know how to get there unless the vet leaders take them along. That sir, is a fact.

I know, I cry myself to sleep every night, we barely gave Herm's 23 year plan a chance. God, Where we could have been in just 20 more years.

Post of the month!!
Posted via Mobile Device

I think if you are going to infuse your team with Veteran players, they need to be of the leadership by example caliper. I think this is what Pioli, and Haley are trying to do. Bring in players that lead by example. Were still young folks.

I've reached the inevitable conclusion that you are a real dumbass.

Wait a minute, does this mean Huard's coming back?
:cuss: Damnit Scott!

Bar' steps up and in to the Gauntlet! :clap: Welcome to Hell my friend. ;)

ROFL

You obviously don't read to well. I said that a player can learn from a vet that plays the same position.

The examples that you've given with Grunhard and Meachem are with players that play the same position.

My point is that you guys act like Bobby Engram is going to be a leader for Tyson Jackson. Not going to happen.

And as far as the culture... You are buying more into the company line than I am. You obviously believe all the hype of bring the vet in to lead and change players attitude. I don't buy into all that crap. These guys are pros. They should have plenty of motivation. And Zach and Engram aren't even the best at their position on the team. And how is Vrabel leading by not showing up??? He doesn't want to be here. He would much rather play for a team that can compete to win now.

And why not sign a vet that's a little younger??? Why do they all have to be so freakin old. Why are many of you so in love with old players? There have been other veteran free agents available that are productive and are 30 and under.

The real reason is that these guys are cheap and fans still like them. They can still play some what productively and get by with them and hope they draft to replace them. And that plan may work out fine..... 3 or 4 years from now.... and maybe it won't...

I'd rather take a chance on a player like Matt Jones than waste time with Bobby Engram. I know he's a risk, but at least he's got some upside. What upside do we have with Engram?

And I would rather have kept Pat Thomas than sign Zach Thomas for the same reason. Pat is young and has upside. He obviously needs to improve, but he also obviously has more of a future than Zach.

I know. I agree with you.

Everyone doesn't like old players as much as you do. Leadership doesn't have to be ancient. Why not at least bring in some younger free agents???

They've acquired 5 guys over 30 and 7 guys under 30, numbnuts.

And which ones do you expect will play??? I'm talking about signing players who will play. All of the old guys that we have signed will start and take up a lot of valuable playing time that could be used to develop a player.

No YOU said that. I never said that Bobby Engram is going to help Tyson Jackson. YOU implied that.

That's because you've proven you are dumb.

I expect Matt Cassel, Tony Curtis, Terrance Copper and Travis Daniels to all receive PT.

Because they DO want to build their own team/identity through the draft, but right now it's about establishing a whole new method and mindset to EVERY aspect of what we eventually want to accomplish.
If these vets were getting Carl Peterson "sweetheart deals" to the tune of 4 and 5 year contracts, then we would have something to worry about.

These vets are here basically to set examples and to help transition to a winning mindset.

I understand that. And I hope it works. But I would still rather sign some players that could have a future with the team.

That's something you never addressed, bubb, the difference in contracts between the Carl that we know is fail and the Pioli we hope is not fail.

Realistically, though, everything in life is maximized through moderation. If young guys were the correct answer, NOBODY would ever get a second contract. It's just that simple.

I would venture a guess that every team that has won the Super Bowl has a FA vet playing a role. It's not the end of the world. These guys aren't being brought in as building blocks for a run, they are bodies. And rather than just have schmucks that will be cut at the earliest possible convenience, he's trying to get a little more out of them.

And again, **** HERM. The only youth movement he was ever on was in Tampa. Dungy was running the show, and I doubt that all veterans were cut loose. Herm is a ****ing toolbox. We should strive to NOT repeat any mistakes, including playing young POS's only because they are young.

**** HERM!
Posted via Mobile Device

God, I wish we could stop talking about Herm, but good points.

As always Little Big B, You are Money!

ROFL ROFL

Dear God that is Awesome!

Thanks!:D

Hey dumbass.

If you had been around for awhile you would know that I believe that you have to build the necleus of your team through the draft.

But you can not sumply play young players because they are young.

You have to find players that can. you know, actually play.

You say you would rather have a Pat Thomas than a Zach Thomas, because at least he has a future.

Well, you are a ****ing idiot.

A player that sucks ass, whether young or old doesn't have a future, and Pat Thomas sucks ass.

I vote to do it the Patriots way, its worked for them so it should work for us.


I like the younger players better & will root for them more, but Pioli knows best for this team and how to get us a Super Bowl Championship.

It's not the Patriot way. It's gonna be more like the Steeler Way. Clark still runs the show. Carry on.

