Chiefs What's with the Thigpen fixation? - Page 39

Mecca · 02-10-2009, 04:53 PM

Now I fully admit it isn't as bad as I thought it was going to be on this forum but I've yet to figure out this fixation with him. It's really bad at some other unnamed forums..

I honestly have no way of comprehending what it's about. It's like everything people said about Croyle has now been lumped onto Thigpen. "Well um he's the guy we don't need another QB"

The worst part is the people who don't want a QB this year then say well if Thigpen doesn't work out we can just take Bradford or McCoy, it's like peoples brains fell out.

**Smed1065** · 02-10-2009, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

#1 Look up how many Super Bowls have been won with first round draft picks at QB

#2 Look up how many Super Bowls have been won by top 5 picks at QB

#3 Take the entire rest of the draft in the same time period, and show ma the success/failure rate of those QBs

#4 Show me the safety of all these other high picks. Like LT. You know, the position of Leonard Davis, Robert Gallery, and Mike Williams?

#5: Show me a situation where a franchise should be totally risk averse, and how well it pays off for them.

I agree but Versus SB winners in in the last 7 years?

Just Passin' By · 02-10-2009, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're right.

The Chiefs should pass on a potential franchise QB out of fear.

Good one.

I didn't say that, but nice attempt at trying to ignore the point. I can just turn that around on you, after all:

The Chiefs should take a statistically probable disapppointment just because some message board posters really want the team to take a quarterback.

How's that any better?

The real issue isn't what you'd prefer, or wouldn't prefer. The real issue is what Pioli thinks is the best choice. Neither taking a quarterback nor NOT taking the quarterback is an inherently bad idea. Insulting people categorically just because they believe that either of those ideas is the right decision this year is just stupid.

**doomy3** · 02-10-2009, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

do you ever think before you speak?

I am really wondering what I said to warrant this post. Please explain.

**RealSNR** · 02-10-2009, 11:16 PM

I still want to know what Brees could have done to make the Saints win more games this season.

More yards? Less INTs? Completion percentage? What?

**Smed1065** · 02-10-2009, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

This has turned into a reeruned debate....

It went beyond pointless about 20 pages ago...

I have already said if we knew, why not draft them. I am no expert but I believe our management is better than all of us.

What the heck is the fun if we are right.

**DeezNutz** · 02-10-2009, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

I didn't say that, but nice attempt at trying to ignore the point. I can just turn that around on you, after all:

The Chiefs should take a statistically probable disapppointment just because some message board posters really want the team to take a quarterback.

How's that any better?

The real issue isn't what you'd prefer, or wouldn't prefer. The real issue is what Pioli thinks is the best choice. Neither taking a quarterback nor NOT taking the quarterback is an inherently bad idea. Insulting people categorically just because they believe that either of those ideas is the right decision this year is just stupid.

Let's cut the bullshit.

Do the Chiefs have a franchise QB (shut the **** up people coddling Thigpen's balls)?

What's the best way to get one?

**doomy3** · 02-10-2009, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

I didn't say that, but nice attempt at trying to ignore the point. I can just turn that around on you, after all:

The Chiefs should take a statistically probable disapppointment just because some message board posters really want the team to take a quarterback.

How's that any better?

The real issue isn't what you'd prefer, or wouldn't prefer. The real issue is what Pioli thinks is the best choice. Neither taking a quarterback nor NOT taking the quarterback is an inherently bad idea. Insulting people categorically just because they believe that either of those ideas is the right decision this year is just stupid.

Good post.

This has been my problem all along. To act like either opinion is categorically wrong is crazy.

**Smed1065** · 02-10-2009, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR

I still want to know what Brees could have done to make the Saints win more games this season.

More yards? Less INTs? Completion percentage? What?

Won the SB with the same defense. LOL

Its all offense in here. Been there done that.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 02-10-2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

I didn't say that, but nice attempt at trying to ignore the point. I can just turn that around on you, after all:

The Chiefs should take a statistically probable disapppointment just because some message board posters really want the team to take a quarterback.

How's that any better?

The real issue isn't what you'd prefer, or wouldn't prefer. The real issue is what Pioli thinks is the best choice. Neither taking a quarterback nor NOT taking the quarterback is an inherently bad idea. Insulting people categorically just because they believe that either of those ideas is the right decision this year is just stupid.

Please explain how you came to the conclusion that Stafford and/or Sanchez are "statistically probable disappointments."

**Smed1065** · 02-10-2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Let's cut the bullshit.

Do the Chiefs have a franchise QB (shut the **** up people coddling Thigpen's balls)?

What's the best way to get one?

Luck?

**DeezNutz** · 02-10-2009, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Please explain how you came to the conclusion that Stafford and/or Sanchez are "statistically probable disappointments."

Because of Vince Young and Mike Vick. Because they're quarterbacks.

I used logic.

**Smed1065** · 02-10-2009, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Please explain how you came to the conclusion that Stafford and/or Sanchez are "statistically probable disappointments."

1 year in starting for college.

Bad decisions?

**DeezNutz** · 02-10-2009, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smed1065

Luck?

Luck. ****.

**Smed1065** · 02-10-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Because of Vince Young and Mike Vick. Because they're quarterbacks.

I used logic.

I want a QB but need to stir the pot. I want a QB and agree but some act they are like scouts? No failures like DV.

Extra Point · 02-10-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

This has turned into a reeruned debate....

It went beyond pointless about 20 pages ago...

Keep contributing.........

02-10-2009, 04:53 PM
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-742950	What's with the Thigpen fixation? Now I fully admit it isn't as bad as I thought it was going to be on this forum but I've yet to figure out this fixation with him. It's really bad at some other unnamed forums.. I honestly have no way of comprehending what it's about. It's like everything people said about Croyle has now been lumped onto Thigpen. "Well um he's the guy we don't need another QB" The worst part is the people who don't want a QB this year then say well if Thigpen doesn't work out we can just take Bradford or McCoy, it's like peoples brains fell out.
Posts: 115,387

02-10-2009, 11:16 PM	#574
RealSNR Special Teams ACE!!! Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Where the hell is SNR Casino cash: $-1574792	I still want to know what Brees could have done to make the Saints win more games this season. More yards? Less INTs? Completion percentage? What?
Posts: 93,458