Quote:
Originally Posted by H5N1
here, disagree with this:
last playoff win: 1993
that's fifteen years. I'm 25 years old. I was ten years old the last playoff win--****, aren't you younger than me? I can't recall. doesn't matter.
I'll be the first person to be optimistic if THERE'S ANYTHING TO BE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT. have you WATCHED the chiefs lately? we're HORRIBLE.
it has nothing to do with being a 'negative nancy.' it has EVERYTHING to do with people holding onto the adages of a by-gone era. and it's gone. if you want to have positive hopes, PLEASE have a REASON to have positive hopes.
I remember a very specific time when I was younger that my dad was like this--and I didn't understand it then, but I do perfectly now.
the chiefs were playing the giants in the meadowlands. we were down big in the second quarter. he left the room in disgust and went to go mow the lawn. before he left, though, we had an argument. I pounded my fists like the preteen douche I was and said 'the chiefs can win! they can come back!' completely optimistic that the chiefs could overcome all odds and win a meaningless game.
my dad was realistic--he said 'there's no way' and went about his day
I'm like that these days. SOME of you still believe. it's like believing in santa claus--he's still coming for some of you. the rest of us in realism land have no delusions about this team.
I remember crying my eyes out after the 1995 playoff loss to the colts. I remember going on my first cussing tirade after the 1997 playoff loss to the broncos.
I, for one, and SICK TO ****ING DEATH of putting up with 'not quite good enough'--it's ALL this ****ing organization feeds to us. if you want to be spoon-fed bullshit? that's fine with me. I'm all for putting their ****ing heads under the guillotine and MAYBE building a team that's in it for the long haul.
|
I'm 35 and I like watching the events unfold. I don't like to watch them lose, but I won't sulk very long about it when they do. We haven't won a playoff in 15 years, but we've been in the playoffs fairly regularly until recent.
Last years sucked balls but this year I saw hope, hope that carl/clark/herm were about to try something different. They did, they did START something different. Carl obviously had to be the first headpiece to leave, because it was so far off from what he wants to do, a philosophy relying more heavily on free agents. One that worked for him for a long time too.
I really think Herm got the ball rolling on this change, sold the idea to clark (which in turn got carl out of here) he has the player's attention, and the players are learning/improving. We aren't watching the same game if you are going to tell me you can't see some steady improvements with several players on both sides of the ball. We've come close to winning some big games against some pretty good teams with mostly rookies, and rookies that weren't even our starting rookies at the begining of the season in some cases.
Yes that is why I say I don't think Herm is a bad coach.
I've seen him make some mistakes on the sideline, and it pisses me off too. But I think he stays unless it becomes a deal breaker for the new GM. If that happens, I won't be off sulking, I'll be very interested and tuned in to find out who the new coach will be.
But the bottom line is, I don't have a single damn thing to say about who it is, the new GM or if a new coach comes in. some of the arguing here is downright ignorant.
BTW - I contest your self promoted title as "realist" - I believe I'm the one being a realist and you are being a Meccamist.