PDA

View Full Version : chiefs done before season starts?



timbok
05-25-2007, 09:40 AM
The quarterback swears he'll be playing somewhere else come September and the defensive end isn't letting a pending suspension stop him from complaining he is underpaid.
When the head coach isn't angrily scolding the media, he's insisting he is an honest man no matter what the disgruntled quarterback might imply.
As far as general manager Carl Peterson is concerned, just about everybody seems unhappy with him, especially media critics who blast away on a daily basis. But it's not true that he's fled the country. He's only in Scotland for the birth of a grandchild.
The month of May has been anything but merry for the Kansas City Chiefs. If the normally short, laid-back practices of the spring are this tumultuous, what chaos and controversy must loom in the autumn?
"This is the offseason. Are you kidding me?" coach Herm Edwards exclaimed this week while parrying with reporters.
"We will have a starting football team when we go to Houston (for the Sept. 9 season opener). They'll be the best 46 guys in my opinion who can help us win games. Period."
But if only it were that simple. For many reasons beyond his control, Edwards is finding the sledding rough as he goes about retooling one of the NFL's oldest lineups and patching up quarrels between players and the front office.
The biggest irritant, for both the quarterback and the coach, is the presence of Trent Green.
Soon to turn 37, the two-time Pro Bowler figures he's not in the long-range plans for a team which Edwards has said needs to get younger.
So he and his agent worked a deal with Miami after, Green says, Peterson assured him the club would make a trade if he found a team that wanted him.
But Peterson and the Dolphins have been unable to agree on compensation, leading to the absurd situation of having a quarterback taking practice snaps this week with what will probably soon be ex-teammates.
"It's very strange," Green says. "I don't even know my role."
What's infuriated Edwards have been implications he has not been truthful when he said Green would be given a fair chance to win the starting job.
"If a situation changes down the road, that doesn't mean that I didn't tell the truth," he snapped at reporters after one practice. "The one thing I do is tell the truth. Maybe some people can't accept that. If the situation changes, don't get it twisted like, `He said this and now it's this.'"
Edwards was so angry at one local radio sports talk host, he led him away from the group and got in his face, gesturing forcefully as the startled young man backed away.
But if Green is upset with Peterson for not pulling the trigger on the Miami trade, Jared Allen is absolutely furious with the sometimes-confrontational general manager. In a move that could only be termed a public relations disaster, Allen went public last winter with his demands to be traded shortly after he was arrested for a second DUI.
Predictably, he's been suspended for the first four games of this coming season and Peterson has refused to yield to his contract demands.
But after having dinner and a heart-to-heart talk one night in Las Vegas with Edwards, Allen signed a one-year tender and reported this week. He's slimmed down, in good condition and promising to make no waves.
But he's also angry at Peterson.
"I don't have anything to prove to the Chiefs. I'm going to go out and play the same way I've been playing for the last three years, and that will take care of itself," he said.
"My teammates and Herm. That's why I'm here," he said. "This is one of my favorite coaching staffs I've ever played for."
Amid this backdrop, contract negotiations are also heating up between Peterson and the agent for Pro Bowl running back Larry Johnson. Nobody is predicting a smooth ride.
But to Pro Bowl guard Brian Waters, all the behind-the-scenes maneuvers are just a part of "the shrewdness of this organization."
"They've always been very shrewd business types," he said. "I don't think they've ever gone out and taken many risks on players. They always stay tight to their business plan."
So does that bother the players?
"It bothers you when it's your time to get paid."


:sign0136:

CHIEFCANNON
05-25-2007, 10:50 AM
This is all apart of the 5 year plan to the SuperBowl. Ask Carl.

Coach
05-25-2007, 11:46 AM
This is all apart of the 5 year plan to the SuperBowl. Ask Carl.

5 yr. plan? Carl won't be here in 5 years. That's the plan anyhow.

timbok
05-25-2007, 01:31 PM
lol....very true

CHIEFCANNON
05-25-2007, 03:40 PM
5 yr. plan? Carl won't be here in 5 years. That's the plan anyhow.

When Carl Peterson took the job ..... almost 20 years ago.... he stated he came to KC with a 5 year plan to get to the SuperBowl.... that's was my point. :11:

Canada
05-25-2007, 04:03 PM
yup...season's over, i probably won't even watch this season. such a refreshing change of all the positive opinions i seem to see here all the time.

Chiefster
05-25-2007, 09:31 PM
yup...season's over, i probably won't even watch this season. such a refreshing change of all the positive opinions i seem to see here all the time.


LOL!! ...Yeah especially from me and Chief31. I'll just bet we're not the only team in the NFL facing these problems. I think these are probably problems which exist to one degree or the other in most every team every season.

Welcome aboard CHIEFCANNON!

Coach
05-25-2007, 10:57 PM
yup...season's over, i probably won't even watch this season. such a refreshing change of all the positive opinions i seem to see here all the time.

