ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs WTF Mike Silver says we are the 28th best team in the NFL (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=259079)

Mr. Arrowhead 04-30-2012 11:23 AM

WTF Mike Silver says we are the 28th best team in the NFL
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--po...GVzdAM-;_ylv=3

1. New York Giants: Is general manager Jerry Reese trying to get disgruntled defensive end Osi Umenyiora to snap?

2. New England Patriots: If Bill Belichick pulled off a trade in which he managed to swap picks with himself, would his reputation for masterful maneuvering reach an unprecedented plateau?

[ Dan Wetzel: Pats move up twice during first round in a dramatic shift in strategy ]

3. Green Bay Packers: Yo, Ted Thompson, feeling a bit defensive – and does having a 28-year-old superstar quarterback impact your thinking much?

4. Baltimore Ravens: When second-round draft pick Courtney Upshaw lines up across from new teammate Michael Oher in training camp, will their biological and surrogate parents be there to cheer them on?

5. San Francisco 49ers: How happy is Jim Harbaugh that the Niners drafted a receiver whose high school nickname was "E.T." and not "Edward Scissorhands"?

6. Houston Texans: With the drafting of Wade Phillips' newest pass-rushing toy, will the Texans' defense be Mercilus in 2012?

7. Pittsburgh Steelers: Got beef?

[ Les Carpenter: Draft picks spend more time in Radio City than anticipated ]

8. Detroit Lions: If the decision-makers in the Lions' war room "listened to our board" and started speaking in Matt Millen's voice, would the team's medical staff pass out handfuls of clozapine?

9. Atlanta Falcons: Hey, Thomas Dimitroff – if second-round pick Peter Konz could play guard and center at the same time, would you have made another Julio Jones-style trade to get him sixth overall?

10. Philadelphia Eagles: After assuring offensive coordinator Marty Mornhinweg that Philly's plan to use a third-round pick on former Arizona quarterback Nick Foles was "a great one", was Michael Vick tempted to add, "By the way – who's Nick Foles?"

11. New Orleans Saints: When Saints general manager Mickey Loomis called in his third-round pick of Regina defensive tackle Akiem Hicks Friday night, was NFL commissioner Roger Goodell tempted to grab the phone and interject, "Yeah, we know – we've got your war room wiretapped …"

[ Fantasy: A dozen draftees bound to make an immediate fantasy impact ]

12. Denver Broncos: Will Brock Osweiler become the tallest-ever teammate to bend down and polish Peyton Manning's dress shoes before a Quarterbacks' Night Out at training camp?

13. Dallas Cowboys: What was the Wonderlic score of the Dallas Morning News website editor who posted this headline about first-round draft pick "Morrris" Claiborne?

14. New York Jets: Am I the only one who wonders whether, based on their 2011 performance, the Jets should have drafted an offensive lineman before the sixth round?

15. Cincinnati Bengals: After Rutgers receiver Mohamed Sanu got a prank call telling him the Bengals were taking him in the first round Thursday night, shouldn't Redskins tight end Chris Cooley have been considered the prime suspect?

Notre Dame WR Michael Floyd is headed to Arizona. (AP)

16. Arizona Cardinals: If I'd been at Larry Fitzgerald's house for the first round of this year's draft, would he have reacted to the selection of Notre Dame receiver Michael Floyd by racing jubilantly through his open-air living room and jumping into the pool?

[Yahoo! Sports Shop: Buy NFL player T-shirts and team gear]

17. San Diego Chargers: After learning that Chargers GM A.J. Smith had called him a "mean, nasty man", shouldn't first-round pick Melvin Ingram have extended his hand and retorted, "Pot, meet kettle"?

18. Carolina Panthers: How crazy is it that this year's No. 1 pick, Boston College middle linebacker Luke Kuechly, is smaller than last year's No. 1, quarterback Cam Newton?

19. Buffalo Bills: When general manager Buddy Nix described the Bills as "riverboat gamblers" after trading up to get North Carolina State wideout T.J. Graham in the third round, why did I immediately picture this body of water?

20. Chicago Bears: Will the new receiving tandem of Brandon Marshall and second-round pick Alshon Jeffery cause more havoc in opposing secondaries, or in the Bears' locker room?

