Will Grbac succeed or fail in Baltimore?...

[Chiefs Pantalones]

Just curious as to what everyone thinks...

Why will he or won't he succeed, will he win over the fans, will he give Bmore back to back Championships, etc?

CG

and if no one wants to discuss this, thats fine. If you guys feel this has been beaten into the ground, I'll delete this topic, if ya'll want me too.:D

I'm a nice guy:p

[Cannibal]

Marty is gone, has been for three years.

We still have not won a playoff game.

We still have no RB.

We still have no primetime legit # 1 receiver. [DA is a true # 2 guy]

We still have no franchise QB.

We still have no field goal kicker.

We still have an incomplete team on the field with players that should be backups in starting roles.

We still have cap problems galore.

Bottom line... Blame Marty all you like, but the Chiefs problems over the last 12 years have one common theme [Carl Peterson].

[stevieray]

If Green and Holmes do not pan out, once again we are RIGHT BACK where we started.


If this happens, I will be highly pissed.

[Nelson Muntz]

actually Brad it was Keith Cash who blocked that punt in the Pittsburg game.

[KCTitus]

It's allways been an interesting argument from those with 'wood' for Marty. How is it that he can be an 'excellent' coach but fail when coaching is at the utmost importance.

If the teams he had we're as bad as has been pointed out, how did they go 13-3 twice? They had to have done something right. Why is it that when the game became more important, KC fell flat on it's face. True, the players were not HOF quality, but they were playing well THAT year together.

In 1995, Indy was w/o Faulk at RB and had Jim Harbaugh at QB. Are you telling me that with KC's defense, and mediocre offense, that KC was so bad they shouldnt have beaten Indy? might wanna pull the head out and re-think that one.

In 1997, KC lost to the eventual SB winners and it was a close game. Would Gannon have made a difference. Doubtful since it was Marty calling the shots. If anyone cares to remember, Greg Hill ripped off a 25 yd carry in one of the first plays of the game--he did not touch the ball again until inside 2 minutes left in the game. Is that Hill's fault, Peterson's fault or Marty's?

[milkman]

Titus,
You haven't reading Johnny, Cannibal and Pac's responses.
We have been the unfortunate recipients of bad luck and bad calls. The fact that we couldn't score any points had nothing to do with poor coaching in those games, because Marty was a great coach that somehow got the team to play way over their heads in the regular season, just to get the team into the playoffs.

Of course that doesn't explain why the team suddenly became the victim of their total lack of talent when the postseason rolled along.

How could I have ever questioned the football god that is Marty?

[Rausch]

In My opinion:


93 we lost Joe. We weren't playing inspired ball before he left, but you could have looked at the Oilers game the same way. Joe does/did not loose championchips. I believe if he finishes that game, we win.

95 terrible QB, TERRIBLE kicker. Overrated team. My personal opinion is that team should not have been 13-3, and probably got as far in the playoffs as it should have. Although, we should have lost to a better team. Whomever didn't just lack talent became invisible in that game. Choke.....plain and simple. Players lost that.


97-the only playoff game I feel the CHiefs have ever honestly been shafted. That was terrible, and Grbac played a marvelous game until he totally unraveled in the last two minutes. Still, it should not have come to that. Marty's not so sly sneak with our punter didn't help. I honestly believe that sentimentality towards an elderly Elway led to that loss. Terrible officiating, cought Broncos with vasoline and yet no repremands, and terrible officiating.

The only one of those games I felt Embarrased the Chiefs was 95, the other two our boys played their hearts out. I'll never be ashamed of that...

[duncan_idaho]

The 1995 game against the Colts was the most painful chiefs game I ever watched. Bono threw 3?4? interceptions. With QB performances like that, it gets pretty hard to loosen the rains and let the offense flow.

Grbac... had he not been plowed by that mammoth from Pittsburgh, would be our starting QB today... that play ruined his KC career. His career in Baltimore isn't going to be all that some think it is... he went from throwing to TG and DA to throwing to Brandon Stokely and Shannon Sharpe, although he does have a better tailback in Jamal Lewis.

Oh well... the scars heal eventually.

[stevieray]

reared it's ugly head in 97...I suppose it was lurking under the surface for quite sometime. Marty said he was done. Two years later...Skins?