I hear ya. Everytime I login to the site I'm waiting to read one Chief31's rants about how bad the Chiefs have sucked in the past, how they currently suck, and how they will suck in the future.

Yet, in the last 20 years they have probably been one of the 3 most successful NFL teams in terms of wins/losses.

timbok
05-25-2007, 11:23 PM
i think....the chiefs need 1 thing!
THEY NEED A NEW COACH

Coach
05-25-2007, 11:24 PM
The coach just got here and has already put them in the playoffs.

Canada
05-25-2007, 11:25 PM
maybe Herm wasn't the problem, i think the Jets just stunk/stink

Coach
05-25-2007, 11:28 PM
maybe Herm wasn't the problem, i think the Jets just stunk/stink

amen.
:bananen_smilies037:

Chiefster
05-26-2007, 12:22 AM
The coach just got here and has already put them in the playoffs.


Good point! I'd give you rep for it but I gotta spread it around before giving you any more. :)

wolfpack
05-26-2007, 08:09 PM
this crap is fairly new to the chiefs but as far as every year crap, the faiders wrote the book on it. the new york media isnt real kind on their football teams also.

Chiefster
05-26-2007, 09:00 PM
this crap is fairly new to the chiefs but as far as every year crap, the faiders wrote the book on it. the new york media isnt real kind on their football teams also.


So, that's where Herm got his disposition towards the media. :D

Bighurt27
06-13-2007, 03:57 AM
I actually kinda like the direction Herm is taking the Chiefs in. A run based defensive powerhouse ala SEC styled team. It worked for the Bears last year granted I'd rather have Damon Huard with 2 broken legs running this offense than Rex Grossman. Brodie Croyle is the real deal. The only reason he slipped to the 3rd round was his injuries. The only thing that worries me about the Chiefs is the O-line.

Chiefster
06-13-2007, 04:28 AM
I actually kinda like the direction Herm is taking the Chiefs in. A run based defensive powerhouse ala SEC styled team. It worked for the Bears last year granted I'd rather have Damon Huard with 2 broken legs running this offense than Rex Grossman. Brodie Croyle is the real deal. The only reason he slipped to the 3rd round was his injuries. The only thing that worries me about the Chiefs is the O-line.


Yup!

I, also, remember the run, run, pass, punt/FG offense with Marty-ball; I fear it will be more of the same. However, Arrowhead will begin to rock more because the defense will be on the field most of the time.

Canada
06-13-2007, 09:32 AM
Didn't Marty ball put us in the playoffs several times?? Seems to me we have been going backwards until Herm came to town. I like where we are headed.

chief31
06-13-2007, 10:29 AM
Oh, Hi all. Negative Nancy, here. Lol. I do reserve hope for the Chiefs, this season. If Huard can repeat the kind of play, he executed, last season. Brodie Croyle is used to playing without alot of protection. The potential of our defense is very high. Perhaps, some of our offensive linemen can maximize on their potential, to become decent starters. Larry Johnson could become willing to play hard, on the plays that are called, rather he agrees with them, or not.

My biggest problem, is with the notion that slowing down the offense is, somehow, a great idea. If you have the best defense, in the NFL, what fool is going to tell you that we need to minimize on the success of the defense, to assist the offense? The concept is ludacris. "Our offense is scoring too quickly." Absolute insanity. Under Vermiel, we had a team that was capable of humiliating, even the best of teams, in the league.

Couple that with "turning a blind eye" to an offensive line that has suffered the losses of, both, Will Shields and Willie Roaf and you are going to hear me "booing" from the highest peak, that I can find, to "boo" from. ( The Chiefs Crowd is the pinnacle of forums, for me to do so.) Thanks for having me, by the way.

Chiefster
06-13-2007, 07:59 PM
Oh, Hi all. Negative Nancy, here. Lol. I do reserve hope for the Chiefs, this season. If Huard can repeat the kind of play, he executed, last season. Brodie Croyle is used to playing without alot of protection. The potential of our defense is very high. Perhaps, some of our offensive linemen can maximize on their potential, to become decent starters. Larry Johnson could become willing to play hard, on the plays that are called, rather he agrees with them, or not.

My biggest problem, is with the notion that slowing down the offense is, somehow, a great idea. If you have the best defense, in the NFL, what fool is going to tell you that we need to minimize on the success of the defense, to assist the offense? The concept is ludacris. "Our offense is scoring too quickly." Absolute insanity. Under Vermiel, we had a team that was capable of humiliating, even the best of teams, in the league.

Couple that with "turning a blind eye" to an offensive line that has suffered the losses of, both, Will Shields and Willie Roaf and you are going to hear me "booing" from the highest peak, that I can find, to "boo" from. ( The Chiefs Crowd is the pinnacle of forums, for me to do so.) Thanks for having me, by the way.

You're welcome! :D

My point in all this is that we can't seem to get a hold of a balanced team, see the Patriots, under Vermeil we had a top notch offense and a defense that was non existent. Under Herm I fear just the opposite is true; neither of these philosophies will yield a Super Bowl. IMO
In fact the only team in recent memory that was successful in pulling off a single Super Bowl victory with a strong defense and a weak offense was the Ravens.

