Oh, that seals the deal. Because some poster on ChiefsPlanet said that the Rams would have held us hostage, then that convinces me too.

You're right, I didn't realize how ****ing cut and dried it was.

Oooh! This just in from THISmage across the hall:

Cut and dried. Deal with it.

Game Plan established on Pioli's part before departure? Yes.

Guaranteed? Not necessarily.

Still; Cut and Dried. Deal with it.

Curry is the wolf in sheeps clothing. Sanchez has performed the miraculous. He has turned one season at USC into expectations of lifting the city of New York to the Heavens.
Mark I lift your name on High. Mark I live to sing your praises. I'm so glad your in my life I'm so glad you came to save us. You came from USC to New York to show the way. From New York to the cross our debt to pay. From the cross to the grave. From the grave to the sky. Mark I lift your name on high.
Posted via Mobile Device

I've said this since the trade came down. People seem to think that Pioli is going to get a chance to try again if Cassel fails. I don't see that at all. Either Cassel succeeds and they're both here for 6 or 7 years or Cassel fails and they're both gone after 3. I think Carl was here for so long that Chiefs fans don't realize that other teams fire their staff after failure.

Wrong. every single team knew Cassel would be available for trade, if Pioli didn't have a deal in place, which he didn't, what advantage does this 'game plan' bring?

I don't have to deal with your crazy conjecture, you can stop saying that now thanks

The Rams were FULLY prepared to actually take him.

Wrong.

I said it more than anyone else, and I NEVER said that we WOULD draft Sanchez.

I said that because Cassel hadn't signed a long-term deal we COULD draft Sanchez.

Don't sit here with hindsight and pretend that just because the outcome ended up being what you wanted that you actually knew what Pioli was thinkign. That's BS and you know it.

:spock: convince me this wasn't just posturing

why didn't they take him, then?

ROFL HALLELUJAH!!!!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/F1qBPgrjuz4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/F1qBPgrjuz4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

It doesn't matter if it was just posturing or not.

I heard a half dozen talking heads in the 48 hours after the 1st round of the draft say that the NFL people they talked to believed that the Rams might be prepared to take Sanchez but didn't buy it from the Chiefs or Seahawks at all.

It really doesn't matter what the team's actual intention was, it only matters how teams wanting to trade up perceived it. In the end, WE probably killed the Rams' chances of trading down because everybody was convinced we wouldn't take Sanchez.

all i'll say is, get your popcorn ready.

Why do people think they are saying anything meaningful when they say this?
When Belichick kept with Brady had Brady failed Belichick would have failed. If Aikman was a flop then Johnson would have flopped. If Montana didn't turn out great Bill Walsh gets canned within 2 years.
Yes, Pioli's success is linked to Cassels performance
Duh.
Posted via Mobile Device

well what you said was 'they were FULLY prepared to actually take him'
still don't understand what that means when they had the chance but chose not to
I agree with the last par though, just not the statement I was disputing.

Then why didn't they?