- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
matthewschiefs;231614 wrote:I guess I have to be the one to give you your answer 0 of those teams made the playoffs. And oh the chiefs beat the Rams 49ers and titians you no the “creampuffs” and we split with denver.
About all of the teams I listed made the playoffs and green bay won the super bowl. I am not sure what your argument is. And referring to our schedule last year please list all the teams.
Canada;231580 wrote:Please…we beat up on Cutler before and we will do it again!! :mooning:If the Bears don’t upgrade their O-line everybody will be beating up on him. I was just kidding, by the way.
The Bears big signings so far are Roy Williams and Marion Barber. Blech! The Chiefs have done GREAT in FA compared to them.
chiefsrule;231620 wrote:About all of the teams I listed made the playoffs and green bay won the super bowl. I am not sure what your argument is. And referring to our schedule last year please list all the teams.The point was that all those teams that I listed did not make the playoffs yet still spent an equal amount of money on players. Its almost like $$ is not the factor that puts teams over the hump. Its quality players and coaches.
TopekaRoy;231621 wrote:If the Bears don’t upgrade their O-line everybody will be beating up on him. I was just kidding, by the way.The Bears big signings so far are Roy Williams and Marion Barber. Blech! The Chiefs have done GREAT in FA compared to them.
😆 I know you are a Bears fan…nobody’s perfect!! Gotta support your team!! :bananen_smilies046:
chiefsrule;231620 wrote:About all of the teams I listed made the playoffs and green bay won the super bowl. I am not sure what your argument is. And referring to our schedule last year please list all the teams.The argument is simple you say spending money leads to winning. The chiefs went to the playoffs last year while ALL those teams in the list spent more then the Chiefs and DID NOT GO TO THE PLAYOFFS. Spending money does not mean winning. Putting a TEAM together does. A team that fits well together and plays well together. And by the way the teams that you labeled creampuffs spent more then the chiefs a year ago the chiefs beat 3 of those teams. Need anymore proof that spending money doesn’t mean wins?
A lot of those teams with high payrolls have spent money to retain players that they drafted, not necessarily in Free agency. Spending money to get marquis players is important, but they have to be the right players. You shouldn’t spend just because you have the money and a player is available. You have to be smart about it.
The Chiefs have a lower payroll because their team is so young, but they have a lot of young talent to build on.
Carry on.
TopekaRoy;231625 wrote:A lot of those teams with high payrolls have spent money to retain players that they drafted, not necessarily in Free agency. Spending money to get marquis players is important, but they have to be the right players. You shouldn’t spend just because you have the money and a player is available. You have to be smart about it.The Chiefs have a lower payroll because there team is so young, but they have a lot of young talent to build on.
Carry on.
YOU carry on!!
TopekaRoy;231625 wrote:A lot of those teams with high payrolls have spent money to retain players that they drafted, not necessarily in Free agency. Spending money to get marquis players is important, but they have to be the right players. You shouldn’t spend just because you have the money and a player is available. You have to be smart about it.The Chiefs have a lower payroll because their team is so young, but they have a lot of young talent to build on.
Carry on.
Very true. :bananen_smilies046:
Canada;231622 wrote:The point was that all those teams that I listed did not make the playoffs yet still spent an equal amount of money on players. Its almost like $$ is not the factor that puts teams over the hump. Its quality players and coaches.I agree totally with that! It is not about big names, it is about the team, the buy into being a Chief! I am a bigger fan of a Chief player who becomes a great Chief, than a already made proven player from some other team. Does not not me not want players available, but just makes me want players on roster to compete and win the job, if they have always been just a Chief or make themselves a Chief!. I do not want a big name think I am, I want a player that will be a CHIEF, and when the playing days are done, they want to retire as a CHIEF!
- The topic ‘Hold your horses…’ is closed to new replies.