Originally Posted by keg in kc

I don't think people are just paying for 8 games, they're paying to see a competitive team play 8 games, they're paying to see what they expect to be a winner. There's a reason ticket sales suffer when you're losing.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I've been saying what you said there for years HC. Carl's been tremendously successful as President/CEO, but as a GM he's left something to be desired. And I think there is a real conflict between the two sides of his job.

Actually, I don't think the problem is just carl, I'm not sure the entire player evaluation side of the organization couldn't use a complete overhaul. We've not done well with drafting for the last decade, and have had mixed results with trades and free agency. There's been an awful lot of failure in that arena, without much success to balance it.

I'd like to think we're due some good things, that maybe all the negative will eventually flip, but I'm too cynical to think the world works like that. I don't believe in luck.

And I also don't think Carl is singularly responsible for everything. I think Lamar should shoulder some blame for his conservative nature, not being willing (at times) to open his checkbook in terms of bonus money. While at other times he's been quite generous. He's where, ultimately, the issue of profit over winning falls, in my book. And I don't necessarily fault him for that, from a business perspective I understand, but as a fan...

Originally Posted by nmt1

I'm glad you'd be a better owner than Lamar Hunt. Get yourself a couple of hundred mil and buy a team.

Is Carl's livelyhood not being GM of the Chiefs? Regardless of what he said, Lamar Hunt signs his paychecks. It's Lamar's team and he'll hire and fire whoever he'd like. Pretty simple.

Originally Posted by nmt1

Do the Chiefs guarantee 8 competitive games?

Originally Posted by nmt1

Do the Chiefs guarantee 8 competitive games?

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

IMO the problem w/ Carl is a conflict of interests. Yes, he's the GM... but he's also the President and CEO. I think there needs to be separation between the football administrative functions (GM) and the business-side of the operation (Pres/CEO).

The GM's responsibility is to provide the team with coaches and players capable of winning... hopefully, with the sincere goal of winning the SB. He negotiates the contracts and ensures the team is capable of keeping it's "core" players (and coaches).

Where the conflict arises is on the business side. The Pres & CEO works for one purpose: the bottom line. Profitability, first & foremost.

What <i>I</i>, and a significant portion of the Chiefs fanbase sees, is more emphasis put on profitability, rather than success. Emphasis for success MUST exist, or profitability suffers... however there is a fine line one can walk to maximize profits w/o spending a lot to guarantee success. That's the tightrope act I see CP & the Chiefs FO walking.... they've been doing so since about 1999.

Originally Posted by nmt1

Do the Chiefs guarantee 8 competitive games?

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

I wish I had a hundred million to buy a team. I guess I expect more than you do from Lamar Hunt.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

That's not the question. The question is whether you're ('you' in a general sense) willing to pay for 8 games if they're not competitive, which they have not been for the greater part of the last decade, like it or not.

I certainly wouldn't. I wouldn't pay just to see the Chiefs play a game I didn't think they could win. And I think the longer this string of mediocrity goes, the more difficulty they'll have filling the stands.

Which is ultimately why I don't believe they don't care about winning, and only about profit: because they DO want to fill the stands. And the only way you can do that is by winning. That's the inherent fallacy of that argument. People will not pay to see a loser.

Originally Posted by nmt1

I don't disagree with you at all. The real problem is that a significant portion of the Chiefs fanbase is not so upset with the team for "not winning anything in years" that they have stopped going to the games. Only when those fans stop going to the games will things change.

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

So you think that Carl's job is on the line? Is that what you're telling me?

He's a GM of a team that hasn't won a playoff game in 13 years. If his "livelyhood" was on the line, something tells me that it would of been taken away from him a long time ago if that was the case.

But it's not. Carl has more job security than GM's that make the playoffs (Seattle for one).

The NFL is a performance based business, but that theory doesn't apply to the Chiefs. They keep defensive players around when they don't get the job done, and they kept CP around about 5 years too long.

I wish I had a hundred million to buy a team. I guess I expect more than you do from Lamar Hunt.

Originally Posted by penguinz

What team do you think you are going to get for $100 million?

Originally Posted by The Stinger

Nothing is guaranteed.

But there is that nice, bitter illusion that we Chiefs fans have every season.....

Whats that called again?


Oh yeah.


Hope.