- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
chief31;232240 wrote:
You don’t think that had much to do with why we won? Fine.
No I don’t because we beat the team the Chargers didn’t. Just because they are not building the team the way you want doesn’t mean they did not earn there divison title. :ninerssuck:
matthewschiefs;232243 wrote:No I don’t because we beat the team the Chargers didn’t. Just because they are not building the team the way you want doesn’t mean they did not earn there divison title. :ninerssuck:That was not the statement that you challenged.
They won the division with a last place schedule.
You said that’s not true.
But it is.
You are wrong.
chief31;232245 wrote:That was not the statement that you challenged.They won the division with a last place schedule.
You said that’s not true.
But it is.
You are wrong.
When you put his statement in context it’s clear he was saying that it was a major reason the Chiefs won the AFC West. That’s what I was challenging. It’s said constantly whenever someone brings up the improvement this team saw last year. Constantly trying to make excuses to why this team won last year just because they are not building the team the way you want it is nothing but whining In my eyes.
matthewschiefs;232251 wrote:When you put his statement in context it’s clear he was saying that it was a major reason the Chiefs won the AFC West. That’s what I was challenging. It’s said constantly whenever someone brings up the improvement this team saw last year. Constantly trying to make excuses to why this team won last year just because they are not building the team the way you want it is nothing but whining In my eyes.Clearly it helped to have an easy schedule, as shown by our struggles against .500 teams, and better (2-4).
It could easily be debated how much that helped. But there was no indication in that statement as to what degree the light schedule helped.
As for the “context” you are aware that you specifically omitted all context when you challened the statement, right?
Just sayin’….
chief31;232252 wrote:Clearly it helped to have an easy schedule, as shown by our struggles against .500 teams, and better (2-4).It could easily be debated how much that helped. But there was no indication in that statement as to what degree the light schedule helped.
As for the “context” you are aware that you specifically omitted all context when you challened the statement, right?
Just sayin’….
Yeah the teams we beat we so easy except the weeks they played the other teams in the west then they suddenly got better. :ninerssuck:
matthewschiefs;232251 wrote:When you put his statement in context it’s clear he was saying that it was a major reason the Chiefs won the AFC West. That’s what I was challenging. It’s said constantly whenever someone brings up the improvement this team saw last year. Constantly trying to make excuses to why this team won last year just because they are not building the team the way you want it is nothing but whining In my eyes.The Chiefs improved last year no question about that but they were not as good as a 10-6 team with a normal schedule and what I am saying is with the schedule we have this year we won’t be as good record wise and our record will drop. That is my opinion or prediction whatever you want to call it. I am predicting right around a 7-9 record for this year. Does this mean I hate the Chiefs or that I do not want them to do good? NO. I would love to see them prove me wrong. I don’t care if you guys come on here and say “see I told you so”. I am just giving my prediction and also saw a sports writer with the same type of prediction talking about the tougher schedule.
I am sorry that I don’t go with the flow and hold hands with everyone and sing Chief songs around a campfire. I apologize I don’t do and say what everyone wants me to. I just try to think realistically and not let my judgement be clouded just because they are my favorite team. It is kind of like our government. I love being in the USA but think our government needs to do a lot better than what they are currently doing and I don’t believe some of the things they feed to us. Some people would call that unamerican because I don’t support the government fully, but I just look at things as they are and give an honest opinion on what I see or read. It doesn’t mean I don’t love being an American or love the country.
chiefsrule;232241 wrote:Those really don’t mean a thing to me. UNLESS they will make me rich or something!!!They do make you rich, lol! Well, the green & gold ones do anyway, hahaha. The orange ones make you somewhat comparible in value to the team of which wears orange, & blue too, lol.
matthewschiefs;232253 wrote:Yeah the teams we beat we so easy except the weeks they played the other teams in the west then they suddenly got better. :ninerssuck:I have to say…. Suggesting that we won because the division was extra weak is contradictory to your case.
It actually sells more to the context which you were challenging.
Connie Jo;232255 wrote:They do make you rich, lol! Well, the green & gold ones do anyway, hahaha. The orange ones make you somewhat comparible in value to the team of which wears orange, & blue too, lol.Oh my that isn’t good.
chiefsrule;232257 wrote:Oh my that isn’t good.It’s tough being in a position of skepticism, while the majority are so upbeat about recent successes.
It’s tough being in a position of skepticism even when the team is terrible!
Those who always have high hopes do not like to hear people talking down of their Chiefs.
I think you will find that to be true of any team’s sites.
chief31;232256 wrote:I have to say…. Suggesting that we won because the division was extra weak is contradictory to your case.It actually sells more to the context which you were challenging.
That’s not what i suggested at all but good job making yet anther excuse to why they won the divison
chief31;232252 wrote:Clearly it helped to have an easy schedule, as shown by our struggles against .500 teams, and better (2-4).It could easily be debated how much that helped. But there was no indication in that statement as to what degree the light schedule helped.
As for the “context” you are aware that you specifically omitted all context when you challened the statement, right?
Just sayin’….
There you go talkin all intellectualfied again. :11:
Chiefster;232263 wrote:There you go talkin all intellectualfied again. :11:He does seem like he knows his stuff I will say that.
matthewschiefs;232259 wrote:That’s not what i suggested at all but good job making yet anther excuse to why they won the divisonWait, you exposed the other teams in our division as unable to beat lesser competition, and you didn’t intend to suggest that they were not, themselves, the highest quality opponent?
Our division was below .500 for the year. And, if you just count the other three teams in our division, they won just 43.8% of their games.
And all of the AFC West teams played a sub-.500 schedule. (Well below .500)
All logic suggests that we had a very easy road to the playoffs.
The Chiefs played very well in 2010. And, when one considers what the team had done in recent years, it is even more impressive.
But denying that we had a soft schedule as well as a weaker division is to deny the obvious facts.
Or do you honestly believe that We were in a division that was tougher than average, and that the NFC West was not a weak division to throw on our schedule? Or that getting The AFC South over the two divisions that sent two teams to the playoffs was not favorable?
I guess I just don’t understand why you refuse to accept the facts that don’t compliment The Chiefs.
I am baised in favor of The Chiefs. I just can’t figure out a way to deny unfavorable aspects of the team’s results.
Even if it is a Raiders fan telling me that Branden Albert is not a good LOT, I can’t figure out how to hide from that.
If there were no negatives, then how did we not win The Super Bowl?
chiefsrule;232234 wrote:Herm made it to the playoffs too.
With Dick Vermeils team!!
chief31;232240 wrote:There is an “IGNORE” feature here at Chiefscrowd.com.
I hear it helps for those who don’t care to hear a particular opinion/poster.
You know you aren’t tired of hearing it, otherwise you would stop reading it. Let alone fueling that conversation which you are tired of hearing.
Just because I am tired of something does not mean I have to ignore, nor does it mean I have to stop talking about it. Im tired of work, but I still go every day and I still do my job every day.
- The topic ‘Hold your horses…’ is closed to new replies.