Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 7920167)

Who are we going to beat, really? We'll win maybe 2-3 games. We should start looking at Luck.

Originally Posted by Barret (Post 7923240)

My question is this, Why is both Stanzi and Powe inactive?? Last yer we had almost all the rookies in the games and playing. I understand you can't have Stanzi in when you are still tied to Cassel but if you are getting blown out, why not get them adjusted to the NFL speed?

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 7920167)

Who are we going to beat, really? We'll win maybe 2-3 games. We should start looking at Luck.

Originally Posted by alnorth (Post 7923254)

There's a huge difference between 2 or 3 wins. We will probably lose every tiebreaker, we have to be the clear-cut crappiest team in the NFL, no ties.

It can be done with 3 wins, but there's many years with more than one 3-win team. We need to be 1-15 or 2-14 to be relatively safe.

Originally Posted by BryanBusby (Post 7923241)

We will have that "feel good win" and **** everything up by beating the Colts. We're going to get beat in any tie breaker situation, so the Chiefs have to be clearly the worst team in the NFL to get Luck.

They are going to **** this up.

Originally Posted by Von Dumbass (Post 7914764)

There is no way in hell the Chiefs can outsuck the Seahawks.

Originally Posted by Bump (Post 7916982)

at this point, I'd trade a 2nd or 3rd for Chase ****ing Daniels and i hate Chase ****ing Daniels

Originally Posted by Stop, Chiefs (Post 7923213)

A good GM/HC would start preparing Stanzi to start the last 8 games of the year to see if he has anything in the event we don't get Luck.

But we won't do that.

Horror scenario: We go 1-15 and hold on to Cassel just in case we don't get Luck, we lose some dumb tiebreaker and draft 2nd, don't get Luck, trade down and pick up a RT, and start Cassel.