ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs The state of the Kansas City Chiefs. (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=267254)

Agent V 12-01-2012 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_Tomahawk (Post 9168059)
This...plus knowing the fans already are upset with you...

Feel pretty bad for them at the moment.

Exactly. If I witnessed what they apparently witnessed, I would be inconsolable, sweating and shaking in a corner somewhere.

rabblerouser 12-01-2012 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by memyselfI (Post 9168064)
I think that Pioli has been putting up a brave face that will come crashing down now. It is too personal now. Too close to home.



well, the word is that Pioli had talked with Belcher the most during the incident at Arrowhead, and Pioli made it clear that he had the full support of the staff and organization and that it was even friendly for a bit and that Jovan was going to put the gun down...and then police showed up, and...

and if that's true, it's very understandable that Scott would be upset.

I'm done talking about it; it's over, and nothing can fix it.

FlaChief58 12-01-2012 02:38 PM

Just when you think things could'nt get any worse with this team....Condolences to the families.

Mr_Tomahawk 12-01-2012 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassel's Reckoning (Post 9168072)
I don't think anyone associated with this tragedy should be part of the leadership group next season.

We badly need a fresh start.

My thoughts too.

But does this extend to the players...? I know they are under contract, but still...don't know how some of them could be mentally prepared to play every time they step foot on 1 Arrowhead Dr.

lcarus 12-01-2012 02:40 PM

The state of the Kansas City Chiefs is Missouri. I know it's confusing to some people not familiar with the region. I mean...why the F is it called Kansas City if it's in Missouri? There's another Kansas City that's actually in Kansas? Why don't the Chiefs play there?

Here's an explanation on the history of Kansas City and why it's called that when it is, in fact, in Missouri and not Kansas. Nice thread! I believe it will clear things up for a lot of people!

Both Kansas and Missouri have a Kansas City, but neither started with that name.

Kansas City in Missouri has been incorporated three different times under three different names. Prior to the first incorporation, the site of early Kansas City was a boat dock called Westport Landing.

In the 1830s, John McCoy’s settlement of West Port, at what is now Westport Road and Pennsylvania, outfitted pioneers for the Santa Fe Trail. Since the nearest landing for river travel and transport was 14 miles away at Blue Mills, near Independence, McCoy established a closer landing on the bluffs at the bend in the Missouri River, just two miles north of his settlement.

Soon after McCoy established “Westport Landing” in 1834, Kansas Town Company, a group of 14 investors, began to settle the area. In 1850 the landing area incorporated as the Town of Kansas; in 1853, as the City of Kansas; and finally in 1889 as Kansas City. John McCoy’s settlement, the old town of Westport, was annexed by Kansas City, Missouri, on December 2, 1897.

The Kansas, or Kaw, River flows into the Missouri River near the site of the early town, and the city founders finally settled on this geographic term for the town’s name. The Kansas River was named after the Kansa Indian tribe located in the area.

http://www.kclibrary.org/kchistory/w...instead-kansas

rabblerouser 12-01-2012 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_Tomahawk (Post 9168086)
My thoughts too.

But does this extend to the players...? I know they are under contract, but still...don't know how some of them could be mentally prepared to play every time they step foot on 1 Arrowhead Dr.

no - just ownership and front-office.

And the enployees who had to sue for their benefits after they all got fired??

They get their jobs back.

Todd Haley, too.

Lumpy 12-01-2012 02:41 PM

IMO, this doesn't change much, other than having 1 less player on the roster. What Crennel and Pioli witnessed today will, without a doubt, have an impact on them. Belcher was in his 4th year, right? That's a lot of time for management and a player to build a relationship.

As far as if this will affect me as a fan, not really. I haven't been paying much attention to the games. If they had a decent season, I would be more interested. But the rebuilding year after year and the lack of effective management has deterred me from, well, pretty much giving a shit.

This wasn't always the case though. When I became a Chiefs fan in '94 I looked forward to every single game. Win or lose, the game was exciting. It was because of my husband, (then b/f), that I became a fan. We watched the games together, he taught me about the sport, and we even spent our honeymoon at Arrowhead, (the Chiefs crushed the Lions). It's just something nice to share w/ someone.

Perhaps one of these days the excitement will return.

Hammock Parties 12-01-2012 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_Tomahawk (Post 9168086)
My thoughts too.

But does this extend to the players...? I know they are under contract, but still...don't know how some of them could be mentally prepared to play every time they step foot on 1 Arrowhead Dr.

No, they weren't witness to it. Nor are they being asked to lead a football program.

A lot of the people that were at the facility today are going to be scarred by this. We're gonna need someone with zero connections to this incident in order to move forward next year.

Hydrae 12-01-2012 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief103182 (Post 9168051)
Resignations seem like a very real possibility. If it's true they paid witness to Belcher's suicide, I can't express how awful I feel for Scott and Romeo.

I have to wonder what Belcher said to them before he walked off. His last words were to these two, he could have been saying anything.

rabblerouser 12-01-2012 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 9168093)
The state of the Kansas City Chiefs is Missouri. I know it's confusing to some people not familiar with the region. I mean...why the F is it called Kansas City if it's in Missouri? There's another Kansas City that's actually in Kansas? Why don't the Chiefs play there?

Here's an explanation on the history of Kansas City and why it's called that when it is, in fact, in Missouri and not Kansas. Nice thread! I believe it will clear things up for a lot of people!

Both Kansas and Missouri have a Kansas City, but neither started with that name.

Kansas City in Missouri has been incorporated three different times under three different names. Prior to the first incorporation, the site of early Kansas City was a boat dock called Westport Landing.

In the 1830s, John McCoy’s settlement of West Port, at what is now Westport Road and Pennsylvania, outfitted pioneers for the Santa Fe Trail. Since the nearest landing for river travel and transport was 14 miles away at Blue Mills, near Independence, McCoy established a closer landing on the bluffs at the bend in the Missouri River, just two miles north of his settlement.

Soon after McCoy established “Westport Landing” in 1834, Kansas Town Company, a group of 14 investors, began to settle the area. In 1850 the landing area incorporated as the Town of Kansas; in 1853, as the City of Kansas; and finally in 1889 as Kansas City. John McCoy’s settlement, the old town of Westport, was annexed by Kansas City, Missouri, on December 2, 1897.

The Kansas, or Kaw, River flows into the Missouri River near the site of the early town, and the city founders finally settled on this geographic term for the town’s name. The Kansas River was named after the Kansa Indian tribe located in the area.

http://www.kclibrary.org/kchistory/w...instead-kansas

^ awesome

I love KC History

Bowser 12-01-2012 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassel's Reckoning (Post 9168098)
No, they weren't witness to it. Nor are they being asked to lead a football program.

A lot of the people that were at the facility today are going to be scarred by this. We're gonna need someone with zero connections to this incident in order to move forward next year.

Harsh to say just hours after the fact, but absolutely true.

Mr_Tomahawk 12-01-2012 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 9168093)
.

Neg'd

lcarus 12-01-2012 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_Tomahawk (Post 9168108)
Neg'd

Mr. Tomahawk. :(

Hammock Parties 12-01-2012 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydrae (Post 9168103)
I have to wonder what Belcher said to them before he walked off. His last words were to these two, he could have been saying anything.

"Draft Geno."

rabblerouser 12-01-2012 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumpy (Post 9168097)
IMO, this doesn't change much, other than having 1 less player on the roster. What Crennel and Pioli witnessed today will, without a doubt, have an impact on them. Belcher was in his 4th year, right? That's a lot of time for management and a player to build a relationship.

As far as if this will affect me as a fan, not really. I haven't been paying much attention to the games. If they had a decent season, I would be more interested. But the rebuilding year after year and the lack of effective management has deterred me from, well, pretty much giving a shit.

This wasn't always the case though. When I became a Chiefs fan in '94 I looked forward to every single game. Win or lose, the game was exciting. It was because of my husband, (then b/f), that I became a fan. We watched the games together, he taught me about the sport, and we even spent our honeymoon at Arrowhead, (the Chiefs crushed the Lions). It's just something nice to share w/ someone.

Perhaps one of these days the excitement will return.

I know how you feel...

Part of that excitement will be gone forever for me...

it sucks.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:04 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.