Five of the last eight Super Bowls. Either way is probably an improvement. As long as it's not the Raider Way or the Lion Way. :)

Wrong.

Clark owns the show, but you know ther is no way that Scott Pioli took the job without some assurance that he would be given free rein to run the show.

And to this point, early in his rein, it looks much like the Patriot Way.

Mmm...this.

Fair enough. I just remember Clark talking alot about how he admired the Steelers. If I'm an owner of a franchise, and I hire a new GM, I tell them what I want. He does have free rein, I agree.

Not me. If I'm an owner, I hire a mother****er that will win me a championship. That's what I want. If I think I know better, I just be the owner/GM ala Jerry Jones.

Well, he did that in Pioli my brother. Clark hit a home run in getting Pioli.

And looking like the Steelers would be just fine and dandy with me.

Maybe Jones will buy the Faihdahs when Al dies. We can only hope.

Honestly, KCBubb has proven he's not the sharpest tool in the shed. Anyone, and I mean anyone, who feels that the "Herm Edwards way" was the right direction for this team, needs to off themselves with pills immediately.

Just because we signed older players to small contracts means jack shit.

I guess the sharp tools want to have several players that are 33+ on this team that will not be on this team when it has a real chance to be competitive.

Say what you want about how those old players will lead or teach or whatever but the fact is, they won't be here when we get to a superbowl. I would rather take the risk of trying a young guy or at a minimum signing a younger free agent that has a chance to help the team long term.

How is Vrabel setting an example on how to transition to a winning mindset?

Brian Waters has been blasted on here repeatedly. The bottom line is Vrabel and Waters are both absent. Neither has shown up. Actions speak louder than words and they are saying the same thing.

I don't want to be here.

You are correct that the long term consequences of these free agents is not as bad bc Pioli is not giving them a ton of $$$ on a long term deal, but the overall premise is the same. Sign an old vet to fill the void. Don't take a chance on developing a younger player.

This will obviously look much better if Pioli can draft to replace these guys.

My opinion is that when you sign several free agents, there age should line up somewhat with the progression of the team toward the team's goal, which is to win the superbowl. If you have a few holes or need some depth at a few spots, it is a great move to sign several old vets if needed to get you to the superbowl. The Patriots just did this and I think it was a great move.

If you are a 2-14 team and you are several years away from a superbowl, you should just have a few vets on the team and spend most of the valuable playing time on some young players with the goal of trying to develop a quality roster with at least some depth.

What I find funny is a lot of you guys argue for drafting a young QB and taking a chance, but when it comes to taking a chance on developing a younger player at another position that is not a high draft pick.... then no, you can't do that. sign the vet. Take the SAFE route.

1.) He's won Super Bowls.
2.) He's a vet.
3.) He can help implement the 3-4 defense.
4.) He can be a goal-line threat. (Even when teams know he's in the game, they still don't seem to guard him. All he does is catch touchdowns, LOL.)

I do agree that it would've made a better impression had he shown up recently. But maybe he had a verbal agreement with Pioli that he wouldn't have to show up for the involuntaries in May. If he's not there when August rolls around, that's different.

Look. First point. The guys "valuable playing time" that they are taking are 99% going to be worthless POS scrubs that aren't going to be here when we make a run either. Look at a free agent list, there's not much there. We tried that shit with Herm. Pat Thomas, Rocky Boiman, and whoever the **** else we stuck in there are OFF THE TEAM and didn't contribute SHIT. If there's a shot those guys can do some mentoring before the wheels fall off then that is significantly better than what Thomas and Boiman did. Their contracts are set up to do that, not to be a burden long after they can't play.

Second point. There should be a balance of youth and age on any team. It used to be too old, Herm made it too young. The elders last year were TG, Waters, and Donnie. 2 of those guys are gone. All we've done is replace some older guys. This team didn't get "older" it just replaced some old guys.

As it is now, this team, agewise is NOT MUCH DIFFERENT than Herm's club. In fact, Donnie and TG were overpaid.
Posted via Mobile Device

Every team has success stories of guys that are cast offs or undrafted that do well. Take for example, Priest Holmes. Undrafted by the Ravens in 97. He was a backup. The Chiefs signed him in 01 and he was 27. He was a cast off from the Ravens. The rest is history.

One way to make 100% sure you don't find the rare success stories like Priest Holmes is by signing players on their last legs.

I agree with this to an extent. I thought Vrabel was enough.

Donnie was overpaid and TG DEFINITELY WAS NOT OVERPAID. NO WAY!

So you'd rather run worthless scrubs out there just so you don't miss a diamond in the rough and then forego any benefit you may have gotten otherwise? You have to balance risk/reward. You just have to.

TG being overpaid is arguable. I'll give you that.
Posted via Mobile Device

Herm's "method" netted us 6 wins in two seasons. That's batting .188. Not so great for MLB, shit for NFL.

Is Herm the only person in the NFL that has chosen to put mostly young guys on the field instead of 33+ vets???

Why is this thread still going? Hasn't kcbubb sobered/healed up yet?

The two youngest teams last season (KC & GB) were a combined 8-24. :spock:

No, he's permanently damaged/impaired.

Veteran players have an impact on young players. Those young players will be around for a SB push in a few years.

The impact veterans have can be tremendous.

It's sad you can't see that.

You can put young guys on the field.

You just have to be a good enough coach to make them the right young guys.

I always felt bad for Squirmin' Herman, 'cause he seems like a nice guy, but I just don't think he's coach material.

I see it, but I would rather sign a guy like Tinoisamoa (see below) than Zach Thomas. I think a guy like him can do both. He can have an impact on the younger guys and still be around in a few years if you want to resign him. Also see that the bears signed him to a one year deal. They didn't break the bank on this guy.


Bears agree to terms with Tinoisamoa, Rams' leading tackler in '08

Associated Press

LAKE FOREST, Ill. -- Free-agent linebacker Pisa Tinoisamoa agreed to a one-year contract with the Chicago Bears on Friday after leading the St. Louis Rams in tackles four of the past six seasons.
Pisa Tinoisamoa, LB
Chicago Bears

2008 Statistics
G/GS: 16/16
Tackles: 104
Sacks: 3.0

The 6-foot-1, 240-pound Tinoisamoa led the Rams with 104 tackles (88 solo) before getting released by a new coaching staff seeking more size. In Chicago, he's reuniting with coach Lovie Smith, his defensive coordinator during the 2003 season in St. Louis.

Tinoisamoa will probably start at strongside linebacker alongside Lance Briggs and Brian Urlacher, although incumbent Nick Roach and former starter Hunter Hillenmeyer are in the mix. A second-round pick by the Rams in 2003, he has 445 total tackles, 10 sacks, seven interceptions, 25 pass break-ups, six forced fumbles and three fumble recoveries in his career.

Terms of the deal were not disclosed.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=090...s&confirm=true

Tinoisamoa was brought in by the Patriots and they decided to go with someone else. Tinoisamoa reportedly was playing last season at somewhere between 220-225. He was reportedly cut by the Rams because he was too light. You really just don't seem to understand football, so maybe instead of constantly whining about Pioli, you should be reading up on the sport.

It is also reported that....

The 6-foot-1, 240-pound Tinoisamoa led the Rams with 104 tackles (88 solo).

Why do you love Pioli so much???? Seriously.... Everytime I question anything he does, you get all in an uproar. What is the connection there? Oh and please give me the he's the GM you aren't qualified to question him crap again.

Give me one thing you disagree with that he has done. Prove that you aren't his secret admirer. Do his glasses do it for you?

It has nothing to do with loving Pioli. It has to do with understanding football more than "YOUNG PLAYERS!" "YOUNG PLAYERS!". You don't seem to have any concept of what it takes to win in any major professional sport. From football to baseball to basketball to hockey, youth consistently gets beaten by experience.

As for things Pioli has done that I don't like, I assume you mean in the less-than-six-months of offseason since he's been in K.C. It's pretty unfair to judge what he's done given the amount of time and the extent of the train wreck he's dealing with. Since, unlike you, I actually like the idea of bringing in veteran players in their final years since I've seen it be successful year after year in New England, I don't view that as a problem. If you need something from me as a gripe, ask me again when the final roster is announced and all the waived/cut players from training camps around the league have been filtered through. Until then, crying about a #17 running back or the 4th backup safety isn't worth the time it takes to type it on the computer.

You, and far too many people following sports today, seem to think that you actually know what the hell you're talking about to the point where you'd be better at the job than the professionals hired. You're really pissing and moaning because you think you'd have done a better job.

This isn't Belichick going to the Patriots, finding a solid core group and drafting a Tom Brady. This is Pioli going to the Chiefs and finding just 1 moderately proven (one year, not yet repeated) 'core' player under the age of 30. Quit bitching, stop acting as if this train wreck could have been fixed if they'd just kept Herm/Herm's way and given it one more year, and realize that this team had, perhaps, the least talented roster in the NFL when Pioli arrived. Then, understand that it's going to take years to make this team truly and consistently competitive.

Wasn't this the bastard that was hurt all the time? I remember a thread about a lamb with a ginormous name that was broken all the time.