You can't build just one side of the ball and neglect the other; now having said thus it is premature to state that this has happened as of yet in the Herm Edwards era.

Canada
06-13-2007, 09:11 PM
You can't honestly say that a defence that has been on the field for 40-50 minutes a game is still going to be effective. I would love to pretend that we have the kind of depth on our defence that it would be possible, but we do not. If you like offence that much, start watching the CFL...they bomb it down the field every play almost. I am not saying that we should slow the offence to a halt, but ball control is a big factor. If the offence is only on the field for 15 minutes a game, the defence will wear out. As far as our offensive line, who would you suggest we replace Shields and Roaf with? Just pluck them from the tree of pro bowl offensive lineman that seems to be growing somewhere? I guess the pro bowlers on offense that we have now are just going to fade away in a mediocre offence retire and give you something else to complain about. Personally I have heard about all of the problems the Chiefs have...what would you do to fix it??

Chiefster
06-13-2007, 10:38 PM
You can't honestly say that a defence that has been on the field for 40-50 minutes a game is still going to be effective. I would love to pretend that we have the kind of depth on our defence that it would be possible, but we do not. If you like offence that much, start watching the CFL...they bomb it down the field every play almost. I am not saying that we should slow the offence to a halt, but ball control is a big factor. If the offence is only on the field for 15 minutes a game, the defence will wear out. As far as our offensive line, who would you suggest we replace Shields and Roaf with? Just pluck them from the tree of pro bowl offensive lineman that seems to be growing somewhere? I guess the pro bowlers on offense that we have now are just going to fade away in a mediocre offence retire and give you something else to complain about. Personally I have heard about all of the problems the Chiefs have...what would you do to fix it??


I agree with what you are saying, and I saw this very thing not only in the Vermeil era but also in the Schottenheimer era as well; the defense was on the field much of the time because much of the time the offense was on and off the field in exactly three plays and a punt. I would like to see a balanced offensive attack along with the defense I believe we are going to field this season; as to how to fix it? Yet another good question, admittedly easier said then done, and it's going to take more then one or two seasons. Don't get me wrong; I think you have a valid point, and I truly do hope Herm can deliver a balanced team. Like all other Chiefs fans I would love to see my beloved Chiefs win another Super Bowl one day in my life time. :D

Canada
06-14-2007, 12:18 AM
I agree with what you are saying, and I saw this very thing not only in the Vermeil era but also in the Schottenheimer era as well; the defense was on the field much of the time because much of the time the offense was on and off the field in exactly three plays and a punt. I would like to see a balanced offensive attack along with the defense I believe we are going to field this season; as to how to fix it? Yet another good question, admittedly easier said then done, and it's going to take more then one or two seasons. Don't get me wrong; I think you have a valid point, and I truly do hope Herm can deliver a balanced team. Like all other Chiefs fans I would love to see my beloved Chiefs win another Super Bowl one day in my life time. :D

Wouldn't we all. I just think we should stop attacking how poor our offence is before they have set foot on the field. The offence we have just finished minicamp. The rookies and the vets pretty much just met. There are some questions on the offence but why does it have to be negative all the time. Has anyoneever wondered how good this team will be if Tony G puts up pro bowl numbers (again) and LJ goes for 1750 yards (again) and Priest comes back and cathes 85 passes out of the backfield and the offensive line that surprises everyone...and we have the defence we all expect. That is the Chiefs team that I will be watching this season. If we end up 6-10 then I will at least know what I am complaining about.

chief31
06-14-2007, 03:12 AM
You can't honestly say that a defence that has been on the field for 40-50 minutes a game is still going to be effective. I would love to pretend that we have the kind of depth on our defence that it would be possible, but we do not. If you like offence that much, start watching the CFL...they bomb it down the field every play almost. I am not saying that we should slow the offence to a halt, but ball control is a big factor. If the offence is only on the field for 15 minutes a game, the defence will wear out. As far as our offensive line, who would you suggest we replace Shields and Roaf with? Just pluck them from the tree of pro bowl offensive lineman that seems to be growing somewhere? I guess the pro bowlers on offense that we have now are just going to fade away in a mediocre offence retire and give you something else to complain about. Personally I have heard about all of the problems the Chiefs have...what would you do to fix it??

First off... Check into those TOP numbers. Vermiels offense almost always controlled the clock. Often by an extreme differential.

Secondly, I wouldn't suggest that there were a "Will Shields" nor a "Willie Roaf" available. How about drafting .....ANYBODY!!!!!! You cannot ignore those losses, to your offensive line. Sixth round....LATE, sixth round. This simply isn't the way to address a problem, of that magnitude.

Thirdly, Yeah, I like offense. Because it is half of the game, of football. Fact is... I have always been more of a defensive fan. However, you don't blame the offense for a crappy defense.

