Chiefs I like Herm's method better... - Page 3

kcbubb · 05-27-2009, 09:24 AM

I would rather play with a bunch of young players and develop them than sign a bunch of old guys if we know that we are going to be bad. Most people seem to believe that the Chiefs are going to be lucky to win six games.

If that is the case, why not look for the next Brandon Carr, Mark Bradley or Mike Cox??? It's hard to find those guys if they don't get a chance to play.

Why are we wasting this valuable playing time on players like Zach Thomas, Mike Vrabel, Mike Goff, and Bobby Engram??? I am sure that they will contribute and play well for the Chiefs at times.

If we were a team that were close to making a playoff run, I would welcome the addition of the older players, but the Chiefs are still developing their roster especially with the change to the 3-4.

If we are going to be bad, I would really rather see Brian Johnston play rather than Vrabel. And I would rather see Quinten Lawrence play rather than Engram.

Or are you one that believes that these older players provide valuable leadership???

MIAdragon · 05-27-2009, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

Engram is 36.

Bradley was a street free agent that has shown that he has the ability to contribute and possibly be our #2 receiver.

and spend major time on the DL

**HemiEd** · 05-27-2009, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

The best way is somehwere in the middle.

You need a good mix of youth and experience.

You need vets who know how to prepare, who understand the game, who serve as mentors and examples for the kids you bring in.

But you have to always be looking for young guys that can repace the vets as their skills diminish.

The Steelers serve as the best example of the way things should work.

And Herman ****ing Edwards can choke on Donkey balls.

I agree, and furthermore, you don't need existing pro bowl veterans, from a loser, that are setting bad examples.
You need guys that are winners, have won, and expect to win.

It is not easy to break the losing mentality, but I think Pioli is doing it the best way.

kcbubb · 05-27-2009, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

Where are you going to get those players? off the street?

Pioli is supposed to be "THE TALENT EVALUATOR". Shouldn't he be able to find a possible MLB in the 3-4 scheme or a #3 wide receiver to replace Thomas and Engram???

What about the guy we drafted, Quinten at WR?

And there have been several undrafted LBs that have had success in the 3-4. I thought that is why we got Pioli. Shouldn't he have an eye for the diamond in the rough???

Micjones · 05-27-2009, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

The best way is somehwere in the middle.

You need a good mix of youth and experience.

You need vets who know how to prepare, who understand the game, who serve as mentors and examples for the kids you bring in.

But you have to always be looking for young guys that can repace the vets as their skills diminish.

The Steelers serve as the best example of the way things should work.

And Herman ****ing Edwards can choke on Donkey balls.

FTW!

**the Talking Can** · 05-27-2009, 09:57 AM

chiefs fans need to take a nap....

milkman · 05-27-2009, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

why not try to fill them now??? is engram or thomas going to be here next year? why wait?

that's my point, why not try to find a guy that can fill those spots that could have a future and then you may have one less hole to fill or maybe even a little depth if you have to upgrade.

Because you don't have young players to fill those holes.

6th, 7th round draft picks and UDFAs are in those rounds and on the street for a reason.

Hitting on those players is not common place.

If a Bryant Johnston or Wes Dacus turn out to be better players than Mike Vrabel and Zach Thomas, they'll earn their place on the field.

The entire premise of your thread is a ****ing fantasy.

JFC.

kcbubb · 05-27-2009, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buehler445

Dude, kcbubb, this team was a giant shit sandwich. The vets are not here to make a superbowl run. They were brought in totemporarily fill holes until we can get a building block or two in here. Looking at who else they could have had, in most cases (except maybe Engram) you can see that they wanted a couple vets with leadership than some worthless Sammy Parker-esque scrub that we could have brought in. They're both unlikely to be around after next year anyway.
Posted via Mobile Device

I think I responded to this with....

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

why not try to fill them now??? is engram or thomas going to be here next year? why wait?

that's my point, why not try to find a guy that can fill those spots that could have a future and then you may have one less hole to fill or maybe even a little depth if you have to upgrade.

**DaKCMan AP** · 05-27-2009, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

Pioli is supposed to be "THE TALENT EVALUATOR". Shouldn't he be able to find a possible MLB in the 3-4 scheme or a #3 wide receiver to replace Thomas and Engram???

What about the guy we drafted, Quinten at WR?

And there have been several undrafted LBs that have had success in the 3-4. I thought that is why we got Pioli. Shouldn't he have an eye for the diamond in the rough???

keg in kc · 05-27-2009, 10:01 AM

One major problem with your "throw the young guys in" scenario is that player development is not a one-year process, especially with day 2 and undrafted players.

**ChiTown** · 05-27-2009, 10:01 AM

I'll assume this was kcbubb's attempt at humor.........

**DaKCMan AP** · 05-27-2009, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiTown

I'll assume this was kcbubb's attempt at humor.........

