Surprise!! Rufus knocks free agency (again) - Page 4

shaneo69 · 01-27-2005, 09:02 AM

DAWES: THIS YEAR'S FREE AGENT DU JOUR
Jan 27, 2005, 1:46:52 AM by Media Watch by Rufus Dawes

The tired voices of past criticism are using another off-season to postulate another Chiefs predicament. Oddly, learning nothing from the immediate past, they are beginning again to advance another generation of tired prognostications. Bob Gretz calls this time of year the “Silly Season” and, indeed, it is. As I sit here in my room in Mobile at the Senior Bowl, I’ve been reading the latest remedy for what ails the Chiefs. From what I understand from the folks back home, names are being tossed around by anybody who’s been able to talk himself onto a radio shout-fest or needs to fill a space in the local newspaper.

Gretz goes on to list some of the familiar player names that have been put out there for the Chiefs to pursue. More column inches have been spent on the notion that unrestricted free agency is a ruse than on any that this writer has contributed to this site. You can search the archives and you’ll find a fairly convincing case that building through free agency doesn’t work. Yes, there are exceptions from time to time but to contend that by signing one or more your season can be turned around it pure nonsense.

One local columnist has never met a marquee free agent name that he didn’t like. Jeff George, Hugh Douglas (he, of “give him the money, Lamar” fame) and Troy Vincent are recent names that come to mind. His latest free-agent du jour, Patriots corner Ty Law, is perhaps his silliest. Should the Chiefs seek out Law if there is a mutual interest? Absolutely. But the cost could be prohibitive considering the player’s age and physical condition. (see more in Gretz) It’s more likely that the Patriots won’t even put up much of a fuss. That’s the Patriots way, and the Steelers way and the Eagles way. Everybody is expendable in their eyes and they quickly part company with starters, all-pros, and such and move to backups. It seems to have worked well, don’t you think?

Consider, if you will, the Patriots who on this year’s trip to the Super Bowl started someone named Randall Gay (undrafted rookie free agent) at left corner and someone named Asante Samuel from that NCAA powerhouse Central Florida at right corner. They finished the season as a top-ten defense and held the explosive Indianapolis Colts offense to no touchdowns in their playoff win. The Pats ranked second in the NFL in points surrendered without last year’s starting corners Ty Law and Tyrone Poole.

So, to run around claiming once again to “give (Law) the money” is to have learned nothing, even if you don’t consider that over the past season the rules affecting cornerback play have changed so significantly as to make the idea of a shut-down corner obsolete.

Champ Bailey’s acquisition by the Denver Broncos last offseason did not improve the team’s defense. The Denver defense was better statistically against the pass in 2003 with Kelly Herndon and Lenny Walls as starters than it was with Bailey as its key cover guy. Denver was a wild card team without him and it was a wild card team with him. Maybe Ty Law would improve the Chiefs defense – it wouldn’t take much – but to throw money at him and sit back and think you’ve cured all of the team’s ills is to have learned nothing about a game you’re charged to provide insight on.

Insight is a term that doesn’t get much traction these days, least of all among some columnists, who prefer to fashion themselves more as entertainers. Good journalism is about linking fact with opinion. Good journalism is about fine analysis and making distinctions and about making a case. Because too many columnists believe they can say whatever they want without having to prove it, we are left with a journalism whose narrative and analytical failings have become ever more glairing. When will they learn and when will we?

nmt1 · 01-27-2005, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manila-Chief

The Planet is a much better read and more factual...

This is funny!

nmt1 · 01-27-2005, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

And that 'football guy' has done so much better than that 'fan'.

Peterson makes token efforts.

Looks to me like they've both done the same, 0 for 0 in Superbowls. Oh wait I forgot, it's OK to not win the Superbowl as long as you keep fans interested and make the team worth a lot of money.

nmt1 · 01-27-2005, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspchief

None of that sh*t matters. Rufus' point was "here are 3 teams that get it done without spending in FA". That's simply not true. Trading fits into the same category, it's just spending draft picks instead of money.