All I know is that he could not get us over the hump, with or without talent. When coaches of a rival team saw us a team who didn't play to lose, I believe they were NOT intimidated, even if we had an awesome D.

Was Marty the answer...no.
Was Gun the answer...no.
Is DV...we don't know. Therefore, no one else knows. The only advantage we have at this point.

[Cannibal]

Is Carl the answer?


An obvious... [b]NO[/b]

[Cannibal]

Guys it really is simple.

We had bad football players. Seriously, so many of them aren't even in the league anymore.

We played conservative football and that was good enough to win some regular season games against shitty teams.

When it came time to play good teams in the playoffs, we were exposed as frauds.

Until Peterson puts a complete team on the field it will remain that way no matter who the coach is.

I find it hard to believe that you guys can't see this.

We've got backups as starters all over this team. Is it any wonder that we always go 9-7? Come on!

[Brock]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by duncan_idaho [/i]
[B]Grbac... had he not been plowed by that mammoth from Pittsburgh, would be our starting QB today... that play ruined his KC career. [/B][/QUOTE]

The play that ruined his career in KC was when he decided his best option with time running out against Denver was to throw the ball to someone other than Tony Gonzalez. January 4, 1998 was the day when most people saw Grbac for what he was and is: A big strong-armed geek who folds like a 5 dollar suitcase under pressure.

[milkman]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Cannibal [/i]
[B]We played conservative football and that was good enough to win some regular season games against shitty teams.

When it came time to play good teams in the playoffs, we were exposed as frauds.[/B][/QUOTE]

So the Colts were a better team?

[Cannibal]

They had the better defense, QB and field kicker that day that's for damn sure.

You guys keep saying we had these "13-3" teams as though we had talent.

Let me remind you that we won 4 or 5 games on the final play or two in 95, and at least 3 maybe 4 in 97.

Both of those teams were 9-7, 10-6 teams in reality. We just got some lucky breaks.

We were never true "contenders", to think so is delusional.



[i]It's painfully obvious...[/i]

[California Injun]

The Colts also had the better OC in 1995. Hackett was the one that choked in the booth in '95 and again in '97 when his attention was elsewhere (remember the USC interviews?)

Marty gagged in '95 by allowing Bono to play with his sprained thumb in -10 degree conditions. Maybe he had Deberg flashbacks of '90 but at least Steve's finger was on his NON-throwing hand!

Couple that with Hackett's inability to see Marcus Allen just KILLING the Colts and we deserved to lose that game.

'97 was a slanted game with the officiating but Stoyo's re-kick was very makeable. (From 42 instead on 32). It's not like he hit a 42 yarder and then had to boot again from 52.

Popson had a brain fart on that final drive by not stepping out of bounds. But then if Stoyo's original FG was good, then Marty would have sat on the ball and threw Pete in there for a 40+ yarder to win it.

Given the Chiefs rich history of clutch FGs in the play-offs, Stoyo would have shredded our hearts by shanking the stupid thing.

[KCTitus]

[i]We played conservative football and that was good enough to win some regular season games against shitty teams[/i]

[i]Let me remind you that we won 4 or 5 games on the final play or two in 95, and at least 3 maybe 4 in 97.[/i]

Excluding the 'shitty teams' comment, these are true statments, KC did play very conservative football which kept the game close and then won it in the end of the game. The PROBLEM that some dont wish to remember was that KC didnt do that in the playoffs.

In 1995, Marty decided to throw the ball rather than run. Regardless of the talent level, he went away from his gameplan, and as I later heard, was notorious for changing his playbook going into the playoffs. At the very least, KC should have played the same game that they did in the playoffs, EVERYONE knew that Elliott was struggling going into the last 2 weeks of the regular season. He was missing xtra points with regularity those last two weeks--a good sign that you're not going to win with your FG kicker if he cant make 20yd fgs. Again the talent that was on the field for Indy and Pitt that year was not 'great' either. KC could have competed against those teams and won had KC played it's game that they played during the season.

In 1997, KC had beaten that team before at home. Same place, same team, different day. Greg Hill rips off a 25yd run to begin the game and doesnt touch the ball again until inside 2 minutes left in the game. Regardless of what you say about Hill, he started hot and they should have kept giving him the ball until Denver stopped him.

What was painfully obvious to me while watching those games was how differently KC played in the playoff game as opposed to the regular season. Is that saying KC should have won the SB those years, definately not.