21. Washington Redskins: When the 'Skins released quarterback John Beck on Saturday, was he humming my altered-lyric version of this iconic '90s tune from his alt-rock namesake?

22. St. Louis Rams: In an effort to help veteran Cortland Finnegan mentor newly drafted cornerbacks Janoris Jenkins and Trumaine Johnson, will coach Jeff Fisher provide the former Titans standout with a Taser gun?

[ Rams' war room: Roll dice on Janoris Jenkin | Select next T.O. ]

23. Tennessee Titans: After NFL Network analyst Mike Mayock described second-round pick Zach Brown as "allergic to contact", how awesome would it have been to see Brown fly across the set at Radio City Music Hall, slam Mayock into the orchestra pit and yell "Gesundheit"?

24. Seattle Seahawks: What's more surprising – that Pete Carroll and Jon Schneider drafted a quarterback in the third round, or that Wisconsin's Russell Wilson is the team's highest-drafted passer in nearly two decades?

25. Oakland Raiders: How disconcerting is it that post-Al Davis Raiders are resolutely boring on draft day, and can't new GM Reggie McKenzie just indulge us with one ultra-swift, lowly regarded "reach" pick per year?

26. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: If the Muscle Hamster runs wild at Raymond James Stadium, will they put a large, spinning wheel next to the pirate ship in Doug Martin's honor?

27. Cleveland Browns: As of Thursday night, is Colt McCoy nostalgic for a little one-on-one time with Brian Daboll?

28. Kansas City Chiefs: Do Scott Pioli and Romeo Crennel seem overly optimistic in their assessment of the Chiefs' talent level – or am I just so pessimistic about K.C.'s quarterback situation that it completely clouds my thinking?

29. Jacksonville Jaguars: To realize value as the 70th overall pick, would Bryan Anger have to figure out a way to get footballs to explode upon making contact with a punt returner?

30. Minnesota Vikings: Yo, Matt Kalil – while proclaiming how much more Minnesota than California you are, were you neglecting to account for the possibility that the team which drafted you might soon be West Coast-bound?

31. Miami Dolphins: Does Jeff Irleand's latest rebuilding project involve replacing his best player – and, if so, why do I sense another protest brewing?

[ Jason Cole: Colts use Day 2 of draft to get Andrew Luck weapons in form of 2 TEs and a WR ]

32. Indianapolis Colts: Now that former Stanford tight end Coby Fleener has successfully convinced an NFL team he was worthy of being selected with the 34th overall pick, will he grow his hair out and lose the whole Rob Gronkowski impersonation bit?

htismaqe 04-30-2012 11:24 AM

Whether or not I disagree with his #28 ranking, I ABSOLUTELY understand his explanation.

Thig Lyfe 04-30-2012 11:26 AM

Matt Cassel

Skyy God 04-30-2012 11:27 AM

Yeah, that's about right. Failing to address the QB problem is total lunacy.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 11:27 AM

I think everybody from 12 on down is beatable.

The problem is, like three of our first four games are against teams in the top 11.

BigMeatballDave 04-30-2012 11:30 AM

28th? No way.

But its hard to win without a QB.

Everyone on the planet sees this except for Scott.

Skyy God 04-30-2012 11:30 AM

But we've got a SB-contending team!

/truefans

keg in kc 04-30-2012 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8582833)
28th? No way.

But its hard to win without a QB.

Everyone on the planet sees this except for Scott.

That's the misperception that people have. I think Scott knows it's hard to win without a quarterback. That's why his first move was to acquire one he believed in. The disconnect is that Scott apparently doesn't see Matt Cassel the way the rest of us do.

RealSNR 04-30-2012 11:33 AM

reeruned. If we had taken a shitty mid-round QB would he have changed his tune?

BoneKrusher 04-30-2012 11:35 AM

it's hard to argue his ranking when the most important player on the team is the weak link.

DJ's left nut 04-30-2012 11:37 AM

A 7-9 team that got absolutely annihilated in the playoffs of it's 'good' season of the last 1/2 decade just treated the draft like they were Super Bowl winners that just needed to add some depth and build for the future.

28 seems extreme, but 20 wouldn't.

