Black people don't get to be executioners.

If it makes you feel better, then sure. Go ahead and make one.

I'm supporting Stanzi because he's the best QB on the roster. That's all. I wanted us to suck for Luck. Then I wanted us to trade up for RGIII. Then I wanted us to trade up for Tannehill. My desire to find a legitimate 1st round QB is well-documented.

Starting Stanzi either gets us better production than Cassel, or it gets us more losses than Cassel. More losses get us a better shot at a real QB (since this franchise has demonstrated it doesn't give a flying **** about trading up to get the right guy). If it goes the other way, then we have an upgrade from Cassel.

People who oppose this kind of astound me. But it's not my problem or responsibility to make them understand. So whatever. They can keep on thinking another 27:7 season from Cassel will get us a playoff win. I'd rather be more realistic.

I just want you guys to have a place to console each other... You guys are pinning your life on some random 5th round QB. IF he fails, you guys will need that thread to throw the blame all over the wall, hoping something sticks.

You've got to be one of the dumbest mother****ers on this board.

Now I can't wait for you to post an unoriginal "No, YOU'RE dumb!" comeback.

"No, YOU'RE dumb!"

Thank you.

You're welcome, now you better get back to fantazing about Penn Stating Stanzi in the shower.

I am sorry I disrupted your afternoon activites...

IF Stanzi really is the "Best QB on the roster" then we are in DEEP, DEEP $HIT this season. :hmmm:

I just wish I knew how he can or will look with the 1's.

WTF is HIT? That's not a value of dollars, or any other currency.

You're allowed to type "shit", you do know that, right?

We've been making excuses for our starter for 30 ****'n years.

Why not the b/u as well?...

Touche!


Well played my friend...

Can't support the draft position argument before the season even starts But another thing that really bothers me about our QB situation is that we're getting to a point where we're going to waste the careers of DJ, Hali, Flowers, etc.

Not listing Bowe on purpose, obviously.

Kind of like DT, Shields, and Gonzo?...

So many careers have been wasted in KC... They are just added to a long list of players...

DT, Smith and Hasty

Whose career has been "wasted" in Kansas City?

Yeah - but I try not to - you know what I meant. Just meant that if Stanzi is the best QB on the roster, then the Chiefs are in BIG toruble this season.

Trezelle Jenkins, Ryan Sims, Mike Cloud, Greg Hill, Jessie Haynes, Brody Croyle...Glen Dorsey, Tyson Jackson...

Every player that hasnt won a superbowl in KC due to poor QB play.

**** Kneel Smith...

LMAO

Yeah was pretty pissed off when he had to leave to win a Super Bowl...

You know the intent here. It's not a "wasted career," as a guy like Gonzo has had a fantastic one. But they're wasted opportunities.

The '93-'98 were absolutely wasteful in this sense, and Pioli is working diligently to reconstruct the team using Carl's blueprint.

The difference between Carl's first five years and Pioli's first five years is that Carl and Marty really tried hard to find a solution at QB. They had DeBerg and brought in Kreig. They traded for Joe Montana, signed Rich Gannon and Steve Bono. In 1997, they signed Elvis Grbac over guys like Chris Chandler and Jeff George. They drafted Mike Elkins and Matt Blundin, along with Steve Stenstrom and others.

The point being is that they made an concerted effort to bring in a quality QB in order to "Win Now", because outside of the QB, the Chiefs WERE ready to "Win Now". Now obviously, they weren't as successful as we all had hoped but you can't scoff at them for not trying.

OTOH, Pioli's done an above average job at roster construction the past few years with the exception of QB. Fine, trade for Matt Cassel. But don't stop there - bring in veteran talent to compete, continue to draft guys and do your damnedest to get that Franchise guy on your roster.

So far, he's failed, which is why the Chiefs continue to fail.

Hardly Carl's blueprint at all. Carl couldn't draft to save his life. On a yearly basis he drafted a 5th round talent in the 2nd round and it showed. To make up for that he went after big free costly agents to fill holes tht usually didn't pan out and sent us into cap hell every year. How is Pioli like that again?

Build the defense. Run the ball. Protect the football. Acquire someone else's backup.

We've never seen this before.

