Chiefs Enough of the "close games" BS - Page 3

FringeNC · 12-24-2008, 07:50 PM

Here's some sobering stats on league rankings for both point differentials and yardage differentials. These are appalling stats.

Year points yards
2005 9 1
2006 13 17
2007 26 24
2008 29 26

These are not the statistics of a team headed in the right direction. Sorry.

Agent V · 12-25-2008, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser

We've "almost" been good enough for a long time now, and I, for one, am sick of always being "almost" there. Give me a coach, GM, and coaching staff that will get us there, instead of "almost" there. Shit.

Amen. Stop accepting mediocrity everyone. Clark did.

FringeNC · 12-25-2008, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyePod

Actually, you're completely wrong idiot. Those are stats for a team going in the right direction. We're just on the up end of a parabola. Hopefully, this season is the high point and then we'll see us going down the other side. So **** you and your stupidity. if you notice, the delta is much smaller now, and should flip signs next season. bitch.

Wow. For a guy that tries to act smart by throwing around terms that are irrelevant to the discussion, you sure are stupid. I love the comment about the delta -- that's classic.

This stats are very simple people: all they show is that the Chiefs have gotten completely dominated at the LOS this year. You can talk close games all you want, but a team is certainly not "close" when it has yardage and scoring differentials we have. Our defense has been absolutely dominated by the opposition.

ChiefsCountry · 12-25-2008, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikey23545

So you're saying that the Dolphin's improvement from 1-15 to 11-5 is a sign they're on the wrong track?...

Goddam it, you're a moron.

In short term market it isnt, but the long term they are screwed. Chiefs arent building a one year 10-6 team for once - Glad Clark isnt going to follow the Miami and KCJohnny way of thinking. He is going after the Colts or Cowboys of the 90's where you are dominate for 6 to 10 years and have a logical shot at winning the Super Bowl each year.

Marcellus · 12-25-2008, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

In short term market it isnt, but the long term they are screwed. Chiefs arent building a one year 10-6 team for once - Glad Clark isnt going to follow the Miami and KCJohnny way of thinking. He is going after the Colts or Cowboys of the 90's where you are dominate for 6 to 10 years and have a logical shot at winning the Super Bowl each year.

I love how people around here can predict the future.

Is Miami into big $ with Pennington? No. Why is he the long term answer?Why can't they shift gears in a year or so?

Do they have salary issues? No.

Did they trade one of their best defensive players and still get better? Yes.

Will they get to the SB? Most likely not but they went from 1-15 to a possible playoff team. They didn't hurt their short term future in any way by doing it.

If they get to the SB in the next 3 years would the turn around be amazing? Your damn right it would be.

Do you have any proof that won't happen? Hell no you don't.

Would Chiefs fans be estatic with a SB on 3 years? They would about die with happiness.

Are they in better shape than KC right now? Yes, yes they are.

Are they in worse shape looking forward? No way you could say that.

Yea, Miami is going the wrong way.

whoman69 · 12-25-2008, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj56dt58

jesus christ, not this shit again. We don't have the best offensive line, Trent Green, and Priest Holmes..we have a bunch of young players including a young quarterback, let them ****ing develop. christ

We have a bunch of 7 ups who were brought in on the cheap. They never had it and never will.

teedubya · 12-25-2008, 10:28 PM

This shit FINALLY got rid of Carl, you dumbasses.

whoman69 · 12-25-2008, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

In short term market it isnt, but the long term they are screwed. Chiefs arent building a one year 10-6 team for once - Glad Clark isnt going to follow the Miami and KCJohnny way of thinking. He is going after the Colts or Cowboys of the 90's where you are dominate for 6 to 10 years and have a logical shot at winning the Super Bowl each year.

I see no signs of Clark putting together a team that can compete at the top for 6-10 years. At this point we are closer to Bengal type run of futility then we are of repeating the success of the teams you mention. Many of these young guys that we are rebuilding with should not be in our long range plans. Should we bring older guys who have proved solid but not spectacular or younger guys that will play horrible and more than likely never really get to a level in which they are going to be a positive influence on the team. IMO we brought in too many young guys hoping to catch lightning. It was clear coming into this year that our oline had deteriorated horribly. Who did we bring in to remedy that?

KCJohnny · 12-25-2008, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

In short term market it isnt, but the long term they are screwed. Chiefs arent building a one year 10-6 team for once - Glad Clark isnt going to follow the Miami and KCJohnny way of thinking. He is going after the Colts or Cowboys of the 90's where you are dominate for 6 to 10 years and have a logical shot at winning the Super Bowl each year.

Did you even read the thread?
I explicity referred to the Colts and Cowboys in reply #8.

RINGLEADER · 12-25-2008, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj56dt58

why can't people understand this?

Ditto.