And if FA is so unneccessary to winning, why did the Superbowl champions go out and get a FA? Why did the team that made the NFC championship game 3 years straight go out and get two huge name guys?

I'm not arguing whether it's the proper method to build a team or not. I'm simply saying that Dawes gave examples that contradicted his theory, rather than support it.

I don't see where Rufus said the team shouldn't use free agency to help build the team. I did see him say the some of the free agents pimped by Whitlock have not amounted to much.

HC_Chief · 01-27-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nmt1

Looks to me like they've both done the same, 0 for 0 in Superbowls. Oh wait I forgot, it's OK to not win the Superbowl as long as you keep fans interested and make the team worth a lot of money.

Like you said, Peterson is supposed to be a 'football' guy - Snyder is just some stupid 'fan'. Which is worse: a fan who spends money to bring in BIG NAME free agents, but hasn't won anything of significance, or a 'football guy' who makes minimal efforts in free agency year-over-year and hasn't won anything of significance?

I say the latter is worse. The 'football guy' should know his stuff - he should bring success to the field. He hasn't.

**Manila-Chief** · 01-27-2005, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Like you said, Peterson is supposed to be a 'football' guy - Snyder is just some stupid 'fan'. Which is worse: a fan who spends money to bring in BIG NAME free agents, but hasn't won anything of significance, or a 'football guy' who makes minimal efforts in free agency year-over-year and hasn't won anything of significance?

I say the latter is worse. The 'football guy' should know his stuff - he should bring success to the field. He hasn't.

Agree .... and how many years has Snyder been at this compared to Kingless? With Gibbs as coach and Snyder willing to help him win ... I'd say D.C. has a better chance of winning a S.B.

HC_Chief · 01-27-2005, 10:39 AM

I don't think Gibbs will be nearly as successful as he once was. His glory days were pre-cap. He used to 'hide' players on IR for years. Can't do that any more - new rules are in place; the loopholes he employed no longer exist. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts in the 'new' NFL. Again, I think Snyder made an error in judgement re: HC. One of these days, he'll get it right.

jspchief · 01-27-2005, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nmt1

I don't see where Rufus said the team shouldn't use free agency to help build the team. I did see him say the some of the free agents pimped by Whitlock have not amounted to much.

He may not have said it outright, but it sure seems to be the meat of his (and Gretz's) article.

If he really is just trying to convince us that we don't need Law, maybe he should concentrate his article on why we don't want Law. Instead, he's decided to try and paint FA in a bad light, and make it look like the recipe for success doesn't include free agency.

Personally, I think this is just the front office PR machine preparing us for KC not even glancing in Law's direction. I don't like that. I don't like these FO mouth pieces spinning, under the guise of journalism. It's that much more hypocritical and bush that in the sane breath they take shots at other journalists' proffesionalism.

I could care less if we got Law. I've never been big on him. I do however think we need to get some talent on the field through FA, and for once I'd like it to be something other than second tier guys.

shaneo69 · 01-27-2005, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nmt1

Looks to me like they've both done the same, 0 for 0 in Superbowls. Oh wait I forgot, it's OK to not win the Superbowl as long as you keep fans interested and make the team worth a lot of money.

Snyder has had 6 years, Peterson 16. I'm willing to bet that with his "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" attitude, he'll get a Super Bowl win in the next decade.

He's got a HOF coach, Pro-Bowl RB, up-and-coming QB, and a top 5 defense. A Super Bowl is inevitable. Just like you can hate Steinbrenner with a passion, but you know he'll have another World Series ring sooner or later because he settles for nothing less.

**Manila-Chief** · 01-27-2005, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nmt1

You're saying that Peterson doesn't actively pursue improvement? You can't be serious about that. You can't tell me, objectively, that Peterson doesn't try to improve the Chiefs.
The thing is, you don't agree with the way Peterson trys to improve the team. The only difference between Peterson and Snyder is that Peterson is a football guy and Snyder is a fan.

This is not a quesiton but my point ... And, how many D players did Kingless add last off season. Also, where was Kingless during the first week or so of F.A.?

