Home › Forums › Kansas City Chiefs › KC Chiefs News and Discussion › Hold your horses…
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
08/02/2011 at 8:21 am #970774
ctchiefsfan
Member::matthewschiefs;231624 wrote: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?THERE IT IS!!!! Spending big $$$ does not mean winning. Winning needs quality management and a TEAM. Not just a bunch of good players. Over the years there have been many teams that had lots of big name stars and just flat out SUCKED.
The Chiefs have good management, good young players, some scattered high quality vets and they are coming together as a TEAM.
Being from New England and being a Chiefs FAN I HATE the Splats with an undying passion but truth is that in the not too distant future its going to be the Chiefs or the Splats representing the AFC in the Super Bowl…..EVERY SINGLE YEAR!
08/02/2011 at 9:28 am #970776Canada
Member::matthewschiefs;231644 wrote:WHAT THE F**K There are rules here? Does that mean the mods do something other then siting on there A**? Next you will tell me they actually help to run this site. I just find all of that hard to be believe:D:mooning:Yes there are some stupid rules. No swearing, I dont know how to complete a fu*kin sentence without a swear work or two. And no…the mods dont run this site, I run this site!! :sFl_canada2:
08/02/2011 at 12:04 pm #97077870 chiefsfan70
Member08/02/2011 at 12:44 pm #970780matthewschiefs
Participant08/02/2011 at 12:59 pm #970781chiefsrule
Member::Canada;231638 wrote:Bullsh!t…that is not AT ALL what you have been saying. You have called us the Kansas City Cheaps, you have repeatedly said that we are not winning because we do not spend the $$ that other teams do. I gave you a pretty long list of team that spent waaaay more money than we did and they did not make the playoffs and you have repeatedly ignored that fact.We first got bad because we quit signing free agents we have been one of the cheapest teams in the last few years and our record shows it. What has been our record the last few years? We get a schedule where we have three teams with winning records and we do good so you proclaim that proves we don’t need to spend money and can keep going the cheap route and success will come. I disagree. Sorry you feel otherwise.
08/02/2011 at 1:55 pm #970786Seek
Member::chiefsrule;231671 wrote:We first got bad because we quit signing free agents we have been one of the cheapest teams in the last few years and our record shows it. What has been our record the last few years? We get a schedule where we have three teams with winning records and we do good so you proclaim that proves we don’t need to spend money and can keep going the cheap route and success will come. I disagree. Sorry you feel otherwise.We got bad because Herm Edwards didn’t know squat about building a team. He only knew how to blow one up.
The Chiefs have signed Free agents every year. Last year we signed Jones, Lilja, Urban and Wiegmann and Shaun Smith.
The year before that we signed Cassell, Vrabel, Chambers, Zach Thomas and others to contracts.
You build a team through the draft, and fill in the holes with serviceable Free agents… You don’t over spend on the biggest names out there. That hurts the integrity of the team over all specifically long term.
08/02/2011 at 4:24 pm #970789chief31
Member::chiefsrule;231532 wrote:I wonder how long I can keep this thread going?Good job of waking up the Crowd. Just took an end to the lockout, and a little bit of an opposing view from the majority to get things rolling.
matthewschiefs;231624 wrote:Spending money does not mean winning.I am too tired to run a bunch of numbers, but I would be shocked to find that, over the course of multiple seasons, the higher salaried teams don’t perform better, on average, than the low salaried teams.
Sure, there are plenty of situations where some expensive player doesn’t work out as planned.
But I have to believe that bringing in upgrades in the form of proven players that demand a high salary, is generally a step in the right direction.
And teams that are stuck at the bottom and continually over-spending on their own poor draft choices, (Keep in mind that every round brings a player who will demand more than a player selected later in that round.) tend to pay a lot due to those insane rookie contracts, year, after year, after year.
I suspect that would be a major player in coloring high spending teams as not too astonishingly successful.
I am sure that we all realize that we don’t specifically want The Chiefs to stay at the bottom of the league in salary, as our own FAs will steadily demand more, and more.
But, if they continue to produce with less pay going out, then it will be pretty hard to complain.
matthewschiefs;231644 wrote:WHAT THE F**K There are rules here? Does that mean the mods do something other then siting on there A**? Next you will tell me they actually help to run this site. I just find all of that hard to be believe:D:mooning:I am just here to keep Canada in line.
But I am rather lazy.
ctchiefsfan;231663 wrote:Nobody called you stupid. We called you a troll.Yes. Please try to refrain from doing so in the future.
Canada;231666 wrote:And no…the mods dont run this site, I run this site!! :sFl_canada2:Canada just services most of the Mods for leniency…. and beer.