Chiefster
06-14-2007, 06:28 AM
Wouldn't we all. I just think we should stop attacking how poor our offence is before they have set foot on the field. The offence we have just finished minicamp. The rookies and the vets pretty much just met. There are some questions on the offence but why does it have to be negative all the time. Has anyoneever wondered how good this team will be if Tony G puts up pro bowl numbers (again) and LJ goes for 1750 yards (again) and Priest comes back and cathes 85 passes out of the backfield and the offensive line that surprises everyone...and we have the defence we all expect. That is the Chiefs team that I will be watching this season. If we end up 6-10 then I will at least know what I am complaining about.


This is why I have tempered my negativism with the "wait and see" attitude because we simply don't know enough about our revamp offensive personnel to say for sure. However, the prospect of Priest coming back, while a hopeful thought, isn't realistic IMO. And, I hope you're right about the offense you expect to see, but as I said before we'll have to "wait and see".
I'm with ya bud; just been disappointed enough to not raise my expectations. :)

chief31
06-14-2007, 07:12 AM
This is why I have tempered my negativism with the "wait and see" attitude because we simply don't know enough about our revamp offensive personnel to say for sure. However, the prospect of Priest coming back, while a hopeful thought, isn't realistic IMO. And, I hope you're right about the offense you expect to see, but as I said before we'll have to "wait and see".
I'm with ya bud; just been disappointed enough to not raise my expectations. :)

Like I started with, I have hope, just not very confident in what this team is capable of. Why do I have to be so negative? Becaause of all of the subtractions. That is all.

Chiefster
06-14-2007, 07:32 AM
Like I started with, I have hope, just not very confident in what this team is capable of. Why do I have to be so negative? Becaause of all of the subtractions. That is all.


Well you are the resident mathematician. :D

Canada
06-14-2007, 10:05 AM
This is why I have tempered my negativism with the "wait and see" attitude because we simply don't know enough about our revamp offensive personnel to say for sure. However, the prospect of Priest coming back, while a hopeful thought, isn't realistic IMO. And, I hope you're right about the offense you expect to see, but as I said before we'll have to "wait and see".
I'm with ya bud; just been disappointed enough to not raise my expectations. :)

That part I was not so serious about, but Bennet...maybe. As far as the subtractions, there are also some additions. We obviously need a new formula because the old one equaled 0 playoff wins. The only playoff wins we have had in the last two decades were with good defence and ball control offence. It would be nice to have the old offence with this defence, but the only way for this to happen is to try to eliminate the salary cap (which i don't think is gonna happen) I agree we should have adressed the O-line more than we have, but I don't think we needed to take a lineman for the sake of taking a lineman. If the talent wasn't there then we would have wasted a pick and then we would have a crappy o lineman to complain about. Remember Ryan Sims?? If I do not have high expectations then why watch the games? I guess I am one of the few optimists here, but we are all entitled to our opinions.

Canada
06-14-2007, 10:10 AM
First off... Check into those TOP numbers. Vermiels offense almost always controlled the clock. Often by an extreme differential.

Secondly, I wouldn't suggest that there were a "Will Shields" nor a "Willie Roaf" available. How about drafting .....ANYBODY!!!!!! You cannot ignore those losses, to your offensive line. Sixth round....LATE, sixth round. This simply isn't the way to address a problem, of that magnitude.

Thirdly, Yeah, I like offense. Because it is half of the game, of football. Fact is... I have always been more of a defensive fan. However, you don't blame the offense for a crappy defense.

Vermiels offence vs. a good team means that we had to have the ball last to win. Look at the loss to the Colts in '03. How many punts were there?

As far as drafting for the sake of drafting...again Ryan Sims

Thirdly...i don't blame the offence for a crappy defence, but if they were that good, why can't they help the defence out? Give them a rest. Reduce the opponents time/number of posessions = less opportunities = less points scored.

chief31
06-14-2007, 01:03 PM
Vermiels offence vs. a good team means that we had to have the ball last to win. Look at the loss to the Colts in '03. How many punts were there?

As far as drafting for the sake of drafting...again Ryan Sims

Thirdly...i don't blame the offence for a crappy defence, but if they were that good, why can't they help the defence out? Give them a rest. Reduce the opponents time/number of posessions = less opportunities = less points scored.

The object of the offense should be to score points. I will repeat, that Under Vermiel, the Chiefs dominated time of possession. Look it up. No offense is good enough to have helped that defense. If you attempt to "slow it down", for the sake of your defense, then you fail to score, and lose the game.

Yeah, the Chiefs needed to have the ball last, or build a large lead, to hold on for the win. I think that you just made my point. The defense was THAT bad. If the offense held possession, four minutes longer than the opposition, while managing to tally... say... thirty-two points .... Exactly what would you have them do, to further aid the defense?

No matter what attempt at logic that you utilize, to make sense of schucking the offense, it will still come up as illogical.

ANYWAY.... I stopped in here, (This thread) to voice my optimism, no matter how mild it may be.