Holy shit, this is ****ing nonsense.

With the fourth selection of the 1989 draft, Carl selected Derrick Thomas. With the third selection of the 2009 draft, Pioli drafted Tyson Jackson.

The selection of Thomas set this franchise on fire and brought it to heights it hadn't seen since the 60's. The selection of Tyson Jackson has brought the Chiefs nothing. Two losing seasons out of three.

To further that notion, Peterson drafted another Hall of Famer in Will Shields in 1993 and yet ANOTHER Hall of Famer in Tony Gonzalez in 1997. Three Hall of Famers in eight years, two in the first four.

I doubt Pioli has drafted a Ring of Honor player during his four drafts, let alone two Hall of Famers.

I guess. But these efforts were almost always centered around someone else's guy, and this is a "safer" approach. There's no way of getting around this fact, and this is what has guaranteed mediocrity.

And Carl's draft picks remain the key playmakers on this team.

Berry can begin to change this, so can Brokaki if he can prove a name change.

There were a lot of misses in the draft in Carl's years, but I think this has been pretty well documented that a lot of mistakes were b/c Peterson gave way too much control to coaches, and bringing Vermeil on board was a terrible, terrible combination.

To me the big difference is that while Carl couldn't draft a QB to save his life he was smart enough to cut his losses and try again.

Pioli can't correct the problem if he won't admit he has one...

Yes and no. Peterson made a great effort in 1993. He traded for Joe Montana with his first round pick, then drafted Matt Blundin in the second round. He had the right idea but it didn't work.

He continued that with Bono and Steve Stenstrom in 1995 but it didn't work out either. He had Grbac and Gannon on the same roster, which turned out to be disastrous and destroyed the locker room, which is why I think he avoided bringing in a young guy once Green was entrenched as the starter.

A lot of people tend to forget Peterson's early days in KC because of the way things ended 19 years later but in his first decade, he pretty much did everything he could to make Kansas City a winner.

Carl didn't have any luck with drafting QB's but you can't accuse him of not trying.

Slick Scotty on the other hand...

The Montana move was indeed risky, and one could argue that it was ultimately a mistake. First rounder for a AFC title game appearance? Eh, sounds like paradise right now given the level of futility that we've enjoyed watching.

Ultimately, he never put forth a serious effort in the draft; one second-rounder and one third-rounder in 19 years don't qualify in my mind.

The organization will either have to nut up or get really lucky.

Actually, Mike Elkins was a #2, Matt Blundin was a #2, Steve Stenstrom was a #4, etc. Stenstrom was well thought of at the time, even though he never suited up for the Chiefs.

Anyway, Carl KNEW they were in "Win Now" mode in the 90's and did his best to "Win Now". I don't get that feeling from Pioli, due to the fact that Dwayne Bowe is unsigned, Brandon Carr was allowed to walk, Kyle Orton wasn't re-signed and no QB was drafted in 2012.

This is the biggest problem. Throwing away another year of all these guys plus Charles if Cassel will never develop further is a waste we can't afford.

Exactly.

If not for that trade I would have never watched the Chiefs win a playoff game.

NEH-VER.

I would compare it to the Payed-a-ton move with Denver. The big difference being the $$$. HOF QB coming back from a serious injury at the end of his career.

Yeah, it's risky, but if it pays off who cares?...

This is the exact point I was trying to make the other night: Teams like Pittsburgh are "lucky". They hadn't drafted a QB in the first round since 1980 and went the entire decade of the 90's with second rate journeyman and a guy that was better suited at wide receiver as their QB. Had the Steelers had any balls and traded for a Steve Young or moved up to draft a guy, they might have TEN Super Bowl rings right now.

Rothlisberger fell into their laps. They didn't make a move to get him. Tom Brady fell into the Patriots laps. They didn't make a move to get him. That doesn't "prove" great ownership or a great front office: It proves that they they were lucky that those players fell to them.

Yet, I've seen people on this forum bash the Giants and Eli Manning and bash the Chargers and Philip Rivers. Hell, at least those two teams MADE something happen. The freaking Chargers took a first round QB in 1998, the 32nd overall pick was a QB in 2001 and they finally got it "right" in 2004.