He's right - the powers that be have wildly overestimated the overall talent of this team. The squad is not appreciably better than the 2010 squad that needed an incredibly soft schedule to go 10-6 and get trucked at home in round 1.

This team has 11-5 and 1 and done as its absolute ceiling and a 5-11 floor. It's stuck in that 12-22 range where it's really just subject to blind luck and the whims of the schedule on any given season.

And Pioli showed absolutely no urgency or aggression in this draft at all. It really does suggest a confidence that I just do not understand.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 8582823)
Whether or not I disagree with his #28 ranking, I ABSOLUTELY understand his explanation.

Yep.

And until they prove otherwise, I don't think his ranking is that far off.

Jerm 04-30-2012 11:38 AM

Not surprised...Silver is a troll and takes any and every chance to dog the Chiefs no matter how delusional it is.

Even with Cassel this team is an upper half of the league team with a top 10 defense...we'll be just fine.

RealSNR 04-30-2012 11:38 AM

Quote:

27. Cleveland Browns: As of Thursday night, is Colt McCoy nostalgic for a little one-on-one time with Brian Daboll?
What the **** is this supposed to mean? :mad:

Mr. Laz 04-30-2012 11:38 AM

Who?

L.A. Chieffan 04-30-2012 11:39 AM

Haha, people are in for a rude awakening

Mr. Laz 04-30-2012 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by L.A.Chieffan (Post 8582854)
Haha, people are in for a rude awakening

and you will be so happy





can't wait for LA to get a team

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582845)
A 7-9 team that got absolutely annihilated in the playoffs of it's 'good' season of the last 1/2 decade just treated the draft like they were Super Bowl winners that just needed to add some depth and build for the future.

28 seems extreme, but 20 wouldn't.

He's right - the powers that be have wildly overestimated the overall talent of this team. The squad is not appreciably better than the 2010 squad that needed an incredibly soft schedule to go 10-6 and get trucked at home in round 1.

This team has 11-5 and 1 and done as its absolute ceiling and a 5-11 floor. It's stuck in that 12-22 range where it's really just subject to blind luck and the whims of the schedule on any given season.

And Pioli showed absolutely no urgency or aggression in this draft at all. It really does suggest a confidence that I just do not understand.

And so have the fans.

Good post, DJ.

L.A. Chieffan 04-30-2012 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 8582856)
and you will be so happy





can't wait for LA to get a team

Hell yeah, when we start 6-0 and Cassel looks to be headed for another pro-bowl idiot fake fans like you will be begging for redemption.

Just Passin' By 04-30-2012 11:43 AM

Terrible job by Silver, but that's nothing new for him.

Mr. Arrowhead 04-30-2012 11:45 AM

Minus the QB, the chiefs are in the top 5 in terms of overall talent

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Arrowhead (Post 8582863)
Minus the QB, the chiefs are in the top 5 in terms of overall talent

ROFL

Holy shit.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582848)
Yep.

And until they prove otherwise, I don't think his ranking is that far off.

You're wrong.

A team that went 7-9 against a HARD schedule while missing its best players on offense and defense, a key contributor on offense, and playing backup QBs for almost half the season?

That's not bottom-third talent. That's, at the very least, mid-third talent. I'd put us towards the top of the mid third.

Garcia Bronco 04-30-2012 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582865)
You're wrong.

A team that went 7-9 against a HARD schedule while missing its best players on offense and defense, a key contributor on offense, and playing backup QBs for almost half the season?

That's not bottom-third talent. That's, at the very least, mid-third talent. I'd put us towards the top of the mid third.

I'd say you had a backup in the whole season at QB.

BigMeatballDave 04-30-2012 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582864)
bROFL

Holy shit.

Haters gotta hate.

You cant be so blind in your hate to say this team would not compete for SB with a good QB.

Coogs 04-30-2012 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582865)
and playing backup QBs for almost half the season?

Actually playing backups QBs all but the last 3 games of the season.

BigCatDaddy 04-30-2012 11:50 AM

The truth is probably somewhere between this

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582848)
Yep.