I would like to request a new forum, for all of the little spats that I wind-up in. How about creating a new forum, called "The Ring"? I think it would be fun to invite some fellow Chiefs fans to "get in the ring". Lol.
I am just kidding, here. Easy there Canada... I don't want in the ring with some crazed, beer chuggin', large Canadian Chiefs fan. Lol.

chief31
06-14-2007, 01:13 PM
I hear ya. Everytime I login to the site I'm waiting to read one Chief31's rants about how bad the Chiefs have sucked in the past, how they currently suck, and how they will suck in the future.

Yet, in the last 20 years they have probably been one of the 3 most successful NFL teams in terms of wins/losses.

Coach, I think that one was a little bit, below the belt. I thought very highly of the "past" Chiefs teams. I don't think I have posted anything about how bad any of our past teams have been. The next time, I think the ref will have to have the judges deduct a point from you.

Canada
06-14-2007, 01:36 PM
The object of the offense should be to score points. I will repeat, that Under Vermiel, the Chiefs dominated time of possession. Look it up. No offense is good enough to have helped that defense. If you attempt to "slow it down", for the sake of your defense, then you fail to score, and lose the game.

Yeah, the Chiefs needed to have the ball last, or build a large lead, to hold on for the win. I think that you just made my point. The defense was THAT bad. If the offense held possession, four minutes longer than the opposition, while managing to tally... say... thirty-two points .... Exactly what would you have them do, to further aid the defense?

No matter what attempt at logic that you utilize, to make sense of schucking the offense, it will still come up as illogical.

ANYWAY.... I stopped in here, (This thread) to voice my optimism, no matter how mild it may be.

I would like to request a new forum, for all of the little spats that I wind-up in. How about creating a new forum, called "The Ring"? I think it would be fun to invite some fellow Chiefs fans to "get in the ring". Lol.
I am just kidding, here. Easy there Canada... I don't want in the ring with some crazed, beer chuggin', large Canadian Chiefs fan. Lol.

I don't remember ever saying that they weren't bad. i am saying that the defence we have now is not that bad and a little help from the offence and vice versa won't hurt the team.

No offence taken, we are all entitled to our opinions. If we all agreed all the time then we would have nothing to talk about. :)

Chiefster
06-14-2007, 02:25 PM
Nothing wrong with spirited debate; I enjoy reading all points of view and think you both present valid arguments. As long as it remains respectful, and it has, things will be fine, and I see no reason to begin deleting posts, moving or removing the thread. :)

Chiefster
06-14-2007, 07:43 PM
[/b]

I don't remember ever saying that they weren't bad. i am saying that the defence we have now is not that bad and a little help from the offence and vice versa won't hurt the team.

No offence taken, we are all entitled to our opinions. If we all agreed all the time then we would have nothing to talk about. :)


Ditto! My Canadian friend; that's what makes us the :invasion: !

Oh, and I'll watch my beloved Chiefs regardless of expectations; high, low or none. :D

Chiefster
06-14-2007, 07:45 PM
Coach, I think that one was a little bit, below the belt. I thought very highly of the "past" Chiefs teams. I don't think I have posted anything about how bad any of our past teams have been. The next time, I think the ref will have to have the judges deduct a point from you.

LOL!!
...Aint gonna happen; coach is the ref. :p

stlchief
06-16-2007, 08:00 PM
Ditto! My Canadian friend; that's what makes us the :invasion: !

Oh, and I'll watch my beloved Chiefs regardless of expectations; high, low or none. :D


I believe that is what ties us all together. No matter if we are 1-14 at the end of the year, I have a feeling all the regulars will be on this site the Saturday before Week 17 talking about what we need to do to get win #2.

But I still say the offense will probably be no worse than last year and the defense is improved. I say 10-6 and first round in Indy again. But we'll have a different Solari calling the plays this year (experienced & ready to go) and we won't have Herm shaking in his boots to yank the perernial (sp?) pro-bowler. We walk out with a win....

Chiefster
06-16-2007, 11:26 PM
I believe that is what ties us all together. No matter if we are 1-14 at the end of the year, I have a feeling all the regulars will be on this site the Saturday before Week 17 talking about what we need to do to get win #2.

But I still say the offense will probably be no worse than last year and the defense is improved. I say 10-6 and first round in Indy again. But we'll have a different Solari calling the plays this year (experienced & ready to go) and we won't have Herm shaking in his boots to yank the perernial (sp?) pro-bowler. We walk out with a win....


I sure hope you're right; this season will be, if nothing else, interesting. :)

wolfpack
06-17-2007, 10:31 AM
the offense goes out and gets a 20 plus lead and we loose. thats bad "d". in todays nfl its real hard to get a balanced team. afew have done it but just a few. give me a attacking high scoring, take some chances, 'O' over some pu$$ whiped offense any day. if the deffense cant hold their own with a 20 plus lead then the team dosent shouldn`t be in the dance.

TXChief
06-17-2007, 01:21 PM
It seems like more teams have won the super bowl with a balanced team. The only teams I can think of that won with high powered off or great def is the rams and ravens.