If the Chiefs don't advance deep into the playoffs, I can't imagine a situation where Clark Hunt does not demand that Slick Scotty acquire a first round QB in 2013.

Dane, not disputing your point, but I remember Blundin being our third QB in 1992 behind Dave Krieg and someone else.

Don't forget about the stud we had in Pat Barnes at a 3 pick.

Oops, you are correct, sir. Second rounder, 1992. My memory's fading...

:D

Carl Peterson started with a lot more talent on the team. Saleamua, Neil Smith, Lewis & Ross, Okoye, Cherry and others were already on the team. Peterson drafted Mike Elkins with the 34th pick, top 2nd round choice there.

I think Pioli gets at least 2 more years to put this team together, until the end of 2014 season. Other than the Cassel trade, I think he's done well here.

You know, Barnes had a real chance before his shoulder injury at the Senior Bowl. It's a damn shame that didn't work out.

I remember having a Blundin fridge magnet! LOL

I was really looking forward to seeing what he could do at the time. Just more bad luck on our part.

Peterson acquired Saleamua through Plan B Free Agency. He also didn't **** up the 4th overall selection in 1989, which was huge. There was a debate going on as to which was the better linebacker, Broderick Thomas or Derrick Thomas. Broderick had a fine career but not a Hall of Fame career.


Two more years?

LMAO

I'm not laughing at your statement, it's just that how in the ****ing world can it take SIX YEARS to put together a competitive roster together in KC when teams turnaround in two or three years all the time?

Like you said in the other thread I think, most of those teams that turn around quickly happen to get a franchise qb to start with. Not wait til the rest of the roster is together.

We have a competitive roster right now.

I would say that we have an incomplete competitive roster. I don't think there's anyone outside of One Arrowhead Drive that truly believes that Matt Cassel can lead a team to the Super Bowl.

We have a talented roster.

We've beaten one playoff team in three years - the 7-9 Seahawks.

I wouldn't call that "competitive".

This roster has the potential to be competitive should they get a franchise QB. Problem is, that's at minimum a year down the road, plus the time it takes for him to play at a high level.

Guys like DJ, Hali, Flowers, etc aren't going to play at an elite level forever.

The window is going to be very small.

No matter how negative one wants to get... we have a very competitive roster! Sure we question the QB spot but you can't deny Pioli has actually done a very good job adding pieces throughout the roster. Imo we are a QB away from a Super Bowl caliber team. Even with that said I think Cassel can still lead this roster to the playoffs since it is that good.

Minus one.

When you go to 4 SB's in 8 years you're doing more right than getting lucky. The Pats make smart trades to give themselves more draft picks. The more draft choices you have the better the chance you'll hit a home run with one of them. Not only that but they've won about every way out there. They've won with a running game and good defense. Passing game and good defense. Outstanding passing game and almost no defense.

They keep going to SB's because they adapt - they don't get stuck in one mindset.

And the Steelers are the opposite. They are the model. Stability, continuity, tradition. 3 HC's in 30+ years because they don't hire the wrong guy. They constantly draft well. They do an excellent job of evaluating their own talent.

Other teams rise and fall but the Steelers and Pats just go to title game after title game every few years...

i'd like to cosign Dane's last 8-10 posts

spot on...and you have a much better memory than me

Exactly. This is so frustrating. I hate thinking about the last times since 1993 we had so much talent on D and made the playoffs. Why didn't we win in the playoffs? The ****ing QB. I cringe thinking about going through that again.

We did beat the Packers and Broncos last year, so we tripled that number.



But I get your point.

"competitive" is a meaningless word in the nfl


you can step on your dick and win 6-7 games in a league built for competitive balance...

Sorry man, I disagree. If the Steelers were a great organization, they would have far more Super Bowl rings. It was a massive amount of failure on their part to not find an adequate QB through either free agency or the draft at O'Donnell left via free agency. That team could have been the most dominant, ever, but instead, they were just a very good team.

It's a myth that the Patriots draft well.

Cassel's scrotum-scrubber.

Yep. My mistake. I was using the "Cassel" numbers and forgot about those two.

Point stands.

This.


The pats have had some decent draft picks, but not a whole lot of studs.