And until they prove otherwise, I don't think his ranking is that far off.


and this


Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Arrowhead (Post 8582863)
Minus the QB, the chiefs are in the top 5 in terms of overall talent


keg in kc 04-30-2012 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582845)
A 7-9 team that got absolutely annihilated in the playoffs of it's 'good' season of the last 1/2 decade just treated the draft like they were Super Bowl winners that just needed to add some depth and build for the future.

28 seems extreme, but 20 wouldn't.

He's right - the powers that be have wildly overestimated the overall talent of this team. The squad is not appreciably better than the 2010 squad that needed an incredibly soft schedule to go 10-6 and get trucked at home in round 1.

This team has 11-5 and 1 and done as its absolute ceiling and a 5-11 floor. It's stuck in that 12-22 range where it's really just subject to blind luck and the whims of the schedule on any given season.

And Pioli showed absolutely no urgency or aggression in this draft at all. It really does suggest a confidence that I just do not understand.

I don't disagree with much except for the idea that the 2012 team can't possibly be appreciably better than the 2010 version. They're better at virtually every position on both lines (obviously in several cases because the same players are better players now than they were two years ago), they're much better at wide receiver, they're likely better at running back (even if Charles isn't the old Charles), they're better at linebacker both inside and out. They're either going to be equal or better at safety. The only positions on the entire roster that don't look to be improved are corner (where the starters are at the least adequate but the depth is questionable) and quarterback (which is unfortunately exactly the same).

And all of that, aside from the Poe pick, was the case before the draft. Which is why I actually liked that they drafted the way that they did, as opposed to making need picks/safe picks on players with less upside.

I think the team as a whole is built to win 10 or 11 games. The question is how many games the quarterback position will cost them. With someone appreciably better than Cassel behind center (say Manning) I think they'd actually be a playoff favorite. All this assuming the injury bug last year was an aberration and not a trend.

Unfortunately we're stuck with Cassel, and there isn't anybody on the bench who's going to come in and save us. Although at least it won't be Palko. Who by himself probably cost us several games last year.

Hog's Gone Fishin 04-30-2012 11:51 AM

Never heard of him but he's obviously a ****ing moron. If we are healthy this year we're competing.Charles,Hillis....Bowe,Breaston, Baldwin and rookie. Line is 100% better than what we fielded last year and now we have a NT that will allow our linebackers to all make the probowl. **** this moron !

boogblaster 04-30-2012 11:51 AM

yea id say we're ranked alittl' low .. 16-20 would be closer .. but i can see his point bout our leak-link .....

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582865)
You're wrong.

A team that went 7-9 against a HARD schedule while missing its best players on offense and defense, a key contributor on offense, and playing backup QBs for almost half the season?

That's not bottom-third talent. That's, at the very least, mid-third talent. I'd put us towards the top of the mid third.

Until that "talent" translates to wins on the field, he's not that far off.

I think he's pretty damn close from 1-23. You could argue a spot here/there.

From 24 I'd go like this:

24 - Oakland

25 - Tampa

26 - KC

27 - Miami

28 - Seattle

29 - Cleveland

30 - Minnesota

31 - Indy

32 - Jacksonville

BigMeatballDave 04-30-2012 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 8582867)
I'd say you had a backup in the whole season at QB.

LOL

Hog's Gone Fishin 04-30-2012 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco (Post 8582867)
I'd say you had a backup in the whole season at QB.

You're absolutely right and shut the **** up !

Quesadilla Joe 04-30-2012 11:53 AM

What Vegas thinks...

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/3...sidercompi.png

http://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/odds/futures/

Pasta Little Brioni 04-30-2012 11:57 AM

7 wins with Palko minus Berry, Charles, and Mo says otherwise

DJ's left nut 04-30-2012 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582865)
You're wrong.

A team that went 7-9 against a HARD schedule while missing its best players on offense and defense, a key contributor on offense, and playing backup QBs for almost half the season?

That's not bottom-third talent. That's, at the very least, mid-third talent. I'd put us towards the top of the mid third.

They'd have gone 6-10 with Cassel as the starter all season, IMO. Cassel wins the Steelers game and loses both of the games that Orton won. The backup QB argument doesn't wash - they had a better QB for nearly 20% of the season than they're going to have next year.

Then they punted the draft.