Chiefster
06-17-2007, 04:28 PM
It seems like more teams have won the super bowl with a balanced team. The only teams I can think of that won with high powered off or great def is the rams and ravens.


Agreed! In the 1980s the 49rs did pretty well with the west coast offense and Joe Montana, and before that it was Terry Bradshaw and the steel curtain in the 1970s. :)

chief31
06-17-2007, 05:01 PM
It seems like more teams have won the super bowl with a balanced team. The only teams I can think of that won with high powered off or great def is the rams and ravens.

Am I the only one who watched the Super Bowl, last season?Lol. Or how about the Steelers, the year before?(Granted, the Steelers started to become more balanced, but still, a defensive monster.)If you can create a monster, on one side of the ball, then bring the other side to a high level, This is where you will find a Super Bowl team.

Canada
06-17-2007, 05:24 PM
Am I the only one who watched the Super Bowl, last season?Lol. Or how about the Steelers, the year before?(Granted, the Steelers started to become more balanced, but still, a defensive monster.)If you can create a monster, on one side of the ball, then bring the other side to a high level, This is where you will find a Super Bowl team.

Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.

chief31
06-17-2007, 06:00 PM
Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.

Ageed. New England seems to be the model, for everyone, as a balanced team. Well, fact is, they have a borderline monster, on both sides of the ball. A very rare luxury.

Chiefster
06-17-2007, 11:38 PM
Am I the only one who watched the Super Bowl, last season?Lol. Or how about the Steelers, the year before?(Granted, the Steelers started to become more balanced, but still, a defensive monster.)If you can create a monster, on one side of the ball, then bring the other side to a high level, This is where you will find a Super Bowl team.

I think you have just described a balanced team.

Hey, don't look now but you just made our case; thanks BTW! :D

Chiefster
06-17-2007, 11:40 PM
Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.


Exactly! :D

chief31
06-18-2007, 06:52 PM
Both those teams as you mentioned were really good on one side of the ball for the regular season, but look at how they played in the post season. They were both very balanced teams which is what this conversation always comes back too. Indy had a terrible Defence last year until the playoffs started. If their playoff D had played the same as they did in the regular season they would not be wearing rings today. If offence was all you needed they would have had a few in the last several years, but instead NE (the balanced team) has been winning them. We never seem to have trouble having a monster, but its getting that other side to the high level that seems to be difficult.

In the Steelers' case, they continued to be a "defense-first" team, in the postseason. The Colts had one game, that made the defense look good and that was more a case of the Chiefs' offense playing poorly. The Ravens had a weak offense, anyway. Much like the Bears. While the Patriots threw thirty-something, on the board. Both of those teams were carried by their dominant side of the ball. But your point is weel taken. Both sides of the ball need to perform at their best, to have a real chance, at a Super Bowl victory.

Chiefster
06-18-2007, 09:14 PM
In the Steelers' case, they continued to be a "defense-first" team, in the postseason. The Colts had one game, that made the defense look good and that was more a case of the Chiefs' offense playing poorly. The Ravens had a weak offense, anyway. Much like the Bears. While the Patriots threw thirty-something, on the board. Both of those teams were carried by their dominant side of the ball. But your point is weel taken. Both sides of the ball need to perform at their best, to have a real chance, at a Super Bowl victory.


Yup; the offense and the defense have got to do their jobs.

Canada
06-20-2007, 11:06 PM
Holy Crap man...we all agree on something. Guess this thread is gonna get closed now. lol

chief31
06-20-2007, 11:08 PM
Holy Crap man...we all agree on something. Guess this thread is gonna get closed now. lol

Hunh-uunh!!!!

chief31
06-20-2007, 11:13 PM
You're aaaaa doo-doo head.Doo-doo heeead, doo-doo head!!!

Canada
06-20-2007, 11:37 PM
grrrrrr....i Don't Know How To Type In Big Letters!!!

Chiefster
06-20-2007, 11:40 PM
Holy Crap man...we all agree on something. Guess this thread is gonna get closed now. lol


Yep! The thread has lost it's burst. LOL!

Chiefster
06-20-2007, 11:41 PM
grrrrrr....i Don't Know How To Type In Big Letters!!!


There I fixed it for ya. :D

Canada
06-21-2007, 12:15 AM
YEAH!!! Thanx man!!

Chiefster
06-21-2007, 01:39 AM
YEAH!!! Thanx man!!

LOL! Hey thats what I'm here for.

BoredomReallySux
06-21-2007, 01:57 PM
It is ridiculous to say the season is over before it's begun. I mean we haven't played a single snap and already the nay sayers are out in full force.