You've got a fair point on the '09 draft, but come on, none of those guys were in DT's level. He was a can't miss prospect so its just stupid to even compare that. But ok, ignoring that, there was Cushing, Matthews, and Orakpo that I think would have warranted a reach (in hindsight, mind you). If we drafted them would we have kept DJ or Hali? Especially after DJ's '09? Would Hali have even had the chance to convert to OLB? Then again, maybe Studebaker would have been our special teams ace and we'd have dumped Vrabel sooner with the development of those guys.

I'm also not sure what the **** Tyson Jackson had to do with the Chiefs losing. 2009 the team flat out sucked ass (and we don't have over half our current starters on the team even), and then 2011 the defense played well without arguably their best player and a big hole at nose tackle, oh and with one of the shittiest offense the Chiefs have ever trotted onto the field so unless the defense only gave up 12 points a game they were doomed to lose anyway.

You doubt any of the guys Pioli has drafted will make the ring of honor? Herm ****ing Edwards found 5 that I think have a good chance of making it (Charles, Bowe, Hali, Albert, Flowers), I doubt Pioli didn't find any.

Actually this whole argument is ****ing stupid. Go back 4 years into Carl's tenure and tell me what clear Hall of Famers he had drafted? FFS this might take the cake for dumbest argument I've read on here.

Point definitely stands. It is strengthened actually.

Who has more?

And you might be the dumbest poster I've encountered since I returned from my absence.

If you didn't think that Derrick Thomas was a future Hall of Famer, especially after his multi-sack performances, you either missed the games or are the biggest dipshit, ever.

No one :redface:

But you do get my point, right? People here are pissed the Chiefs haven't spent a first rounder on a QB since 1983 but the Steelers went nearly that long.

What is going to happen this year is that the team will win 7-9 games, take itself out of position to draft a quarterback, and Cassel will be 2013's opening day starter.

If you have tears, prepare to shed them

We're missing something. What could it be?

My point was Carl Peterson started with a lot of talent already on the team. I don't think you can argue that. The Chiefs were considered to have less talent than a first year expansion team. When you're roster is that bad, it's going to take more time than the average turn around. As for Pioli's time, it's just an opinion. I'm hoping Romeo can correct the Cassel mistake, one way or another. I think he will:D

Packers don't count as a playoff team?

I rarely say this anymore, but Sir, goddamn you.

I think this is the most talented roster since 1989. Yes, the Chiefs need a franchise QB, no question. But they have a shit ton of young talent at nearly every position and they actually acquired a little depth this off-season.

Now, I'm not making any predictions but I think this team has a chance, despite Cassel, to make a little noise this year.

Holy shit, now you're arguing that the Steelers aren't a good organization and the Pats don't draft well? I'm not saying the Pats are the best, but damn, they've done quite well in the past 12-13 years, probably about as good as anyone else. They've had their share of bad ones, but what teams have done better through the draft in that time period?

I think you have a valid criticism about the Steelers and them not finding a QB (which is exactly why Pioli's horseshit about Cassel is so stupid, the evidence is that mediocre guys like him don't win you Super Bowls), but to say they're a bad organization, I don't know what to say other than that is right in line with the rest of the stupidity you've posted in this thread. Does that make the Raiders and Lions (pre-Stafford) and some of these other teams that have busted on QBs they drafted high good organizations?

or the steelers

edit: plus those 7-9 seahawks took out a good playoff team in the 1st round of the playoffs....IIRC

God bless us, everyone.

Well, everyone that's in our group...everyone else can go straight to hades with Aaron Curry aids.

Dragging the millstone, so to speak.

Unfortunately, that's pretty much all we can hope for at this point.

No wonder you left, jesus christ, if you posted regularly like you do in this thread I'm sure you probably were constantly called a moron.

Which, if you could ****ing read, actually plays into my argument. Other than Berry, who Pioli did draft, who has been a player anywhere close to that level of prospect that Pioli passed on?

Wow, 1 guy, you're right, no wonder Carl got to stick around so long, we knew he'd draft a few Hall of Fame players. That sure got the Chiefs Super Bowl wins. All that amazing drafting Carl did sure paid off.

Who exactly have the Pats drafted?