Given the fact that they're getting 3 good players back in some capacity (maybe 100%...until Moeaki gets hurt again), they should be better. And the Winston pickup will help a great deal.

They're still a 1 and done squad at their best.

BigMeatballDave 04-30-2012 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassel>Manning (Post 8582882)

A lot of people are going to lose betting on Denver.

Oh, and you're a welcher

Pasta Little Brioni 04-30-2012 11:57 AM

ROFL Broncos 7 to 1

Garcia Bronco 04-30-2012 11:58 AM

Seriously though...if KC would just draft a first round QB and develop him...you guys would be one of the best teams on paper. Maybe you guys could end that 19 years playoff winless streak and NFL record 7 in-a-row.

Pasta Little Brioni 04-30-2012 11:58 AM

ROFL still laughing

Bowser 04-30-2012 11:59 AM

28th best in the NFL, or 28th best draft?

Either way....

Mr. Laz 04-30-2012 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Arrowhead (Post 8582863)
Minus the QB, the chiefs are in the top 5 in the AFC in terms of overall talent

FYP

You give us Payton Manning this offseason or by some miracle Drew Brees bails and we get him ... imo we are instantly among Pitt,Balt,Pats etc in the AFC.

As it sits, we are going to struggle to make the playoffs.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582876)
Until that "talent" translates to wins on the field, he's not that far off.

I think he's pretty damn close from 1-23. You could argue a spot here/there.

From 24 I'd go like this:

24 - Oakland

25 - Tampa

26 - KC

27 - Miami

28 - Seattle

29 - Cleveland

30 - Minnesota

31 - Indy

32 - Jacksonville

Clinically dumb.

But since you've provided zero reasoning to back this up, I'll just reiterate the point that it's clinically dumb.

Bearcat 04-30-2012 12:00 PM

I dunno, they've only gone two decades without winning a playoff game.... I think the media should respect them for at least another decade, until they've really, really proven they're no better than the Browns.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8582868)
Haters gotta hate.

You cant be so blind in your hate to say this team would not compete for SB with a good QB.

Again, here's what people refuse to acknowledge when it comes to my opinions.

I'm not saying this team is devoid of talent.

I'm simply saying that we don't know exactly what we have.

The overwhelming majority of this board has already declared our young players and FA acquisitions as successes.

We haven't seen enough of these players to make that claim.

Add to that, two of our best players are coming back from an injury that typically sees a decline in performance - and thge QB situation, and I see a team with a metric ****ton of question marks.

I think DJ hit the nail on the head.

If everything goes perfect, this might be a 11-5 team.

But this team could just as easily win 4-6 games - and not necessarily because of injury - but because these kids with little-to-no experience don't end up being anywhere near as good as this fanbase (and organization) think they are.

DJ's left nut 04-30-2012 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassel>Manning (Post 8582882)
What Vegas thinks...

The Ravens and Cowboys are the only 2 halfway decent bets in the lot. The rest of them are just not good enough bets to justify putting money down this early.

The Broncos are a sucker bet from Vegas. Gotta love the sharks, man. They know how to make some easy money...

Bowser 04-30-2012 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat (Post 8582899)
I dunno, they've only gone two decades without winning a playoff game.... I think the media should respect them for at least another decade, until they've really, really proven they're no better than the Browns.

Keep doubting Donald Stephenson!

Ceej 04-30-2012 12:02 PM

The explanation makes sense.

But worse than Seattle and St. Louis??

I beg to diff.

Bowser 04-30-2012 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582901)
The Ravens and Cowboys are the only 2 halfway decent bets in the lot. The rest of them are just not good enough bets to justify putting money down this early.

The Broncos are a sucker bet from Vegas. Gotta love the sharks, man. They know how to make some easy money...

No shit. I'd love to see the millions they make after the season on Bronco wagers.

DJ's left nut 04-30-2012 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CJizzles (Post 8582904)
The explanation makes sense.

But worse than Seattle and St. Louis??

I beg to diff.

Flynn and Bradford. Yeah - that's all it takes.

That's how little regard there is league-wide for Matt Cassel.

He's truly truly awful.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582889)
They'd have gone 6-10 with Cassel as the starter all season, IMO. Cassel wins the Steelers game and loses both of the games that Orton won. The backup QB argument doesn't wash - they had a better QB for nearly 20% of the season than they're going to have next year.