See.. another vote for the 'kcbubb is dumb and DaKCMan AP is Awesome' option. Neglecting to include it in the poll is criminal!

kcbubb · 05-27-2009, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Because you don't have young players to fill those holes.

6th, 7th round draft picks and UDFAs are in those rounds and on the street for a reason.

Hitting on those players is not common place.

If a Bryant Johnston or Wes Dacus turn out to be better players than Mike Vrabel and Zach Thomas, they'll earn their place on the field.

The entire premise of your thread is a ****ing fantasy.

JFC.

The odds are slim that's true. But those older players won't be on the team next year anyway.

I would rather take a chance with a younger guy. If he sucks, and you cut him then that this same result that you have with Engram or Thomas.

The roster is the same. With a bad young player or an old vet. Both are probably not on the team the next year.

If he is decent, then you have some depth and on the long shot that he is James Harrison then you hit a home run.

**DaKCMan AP** · 05-27-2009, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

The odds are slim that's true. But those older players won't be on the team next year anyway.

I would rather take a chance with a younger guy. If he sucks, and you cut him then that this same result that you have with Engram or Thomas.

The roster is the same. With a bad young player or an old vet. Both are probably not on the team the next year.

If he is decent, then you have some depth and on the long shot that he is James Harrison then you hit a home run.

You. Just. Don't. Get. It.

Go read Patriot Reign (I'm making a large assumption that you can read) and maybe you'll start to understand, but I'm not optimistic that you will.

BTW, James Harrison sat on the bench for 4 years in Pittsburgh before starting in 2007.

milkman · 05-27-2009, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

The odds are slim that's true. But those older players won't be on the team next year anyway.

I would rather take a chance with a younger guy. If he sucks, and you cut him then that this same result that you have with Engram or Thomas.

The roster is the same. With a bad young player or an old vet. Both are probably not on the team the next year.

If he is decent, then you have some depth and on the long shot that he is James Harrison then you hit a home run.

And the odds that an UDFA is going to make your roster is almost the same as the odds that Mike Vrabel will be on this team in 2012.

You might get one or two UDFA that can actually play, but if they can't play, you are hurting your team even more by not having players on your roster today that can play.

This is just ****ing too ridiculous to even argue about.

CoMoChief · 05-27-2009, 10:10 AM

If you're in a transitional period with coaching scheme's etc, you need stop gap players. Not everything can be fixed via draft. Having that said you need to build through the draft and draft well. I don't think this season's draft is THE draft to build around, sadly. Next season's draft is going to be a HUGE defensive draft. I'm excited about that.

View Poll Results: Would you rather play the older guys or look for younger players to contribute?
We need the older guys. They provide valuable leadership.	85	82.52%
We shouldn't have signed the older guys, we should find and develop younger players and let them play.	18	17.48%
Voters: 103. You may not vote on this poll

05-27-2009, 09:24 AM
kcbubb Veteran Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $5016719	I like Herm's method better... I would rather play with a bunch of young players and develop them than sign a bunch of old guys if we know that we are going to be bad. Most people seem to believe that the Chiefs are going to be lucky to win six games. If that is the case, why not look for the next Brandon Carr, Mark Bradley or Mike Cox??? It's hard to find those guys if they don't get a chance to play. Why are we wasting this valuable playing time on players like Zach Thomas, Mike Vrabel, Mike Goff, and Bobby Engram??? I am sure that they will contribute and play well for the Chiefs at times. If we were a team that were close to making a playoff run, I would welcome the addition of the older players, but the Chiefs are still developing their roster especially with the change to the 3-4. If we are going to be bad, I would really rather see Brian Johnston play rather than Vrabel. And I would rather see Quinten Lawrence play rather than Engram. Or are you one that believes that these older players provide valuable leadership???
Posts: 2,557

05-27-2009, 09:57 AM	#35
the Talking Can Supporter Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: street Casino cash: $9192208	chiefs fans need to take a nap.... __________________ Clark Hunt: "Thank god for the Dominican pool boy"
Posts: 51,585

05-27-2009, 10:01 AM	#39
keg in kc oxymoron Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: OP/KC/Whatever Casino cash: $9556299	One major problem with your "throw the young guys in" scenario is that player development is not a one-year process, especially with day 2 and undrafted players.
Posts: 58,682

05-27-2009, 10:01 AM	#40
ChiTown Stroking to the SB Champs! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Flatlands of Kansas Casino cash: $-501038	I'll assume this was kcbubb's attempt at humor.........
Posts: 40,921

05-27-2009, 10:10 AM	#45
CoMoChief Mahomes Dynasty Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Parts Unknown Casino cash: $7672254	If you're in a transitional period with coaching scheme's etc, you need stop gap players. Not everything can be fixed via draft. Having that said you need to build through the draft and draft well. I don't think this season's draft is THE draft to build around, sadly. Next season's draft is going to be a HUGE defensive draft. I'm excited about that.
Posts: 39,245