ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Alex Smith: Chief's aren't running a "Cookie-cutter offense" (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=274644)

O.city 07-20-2013 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 9824254)
I know you didn't ask me, but I expect a team that will be in contention for either AFC West champions or AFC Wild Card all season long. 2010, the bulk of this team was in the playoffs. 2011 they damn near made it without Charles and Berry the whole season... with Palko at the helm for part of the season. Succop makes a FG against the Faid, and the 2011 team is in. 2012 could have been the season, but Pioli saddled the team with his boy Gus. IMO, that is the sole reason for the 2-14 debacle. Haley wanted him gone... instead Haley got gone. RAC wanted Orton. Pioli would have none of it. RAC tried to change his stripes and say he backed Gus, but the players that were here knew better. Winston went to bat for Gus. Nobody else did. And I'm not just talking the injury thing.

Enter new regime and Smith. The players are already saying the chemistry is great. Bowe and Charles are talking career years. Things are looking up.

I'm expecting playoff contention all year long. Maybe even a playoff run. Stranger things have happened.

I got ran out of a thread the other day for saying we should make the playoffs and if we don't it's a failure of a season.

So watch it.

ShortRoundChief 07-20-2013 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz (Post 9824266)
Proudly displaying badgirl's quotation is far more important than anything the Chiefs could possibly do.

Here I tell you what. You get free reign of my sig and I get 1 line on yours. Bad girls stays the same. Also whatever I put on there must contain the word "pickle"

tredadda 07-20-2013 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 9824258)
I don't necessarily think height was the ONLY reason, but it was one of the few.

I want to see him do it longer before I crown him, but for what he is as a Qb he's in the perfect situation.

Situation is something that doesn't get talked about much on here, but it's a huge factor IMO. Kaep, Wilson, Cousins etc, all were drafted into the right situation.

I don't think it would have mattered who we would have taken the past 4 years, they weren't succeeding here.

Oh it was height. Unless a QB is 6-2 or above it is assumed they can't succeed in the NFL. Any mention of Brees comes with an "he's the exception" comment. And I agree anyone here would have failed under the old regime.

ShortRoundChief 07-20-2013 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tredadda (Post 9824261)
This is also under the tyranny that was the Pioli regime. Things have changed. Hell Haley got fired for saying F you to Pioli by playing Palko.

and I hope so, but Haley played ****ing Palko. Why didn't he try the hand of Stanzi. That makes no sense.

O.city 07-20-2013 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tredadda (Post 9824273)
Oh it was height. Unless a QB is 6-2 or above it is assumed they can't succeed in the NFL. Any mention of Brees comes with an "he's the exception" comment. And I agree anyone here would have failed under the old regime.

I think Wilson is a scheme dependent QB. I don't think he could excel in a Brees type system but he's in a great situation in Seattle.

tredadda 07-20-2013 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 9824269)
I got ran out of a thread the other day for saying we should make the playoffs and if we don't it's a failure of a season.

So watch it.

Technically anything less than winning the SB is a failure of a season. Every team strives to win the SB, not win 8 or 10 or 12 games etc......

ShortRoundChief 07-20-2013 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 9824279)
I think Wilson is a scheme dependent QB. I don't think he could excel in a Brees type system but he's in a great situation in Seattle.

I think this here is where you and I would get into a fundamental difference of opinion. If you can get the guy who can best run your ideal scheme then you are set, but I don't think that is that common. You build a scheme around a good athlete and I think that is what is you can best hope for.

Coogs 07-20-2013 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 9824269)
I got ran out of a thread the other day for saying we should make the playoffs and if we don't it's a failure of a season.

So watch it.

I can handle it.

We may not make the playoffs. Depends on a lot of factors. But I really think this team should be in contention for either West title (Manning be damned) or Wild Card for nearly all of the 17 weeks.

I'll be totally shocked if we see something like last season when we didn't lead a game with the clock running until somewhere around Thanksgiving.

tredadda 07-20-2013 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Diddy (Post 9824276)
and I hope so, but Haley played ****ing Palko. Why didn't he try the hand of Stanzi. That makes no sense.

Because Stanzi was a guy Pioli drafted, Palko wasn't. He was the only QB on the roster that wasn't a true Pioli guy. No one had a shot as long as Cassel was healthy.

O.city 07-20-2013 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Diddy (Post 9824287)
I think this here is where you and I would get into a fundamental difference of opinion. If you can get the guy who can best run your ideal scheme then you are set, but I don't think that is that common. You build a scheme around a good athlete and I think that is what is you can best hope for.

I don't knwo about the good athlete part, it's a plus, but not a have to have.

I think you get a guy thats versatile, but I do agree that you tweek your scheme to him. Which is what the Seahawks have done.

I think you have to figure out a way to mesh your philosophy to what the QB skillset is.

tredadda 07-20-2013 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 9824279)
I think Wilson is a scheme dependent QB. I don't think he could excel in a Brees type system but he's in a great situation in Seattle.

Almost all QBs are scheme dependent. But I agree, Seattle is a great spot for him.

O.city 07-20-2013 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 9824288)
I can handle it.

We may not make the playoffs. Depends on a lot of factors. But I really think this team should be in contention for either West title (Manning be damned) or Wild Card for nearly all of the 17 weeks.

I'll be totally shocked if we see something like last season when we didn't lead a game with the clock running until somewhere around Thanksgiving.

To make the moves they've made, they think they can win now.

So if they think it, I'm gonna think it.

If they win 9 games and miss out the last week, thats a success IMO.

But if they've made these moves and win 6 games, it's a steaming pile of failure.

And FWIW, I don't think the playoffs depend on alot of factors. We control our own destiny from the getgo, it's on us to go get it.

O.city 07-20-2013 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tredadda (Post 9824295)
Almost all QBs are scheme dependent. But I agree, Seattle is a great spot for him.

For me, thats one of the ways I define someone who's "elite" and someone who isn't.

Manning (in his prime) could go anywhere and run the system. Same with Brady, to an extent. Obviously they couldn't be runners ala RGIII, but in terms of a WCO, etc I think they could.

DaneMcCloud 07-20-2013 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Diddy (Post 9824263)
It's a pig heart so....

LMAO

DeezNutz 07-20-2013 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J Diddy (Post 9824272)
Here I tell you what. You get free reign of my sig and I get 1 line on yours. Bad girls stays the same. Also whatever I put on there must contain the word "pickle"

I don't make bets of any kind on CP. Because I just don't give a ****.

That said, I encourage you to point out all of my errors if any of my takes end up turning to shit. I'll own them.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:20 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.