Doesn't matter how talented the guy is in Orton's case, because Cassel's been taking the 1st string snaps since camp opened.

So while Cassel's not exactly the best QB in the league, he's had months of preparation as the #1 guy on the roster over everybody else. And almost 6 months of prep over Orton.

It's different if we're talking on paper, but we're not. We're talking about the heat of the season -- Orton came in with basically a couple weeks of training and we were still able to win with that.

Thanks, partially, to his great effort. Thanks, partially, to a relatively talented team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582889)
Then they punted the draft.

Where they finally finished our transition to the 3-4, and fortified our offensive line, and stacked the team with relatively solid depth, which people like yourself have been begging us to do for how long?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582889)
Given the fact that they're getting 3 good players back in some capacity (maybe 100%...until Moeaki gets hurt again), they should be better. And the Winston pickup will help a great deal.

They're still a 1 and done squad at their best.

I don't disagree.

The Chiefs still have work to go. Acquiring better talent, and developing the talent they have.

But let's call a spade a spade here. This is not a Bottom 10 team.

Bearcat 04-30-2012 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8582868)
Haters gotta hate.

You cant be so blind in your hate to say this team would not compete for SB with a good QB.

A 7-9 team won a playoff game 2 years ago and Tim Tebow won a playoff game this past season... it's not like any team is that far off in such a mediocre league. Hell, the Chiefs almost won the AFCW and they were awful last year.... to the ship!

suds79 04-30-2012 12:07 PM

I think we'll be better then that but there are two issues that could kill us.

# 1 - The QB. Hard to do much when you have the 23rd or so best starting QB in the league.

# 2 - We just assume that Jamaal Charles will be his same ole self coming off that ACL.

It doesn't take a huge stretch of the imagination to see how this next season could go horribly wrong.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582898)
Clinically dumb.

But since you've provided zero reasoning to back this up, I'll just reiterate the point that it's clinically dumb.

Who should we be ahead of on that list?

Oakland? We're what, 2-4 against them under Pioli, without a win at Arrowhead?

Tampa? We'll find out this year, but give me Freeman, their draft and FA signings, and I'll take my chances in a tough division.

7 wins in 3 seasons - buoyed by a 10-win season against the easiest schedule in 10 years. (99 Rams)

No one in the national media is going to give them a second glance until they prove they can win on Sundays.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582900)
Again, here's what people refuse to acknowledge when it comes to my opinions.

I'm not saying this team is devoid of talent.

I'm simply saying that we don't know exactly what we have.

The overwhelming majority of this board has already declared our young players and FA acquisitions as successes.

We haven't seen enough of these players to make that claim.

Add to that, two of our best players are coming back from an injury that typically sees a decline in performance - and thge QB situation, and I see a team with a metric ****ton of question marks.

I think DJ hit the nail on the head.

If everything goes perfect, this might be a 11-5 team.

But this team could just as easily win 4-6 games - and not necessarily because of injury - but because these kids with little-to-no experience don't end up being anywhere near as good as this fanbase (and organization) think they are.

The point that I'm taking issue with is that you see the 4-6 option as the most likely.

All due respect, I call bullshit.

I don't doubt the question marks, but I'm very comfortable with things ending up more positive than negative with the vast majority of them.

My biggest pessimist POV is on Charles' recovery. On most of the other risks, I'm cautiously optimistic.

evolve27 04-30-2012 12:07 PM

Realistic assessment finally.

Ceej 04-30-2012 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582911)
Flynn and Bradford. Yeah - that's all it takes.

That's how little regard there is league-wide for Matt Cassel.

He's truly truly awful.

I certainly understand that's why.

But weren't most people considering Flynn - Cassel v. 2?

I just know KC is better top to bottom then both Seattle and StL.

Regardless, it's some dude's preseason power rankings. Just good for message board conversation.

Just Passin' By 04-30-2012 12:08 PM

Rams wins totals the past 5 seasons:

2
7
1
2
3

and he's got the Rams at #22. His rankings are a joke.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by suds79 (Post 8582917)
I think we'll be better then that but there are two issues that could kill us.