____________________________________________
106-150 (41.4 winning percentage) was the record of our opponents (counting teams we played twice, twice) from the 2010 regular season.
Only three games were played against teams with a winning record for the year. We went 1-2 in those games.And we went 1-2 against teams with a .500 record. That makes us 2-4 against teams without a losing record, and 8-2 against sub .500 teams.
I don’t think anybody can deny that we did have an easy schedule last year.
And I am also pretty sure that we all know that it helped that we had an easy schedule.
We played very well in 2010. And beating the teams you should beat is a requirement for all successful teams.
But the point being made that we feasted on weaker teams is extremely valid.
I definitely worry about how we will do this season.
As of right now, I will need to see something more happening in the FA market before I will be able to say that I am confident in The Chiefs for 2011.
However, considering the success of last season, and it was a tremendous success, considering the expectations, The whole organization is going to get a far lighter judgement out of me, than what I have handed down in the recent past.
Whereas, when we were terrible my outlook was somewhat of a “prove you can do something right”, I am now in more of a “prove you are not doing this right” mode.Hard to grip how someone can be down on this team right now.
But pretty easy to see why someone might not be overly confident too.
08/02/2011 at 4:27 pm #970790Canada
Member::chiefsrule;231671 wrote:We first got bad because we quit signing free agents we have been one of the cheapest teams in the last few years and our record shows it. What has been our record the last few years? We get a schedule where we have three teams with winning records and we do good so you proclaim that proves we don’t need to spend money and can keep going the cheap route and success will come. I disagree. Sorry you feel otherwise.Forget about us…how about the fact that all those teams spent lots of money and did not make the playoffs? You can keep ignoring it, but the rest of the site membership can read. I understand that you are the type who will complain no matter what they do, but can you please try and find a new topic to hate on because this one is getting so old.
08/02/2011 at 4:47 pm #970791Seek
Member08/02/2011 at 5:35 pm #970794chiefsrule
Member::chief31;231679 wrote:Good job of waking up the Crowd. Just took an end to the lockout, and a little bit of an opposing view from the majority to get things rolling.I am too tired to run a bunch of numbers, but I would be shocked to find that, over the course of multiple seasons, the higher salaried teams don’t perform better, on average, than the low salaried teams.
Sure, there are plenty of situations where some expensive player doesn’t work out as planned.
But I have to believe that bringing in upgrades in the form of proven players that demand a high salary, is generally a step in the right direction.
And teams that are stuck at the bottom and continually over-spending on their own poor draft choices, (Keep in mind that every round brings a player who will demand more than a player selected later in that round.) tend to pay a lot due to those insane rookie contracts, year, after year, after year.
I suspect that would be a major player in coloring high spending teams as not too astonishingly successful.
I am sure that we all realize that we don’t specifically want The Chiefs to stay at the bottom of the league in salary, as our own FAs will steadily demand more, and more.
But, if they continue to produce with less pay going out, then it will be pretty hard to complain.
I am just here to keep Canada in line.
But I am rather lazy.
Yes. Please try to refrain from doing so in the future.
Canada just services most of the Mods for leniency…. and beer.
____________________________________________
106-150 (41.4 winning percentage) was the record of our opponents (counting teams we played twice, twice) from the 2010 regular season.
Only three games were played against teams with a winning record for the year. We went 1-2 in those games.And we went 1-2 against teams with a .500 record. That makes us 2-4 against teams without a losing record, and 8-2 against sub .500 teams.
I don’t think anybody can deny that we did have an easy schedule last year.
And I am also pretty sure that we all know that it helped that we had an easy schedule.
We played very well in 2010. And beating the teams you should beat is a requirement for all successful teams.
But the point being made that we feasted on weaker teams is extremely valid.
I definitely worry about how we will do this season.
As of right now, I will need to see something more happening in the FA market before I will be able to say that I am confident in The Chiefs for 2011.
However, considering the success of last season, and it was a tremendous success, considering the expectations, The whole organization is going to get a far lighter judgement out of me, than what I have handed down in the recent past.
Whereas, when we were terrible my outlook was somewhat of a “prove you can do something right”, I am now in more of a “prove you are not doing this right” mode.Hard to grip how someone can be down on this team right now.
But pretty easy to see why someone might not be overly confident too.
VERY good post Chief31!
