[BroncoBuff]

Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar

Again, the "Chiefs Suck" thread at Huddle (which started on the Mane in like 2012) has by far the most replies of any thread on the board. It also has about 150x more views than the typical thread there. You're obsessed w/ KC.

I see your point, but I disagree, at least for myself. I am definitely NOT obsessed. I wasn't even po'd about our long losing streak to you - I didn't like it, but if we're not going to the playoffs, I want a good draft pick. If we popped up and upset you a couple times, we wouldn't have Patrick Surtain.

We have a couple of chiefs trolls over there now (Zerovoltz, RockyMountainOyster), and there have been some heated talk, but honestly, nothing like what I've experienced in here the past few days. And I'm not even a flamethrower.

I saw that thread as comedy until Mahomes showed up, that's when everything changed. I'm not a Mahomes hater or any of that - I definitely hope we kick your ass in a couple weeks, but I'm not in denial about young Patrick. In fact when my cousin visited a couple months ago, we sat down with cigars on the patio and talked about our Top 10 lists, like all red-blooded American men do. I had to acknowledge that young Patrick had leap-frogged #18 into 3rd on my all-time QB list. If you think that was easy you're crazy.

Originally Posted by RaidersCellar

At best, you can say that both fanbases are obsessed. Difference is, only one is fueled by jealousy.

Jealousy? The last five years maybe, not before that. C'mon. That 48 years I been pointing out, that's no joke.

Originally Posted by RaidersCellar

All righty then...let's compare accomplishments from this millennium. That's a quarter of a century. Pretty good sample size, wouldn't you say? Who comes out on top?

�� ... I am not in denial, my friend. I know what's up. We've had some pretty good success this millennium, but we don't compare at ALL to the crayon-red-clad native Americans ��

Originally Posted by RaidersCellar

you said that you personally don't count "minor league" stats, aka AFL accomplishments pre-1970. If you count them, why would you not include them in your comparisons?

Btw, isn't it impressive that a "minor league" team blew out a major league team in January 1970?

The NFL recognizes all AFL games and stats. You're literally the only person I've ever seen make this argument. And you want to talk about obsession?

Yes they do count, that was part of the merger agreement. But there are very very few that ever pop up.

Again, believe it or not, I am not obsessed. I was trying to make a point ... I wish I'd never said "minor league". My point was for the first 7 years the only care the AFL had was surviving to press the issue of merger. As the franchise most cash-poor in the bank and piss poor on the field, I can accurately point to our top priority of survival as making our on-field performance unfair to be judged at this late a date. Especially with a silly record like 1-19 vs a wealthy team.