# 1 - The QB. Hard to do much when you have the 23rd or so best starting QB in the league.

# 2 - We just assume that Jamaal Charles will be his same ole self coming off that ACL.

It doesn't take a huge stretch of the imagination to see how this next season could go horribly wrong.

Hater.

Bowser 04-30-2012 12:09 PM

"Bottom 10 team" is certainly debatable, but the one thing that is NOT debatable is that if this team wins, it will most certainly be in spite of the most important position on the team. And if they DO finish bottom 10, you can be assured that a larger reason for that will be beacuse of our quarterback.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582920)
The point that I'm taking issue with is that you see the 4-6 option as the most likely.

All due respect, I call bullshit.

I don't doubt the question marks, but I'm very comfortable with things ending up more positive than negative with the vast majority of them.

My biggest pessimist POV is on Charles' recovery. On most of the other risks, I'm cautiously optimistic.

Where did I say that?

My best guess as of right now is 8 wins.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582918)
Who should we be ahead of on that list?

Oakland? We're what, 2-4 against them under Pioli, without a win at Arrowhead?

Tampa? We'll find out this year, but give me Freeman, their draft and FA signings, and I'll take my chances in a tough division.

7 wins in 3 seasons - buoyed by a 10-win season against the easiest schedule in 10 years. (99 Rams)

No one in the national media is going to give them a second glance until they prove they can win on Sundays.

I'd put us ahead of about half the teams in the league right now.

I can't help but feel like you have this overwhelming double standard with the Chiefs.

If the Raiders walked out of the draft fortified in the trenches, and we walked out of the draft with 3 draft picks, one of which was on a guard, you'd rightfully downgrade us to the league's cellar.

But in a season where we're playoff bound over them if we don't start Palko without our best players on both sides of the ball, and the Raiders walked away with absolutely nothing in the draft, you're still willing to give them a thumbs up.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582931)
Where did I say that?

My best guess as of right now is 8 wins.

And yet, 27th in the league.

I guess that means 26 teams have a .500+ record this year.

Edit: Correction, you said 26th.

HemiEd 04-30-2012 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave (Post 8582868)
Haters gotta hate.

You cant be so blind in your hate to say this team would not compete for SB with a good QB.

That is his deal anymore, pure hate.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582933)
I'd put us ahead of about half the teams in the league right now.

I can't help but feel like you have this overwhelming double standard with the Chiefs.

If the Raiders walked out of the draft fortified in the trenches, and we walked out of the draft with 3 draft picks, one of which was on a guard, you'd rightfully downgrade us to the league's cellar.

But in a season where we're playoff bound over them if we don't start Palko without our best players on both sides of the ball, and the Raiders walked away with absolutely nothing in the draft, you're still willing to give them a thumbs up.

What is our record against the Raiders under Pioli?

ThaVirus 04-30-2012 12:13 PM

Wait, I had heard about Claiborne's Wonderlic... But did he actually spell his name "Morrris"?

BigMeatballDave 04-30-2012 12:13 PM

With all the injuries against a tough schedule they win 7, but now only 4-6?

Okay.

Ceej 04-30-2012 12:13 PM

Would anyone here honestly want the Rams or Seahawks roster?

The ENTIRE roster; not just QBs gentlemen.

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582936)
What is our record against the Raiders under Pioli?

We can play the who-has-beaten-who as a determiner of who's better, if that's the rankings system you want to employ.

But we both know where it ends up: a big, reeruned circle that means nothing.

We defeated the Packers, FFS.

HemiEd 04-30-2012 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGM (Post 8582891)
ROFL Broncos 7 to 1

Yeah, I would like to get some of Vegas's side of that one.

DJ's left nut 04-30-2012 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582912)
But let's call a spade a spade here. This is not a Bottom 10 team.

Remove QB from the equation and I'm 100% comfortable saying they're not a bottom 10 team. I'd still argue they're not a top 10 team, but at least not a bottom 10.

With Matt Cassel under center, there's no way in hell I'm comfortable categorically stating that this in not a bottom 10 team.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582934)
And yet, 27th in the league.

I guess that means 26 teams have a .500+ record this year.

Edit: Correction, you said 26th.