Canada
06-21-2007, 03:12 PM
again...welcome to the crowd

BoredomReallySux
06-21-2007, 04:18 PM
again...welcome to the crowd

Thanx! :)

TheLateGreat#58Fan
06-21-2007, 10:30 PM
unforutnately alot times we (being Chiefs fans) automatically think the very worst is going to happen while all along hoping for the best. Honestly I dont expect to have a great year but I am excited about watchingthis years team, all the young talent, I am excited as long as Brodiestays healthy and develops-we re-sign Larry things look positive

Chiefster
06-21-2007, 10:41 PM
unforutnately alot times we (being Chiefs fans) automatically think the very worst is going to happen while all along hoping for the best. Honestly I dont expect to have a great year but I am excited about watchingthis years team, all the young talent, I am excited as long as Brodiestays healthy and develops-we re-sign Larry things look positive


...Very well put! :)

chief31
06-22-2007, 07:09 AM
unforutnately alot times we (being Chiefs fans) automatically think the very worst is going to happen while all along hoping for the best. Honestly I dont expect to have a great year but I am excited about watchingthis years team, all the young talent, I am excited as long as Brodiestays healthy and develops-we re-sign Larry things look positive

No two ways about it. I'm a pessemist for a reason. If I expect the worst, then, not only, can I not be dissapointed, but there is room for some very pleasant surprise. Like last season, I was giddy as a little girl, when the Fourty-niners put that final field goal, on the boards, to eliminate the Donkos and send us into the playoffs. If I have high hopes, for a season, then there is a good chance that I will be dissapointed. Therefore, I keep my expectations low, then I keep my hope a little higher.

Canada
06-22-2007, 09:38 AM
It's almost like the philosophy of out management. Don't Aim Too High!

Chiefster
06-22-2007, 07:55 PM
No two ways about it. I'm a pessemist for a reason. If I expect the worst, then, not only, can I not be dissapointed, but there is room for some very pleasant surprise. Like last season, I was giddy as a little girl, when the Fourty-niners put that final field goal, on the boards, to eliminate the Donkos and send us into the playoffs. If I have high hopes, for a season, then there is a good chance that I will be dissapointed. Therefore, I keep my expectations low, then I keep my hope a little higher.


I'm much the same way; although I have tried to temper it somewhat so as to not bring down the board too much. :D

BoredomReallySux
06-22-2007, 07:59 PM
No two ways about it. I'm a pessemist for a reason. If I expect the worst, then, not only, can I not be dissapointed, but there is room for some very pleasant surprise. Like last season, I was giddy as a little girl, when the Fourty-niners put that final field goal, on the boards, to eliminate the Donkos and send us into the playoffs. If I have high hopes, for a season, then there is a good chance that I will be dissapointed. Therefore, I keep my expectations low, then I keep my hope a little higher.


I guess that makes since. You're a glass is half empty kind of guy huh. :)

Canada
06-22-2007, 11:33 PM
My beer glass is always half empty for some reason. But I am always happy cause when i look in my other hand there is a full one!! woo hoo :)

BoredomReallySux
06-23-2007, 06:38 AM
My beer glass is always half empty for some reason. But I am always happy cause when i look in my other hand there is a full one!! woo hoo :)


Well it sounds as if you are a man of many resources. :D

TheLateGreat#58Fan
06-23-2007, 01:32 PM
My beer glass is always half empty for some reason. But I am always happy cause when i look in my other hand there is a full one!! woo hoo :)


Now Canada everytime I see oyu post on here its something about you having a beer or get into a fight representing our Chiefs. SO I felt like I needed to reply to tell you that even though I am in Atlanta, you tell me when your headed to Arrowhead, and I will do my best to head up. I also enjoy a tasty beverage.
It might be a good idea get a big group of us together meet before one of the games this year
just an idea

Lets Go Chiefs

Canada
06-23-2007, 02:02 PM
I will be there Sept 23 for the game gainst the Viqueens!!

BoredomReallySux
06-23-2007, 07:58 PM
I will be there Sept 23 for the game gainst the Viqueens!!


LOL!!

For some reason I envision the Village People.

Guru
06-23-2007, 10:24 PM
LOL!!

For some reason I envision the Village People.

Anyone who envisions that group is in serious need of psychological help.

Chiefster
06-24-2007, 12:24 AM
Anyone who envisions that group is in serious need of psychological help.


LOL!! I agree; but then again I speak from experience.

BoredomReallySux
06-24-2007, 12:28 AM
Anyone who envisions that group is in serious need of psychological help.


It's been tried but to no avail.

chief31
06-24-2007, 02:52 PM
Anyone who envisions that group is in serious need of psychological help.

What's that? :ymca: What were we talking about?

Chiefster
06-24-2007, 07:42 PM
What's that? :ymca: What were we talking about?


See this is what happens when you chime in on the middle of a conversation. :p

Guru
06-24-2007, 10:51 PM
What's that? :ymca: What were we talking about?

You, my friend, are in serious need of psychological:character0072: help.

Chiefster
06-25-2007, 12:29 AM
You, my friend, are in serious need of psychological:character0072: help.


LOL!!

Calling Dr. Phil!

BoredomReallySux
06-25-2007, 03:09 AM
I think the inmates are running the assylum.

Guru
06-25-2007, 03:14 AM
I think the inmates are running the assylum.

Makes you feel right at home then I am sure.

chief31
06-25-2007, 03:15 AM
I think the inmates are running the assylum.
You mean here, or the Chiefs front office? Or both?

Guru
06-25-2007, 03:20 AM
You mean here, or the Chiefs front office? Or both?

:hyper:

BoredomReallySux
06-25-2007, 03:20 AM
Makes you feel right at home then I am sure.

Comfortable surroundings and good company are a very important must have.


You mean here, or the Chiefs front office? Or both?

Yep and yep!

kenny1937
07-16-2007, 03:16 PM
LOL!!

For some reason I envision the Village People.

Hmmmmm, Isn't that the bunch that stays in the YMCA?

Pessimism is catching, but then again so is enthusiasm, depends of what brand of brew you are drinking. (grin)

:naughty: :character00243: :worm:"Duh, Ta-Key-La"

Chiefster
07-16-2007, 03:27 PM
Hmmmmm, Isn't that the bunch that stays in the YMCA?

Pessimism is catching, but then again so is enthusiasm, depends of what brand of brew you are drinking. (grin)

:naughty: :character00243: :worm:"Duh, Ta-Key-La"


Well you are what you drink.

kenny1937
07-16-2007, 03:32 PM
Well you are what you drink.

Hmmmmm, well my glass is half fullof Dr. Pepper, guess that makes me a "Doc"

:naughty: :character00243: :worm: "Duh Ta-Kee-La"

Chiefster
07-16-2007, 03:44 PM
Hmmmmm, well my glass is half fullof Dr. Pepper, guess that makes me a "Doc"

:naughty: :character00243: :worm: "Duh Ta-Kee-La"

Yikes!!!

kenny1937
07-16-2007, 03:53 PM
Hee, Hee!!

:worm: "Duh Ta-Kee-La"

Chiefster
07-16-2007, 03:54 PM
Hee, Hee!!

:worm: "Duh Ta-Kee-La"

...Stayed at a Holiday Inn last night eh?

kenny1937
07-16-2007, 04:05 PM
ROFL How did you guess!! (grin)

:naughty: :character00243: :worm: "Duh Ta-Kee-La"

Chiefster
07-16-2007, 04:22 PM
ROFL How did you guess!! (grin)

:naughty: :character00243: :worm: "Duh Ta-Kee-La"

Reasonable guess.

kenny1937
07-26-2007, 03:25 AM
Wonder if we can get Carl to stay in a Holiday Inn, and stay, and stay, and stay, to infinity? (grin)

:wheelchair: Not on your life Sonny, I have important things to do, like keeping Arrowhead full with minimum cost, like dangling my five year plan to infinity, so leave me ALONE!!

Chiefster
07-26-2007, 02:10 PM
Wonder if we can get Carl to stay in a Holiday Inn, and stay, and stay, and stay, to infinity? (grin)


Well he certainly has enough money to.

kenny1937
07-27-2007, 01:20 AM
Well he certainly has enough money to.

Hey, we need to talk him into spending some of it to raise the team above average in his new five year plan. (grin)

:punk: :character00274: :character00117:

Chiefster
07-27-2007, 06:24 AM
Hey, we need to talk him into spending some of it to raise the team above average in his new five year plan. (grin)



:punk: :character00274: :character00117:




...Wouldn't do any good.

kenny1937
07-28-2007, 03:23 AM
...Wouldn't do any good.



:wheelchair: Hee, Hee, You got that right Sonny! Hee! Hee!

Chiefster
10-04-2007, 01:43 AM
2-2, looks like the Chiefs is done; may as well pack up and go home. :p

Polleo Pit Man
10-04-2007, 01:45 AM
Wonder if we can get Carl to stay in a Holiday Inn, and stay, and stay, and stay, to infinity? (grin)

:wheelchair: Not on your life Sonny, I have important things to do, like keeping Arrowhead full with minimum cost, like dangling my five year plan to infinity, so leave me ALONE!!
Maybee a holiday express?

Chiefster
10-04-2007, 01:56 AM
Maybee a holiday express?


Maybe????:D

m0ef0e
10-04-2007, 02:10 AM
2-2, looks like the Chiefs is done; may as well pack up and go home. :p

BURN THIS THREAD TO THE GROUND!!!!

:mob: :mob: :mob:

hermhater
10-04-2007, 02:11 AM
BURN THIS THREAD TO THE GROUND!!!!

:mob: :mob: :mob:

So now we are cremating Kenny?

Can't we all just get along?

:lol::sign0098::beer::yahoo:

tornadospotter
10-04-2007, 04:37 AM
2-2, looks like the Chiefs is done; may as well pack up and go home. :p
And kick some sgaj ssa! GO CHIEFS, BRING ON THE STORM!!!!!!:beer:

m0ef0e
10-04-2007, 02:31 PM
So now we are cremating Kenny?

Can't we all just get along?

:lol::sign0098::beer::yahoo:

Aww. Cmon. That's no fun. :D