Point ... he didn't even TRY to upgrade the defense. That worked out well, didn't it. I know he couldn't sign every player he wanted but last off season he didn't even try and we lost a season of opportunity.

We have maybe one more year with our O. We need a quality D to help us win a S.B. while the opportunity is there.

Point is Kingless is only interested in filling seats so the bottom line can remain fat. He is less interested in winning a S.B.

**Manila-Chief** · 01-27-2005, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

I don't think Gibbs will be nearly as successful as he once was. His glory days were pre-cap. He used to 'hide' players on IR for years. Can't do that any more - new rules are in place; the loopholes he employed no longer exist. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts in the 'new' NFL. Again, I think Snyder made an error in judgement re: HC. One of these days, he'll get it right.

I do not disagree with you ... but on the other hand ... Gibbs was smart enough to work the system and I think he has that same insight in the cap area. New England's BB seems to be able to work the system....

Plus, unlike Marty ... Gibbs has won it all.

KCTitus · 01-27-2005, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaneo69

Snyder has had 6 years, Peterson 16. I'm willing to bet that with his "winning isn't everything, it's the only thing" attitude, he'll get a Super Bowl win in the next decade.

He's got a HOF coach, Pro-Bowl RB, up-and-coming QB, and a top 5 defense. A Super Bowl is inevitable. Just like you can hate Steinbrenner with a passion, but you know he'll have another World Series ring sooner or later because he settles for nothing less.

Cant compare football and baseball...Steinbrenner just outspends everyone and has the money to afford the flops.

HC_Chief · 01-27-2005, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manila-Chief

I do not disagree with you ... but on the other hand ... Gibbs was smart enough to work the system and I think he has that same insight in the cap area. New England's BB seems to be able to work the system....

Plus, unlike Marty ... Gibbs has won it all.

We'll see. He is definitely a bright guy and a proven winner. I was surprised when he came back - his NASCAR team has been a huge success.

He does have a couple of things going for him: an envigorated fanbase, an owner willing to give him whatever he asks for, a very good defense, and a superstar RB. What he really needs to do now is fix that offensive line. If he can get that done w/o having to dismantle the D, that team will be solid.

I'm still not sold on Ramsay.

TEX · 01-27-2005, 10:54 AM

___________________________________________________________
That’s the Patriots way, and the Steelers way and the Eagles way. Everybody is expendable in their eyes and they quickly part company with starters, all-pros, and such and move to backups. It seems to have worked well, don’t you think?
___________________________________________________________

Um.... to do that you MUST DRAFT WELL. The CHIEFS don't, so to even use that as an argument in the CHIEFS case is moot.

KCTitus · 01-27-2005, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

We'll see. He is definitely a bright guy and a proven winner. I was surprised when he came back - his NASCAR team has been a huge success.

He does have a couple of things going for him: an envigorated fanbase, an owner willing to give him whatever he asks for, a very good defense, and a superstar RB. What he really needs to do now is fix that offensive line. If he can get that done w/o having to dismantle the D, that team will be solid.

I'm still not sold on Ramsay.

I can tell you the fan base, at least those that are vocal (the sports talk callers) are not happy with Gibbs.

Bootlegged · 01-27-2005, 10:56 AM

I'm waiting for the Drafting 101; The Chiefs Way article from Rufus/Gretz.

