Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: 1990 vs. 2015 I think we have a Winner!

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    521

    Default 1990 vs. 2015 I think we have a Winner!

    I know I "might" be going a tad overboard, but I think we might have all of the puzzles to complete the big picture. If you look @ our O & our D we our pretty loaded on both sides (tad weak @ WR & the secondary) This team reminds me a lot of the 1990 Chiefs.

    We have a better team then we did in 1990. Granted we had Albert Lewis, Kevin Ross & Kevin Porter in the backfield. Let's play conservative ball (Alex's best strength) & move the ball. Let our defense keep us in the game. Nail-Biting stuff, but it wins games!

    I really think we can finally beat the Broncos & move forward. For those of you that don't remember the 1990, then do a quick "google" & find out!
    KC Chiefs fan since 1965!
    Home of the Middle East! Istanbul Club.

  2. #31
    Member Since
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,027

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    Brdempsey


    Here's the element when it comes to Marty that I think you're missing when talking about that game

    Stubborness

    Grbac was brought in to be the guy. Marty and Carl both were a part of that choice. Marty was to stubborn to admit that move was a mistake and stuck with him. I don't believe that he didn't want to win that game. I think he was just to damn stubborn to make a move that was clear to anybody else.
    Matt, can't you see that what you are saying conforms exactly to what I'm trying to tell people? How can stubbornness and "wanting to win" go hand-in-hand in this scenario? It just is not possible. It was obvious that priority #1 with Marty was playing Grbac the whole game, regardless of how things went, and therefore with that comes an automatic forfeiture of what should have been priority #1 -- winning the ball game.

  3. #32
    Member Since
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    19,196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brdempsey69 View Post
    Matt, can't you see that what you are saying conforms exactly to what I'm trying to tell people? How can stubbornness and "wanting to win" go hand-in-hand in this scenario? It just is not possible. It was obvious that priority #1 with Marty was playing Grbac the whole game, regardless of how things went, and therefore with that comes an automatic forfeiture of what should have been priority #1 -- winning the ball game.
    What I was trying to say that it was in stubbornness that Marty thought that Grbac gave us a better chance to win that year then Gannon. Marty wanted to win that game just as much as any other game that he coached. Why wouldn't he? It was a years of work on the line. But he just couldnt get over his stubbornness.
    TopekaRoy is my hero!

  4. #33
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Falls Village, Ct
    Posts
    9,803

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    What I was trying to say that it was in stubbornness that Marty thought that Grbac gave us a better chance to win that year then Gannon. Marty wanted to win that game just as much as any other game that he coached. Why wouldn't he? It was a years of work on the line. But he just couldnt get over his stubbornness.
    Or perhaps the stubbornness of King Carl. As I said earlier, sometimes it is just best to risk asking for forgiveness rather than to ask for permission. I think it's possible the decision to play Grbac may have come from on high. And as we all know, Marty was not the kind of guy to say...."screw the higher ups, I'm just going to do what I think is right and the consequences be damned". Marty was not a guy with big brass ones.

  5. #34
    Member Since
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    8,803

    Default

    I was at the steelers game when Elvis king choke Grbac broke his collarbone I haven't seen a QB be that pitiful since Todd Blackledge and Brodie Croyle were here

  6. #35
    Member Since
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,027

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by matthewschiefs View Post
    What I was trying to say that it was in stubbornness that Marty thought that Grbac gave us a better chance to win that year then Gannon. Marty wanted to win that game just as much as any other game that he coached. Why wouldn't he? It was a years of work on the line. But he just couldnt get over his stubbornness.
    Sorry, but I don't believe Marty really wanted to win that game as much as any other he coached for two reasons;

    Chiefs4life24 provides the 1st reason:

    Quote Originally Posted by Chiefs4life24 View Post
    I was at the steelers game when Elvis king choke Grbac broke his collarbone I haven't seen a QB be that pitiful since Todd Blackledge and Brodie Croyle were here
    Grbac was out for nearly two months and he wasn't a star-caliber QB to begin with. If this had been Joe Montana, then you have a whole different scenario. Grbac proved in the season final against N.O.that he was not ready to start for the Chiefs in the post-season, to the point where Marty pulled him out of a meaningless game and replaced him with Gannon to spark the Offense -- which Gannon did.

    This lead to the obvious question: Why the pig-headedness to not allow Gannon to play in the playoff game when Grbac struggled in the exact same manner like had the game before? There is no possible way Marty could have came to the deduction that Grbac gave the Chiefs the best chance to win by the time the 1st QTR was over or even the 1st half at the maximum. Grbac was rusty, he was immobile, and squandered all three of the Chiefs timeouts early in the 2nd half.

    Here's the 2nd reason that I posted earlier:

    When you are relegating a man (Gannon), who had been instrumental in helping your team to it's best December stretch ever witnessed in team history (even to this day), to being a benchwarmer for no good reason in an all-important post-season game (and for the entire game, at that), then it clearly goes way beyond being simply just a "bad decision".

  7. #36
    Member Since
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    7,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ctchiefsfan View Post
    Or perhaps the stubbornness of King Carl. As I said earlier, sometimes it is just best to risk asking for forgiveness rather than to ask for permission. I think it's possible the decision to play Grbac may have come from on high. And as we all know, Marty was not the kind of guy to say...."screw the higher ups, I'm just going to do what I think is right and the consequences be damned". Marty was not a guy with big brass ones.
    This is the most likely scenario from everything I've read. Right after the '96 season ended, Carl Peterson told the KC star that he didn't think Gannon was enough at QB. So he goes out, spends Lamar's money and signs Grbac. Grbac wasn't horrible (at least at that point) but he (and Steve Bono) lacked one quality that Gannon had; The abilty to improvise when the play broke down. Also, Gannon had a much better handle on the west coast offense in '97, as opposed to when he got to start in '96. But nobody wants to tell the boss his latest find is so-so compared to what he already had on the shelf! That, combined with Schottenheimer's stern belief starters get their jobs back as soon as they're healthy...

    I don't believe any conspiracy stories with Schottenheimer. Stubborn to the point of making wrong decisions, yes; Winning to the point of rigging playoff games for payola, no.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-18-2009, 01:30 AM
  2. 1990 AFC WILD CARD Game: Chiefs vs. Dolphins
    By AussieChiefsFan in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-07-2009, 01:54 AM
  3. Super Bowl Winner!!
    By kenny1937 in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-08-2007, 12:17 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •