Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12635635)

I don't think that most Chiefs fans are willing to give up the prospect of these 10-12 win seasons, even if there isn't a realistic chance at winning anything of consequence.

This is the same argument that has happened on this site for a decade: it's the tug-of-war between people that see wild card flameouts as empty and those that view the pantomime of competitiveness as something not to be trifled with.

Approach the question from the perspective of a bureaucrat: would you rather have a job with extremely high pay and security in perpetuity with little risk, even if you don't achieve goals that will have you recognized at the top of your field, or would you risk losing said job with high salary, if your key evaluation turns out incorrectly?

Alex Smith is a "don't rock the boat, kiss the boss's ass, and hope for the best," pick. It can work, rarely, but it's the kind of chickenshit move made by management the world over. And it's the right move, not because he actually gives you a chance to win anything of consequence, but because most fans are happy enough with 10-6, and are too impatient to undergo a rebuild with both down years and a risk of failure.

Me? Beating Brian Hoyer for your playoff scalp is just as meaningless as 3-13. But I'm not the person tying my identity to Red Friday, treating Arrowhead as a bottomless kegger, and fighting people in the stands over the result of a game.

Originally Posted by TigerUppercut (Post 12635674)

Flacco was a 230 yard/game (22 TD's/10 INT) guy the year he won it all. He just got hot at the right time in the playoffs.

Aikman/Elway/Young Tom Brady were all game managers when they won their set of rings. Brady has only won a single lombardi since he moved to the "elite level" in 2006. Russell Wilson is a premier game manager and has gone to two superbowls in a span of 3 seasons.

Effective game managers = Winners

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan (Post 12634707)

Foles isnt the answer...keep Smith, draft his replacement and let Bray continue to think that he is a qb

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12635635)

I don't think that most Chiefs fans are willing to give up the prospect of these 10-12 win seasons, even if there isn't a realistic chance at winning anything of consequence.

This is the same argument that has happened on this site for a decade: it's the tug-of-war between people that see wild card flameouts as empty and those that view the pantomime of competitiveness as something not to be trifled with.

Approach the question from the perspective of a bureaucrat: would you rather have a job with extremely high pay and security in perpetuity with little risk, even if you don't achieve goals that will have you recognized at the top of your field, or would you risk losing said job with high salary, if your key evaluation turns out incorrectly?

Alex Smith is a "don't rock the boat, kiss the boss's ass, and hope for the best," pick. It can work, rarely, but it's the kind of chickenshit move made by management the world over. And it's the right move, not because he actually gives you a chance to win anything of consequence, but because most fans are happy enough with 10-6, and are too impatient to undergo a rebuild with both down years and a risk of failure.

Me? Beating Brian Hoyer for your playoff scalp is just as meaningless as 3-13. But I'm not the person tying my identity to Red Friday, treating Arrowhead as a bottomless kegger, and fighting people in the stands over the result of a game.

Originally Posted by TigerUppercut (Post 12635674)

Effective game managers = Winners

Originally Posted by CupidStunt (Post 12635752)

Tiger nails 20 bags of groceries per hour. He doesn't drop a single one.

His colleague bags 60/hour. He drops 1 or 2 in his frantic pace.

Tiger thinks he's a better grocery bagger.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 12635647)

I understand the Alex Smith trade. It was a win now move from Hunt/Dorsey/Reid because this fan base needed wins after years of Pioli/Cassel. It stabilized the team and allowed them to build depth. Great....thanks for the wins. Now is the time to ditch that buoy and build a team that can actually compete for SBs in the future.

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12635763)

Tigers mom should come down to the basement, take his keyboard away and send him off to work.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12635635)

I don't think that most Chiefs fans are willing to give up the prospect of these 10-12 win seasons, even if there isn't a realistic chance at winning anything of consequence.

This is the same argument that has happened on this site for a decade: it's the tug-of-war between people that see wild card flameouts as empty and those that view the pantomime of competitiveness as something not to be trifled with.

Approach the question from the perspective of a bureaucrat: would you rather have a job with extremely high pay and security in perpetuity with little risk, even if you don't achieve goals that will have you recognized at the top of your field, or would you risk losing said job with high salary, if your key evaluation turns out incorrectly?

Alex Smith is a "don't rock the boat, kiss the boss's ass, and hope for the best," pick. It can work, rarely, but it's the kind of chickenshit move made by management the world over. And it's the right move, not because he actually gives you a chance to win anything of consequence, but because most fans are happy enough with 10-6, and are too impatient to undergo a rebuild with both down years and a risk of failure.

Me? Beating Brian Hoyer for your playoff scalp is just as meaningless as 3-13. But I'm not the person tying my identity to Red Friday, treating Arrowhead as a bottomless kegger, and fighting people in the stands over the result of a game.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12635635)

I don't think that most Chiefs fans are willing to give up the prospect of these 10-12 win seasons, even if there isn't a realistic chance at winning anything of consequence.

This is the same argument that has happened on this site for a decade: it's the tug-of-war between people that see wild card flameouts as empty and those that view the pantomime of competitiveness as something not to be trifled with.

Approach the question from the perspective of a bureaucrat: would you rather have a job with extremely high pay and security in perpetuity with little risk, even if you don't achieve goals that will have you recognized at the top of your field, or would you risk losing said job with high salary, if your key evaluation turns out incorrectly?

Alex Smith is a "don't rock the boat, kiss the boss's ass, and hope for the best," pick. It can work, rarely, but it's the kind of chickenshit move made by management the world over. And it's the right move, not because he actually gives you a chance to win anything of consequence, but because most fans are happy enough with 10-6, and are too impatient to undergo a rebuild with both down years and a risk of failure.

Me? Beating Brian Hoyer for your playoff scalp is just as meaningless as 3-13. But I'm not the person tying my identity to Red Friday, treating Arrowhead as a bottomless kegger, and fighting people in the stands over the result of a game.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12635635)

I don't think that most Chiefs fans are willing to give up the prospect of these 10-12 win seasons, even if there isn't a realistic chance at winning anything of consequence.

This is the same argument that has happened on this site for a decade: it's the tug-of-war between people that see wild card flameouts as empty and those that view the pantomime of competitiveness as something not to be trifled with.

Approach the question from the perspective of a bureaucrat: would you rather have a job with extremely high pay and security in perpetuity with little risk, even if you don't achieve goals that will have you recognized at the top of your field, or would you risk losing said job with high salary, if your key evaluation turns out incorrectly?

Alex Smith is a "don't rock the boat, kiss the boss's ass, and hope for the best," pick. It can work, rarely, but it's the kind of chickenshit move made by management the world over. And it's the right move, not because he actually gives you a chance to win anything of consequence, but because most fans are happy enough with 10-6, and are too impatient to undergo a rebuild with both down years and a risk of failure.

Me? Beating Brian Hoyer for your playoff scalp is just as meaningless as 3-13. But I'm not the person tying my identity to Red Friday, treating Arrowhead as a bottomless kegger, and fighting people in the stands over the result of a game.

Originally Posted by philfree (Post 12636116)

Dorsey needs to set himself apart by finding our QBOTF while were having all these shitty winning seasons. Maybe we should do it like the Patriots did and get lucky with a 6th round pick. That'd be great. The whole idea that a team has to lose games to find a QB is BS. Keep, winning keep stacking the D and find the QBOTF any way you can. Doesn't have to be the same old argument.

Originally Posted by Snica (Post 12636119)

That would be even better but I don't see the team sacrificing picks or players to trade up into the 1st or 2nd round to get a QB. The problem is that KC continues to hope on having Patriot fortune and lucking into a late round surprise. So far they are batting .000.

Originally Posted by philfree (Post 12636139)

Like I said Dorsey needs to set himself apart and find The guy.

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks (Post 12635653)

Well, for you and your life, that decision is yours to make.

For me, the season is long.. and the more weeks that I can smile over a win.. the later in the year where I can view KC as relevant.. is pleasing to me.. adds a little something positive throughout the football year.

I can see both sides of this.. but imho, my side is a hell of a lot happier.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12636165)

The Chiefs are just as irrelevant now as they were when they were 2-14.

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 12636165)

The Chiefs are just as irrelevant now as they were when they were 2-14.

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 12635647)

I understand the Alex Smith trade. It was a win now move from Hunt/Dorsey/Reid because this fan base needed wins after years of Pioli/Cassel. It stabilized the team and allowed them to build depth. Great....thanks for the wins. Now is the time to ditch that buoy and build a team that can actually compete for SBs in the future.

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636199)

:clap:
I agree completely.
I keep hanging on to that thread of hope year after year. But the logical side of me sees it the way Hamas does. The business known as The Chiefs is continually a very profitable business. Why would they risk that ? They're current operating procedure is pretty damn successful.

Originally Posted by Easy 6 (Post 12636203)

I tend to see it like philfree... winning seasons and acquiring a QBOTF dont have to be mutually exclusive

A trade up into the top of the second round is totally feasible, for example

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636228)

A few losing seasons caused by a high draft pick QB bust will cost them big time $$. While continuing down the same old path has been and still is very profitable.

Originally Posted by Easy 6 (Post 12636263)

I respectfully disagree, Chiefs fans packed Arrowhead for consecutive, and truly awful, years... the fans arent going to abandon this team

Besides that...

Dorsey will get us a QBOTF while maintaining a winning vibe, I'd swear on it

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636268)

I didn't say the team was or will be abandoned. I'm talking about the $$ involved. Surely you don't think losing seasons are as profitable as winning seasons ?

Originally Posted by Dagnabit (Post 12636284)

I think that after 4 to 5 years of tail-chasing in regards to winning the Big Prize, most fans would be willing to give it a go and to show some developmental patience.

Ideally, you take a good prospect while Smiff is still on the roster, so as not to cause panic among the more weak-stomached folk.

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636293)

I think you give too much credit to the average football fan.

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636268)

I didn't say the team was or will be abandoned. I'm talking about the $$ involved. Surely you don't think losing seasons are as profitable as winning seasons ?

Originally Posted by Dagnabit (Post 12636313)

Yeah, after I posted that I remembered some of the many and sad things I have read on Facebook and other, lesser Chiefs outlets and came to the exact same conclusion.

:(

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636336)

Those of us who post here 365 days a year forget we're not the norm when it comes to football fans.

Originally Posted by Easy 6 (Post 12636315)

No, of course not... but I do believe Clark has given Dorsey the leeway to do what he believes is best for the team

If that meant enduring an off year while a rookie or second year QB took his lumps, I'm sure Dorsey would be allowed to make that call

The Hunts wipe their butts with money, they'd let John Dorsey make the call IMO

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636353)

Therein lies the problem. A high draft pick QB can set your team back for several years. It's not like the Chiefs are based in one of the big money markets. The teams in big cities can absorb the loses from down years a helluva lot better than ones based in flyover country.
Just my opinion but I think that has a helluva a lot to do with our last 1st round QB draft being so long ago. Especially now with revenues being what they are.

Originally Posted by Dagnabit (Post 12636359)

That didn't stop Green Bay from selecting Rodgers in the 2nd, and I'm pretty sure someone can come along and point to another small market team picking a QB high, not getting the desired result, and then moving on down the road without keeling over dead as a franchise.

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636363)

Your right, what I've posted probably doesn't apply to most teams. But I think it does to our team.

By the way, Green Bay ??? bad example. Hell, the fans own the team. lol

Originally Posted by Dagnabit (Post 12636359)

That didn't stop Green Bay from selecting Rodgers in the 2nd, and I'm pretty sure someone can come along and point to another small market team picking a QB high, not getting the desired result, and then moving on down the road without keeling over dead as a franchise.

Originally Posted by TigerUppercut (Post 12635674)

Flacco was a 230 yard/game (22 TD's/10 INT) guy the year he won it all. He just got hot at the right time in the playoffs.

Aikman/Elway/Young Tom Brady were all game managers when they won their set of rings. Brady has only won a single lombardi since he moved to the "elite level" in 2006. Russell Wilson is a premier game manager and has gone to two superbowls in a span of 3 seasons.

Effective game managers = Winners

Originally Posted by Dagnabit (Post 12636388)

Appears to me that it just as risky to take someone else's free agent and hope for a gold mine:
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/ac13..._15_13-4_3.jpg

( a duhhhhhhhhhhhh....derp-derp-derp! LMAO )

Originally Posted by MeatRock (Post 12636392)

ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL
What. the. ****?

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 12636391)

Rodgers was in the 1st round.

Originally Posted by stumppy (Post 12636401)

ROFL
He's a shit salesman with a mouthful of samples isn't he !