Ford? Who only plays on 2nd or 3rd and long in SF, because he sucks against the run, or Houston who refused to renegotiate his contract and was "rumored" to not be a great teammate in the locker room?

Which one?

Houston refused a paycut like anyone else would. He would have restructured his deal though and we would be in a much better place if we had offered him a restructure.

The hindsight in this thread is incredible... Most folks were pumped when we signed Clark as he was better than Ford and played well against the run. He has under performed this year as he appears banged up but doesn't sit like Ford did when he was hurt. I also think you are underestimating the change in attitude that the Honey Badger and Clark have brought to the Defense this year. We are nastier than last year in attitude and it is now really showing up. I expect Frank to be just fine when he comes back and this thread will not age will. JMO

Don't be naive. If Houston would have wanted to be here he would have been here as we would have kept him for his Indy deal...

Maybe you should take your own ****ing advice, ya?

The paycut he was asked to take would have got him less money than he got from the colts this season.

Uh you should look at the Frank Clark thread when we got him. Most people weren't pumped and thought we overpaid. It's not really a bunch of hindsight going on.

There’s a huge difference between complaining about compensation and bad mouthing the player.

Most people thought we were at least getting a very good player.

Now they’re pretending it wasn’t just about the compensation and they knew Clark would disappoint like this.

You know if he was playing well people wouldn't be upset about it?

He was supposed to be durable and a better player than what they had. That hasn't lined up yet.

Sure. And this season he hasn't been a good player. Most people would have dealt with the compensation if he would have came in and been on pace for 13 sacks like he did last year. But he's on pace for less than 6. So now the compensation looks even worse than originally thought.

It’s just King pussy being a contrarian.

Houston quickly went south as soon as he got paid. He only played 43 of 63 possible games once he got that mega deal. His knee was permanently damaged, he was 30 and he had to have teammates motivate him to do something in critical times despite him “supposably” being the leader.

DJLN will tell you himself that there was a discussion last year about Houston being lazy and not being as good of a run defender as he usually was.

The whole mindset change this franchise wanted was basically aimed at him.

Yeah, I'm not on the 'we should've kept Houston at his price' train. I was intrigued to see if he could be brought back on a new deal because I thought he was interesting as a strong side DE in this scheme (which isn't being run at ALL like I thought it would be anyway). Houston doesn't appear to have been interested - c'est la vie.

But Houston wasn't the only option and giving up what we gave up for Clark AND signing him to that deal was among the worst possible options available to us. I'd have rather spent that money on Jones, drafted Murphy and then rolled with Ogbah, K-Pass, Okafor and Speaks.

It wouldn't have been a great DL - in fact it would very probably be worse than what we have. But we'd have Jones locked up, a young CB in hand and a far cleaner path forward from here. Instead we're left with "Man, I really hope Clark un****s himself..." and that's a pretty nasty spot to find oneself in...

I havent posted about Alex Smith since he left you dumb ****

Here's the thread I was trying to recall:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showp...postcount=1015

No - I don't just shit on everything this team does. Nor do I give an opinion without (far) too many words on the subject. I rarely say something is stupid without going on record with what I'd have done instead and why I'd have done it.

Do I get 'em all right? Nope - nor has any executive in football history. But I'm not just this high and mighty, hypercritical ass you believe me to be. I'll view a decision on its face and respond accordingly. It's had me well ahead of this franchise on numerous occasions and would've properly ****ed the organization on others. So what? I'll be damned if I'm just gonna cede my opinion to the people in charge strictly on the basis that they're in charge.

I'm a contrarian because I'd rather have a player who had 9 sacks last year and is on pace 12 this year over a player who had 23 sacks last year and is on pace for 5 this year and cost us a 1st and 2nd round pick? Ok.


By the way, you never answered my question. You kept pointing out how much better the defense and run defense got after Chris Jones got injured. How come I haven't seen you doing that when it comes to Clark? We had our best game defensively on Sunday and Jones was a major contributor and Clark was on the sideline. Why haven't you used that same logic against Clark?