CUTLER TO BEARS!

[tk13]

Interesting deal. Don't think the Broncos got ripped off, got a lot of good stuff out of it... but that comes with the caveat that they now don't have a QB.

The Bears are obviously going all-in. I wouldn't call Cutler close to a local product though, Santa Claus is about 6+ hours away from Chicago. Chicago's about as far away as Atlanta is, and that's really not an exaggeration. Nashville would be a lot closer.

Only skimmed most of the thread, you knew the Cassel stuff was coming, despite how mentally imbalanced it is. Seriously, I think some of it is borderline mentally ill, I don't know why I even bother to post... to argue that Cassel obviously isn't good enough because we didn't give up enough to get him. What the heck is that? I hate saying this, but you can call me a true fan, I don't care, complaining that we didn't get fleeced in a trade, how in the bleep can you be a fan of a team and hope to get bent over in a trade? That is stupid. Despite the fact that the only reason Cutler was traded was because the Broncos wanted to trade Cutler FOR Cassel to begin with.

So, they wanted to trade Cutler away to get Cassel.... Cassel goes for a 2nd, Cutler goes for much more... therefore, instead of using logic and common sense to say the Bears gave up more than they should've, or that Cassel was really worth a 1st and 3rd or whatever, the Chiefs screwed up by not giving more value for Cassel. Brilliant!

No. It sounds a lot more like some people want this whole thing to fail just so they can be proven right. Which, that's fine, you're entitled to act however you want, but let's just call it like it is and quit using passive aggressive 4 year old stuff to make your point. That's all I have to say on the subject.

[stevieray]

Originally Posted by tk13

No. It sounds a lot more like some people want this whole thing to fail just so they can be proven right. Which, that's fine, you're entitled to act however you want, but let's just call it like it is and quit using passive aggressive 4 year old stuff to make your point. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Mainly because Sanchez has been annointed by the mob rule...

[tk13]

Originally Posted by stevieray

Mainly because Sanchez has been annointed by the mob rule...

I like Stafford over Sanchez, but I've said that before. Stafford's tools are off the charts, and he performed great in pressure situations. I like Sanchez too. But Cassel doesn't suck. And I think Stafford has a good shot to be better than Cassel. But then again, I've always though there's a solid chance Stafford isn't there when we pick. I like Sanchez too. But then again I liked Leinart a lot. It's not like we traded for AJ Feeley.

I understand why people are so burned by playing it safe under Carl, but there's a difference between playing it safe and trying to maximize value.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by tk13

Interesting deal. Don't think the Broncos got ripped off, got a lot of good stuff out of it... but that comes with the caveat that they now don't have a QB.

The Bears are obviously going all-in. I wouldn't call Cutler close to a local product though, Santa Claus is about 6+ hours away from Chicago. Chicago's about as far away as Atlanta is, and that's really not an exaggeration. Nashville would be a lot closer.

Only skimmed most of the thread, you knew the Cassel stuff was coming, despite how mentally imbalanced it is. Seriously, I think some of it is borderline mentally ill, I don't know why I even bother to post... to argue that Cassel obviously isn't good enough because we didn't give up enough to get him. What the heck is that? I hate saying this, but you can call me a true fan, I don't care, complaining that we didn't get fleeced in a trade, how in the bleep can you be a fan of a team and hope to get bent over in a trade? That is stupid. Despite the fact that the only reason Cutler was traded was because the Broncos wanted to trade Cutler FOR Cassel to begin with.

So, they wanted to trade Cutler away to get Cassel.... Cassel goes for a 2nd, Cutler goes for much more... therefore, instead of using logic and common sense to say the Bears gave up more than they should've, or that Cassel was really worth a 1st and 3rd or whatever, the Chiefs screwed up by not giving more value for Cassel. Brilliant!

No. It sounds a lot more like some people want this whole thing to fail just so they can be proven right. Which, that's fine, you're entitled to act however you want, but let's just call it like it is and quit using passive aggressive 4 year old stuff to make your point. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Who the **** is "complaining that we didn't get fleeced in a trade," or saying that "the Chiefs screwed up by not giving more value for Cassel?"

[Tiger's Fan]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Who the **** is "complaining that we didn't get fleeced in a trade," or saying that "the Chiefs screwed up by not giving more value for Cassel?"

It's more that you, and your ilk have completely discounted Cassel before he's even played a down for the Chiefs.

What it's come down to on this board is a divide between the true fans and the non fans. I think everyone knows where they stand on that. Myself, I'm a true fan, in that I want the Chiefs to win, and think the new guys are making decisions to make that happen. Then theres Mecca and his merry band of high school football stars who really don't seem to give a shit one way or the other, as long as the guys they don't like fail in the end.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by Buster Hymen

What it's come down to on this board is a divide between the true fans and the non fans.

[orange]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

How many winning seasons in the last 30 years has Vanderbilt had?

You can look here for that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanderb...dores_football


But more to the point, here are the last seven years:


2002 2 10 0 .167
2003 2 10 0 .167
2004 2 9 0 .182
2005 5 6 0 .455
2006 4 8 0 .333
2007 5 7 0 .417
2008 7 6 0 .539 *includes bowl win*


Red years with Cutler. Same coach throughout. Looks like they're trending up. Since Cutler.

In the 2006 season, Vanderbilt finished with a 4–8 record with sophomore Chris Nickson at quarterback. The 2006 team's peak performance came with a 24–22 defeat of conference rival #16 ranked Georgia at Sanford Stadium, the first time Vanderbilt had ever defeated a ranked opponent on the road. The team came within seconds of defeating Arkansas and Alabama in consecutive weeks.

In 2007, Vanderbilt upset #6 ranked South Carolina 17–6 at Williams-Brice Stadium in Columbia, beating a top 10 team for the first time in 33 years. It was the highest ranked team Vanderbilt had beaten since defeating #6 LSU in 1937, and came one week after losing 20–17 to #21 Georgia on the final play of the game in Nashville. In the following home game against Miami (Ohio), junior wide receiver Earl Bennett made history by breaking the SEC record for most career receptions. Vanderbilt would go on to win the game 24–13.

In 2008, after playing 5 games, the Commodores were 5-0 for the first time since 1943, 3-0 in the Southeastern Conference for the first time since 1950, and one victory away from being eligible for their first bowl appearance since 1982. In the 5th game, they defeated SEC rival Auburn for the first time since 1955, when backup quarterback Mackenzi Adams led them back from an early 13-point deficit. Vanderbilt lost its next four games, but history was made on November 15, 2008, when Vanderbilt defeated the Kentucky Wildcats to become bowl eligible for the first time since 1982. The Commodores finished the 2008 regular season with losses to Tennessee and Wake Forest, completing the regular season with a 6-6 record (4-4 in the SEC).

Their 2008 finish was good enough for the Commodores to earn an invitation to play the Boston College Eagles in the Music City Bowl on December 31, 2008. In a dramatic come-from-behind win, Vanderbilt beat Boston College by a score of 16-14, to win its first bowl game in fifty-three years.

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by orange

You can look here for that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanderb...dores_football


But more to the point, here are the last seven years:


2002 2 10 0 .167
2003 2 10 0 .167
2004 2 9 0 .182
2005 5 6 0 .455
2006 4 8 0 .333
2007 5 7 0 .417
2008 7 6 0 .539 *includes bowl win*


Red years with Cutler. Same coach throughout. Looks like they're trending up. Since Cutler.

Their defense must be much better the last couple years than when Cutler was there. No way they only win that many games if he gets some defensive help./CP "non true fans"

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Buster Hymen

It's more that you, and your ilk have completely discounted Cassel before he's even played a down for the Chiefs.

What it's come down to on this board is a divide between the true fans and the non fans. I think everyone knows where they stand on that. Myself, I'm a true fan, in that I want the Chiefs to win, and think the new guys are making decisions to make that happen. Then theres Mecca and his merry band of high school football stars who really don't seem to give a shit one way or the other, as long as the guys they don't like fail in the end.

And as pointed out numerous times, I want the team to win as well, and have said that I hope like hell I'm wrong on Cassel. I'll gladly eat crow if he leads us to a championship.

Unlike you, I feel it is perfectly acceptable to hope your team wins, while sometimes disagreeing with decisions that are made by the FO.

Just because Pioli has 3 rings to his name doesn't make him impervious to failure, or making bad decisions.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Buster Hymen

Myself, I'm a true fan.

Say it loud and say it proud.