08/02/2011 at 5:44 pm #970795chiefsrule
Member::Canada;231680 wrote:Forget about us…how about the fact that all those teams spent lots of money and did not make the playoffs? You can keep ignoring it, but the rest of the site membership can read. I understand that you are the type who will complain no matter what they do, but can you please try and find a new topic to hate on because this one is getting so old.If you just want to look at last year alone your point is valid but if you look at what these teams have done for the last couple of years it averages out. We have stunk for so long because we only relied on the draft alone basically to bring in talent and are continuing to do so. The point I am trying to make is Clark’s main priority is to save money and if we happen to do good then that is fantastic. If we go 4-12 again then he just fires the coach blames it on him and we start all over again. We did have a good team last year but not as good at the 10-6 record. If we played a schedule like we are going to this year we will be lucky to hit .500 unless some big move is made and Clark opens up his wallet.
I have read the argument that we are a small market team but that never stopped his dad from trying to bring in good players and there are other small market teams that will get good free agents. What we have done lately is overspend on draft picks. Tyson Jackson there was a lot of money wasted there for someone who never even showed they could play in the NFL. And when you draft players that high you have to pay them what the other players got drafted around them you have no choice.
As long as Clark sees fans will support this team and buy tickets no matter what he does why should he change? Just keep them believing that what he is doing is building for a championship even if it never comes 10 years later.
08/02/2011 at 6:02 pm #970796Seek
Member::chiefsrule;231685 wrote:If you just want to look at last year alone your point is valid but if you look at what these teams have done for the last couple of years it averages out. We have stunk for so long because we only relied on the draft alone basically to bring in talent and are continuing to do so. The point I am trying to make is Clark’s main priority is to save money and if we happen to do good then that is fantastic. If we go 4-12 again then he just fires the coach blames it on him and we start all over again. We did have a good team last year but not as good at the 10-6 record. If we played a schedule like we are going to this year we will be lucky to hit .500 unless some big move is made and Clark opens up his wallet.I have read the argument that we are a small market team but that never stopped his dad from trying to bring in good players and there are other small market teams that will get good free agents. What we have done lately is overspend on draft picks. Tyson Jackson there was a lot of money wasted there for someone who never even showed they could play in the NFL. And when you draft players that high you have to pay them what the other players got drafted around them you have no choice.
As long as Clark sees fans will support this team and buy tickets no matter what he does why should he change? Just keep them believing that what he is doing is building for a championship even if it never comes 10 years later.
Under Carl Peterson this team spent a ton of money on high dollar free agents and we have zero superbowls to hang that on.
Even under DV we signed a lot of free agents and it got us NO super bowl.
Our team sucked the last couple years not because our team was cheap, it was because Herm Edward gutted this team and spent all his time in effort to build his TAMPA 2 offense while neglecting the offense.
The Chiefs have signed players the last two years to fill holes.
So while you feel the Chiefs are cheap and I get a feeling you listen to Nick Wright. Tell me which big time free agents the last two years would have made you feel good.
Averaging out, Teams that win Superbowls build their core from the draft, and spend money keeping their own players. They don’t spend a lot of money buying other teams players.
08/02/2011 at 8:27 pm #970807Canada
Member::chief31;231679 wrote:
I am just here to keep Canada in line.But I am rather lazy.
My own personal mod!!Canada just services most of the Mods for leniency…. and beer.
You don’t have enough beer to buy my good behaviour
I don’t think anybody can deny that we did have an easy schedule last year.
And I am also pretty sure that we all know that it helped that we had an easy schedule.
We played very well in 2010. And beating the teams you should beat is a requirement for all successful teams.
But the point being made that we feasted on weaker teams is extremely valid.
Why do people fault us for having a easy schedule. Perhaps you were all unaware, but to a 4-12 team there is no such thing as an easy schedule. We used to be part of the easy schedule. How about the face that we went 7-1 at home? The Arrowhead advantage is back and the Chiefs made the strides necessary to A. Win the division (which no one thought we would do)and B. Make the playoffs (which no one thought we would do) So sure we lost to some better teams but if my memory serves me… We lost to the Colts (in a game we almost won on the road) We lost to the Chargers with Brokie Croyle while our starting QB was out, We lost to Houston on a bullsh!t PI call against Flowers. Even though we lost to the better teams, we hung around in most of them. We werent that far off being 12-4. Easy schedule or not, this is the NFL and we played NFL calibur teams. We will be tested this year but I dont have anywhere near the dismal outlook some people have.
Chiefsrule agreed with a post stating that we might not win a game until Week 6. We play Buffalo Week 1….do you really think the B-lls are better than the Chiefs….seems like an uninformed comment to me.
08/02/2011 at 8:29 pm #970808Canada
Member08/02/2011 at 8:40 pm #970813 -
AuthorPosts
- The topic ‘Hold your horses…’ is closed to new replies.