Go back and look at how Favre and Manning and Aikman played their first years. Manning had three 3 INT games in the first 4 if memory serves. Not saying Thigpen is on par with these guys -- but he could be if we don't sack the whole thing and start from scratch again with a new rookie when we have a team putting up points. Fix the second half production problems and get some defense I say...

evolve27 · 12-25-2008, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dj56dt58

jesus christ, not this shit again. We don't have the best offensive line, Trent Green, and Priest Holmes..we have a bunch of young players including a young quarterback, let them ****ing develop. christ

ihaveabadfeelingaboutthis

ChiefsCountry · 12-25-2008, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoman69

I see no signs of Clark putting together a team that can compete at the top for 6-10 years. At this point we are closer to Bengal type run of futility then we are of repeating the success of the teams you mention. Many of these young guys that we are rebuilding with should not be in our long range plans. Should we bring older guys who have proved solid but not spectacular or younger guys that will play horrible and more than likely never really get to a level in which they are going to be a positive influence on the team. IMO we brought in too many young guys hoping to catch lightning. It was clear coming into this year that our oline had deteriorated horribly. Who did we bring in to remedy that?

Ok your thought process is totally reeruned. Older guys who suck would be better than young guys who suck? Not really. Our core is being built - Dorsey, Johnson, Bowe, Albert, Flowers maybe Hali and Carr. I dont know why you guys are harping on the Boiman's, Pat Thomas types. All these are just stop gap players and we might get lucky on one like Bradley. Thats a bonus. Its the right way to do it - this thing is being build with 2010 and beyond in mind. Also about the line - I think the addition of Albert is a pretty big step with that.

whoman69 · 12-26-2008, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

Ok your thought process is totally reeruned. Older guys who suck would be better than young guys who suck? Not really. Our core is being built - Dorsey, Johnson, Bowe, Albert, Flowers maybe Hali and Carr. I dont know why you guys are harping on the Boiman's, Pat Thomas types. All these are just stop gap players and we might get lucky on one like Bradley. Thats a bonus. Its the right way to do it - this thing is being build with 2010 and beyond in mind. Also about the line - I think the addition of Albert is a pretty big step with that.

I didn't say older guys that suck. I said older players that are solid but not spectacular. I also was not talking about our top draft picks either. The reason why I am harping on the Boiman and Thomas types is because we brought in quite a few of those type plays, and not just as a stop gap as you try to pass it off as. We had one of the worst offensive lines in the league last year. Tell me who we brought in to compete for those spots besides our top draft pick. We had Bowe and others for our receiver corps. Devard Darling was a starter and didn't have a TD reception until last week. How many players did we bring in like Bradley that didn't catch but were expected to compete for an important role on this team. I'd rather have a vet that has proven he can get the job done in a solid manner than to bring in a young guy that may strike lightning in a bottle one out of 100 times. That sounds like Pederson's draft strategy over the last decade. Too many times he reached for a second rounder like William Bartee, Kenyaron Fox, Kawika Mitchell and Junior Siavii instead of taken a player with more proven ability. What's sad is that those players I mentioned all would have been available in the 4th and 5th rounds.

RINGLEADER · 12-26-2008, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whoman69

Too many times he reached for a second rounder like William Bartee, Kenyaron Fox, Kawika Mitchell and Junior Siavii instead of taken a player with more proven ability. What's sad is that those players I mentioned all would have been available in the 4th and 5th rounds.

Who wishes we still had Kawika or Scott Fujita? They were decent picks given how they've performed since they were Chiefs. But I agree with your point about reaching in the second round (although I think Fox was a third rounder).

triple · 12-26-2008, 10:11 AM

i do not see why Herm's total inability to manage a close game and win it should be to his credit.

it should be exhibit A on why he should not be a head coach in the NFL

BigChiefFan · 12-26-2008, 10:13 AM

I don't recall seeing any horse shoes or hand grenades.

12-24-2008, 07:50 PM
FringeNC MVP Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: NC Casino cash: $-1783986	Enough of the "close games" BS Here's some sobering stats on league rankings for both point differentials and yardage differentials. These are appalling stats. Year points yards 2005 9 1 2006 13 17 2007 26 24 2008 29 26 These are not the statistics of a team headed in the right direction. Sorry.
Posts: 10,234

12-25-2008, 10:28 PM	#36
teedubya Most Valuable Poster Join Date: Oct 2003 Casino cash: $8993042	This shit FINALLY got rid of Carl, you dumbasses.
Posts: 36,832

12-26-2008, 10:11 AM	#44
triple Stop saying &quot;This.&quot; Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $10004900	i do not see why Herm's total inability to manage a close game and win it should be to his credit. it should be exhibit A on why he should not be a head coach in the NFL __________________
Posts: 2,110

12-26-2008, 10:13 AM	#45
BigChiefFan MVP Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: In the Top 10 Casino cash: $9924205	I don't recall seeing any horse shoes or hand grenades. __________________ A 35 year drought can make you thirsty.
Posts: 15,777