Berry has signed

[The Bad Guy]

That's all the info I got just a few minutes ago.

[RedThat]

Originally Posted by H5N1

because until he does, it's still unfortunately the following:

carl>pioli (OR) carl=pioli (depending on how you measure it)...

sure, pioli won a few championships in new england. carl won in the USFL. neither means shit to me as a chiefs fan. (the second scenario)

carl won a few playoff games in KC (thanks to montana). pioli hasn't. (the first scenario)

as such, pioli is still an unmeasured and thus mysterious commodity. the easy to way to become pioli>carl is by getting a goddamned trophy that has either our owner's name or, better yet, vince lombardi's name on it.

Well, pardon me for saying this, but Pioli winning and putting together good teams in New England means shit to me as a Chiefs fan.

What matters is what he does here. If we want to draw comparisons as far as who the better GM was in KC, that is waaay to early to tell. And, Im not talking about what those guys did outside of KC. That is all irrelevant to me. If we are going to compare the two, it is what they do in KC and in KC only. It is going to take some time to determine that. Right now we just know what Carl was as a GM here.

Imo, Carl Peterson was a mediocre GM in KC. He wasn't terrible but nothing great either. I give him some credit. He put together good teams in the 90's, and made this franchise somewhat respectable during that era. However, he never won a championship. We all know that. Chiefs did win a few playoff games in the early 90's. After that, he failed to make his teams more competitive. Once Marty left, he built mediocre teams, and went down hill from there.

During his prime, my perception of Carl as a GM was one who was good enough to make the playoffs, but couldn't accomplish anything more outside of that. That was his identity as a GM and Im not certain whether ownership was aware of that or not? Regardless, it turned out that they made the mistake of retaining his services for too damn long. Carl should of been fired long time ago and the Hunts should've hired a better GM that could build their team and make them more competitive then Carl did if they ever wanted to win a championship.

Carl managed to make this franchise play at a high competitve level for a decade, but the competitveness wasn't good enough. Pioli imo has to provide what was missing. He simply has to build more competitive teams and win in the playoffs year in and year out. Win a championship like you are saying. Not only make this franchise play at a higher competitive level than Carls teams but do it with a lot more consistency. If he accomplishes that, I would then be convinced that he is the better GM.

Another way to judge who is the better GM is compare their track records of both regular season and playoffs. We can't do that now obviously since Pioli is only entering year two in KC but we will in years to come.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by RedThat

Well, pardon me for saying this, but Pioli winning and putting together good teams in New England means shit to me as a Chiefs fan.

What matters is what he does here. If we want to draw comparisons as far as who the better GM was in KC, that is waaay to early to tell. And, Im not talking about what those guys did outside of KC. That is all irrelevant to me. If we are going to compare the two, it is what they do in KC and in KC only. It is going to take some time to determine that. Right now we just know what Carl was as a GM here.

Imo, Carl Peterson was a mediocre GM in KC. He wasn't terrible but nothing great either. I give him some credit. He put together good teams in the 90's, and made this franchise somewhat respectable during that era. However, he never won a championship. We all know that. Chiefs did win a few playoff games in the early 90's. After that, he failed to make his teams more competitive. Once Marty left, he built mediocre teams, and went down hill from there.

During his prime, my perception of Carl as a GM was one who was good enough to make the playoffs, but couldn't accomplish anything more outside of that. That was his identity as a GM and Im not certain whether ownership was aware of that or not? Regardless, it turned out that they made the mistake of retaining his services for too damn long. Carl should of been fired long time ago and the Hunts should've hired a better GM that could build their team and make them more competitive then Carl did if they ever wanted to win a championship.

Carl managed to make this franchise play at a high competitve level for a decade, but the competitveness wasn't good enough. Pioli imo has to provide what was missing. He simply has to build more competitive teams and win in the playoffs year in and year out. Win a championship like you are saying. Not only make this franchise play at a higher competitive level than Carls teams but do it with a lot more consistency. If he accomplishes that, I would then be convinced that he is the better GM.

Another way to judge who is the better GM is compare their track records of both regular season and playoffs. We can't do that now obviously since Pioli is only entering year two in KC but we will in years to come.

Tl;dr
Posted via Mobile Device

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by kysirsoze

Law students don't typically deal with the very real possibility of suffering a career ending injury the first time they step into the court room. Plus, college football players don't just work hard. They are used to make boatloads of money for the colleges and coaches. Not a good comparison.

And Tom Brady doesn't have those same fears, if not a lot moreso? Or what about doctors--after going through 7 or 8 years of school loaded with debt, guess what they have to do? Work 80-100 hours on pretty much minimum wage during their residencies.

In almost every profession on earth, you have to earn your respect. Of course rookies deserve to get paid. But how can you possibly make an argument that Jamarcus Russell or Matt Stafford deserved to be paid more than Philip Rivers or Tom Brady? It is exactly the same as paying a newly minted law school graduate more to practice law than the experienced partner who has won a bunch of cases and made millions of dollars for the firm.

Teams need to have some bargaining power. Instead, they're FORCED to pay based on the slot they're drafted in.