This sounds to me like a Nap Harris type retread. He got PT in St Louis (obviously, since he lead the team in tackles). If he was good why is he on the street. If his leading the team in tackles is so wonderful, why did he get a 1 year deal?

This doesn't sound to me to be a Diamond in the Rough situation. This sounds like the dude doesn't have the goods. And it's not like St. Louis is stacked at LB, like Baltimore was when they let Preist go (IIRC).

I don't think there are too many people that are clamoring to have Nap Harris back.

I knew you had a crush on Pioli, but I really didn't think it was this bad.

So it is ok to slam Carl and Herm even though they are supposed to be professionals. But not Pioli??? I don't think so. I'll criticize all of them on a message board if I feel like it.

That's the point of a message board... To express your opinion. If everyone never questioned management, there would be no Chiefs Planet. If you want that, go to kcchiefs.com.

He lead the Rams in tackles for 4 seasons and I know there defense sucked, but the guy is 27 and has some experience. They didn't sign him for a ton of money and they signed him on a one year contract. Tinoisamoa > Zach

Pioli has a track record which includes three Lombardi trophies. Carl and Herm have a track record of.... ummm.... :shrug:

As Belichick said to the media when he signed Randy Moss, "let's give him a chance". If the Chiefs go 2-14 this season and show no improvement, then bring out the rope and hang the bastard...

Tino turned down the Patriots to sign with Chicago instead. What makes you think he would've considered KC? Pioli probably knew better, hence the reason there was no public interest.

What the hell are you talking about? Carl and Herm have a track record of failure. Questioning the moves of failures makes sense, incessantly complaining about the moves of someone without a track record of failure while defending the 'way' of the known failures is completely idiotic. You won't catch me calling out Lions fans who belittle Millen's tenure as G.M., because he proved that he was incompetent. There's a clear difference here, which I'd expect any human being of even somewhat substandard intelligence to understand.

I think everybody would have done things differently than Pioli. But bashing him because of Vrable, Thomas, and Engram is stupid.

If anything, they maybe should have brought in some more younger guys in addition, but the level of leadership these guys are supposed to provide will be a lot more than some ****ing POS scrub that will just perpetuate the suck.

Sure, they might not work out as well as planned, but that certainly doesn't mean that Herm's method would have done better.
Posted via Mobile Device

The only reports I've read say (or imply) that the Patriots didn't make him an offer, and that he had the two basically identical offers from Chicago and Buffalo to choose from. Have you got a link to back up your claim about the Patriots getting turned down? I'd love to read about any new info you can offer on this.

He started on a shitty ass team. So ****ing what? Harris led the team in tackles the year before OUR horrible ****ing worthless waste of space defense ****ing fired his pussy ass. Just because he played doesn't mean he is good. At this point, I'd take some leadership over a worthless piece of ass that is a little younger. And if you are looking for I'mnotgoingtospellouthislongass****ingname to provide leadership, then, well, I guess you want to be like St. Louis.
Posted via Mobile Device

You said professionals. You didn't say anything about performance. And Pioli is a rookie. I'll give him a chance but don't fault me for questioning his moves.

And will you question Pioli if the Chiefs suck next season??? He's Pioli. You can't question Pioli.

I doubt it. You have his picture next to your speedometer in your car. Just Passin' By + Pioli = man crush

Just my take on it. IIRC the order of events was: PinoTino flew to N.E. for a visit; he left; the Pats signed Paris Lenon. Some say the Pats decided he didn't fit the 3-4 but I find it weird that the Pats showed that much interest in a guy, had him in the building, and then he walks out and signs with Chicago. I'd like to know what the contract he got from the Bears looks like, and compare it to what Lenon got from the Pats, to see if there were enough differences there for him to warrant choosing Chicago over New England or if the Pats just thought Lenon was a cheaper alternative.

In slight defense of the Pioli-questioners, I do find it interesting that Pioli hasn't signed more players this offseason and/or brought a bunch in for tryouts. If the roster's as bad as some of you claim, you would think a huge turnover is in order... unless Pioli thinks the players weren't as much of the problem? Maybe he actually likes the youth on the team better than players that he could go get, which would actually go against the very point being argued...

I think their might be more to this than some people believe, especially with the resigning of Jarrad Page.

And I agree with you about the depth. I think there is a pretty good chance Zach gets hurt this year. Who's backing him up??? Please don't say Dacus.

But Dacus is just the tyope of scrub that you are advocating. He could be the one that gets away!!!

Coincidentally, this is my problem with Pioli. He didn't bring more guys in.
Posted via Mobile Device