Funny, the Broncos went 8-8 last year and won a playoff game, something we haven't done in nearly 20 years - yet you'd put us ahead of them.

You're arguing that we're better than our 7-9 record.

So what does record have to do with it?

Mr. Laz 04-30-2012 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582933)
I'd put us ahead of about half the teams in the league right now.

I can't help but feel like you have this overwhelming double standard with the Chiefs.

If the Raiders walked out of the draft fortified in the trenches, and we walked out of the draft with 3 draft picks, one of which was on a guard, you'd rightfully downgrade us to the league's cellar.

But in a season where we're playoff bound over them if we don't start Palko without our best players on both sides of the ball, and the Raiders walked away with absolutely nothing in the draft, you're still willing to give them a thumbs up.

he's among the group that has bitched about Pioli from Day 1.

Pioli is a dictator ...
Pioli forced Haley to .... *insert player/coach/play call here*
Pioli is mean to janitors ...

You aren't going to get ANY benefit of the doubt or anything else from him.

Just scream Pioli and Cassel suck if you want him to cheer.

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 8582944)
We can play the who-has-beaten-who as a determiner of who's better, if that's the rankings system you want to employ.

But we both know where it ends up: a big, reeruned circle that means nothing.

We defeated the Packers, FFS.

We play the Raiders twice a ****ing year.

Much bigger sample size than a one-off against GB.

ChiefRocka 04-30-2012 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BoneKrusher (Post 8582841)
it's hard to argue his ranking when the most important player on the team is the weak link.

Truer words have never been spoken...

Rasputin 04-30-2012 12:19 PM

Bfd. It's best to play the spoiler anyways, but yet Casseled. :spock:

OnTheWarpath15 04-30-2012 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laz (Post 8582950)
he's among the group that has bitched about Pioli from Day 1.

Pioli is a dictator ...
Pioli forced Haley to .... *insert player/coach/play call here*
Pioli is mean to janitors ...

You aren't going to get ANY benefit of the doubt or anything else from him.

Just scream Pioli and Cassel suck if you want him to cheer.

Why should anyone give them the benefit of the doubt, other than to be a flaming homer?

They so-called "Executive of the Decade" has compiled a roster worthy of 21 wins in 3 seasons.

Until they prove otherwise, they are what they are.

Bowser 04-30-2012 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 8582946)
Remove QB from the equation and I'm 100% comfortable saying they're not a bottom 10 team. I'd still argue they're not a top 10 team, but at least not a bottom 10.

With Matt Cassel under center, there's no way in hell I'm comfortable categorically stating that this in not a bottom 10 team.

This is a necessary repost.

On top of Cassel, we still have Brian Daboll as offensive coordinator, who has historically been crap as a coordinator. Then there is Romeo, who has exactly *one* playoff season as a head coach.

Regardless of how you feel our draft went and how it sets us up for this season and seasons to come, we still have to overcome Cassel and Daboll's shortcomings, which is going to take more than good intentions and a smile.

ChiefRocka 04-30-2012 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus (Post 8582939)
Wait, I had heard about Claiborne's Wonderlic... But did he actually spell his name "Morrris"?

B
A
D
C
A
B
D
A
D
D
A
B





**** this...peace, I'm out homie...fastest Wonderlic finisher!!!

Direckshun 04-30-2012 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58 (Post 8582947)
Funny, the Broncos went 8-8 last year and won a playoff game, something we haven't done in nearly 20 years - yet you'd put us ahead of them.

You're arguing that we're better than our 7-9 record.

So what does record have to do with it?

I would not put us ahead of the Broncos. They have a HOF QB right now.

I would have put them ahead with Tebow this time last year, along with the vast majority of NFL speculators. That run they had was magical, not something you can rely on occurring regularly.

You've just hedged your bets in a clever way as to allow you to speculate freely without having to worry about getting burnt.

A crappy team, but manages 8 wins against a legitimately tough schedule. That means the only way you're wrong is if Cassel pulls magic out of his ass and plays like a Pro Bowler, guiding this team to a 10+ win season and a playoff run.

I think this team is better now than its 7-9 record indicated last year.

You think the team is worse, I suppose? Yet will improve on its record, with our best players on both side of the ball returning.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:32 PM.

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