01-27-2005, 09:02 AM
shaneo69 Smug Weasel Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bleachers at Busch Casino cash: $10004900	Surprise!! Rufus knocks free agency (again) DAWES: THIS YEAR'S FREE AGENT DU JOUR Jan 27, 2005, 1:46:52 AM by Media Watch by Rufus Dawes The tired voices of past criticism are using another off-season to postulate another Chiefs predicament. Oddly, learning nothing from the immediate past, they are beginning again to advance another generation of tired prognostications. Bob Gretz calls this time of year the “Silly Season” and, indeed, it is. As I sit here in my room in Mobile at the Senior Bowl, I’ve been reading the latest remedy for what ails the Chiefs. From what I understand from the folks back home, names are being tossed around by anybody who’s been able to talk himself onto a radio shout-fest or needs to fill a space in the local newspaper. Gretz goes on to list some of the familiar player names that have been put out there for the Chiefs to pursue. More column inches have been spent on the notion that unrestricted free agency is a ruse than on any that this writer has contributed to this site. You can search the archives and you’ll find a fairly convincing case that building through free agency doesn’t work. Yes, there are exceptions from time to time but to contend that by signing one or more your season can be turned around it pure nonsense. One local columnist has never met a marquee free agent name that he didn’t like. Jeff George, Hugh Douglas (he, of “give him the money, Lamar” fame) and Troy Vincent are recent names that come to mind. His latest free-agent du jour, Patriots corner Ty Law, is perhaps his silliest. Should the Chiefs seek out Law if there is a mutual interest? Absolutely. But the cost could be prohibitive considering the player’s age and physical condition. (see more in Gretz) It’s more likely that the Patriots won’t even put up much of a fuss. That’s the Patriots way, and the Steelers way and the Eagles way. Everybody is expendable in their eyes and they quickly part company with starters, all-pros, and such and move to backups. It seems to have worked well, don’t you think? Consider, if you will, the Patriots who on this year’s trip to the Super Bowl started someone named Randall Gay (undrafted rookie free agent) at left corner and someone named Asante Samuel from that NCAA powerhouse Central Florida at right corner. They finished the season as a top-ten defense and held the explosive Indianapolis Colts offense to no touchdowns in their playoff win. The Pats ranked second in the NFL in points surrendered without last year’s starting corners Ty Law and Tyrone Poole. So, to run around claiming once again to “give (Law) the money” is to have learned nothing, even if you don’t consider that over the past season the rules affecting cornerback play have changed so significantly as to make the idea of a shut-down corner obsolete. Champ Bailey’s acquisition by the Denver Broncos last offseason did not improve the team’s defense. The Denver defense was better statistically against the pass in 2003 with Kelly Herndon and Lenny Walls as starters than it was with Bailey as its key cover guy. Denver was a wild card team without him and it was a wild card team with him. Maybe Ty Law would improve the Chiefs defense – it wouldn’t take much – but to throw money at him and sit back and think you’ve cured all of the team’s ills is to have learned nothing about a game you’re charged to provide insight on. Insight is a term that doesn’t get much traction these days, least of all among some columnists, who prefer to fashion themselves more as entertainers. Good journalism is about linking fact with opinion. Good journalism is about fine analysis and making distinctions and about making a case. Because too many columnists believe they can say whatever they want without having to prove it, we are left with a journalism whose narrative and analytical failings have become ever more glairing. When will they learn and when will we?
Posts: 4,910

01-27-2005, 10:39 AM	#51
HC_Chief That's just f***in' stupid Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: suburbia Casino cash: $3687107	I don't think Gibbs will be nearly as successful as he once was. His glory days were pre-cap. He used to 'hide' players on IR for years. Can't do that any more - new rules are in place; the loopholes he employed no longer exist. It will be interesting to see how long he lasts in the 'new' NFL. Again, I think Snyder made an error in judgement re: HC. One of these days, he'll get it right. __________________ "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
Posts: 12,355

01-27-2005, 10:54 AM	#58
TEX Out Gunning CP's Fandom Police Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Galveston, TX Casino cash: $-1526873	___________________________________________________________ That’s the Patriots way, and the Steelers way and the Eagles way. Everybody is expendable in their eyes and they quickly part company with starters, all-pros, and such and move to backups. It seems to have worked well, don’t you think? ___________________________________________________________ Um.... to do that you MUST DRAFT WELL. The CHIEFS don't, so to even use that as an argument in the CHIEFS case is moot. __________________ "Do we have time to run WASP?"
Posts: 37,119

01-27-2005, 10:56 AM	#60
Bootlegged One4Mahomes Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: f Casino cash: $9955545	I'm waiting for the Drafting 101; The Chiefs Way article from Rufus/Gretz.
Posts: 5,234