Football Which type of team would you prefer? - Page 2

**DaFace** · 10-04-2009, 06:48 PM

Just curious. I think I may be in the minority on this one.

**Bane** · 10-04-2009, 06:57 PM

As bad as it may sound Id rather win 11-12 games a year,win a playoff game,then call it a season.I don't need the Chiefs to win the SB to be a fan,even though Id love to see it happen someday.

**TrebMaxx** · 10-04-2009, 06:57 PM

Constant contender, but wins it all on occasion.

**KcMizzou** · 10-04-2009, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrebMaxx

Constant contender, but wins it all on occasion.

Don't think that was an option, but I'm pretty sure we'd all choose it if it were.

**DaFace** · 10-04-2009, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KcMizzou

The thing is, option A can't happen. If you're that good, you've got a shot.

In the end... we all just wanna see our team win.

I'd tend to agree, but then we've got the hatred for the Marty days as an example otherwise. Myself, I'd probably be thrilled if we could repeat the 90's again with the thinking that, eventually, you'll catch a few breaks and make it into the Super Bowl.

**KcMizzou** · 10-04-2009, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

I'd tend to agree, but then we've got the hatred for the Marty days as an example otherwise. Myself, I'd probably be thrilled if we could repeat the 90's again with the thinking that, eventually, you'll catch a few breaks and make it into the Super Bowl.

Sounds pretty damned good at this point... that's for sure.

**DaFace** · 10-04-2009, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KcMizzou

Well, option B obviously.

Since you said option A will "NEVER" win it all.

I suppose, in retrospect, a better phrase might have been "never seems to be able to win it all"

**TrebMaxx** · 10-04-2009, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KcMizzou

Don't think that was an option, but I'm pretty sure we'd all choose it if it were.

Yeah it was. Last option.

Some other type of team that I will describe below (aka the weasel option)

**Bearcat** · 10-04-2009, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

That's where I think I'm in the minority. If you could give me a team that was guaranteed to make the playoffs every single year, but never win the Super Bowl, I'd probably take it. I'd rather have reasonably entertaining football week after week than a team that isn't worth watching for years on end. I just keep finding myself bored on Sundays these days, which is where the question came from.

On the surface it seems like a dumb question (we're in it for the championships), but when I look back on a year like 2003, it was a fun year... going 9-0, I went to the Bills SNF game and a couple others, and I went to the playoff game against the Colts. By that time I had gotten out of feeling devastated for days after big losses, so while it was disappointing, I don't look back on it like I do '95 and '97.

I voted the second option, but with the right mindset, the first option is better, especially if you're talking about 7-8 years of what we've seen from the Chiefs the past two years, followed by 2-3 years of SB runs (and you didn't say "and win a SB").

If this was about college, I'd say the first option, no question... March Madness is a crapshoot, and the BCS is crap... the NFL is a bit tougher though.

**Tribal Warfare** · 10-04-2009, 07:07 PM

I want an organization that knows how to build a team yes there are peaks and valleys, but the down years should be non-existent with a good FO, due to the transition phase is more of reloading when the talent is already present. When a player's contract comes up then their's an equally good player to fill the position. The continuity should be seamless concerning this issue.

**DaFace** · 10-04-2009, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat

On the surface it seems like a dumb question (we're in it for the championships), but when I look back on a year like 2003, it was a fun year... going 9-0, I went to the Bills SNF game and a couple others, and I went to the playoff game against the Colts. By that time I had gotten out of feeling devastated for days after big losses, so while it was disappointing, I don't look back on it like I do '95 and '97.

I voted the second option, but with the right mindset, the first option is better, especially if you're talking about 7-8 years of what we've seen from the Chiefs the past two years, followed by 2-3 years of SB runs (and you didn't say "and win a SB").

If this was about college, I'd say the first option, no question... March Madness is a crapshoot, and the BCS is crap... the NFL is a bit tougher though.

Yeah, the college comparison is really where I'm coming from. I don't expect my college team to win it all every year by any means. (Granted, there are a shit ton more teams that make it more difficult.) Yet, I still enjoy the season if the team can have a reasonably good year. The fun is in watching the individual games; the championship itself is a good goal, but is too short-lived to really dwell on it. IMO, that is.

**Skip Towne** · 10-04-2009, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

That's where I think I'm in the minority. If you could give me a team that was guaranteed to make the playoffs every single year, but never win the Super Bowl, I'd probably take it. I'd rather have reasonably entertaining football week after week than a team that isn't worth watching for years on end. I just keep finding myself bored on Sundays these days, which is where the question came from.

You just described the Marty years. I'd sure take it. Reerun can go **** his mother.

ArrowheadMagic · 10-04-2009, 07:12 PM

Maybe someday... Balt. will draft well enough to actually beat NE.... until then If we could be the pats or Steelers..... sign me up.

**DaFace** · 10-04-2009, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Towne

You just described the Marty years. I'd sure take it. Reerun can go **** his mother.

Yup. It's probably not all that tough to tell that we're kind of talking about the 90's Chiefs vs the theoretical future where we'll be a contender after being really shitty for 5+ years.

**KcMizzou** · 10-04-2009, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Towne

You just described the Marty years. I'd sure take it. Reerun can go **** his mother.

It sounds great... it's just that "never" word that bugs me. Of course, I guess I wouldn't know any better anyway.

**DaFace** · 10-04-2009, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KcMizzou

It sounds great... it's just that "never" word that bugs me. Of course, I guess I wouldn't know any better anyway.

I cheated and modified the poll phrasing, for what it's worth.

View Poll Results: Which type of team would you prefer?
Constant contender, but never seems to be able to make waves in the postseason.	9	21.95%
Below-average team most years, but makes a legitimate Super Bowl run about once a decade.	21	51.22%
Some other type of team that I will describe below (aka the weasel option)	11	26.83%
Voters: 41. You may not vote on this poll

10-04-2009, 06:48 PM
DaFace Kind of a mod Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Donkey Land Casino cash: $-1943101	Which type of team would you prefer? Just curious. I think I may be in the minority on this one.
Posts: 53,155

10-04-2009, 06:57 PM	#16
Bane C.H.I.E.F.S Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: **** your face Casino cash: $10005055	As bad as it may sound Id rather win 11-12 games a year,win a playoff game,then call it a season.I don't need the Chiefs to win the SB to be a fan,even though Id love to see it happen someday.
Posts: 12,621

10-04-2009, 06:57 PM	#17
TrebMaxx Supporter Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Peoples Republic of CoMo Casino cash: $-2482748	Constant contender, but wins it all on occasion.
Posts: 4,462

10-04-2009, 07:07 PM	#24
Tribal Warfare Man of Culture Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Far Beyond Comprehension Casino cash: $-3057187	I want an organization that knows how to build a team yes there are peaks and valleys, but the down years should be non-existent with a good FO, due to the transition phase is more of reloading when the talent is already present. When a player's contract comes up then their's an equally good player to fill the position. The continuity should be seamless concerning this issue. __________________
Posts: 43,457

10-04-2009, 07:12 PM	#27
ArrowheadMagic Veteran Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: OPKS Casino cash: $7853465	Maybe someday... Balt. will draft well enough to actually beat NE.... until then If we could be the pats or Steelers..... sign me up.
Posts: 3,874